GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #37 *Arrest*

[BaeMomma]

No other arrests. No new information. No one is talking about this on social media or the press or here much. Other than that, I guess it's against TOS for me to say much. I'm doing my own research and talking to different people who knew Christina.

But, obviously I don't really know. So, should I not state that that's what I think LE should be doing?

No other arrests - perhaps he's the only one involved.
No new info - why would they release any new info? Seriously, they don't care that we want to know more, right now.
No one is talking about it on SM or MSM - if the party goers are who your're talking about, they may not be allowed to talk (advised by LE) considering this is an ongoing investigation that they're part of. I believe most people who are involved in an ongoing investigation are (or strongly encouraged by their own atty) advised to keep it tight lipped.

As far as doing your own research, I sincerely hope it leads to clues as to where she might be. This town & her family are ready to bring her home whatever the circumstances may be. If you find any info. I'm sure you can msg her mother on SM, she'd be thrilled to know more.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

Yes, I tell Jonni what I think she might want to know, of course. And, yeah, I hope I can gather enough info that it makes a difference. Thanks for the support!

 

[Mamamerced]

This is a collaged selection from an article today in the LA Times about narcissism resulting from how parents raise their children. One sentence in particular reminded me of EA.
I had to seriously edit the article to keep within the 10% allowed and still cite the salient points.
You can go to the LA Times FB page to read article in it's entirety.

"Parents who believe their kids are better, more special, and deserve more than other kids can pass that point of view on to their children, creating young narcissists who feel superior to others, and entitled to privileges, according to a study.

The statements included "Kids like me deserve something extra," and "I am a great example for other kids to follow."

***It also included the sinister question, "I am very good at making other people believe what I want them to believe."***

When children are seen by their parents as being more special and more entitled than other children, they may internalize the view that they are superior individuals, a view that is at the core of narcissism, the researchers conclude in the paper."

 

[MIKAYOYO]

This is a collaged selection from an article today in the LA Times about narcissism resulting from how parents raise their children. One sentence in particular reminded me of EA.
I had to seriously edit the article to keep within the 10% allowed and still cite the salient points.
You can go to the LA Times FB page to read article in it's entirety.

"Parents who believe their kids are better, more special, and deserve more than other kids can pass that point of view on to their children, creating young narcissists who feel superior to others, and entitled to privileges, according to a study.

The statements included "Kids like me deserve something extra," and "I am a great example for other kids to follow."

***It also included the sinister question, "I am very good at making other people believe what I want them to believe."***

When children are seen by their parents as being more special and more entitled than other children, they may internalize the view that they are superior individuals, a view that is at the core of narcissism, the researchers conclude in the paper."

Sounds like half the kids/parents my kids have ever played youth sports with. Moo

ETA Interesting article. I like how they mention 'genetics being an important factor' as an afterthought.

 

[cluciano63]

Let me preface this by saying I do NOT think what I am about to talk about is what happened, but I'm just bringing it up as a question about an aggravated kidnapping charge. From what I understand the key component of AK is an "intent." So like you say here ^^ it could be intent of bodily harm. But let's say someone decides to get into a car with someone else and go to someplace like Denney's at 2 am. They ride over there and the passenger gets out of the car and the driver is still in the driver's seat. The passenger walks behind the car, drops something, and bends down to pick it up. The driver, for whatever reason, maybe realize they parked all cockeyed and reverses the car to adjust. It's dark, they don't see that the passenger has bent down, and they run over the passenger. The driver flips out and panics. Opens the trunk and puts the passenger inside, drives to some remote location, and dumps off the passenger. (Like I said, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE so don't anyone go all ape $hit on here...) This could not be considered AK, right? I mean there was no "intent" to harm when they left with the person, right?
Now I know that a normal person would, of course, explain this horrible accident, but I am just wondering about the AK charge. In this hypothetical case it would have to be something else, right? Something like vehicular manslaughter I think. Anyway, I was just wondering about how LE has to prove intent in an AK case, so I thought I'd bring it up.

In this scenario, the kidnapping would begin at time she was placed in trunk, Imo, and intent to harm would be putting her in a trunk...i.e with the great possibility of her dying in there, not taking her to a hospital. Jmo

 

[heather.scissorhands]

No other arrests - perhaps he's the only one involved.
No new info - why would they release any new info? Seriously, they don't care that we want to know more, right now.
No one is talking about it on SM or MSM - if the party goers are who your're talking about, they may not be allowed to talk (advised by LE) considering this is an ongoing investigation that they're part of. I believe most people who are involved in an ongoing investigation are (or strongly encouraged by their own atty) advised to keep it tight lipped.

As far as doing your own research, I sincerely hope it leads to clues as to where she might be. This town & her family are ready to bring her home whatever the circumstances may be. If you find any info. I'm sure you can msg her mother on SM, she'd be thrilled to know more.

I can say that even if LE wants pthese young people to be tight lipped, they probably aren't. Do you think they stopped drinking and doing drugs? They are still the same people. They talk. They talk a lot. And Christina had a lot of friends.

 

[Sweetgrits]

Perhaps because they are the ones setting up the tone of the evening? Perhaps because everyone keeps saying these were her friends, why did they let her go with him if he was being sexually aggressive? Maybe because the stories of that night don't add up?

BBM
I'm confused. I believe that the original story from the friends at the apartment was that EA wanted SB to "sleep" on the couch with him that night and when he found that wasn't going to happen he was ready to leave. But how does that translate to sexually aggressive?
IIRC, when LE talked to the other people at the “party” they told LE that EA told SB that if she wasn't coming back to the couch he was leaving. LE asked if they would describe EA’s behavior that night as angry and the party goers said yes. Is that what is being described as sexually aggressive?

I tried to figure out a way to describe my personal opinion of sexually aggressive behavior in a PC way but I wasn’t making any headway so I took the coward’s way out and went to the web. LOL

Sexual Aggression: Relating to potentially violent behavior focused on gratification of sexual drives,
regardless of the desire for participation on the part of the partner. See Sexually dangerous.

Some have questioned why the other people at the apartment that night would let Christina leave with Enrique if he was acting aggressively but according to the definition above I don’t think he was. Also respectfully, I don’t see anything in the body language of Enrique walking to the garage with Christina that would be described as aggressive.

JMO, but I think he was drunk and/or high when he left the apartment with Christina. I believe for whatever reason CM got into his car willingly. Maybe he hoped Christina would get in touch with HF or maybe someone else for more drugs but when that didn't happen he turned off on some deserted road thinking or hoping CM would be a willing hook up. I think she fought back and he accidentally killed her and then panicked and dumped her body somewhere. I don’t think he is capable of being a criminal mastermind as evidenced by the ridiculous lies he told to LE. I think he has just gotten lucky that CM’s body hasn't been found but I also believe that it will be found.

Maybe because there hasn't been anything new on Christina’s case some of us just keep going over and over the same facts and try to find something new and I don’t think there is anything. It’s like the telephone game we played eons ago. Some facts we learned at the beginning of this case have been repeated over and over so many times that they don’t even resemble the originals. I get that putting ideas out there and discussing them can hopefully help jog something that will help find CM. But it’s gotten to the point that now it seems that some of us (and no I’m not talking about anyone in particular) just want to disagree with someone else without really having a point. I sure hope Christina is found soon.

 

[Mamamerced]

Sounds like half the kids/parents my kids have ever played youth sports with. Moo

ETA Interesting article. I like how they mention 'genetics being an important factor' as an afterthought.

Yes, the study was focussed on parenting but they did acknowledge the role of genetics. I hadn't realized narcicissm was a spectrum disorder. I also think that if parents project that sense of their own self-importance then the children could model it in imitation. I also suspect parental neglect in some instances might led to exaggerated sense of self-importance in their children. Interesting topic.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

Then I'm not sure of your point. EA will be tried separately for at least 2 different felonies, for Sexual Assault of a Child against "Jennifer Smith" and then for one or more crimes against Christina Morris. In order to convict him for the crimes against CM, they don't have to prove anything at all about the SA case against JS; and I see no reason they will be mentioning any of the SA details or evidence in the CM trial.

Assuming he's tried and convicted of the SA first, I can see where they might reference that he's a convicted felon, a registered sex offender, and has a proven history of sexual assault before he took the walk with CM that night. But I can't see any reason for them to want to, or need to, offer up the details/evidence of that case itself.

The defense may question it, right? It's not one sided?

 

[BaeMomma]

BBM
I'm confused. I believe that the original story from the friends at the apartment was that EA wanted SB to "sleep" on the couch with him that night and when he found that wasn't going to happen he was ready to leave. But how does that translate to sexually aggressive?
IIRC, when LE talked to the other people at the “party” they told LE that EA told SB that if she wasn’t coming back to the couch he was leaving. LE asked if they would describe EA’s behavior that night as angry and the party goers said yes. Is that what is being described as sexually aggressive?
I tried to figure out a way to describe my personal opinion of sexually aggressive behavior in a PC way but I wasn’t making any headway so I took the coward’s way out and went to the web. LOL
Sexual Aggression: Relating to potentially violent behavior focused on gratification of sexual drives,
regardless of the desire for participation on the part of the partner. See Sexually dangerous.
Some have questioned why the other people at the apartment that night would let Christina leave with Enrique if he was acting aggressively but according to the definition above I don’t think he was. Also respectfully, I don’t see anything in the body language of Enrique walking to the garage with Christina that would be described as aggressive.
JMO, but I think he was drunk and/or high when he left the apartment with Christina. I believe for whatever reason CM got into his car willingly. Maybe he hoped Christina would get in touch with HF or maybe someone else for more drugs but when that didn’t happen he turned off on some deserted road thinking or hoping CM would be a willing hook up. I think she fought back and he accidently killed her and then panicked and dumped her body somewhere. I don’t think he is capable of being a criminal mastermind as evidenced by the ridiculous lies he told to LE. I think he has just gotten lucky that CM’s body hasn’t been found but I also believe that it will be found.
Maybe because there hasn’t been anything new on Christina’s case some of us just keep going over and over the same facts and try to find something new and I don’t think there is anything. It’s like the telephone game we played eons ago. Some facts we learned at the beginning of this case have been repeated over and over so many times that they don’t even resemble the originals. I get that putting ideas out there and discussing them can hopefully help jog something that will help find CM. But it’s gotten to the point that now it seems that some of us (and no I’m not talking about anyone in particular) just want to disagree with someone else without really having a point. I sure hope Christina is found soon.

I couldn't agree more with your last paragraph! That's exactly how I see it. MOO

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I think they should too but what makes you believe they have not done this? Seriously, an honest question.

Maybe because they are the same people who didn't bother to collect DNA from EA until much later (long after they needed it)? Probably the most important element of their case against EA and they had to backpedal to get it. "Unknown male DNA" should never have been part of their report because they should have been able to either match it or not against a sample they had already obtained from the beginning. Defense will be all over that mistake, too.

 

[Happyshoes]

Yeah I doubt Stamm would lie about that.. Maybe the key word here is "estimated"..

High vs. sober? Talking on cell phones? Stopping or just walking slow? Doesn't matter too much.

 

[SeeAlice]

Thanks for contributing! IMO, this forum, while a great tool in brainstorming and learning new things about the CJ system (at least I have, I don't know about ya'll), essentially operates like much more sophisticated court of public opinion, thankfully with parameters to eliminate inflammatory, threatening, and/or insensitive comments you usually find in the typical court of public opinion.
IMO, once he goes to jury, we will, undoubtedly get much more information that we have not yet been made privy to. We are two different people and to me, I feel like I've read a lot of posts citing positive reasons they feel as though the prosecution is strong in achieving a guilty verdict of the AK charge, and I've also read a lot of points that a defense side may bring up. To me, the DNA evidence, including blood in the trunk of his car, and the subsequent disappearance of a young lady who has yet to be found indicates there was a crime committed.
I ask my next question because I sincerely want to know your thoughts on this; do you think those two facts are not solid enough in evidence to show positive proof of a crime. If you do believe they're not, do you mind sharing why?

Not at this point. Perhaps when presented in context with additional evidence and a coherent argument by the prosecution, it might be enough. I don't know.

So many seem so absolutely convinced EA did it (whatever "it" is) and even why he did "it" that I often feel like the little old lady in the Wendy's commercial saying, "Where's the beef?"

JMO, I would try to hold my judgment and my tongue regarding the guilt or innocence of a suspect in my daughter's disappearance, especially if accusing one of such serious and heinous crimes, at least until after hearing the state's case.

The day may come when someone accuses their son of a crime. I believe they would not want the public and/or the accuser's friends & relatives to "convict" him without hearing all the evidence and allowing him a fair trial by the courts, not the court of public opinion.


I have not been on the same journey that you all and CM's parents have traversed the past 7 months. If I had, perhaps I would be able to call someone a liar, a rapist, a murderer, or (evil/spoiled/narcissistic/entitled/sociopathic/deviant/whatever) with the same certainty,

However...

Neither have any jurors, who may at some point be asked to determine the truth of what happened to Christina early that morning - based on evidence, Texas laws and rules of criminal procedure.

 

[zippixx]

Maybe because they are the same people who didn't bother to collect DNA from EA until much later (long after they needed it)? Probably the most important element of their case against EA and they had to backpedal to get it. "Unknown male DNA" should never have been part of their report because they should have been able to either match it or not against a sample they had already obtained from the beginning. Defense will be all over that mistake, too.

Would it really matter, since they eventually did get a DNA sample?

 

[Helen_Ready]

You know how we can all agree that the "sexual assault of a CHILD" is different than a relationship with a teenager is our reaction when we first heard the news. I thought I was going to throw up. I cried. I was convinced he was evil. The next day when they released the details--were we not all relieved that it wasn't a young child? The tone of the forum changed. Because there is a difference.

A jury isn't going to go for this as evidence of a potential kidnapper. No way. Some of the women in the jury will have dated older guys when they were younger, some of the men will have dated younger women when they were in their 20s. Most of the jury will have grandparents or parents who met at those ages and had full lives of love and happiness.

The truth is, younger girls dating older guys is pretty normal. It's not unheard of. Yes, I get it,it's a crime, but let's get real.

I sat on a jury years ago. It was SA case. When it came time to deliberate the judge asked us to look at the evidence and base our decision on what the law says, not what we think the law should be. As we deliberated we had to keep rereading what the law said. When we started to have a couple of holdouts.. We had to remind the other jurors what the judge said.... We are to base our decision on the law.
I think this is applicable here.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

BBM
I'm confused. I believe that the original story from the friends at the apartment was that EA wanted SB to "sleep" on the couch with him that night and when he found that wasn't going to happen he was ready to leave. But how does that translate to sexually aggressive?
IIRC, when LE talked to the other people at the “party” they told LE that EA told SB that if she wasn't coming back to the couch he was leaving. LE asked if they would describe EA’s behavior that night as angry and the party goers said yes. Is that what is being described as sexually aggressive?

I tried to figure out a way to describe my personal opinion of sexually aggressive behavior in a PC way but I wasn’t making any headway so I took the coward’s way out and went to the web. LOL

Sexual Aggression: Relating to potentially violent behavior focused on gratification of sexual drives,
regardless of the desire for participation on the part of the partner. See Sexually dangerous.

Some have questioned why the other people at the apartment that night would let Christina leave with Enrique if he was acting aggressively but according to the definition above I don’t think he was. Also respectfully, I don’t see anything in the body language of Enrique walking to the garage with Christina that would be described as aggressive.

JMO, but I think he was drunk and/or high when he left the apartment with Christina. I believe for whatever reason CM got into his car willingly. Maybe he hoped Christina would get in touch with HF or maybe someone else for more drugs but when that didn't happen he turned off on some deserted road thinking or hoping CM would be a willing hook up. I think she fought back and he accidentally killed her and then panicked and dumped her body somewhere. I don’t think he is capable of being a criminal mastermind as evidenced by the ridiculous lies he told to LE. I think he has just gotten lucky that CM’s body hasn't been found but I also believe that it will be found.

Maybe because there hasn't been anything new on Christina’s case some of us just keep going over and over the same facts and try to find something new and I don’t think there is anything. It’s like the telephone game we played eons ago. Some facts we learned at the beginning of this case have been repeated over and over so many times that they don’t even resemble the originals. I get that putting ideas out there and discussing them can hopefully help jog something that will help find CM. But it’s gotten to the point that now it seems that some of us (and no I’m not talking about anyone in particular) just want to disagree with someone else without really having a point. I sure hope Christina is found soon.

Im confused. I thought that the general consensus was that he was looking to "get some" that night and the SB account was indicative of his state of mind.

Why do you think LE has said this was SA, then? Where else are they getting that idea? I, personally think SB's story is BS, but I was under the assumption that LE and others were putting Some stock in it.

I'm not going over the same evidence over and over again. Im actively seeking new information. I'm trying to figure out how all these different people played a role in this situation. Even people who weren't there. Even people who weren't involved. Life isn't simple. Her life was real. There are reasons that they all ended up in the same apartment on the same night that she went missing.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

I sat on a jury years ago. It was SA case. When it came time to deliberate the judge asked us to look at the evidence and base our decision on what the law says, not what we think the law should be. As we deliberated we had to keep rereading what the law said. When we started to have a couple of holdouts.. We had to remind the other jurors what the judge said.... We are to base our decision on the law.
I think this is applicable here.

I think it's applicable for the crime of having sex with an underage girl. I agree. I think he could get probation or some months in jail over it, sure.

I don't think it explains anything about what happened the night CM went missing. I don't think it will help us find her.

 

[Helen_Ready]

I think it's applicable for the crime of having sex with an underage girl. I agree. I think he could get probation or some months in jail over it, sure.

I don't think it explains anything about what happened the night CM went missing. I don't think it will help us find her.

Why thank you.

 

[heather.scissorhands]

Can they bring up the CM case during the Jennifer trial?

 

[SteveS]

The defense may question it, right? It's not one sided?

I have no idea what "it" you were asking about, so I can't really answer that. But in general, the defense does have limits in what they can introduce into a trial, just like the prosecution does.

Can they bring up the CM case during the Jennifer trial?

The answer would be up to the judge, but frankly I can't see why either side would want to.

I have a strong suspicion there won't even be a trial for sexual assault of a child, as that looks to me like a case for a guilty plea with a negotiated sentence.