Replies

Thanks for notifing me of this information.

It makes you wonder about LE or at least I do, why does it take them so long to ask for help in identifing someone. They always seem to wait until they are long gone. I know they think they can find these people on their own but really they haven't done a good job since June. Well, maybe they have in at least pointing fingers. (Edmunds did it, no Ricci did it, no Emmanuel did it. Is this all they have in tring to find out what really happened? They need help why don't they swallow their pride and get real help.)

I also know that when they were looking for Edmunds it became like a witch hunt for citizens and LE, but he seem to get all the way across the country without being seen. So who really knows what the answer is in finding them except I really don't trust anyone that is linked to this case except for MC that is.

I do also find it interesting that Edmunds would end up in a city were another young girl was missing and later on when they thought Elizabeth was seen and found her it was this other girl that had been missing from the city Edmunds had gone to. It's either a small world or Edmunds knows somethings and still really hasn't said what he knows. I find it really interesting that not one news media person every tried to talk to Edmunds and do an interview with him. You think at that time or when they brought him back to Utah someone would have done that for ratings at least.

Here is a question from me-I would like to know what happened to the investigation of a blue suv that really is a blue kingcab truck with a matching shell. That was seen at the time of the disappearance also afterwards, And the owner of the truck works/ed for a city in the Salt lake valley?

Also someone said Brigett is really a code name for a private investigator (male) working on the case. I don't know if they are one in the same but could be. If so that would answer how Brigett knows things as well. I do know back when I came on this forum brigette stated she had files and pulled personal files on this case. So when I stated about the cabin that Smarts owned but didn't know the exact address she had it. I would tend to believe what was written from Brigette.

The people that testified at the Grand Jury was stated at the time but what was said in the Grand Jury was behind close doors and noone will know until there is a trail.
I know Moul did testify as well as Pete Romero, that neighbor of Ricci's (sorry I don't know his name right now)and Angela Ricci. Also I do believe Ed and Lois were questioned. At this time I want to restate what I know about Moul, he owns the repair shop however; he was not the mechanic that worked on Ricci's cars. I know this for a fact and believed he was questioned as well on this Grand Jury.

CNN LARRY KING LIVE (An Excerpt)

Interviews With Patricia Hearst; Friends, Members of Smart Family

Aired March 13, 2003 - 21:00 ET
On February 4, 1974 -- 74 Patricia Hearst was kidnapped from her Berkeley apartment, a student at the University of California at Berkeley, imprisoned in the closet, sexually assaulted, eventually involved in the SLA robbery of a bank in San Francisco. You know the story.

Patricia Hearst joins us tonight with a unique personal perspective on Elizabeth's kidnapping. First, what do you think it must be like for her right now?

PATRICIA HEARST, KIDNAP VICTIM: Right now, I'd say she is very confused. And even though she's back with her family, which is far and away the best thing for her, because that -- the closeness of her family and being back with them is what's going on bring her, you know, back to being truly herself.

It's going to take a while. I think that she still believes that her kidnappers have some kind of control over her and it's going to take at least, at least a couple of weeks being away from them and back safely with her family before she realizes that they have no more powers, that she's truly safe.

And I know for me, the moment when -- it was a longer time, but the moment when I really, really felt the ultimate relief was when I saw them in a courtroom, and that was when I knew for sure that they could never, ever hurt me again.

KING: All right. But was there a time, since you associated and participating with them in events where this Stockholm Syndrome sets in, where you believe your captors?

HEARST: Well, you know, she was taken out of her bedroom, you know, at knife point, terrorized, tortured -- and there's no question in my mind that she was tortured. She's a little, you know, 14-year- old baby and you have someone who took her, robbed her of the identity that she was in the process of developing. You know, that's a very, very rough age for a child. You know, 14, 15, 16.

She's got to now kind of start over and she's also come home, you know, into a family where the dynamic that they had before her kidnapping has changed dramatically. She's come into a family now that has spent nine months totally focused toward getting her back to them. In that nine months she's been, you know, certainly mentally abused and certainly physically abused. You know, he had her hiding her places, dressing -- you know, dressing her the way he wanted her. You know, telling her, I'm sure, you know -- I'm going to kill you. You're not safe. I'll kill your family And he certainly knew the house, the family where everybody was, who they were. She's got to work back into that family dynamic again and it all has to try to form a new normalcy.

KING: The question, Patricia, most people ask -- it been asked of you a hundred times, but it's more relevant today than it was a couple months ago, when your case dimmed and this case is now in front of us. Why didn't she run away?

HEARST: I'm sorry?

KING: She -- why didn't she run away?

HEARS: Oh, I thought -- sorry. I thought you said she ran away from home.

KING: No, why didn't she run away. She was found on the street, walking down the street. Run up to a cop.

HEARST: Yes, you can't do that. It's impossible.

KING: Why?

HEARST: Because you have been so abused and so robbed of your free will and so frightened that you believe -- you come to a point where you believe any lie your abductor has told you. You don't feel safe. You think that either you will be killed if you reach out to get help. You believe that your family will be killed. You're not even thinking about trying to get help anymore. You've in a way, given up. You have absorbed this new, you know, identity that they've given you. You're just surviving. You're not even doing that, really. You're just living while everything else is going on around you. KING: All right. Now, there are even -- there were even pictures taken of them apparently fairly recently. The two suspects and her at a party somewhere.

HEARST: What kind of party was that?

KING: I know. Think of it. Now, you -- because she must have mingled with people. They weren't just the three of them together. They were with other people. He was in jail for six days. How do you explain that?

HEARST: Well, the party, I would say, his friends and I know the SLA had people around them. And why would you reach out to people clearly that were his friends, people he trusted to take you in there.

KING: So you think other people knew...

HEARST: It's not even an issue.

KING: Other people knew that he had taken her. Other people -- friends of his would have known that Ms. Smart is his victim?

HEARST: No. I think that other people would -- I think she believes that if she had told these other people that he had kidnapped her that they would have told him that.

KING: Oh.

HEARST: And frankly, I even believed that. I would -- I would be very frightened to just tell, you know, clearly what were his friends a thing like that.

KING: All right. How do you explain...

HEARST: These are not the people you would reach out to and I don't know about the six days. For all I know, he had left her locked in the trunk of a car while he was in jail.

The best case scenario is that she wasn't locked in a box and tucked under a bed or stuffed into a basement, but that she was left with, you know, his wife. We don't know what she was going through in those six days. She could have been buried in somebody's backyard.

KING: Should Elizabeth get an attorney?

HEARST: Yes. Absolutely. She needs an attorney.

KING: Why?

HEARST: She needs an attorney for several reasons.

On is -- and the most important reason at this point, is to keep the investigators in line, because they are, at this point, only interested in prosecuting the people who kidnapped her, which very admirable it is, however, there needs to be a limit on who has access to this child. She's very, vulnerable. Everybody is going to be -- you know, want to be able to say, Oh, I went in and I interviewed her and they're not going to be careful and cautious. If they administer psychological or psychiatric examination or physical examinations, I would be very concerned that there is no privilege between, you know, this child and those doctors and in fact, at the time of trial, it's possible that -- that the defense could then say, Well, you know, the prosecution's given these tests. We want our doctors to give her these tests, too. And then she's subjected to, you know, potentially an abuse as bad or worse than the abuse that she received while she was at the hands of her kidnapper.

Also, I think it's a good idea just in terms of the press. The press is getting -- well, you know, it's all about the sex isn't it? They're out of control.

KING: All about the sex. You mean they're implying that she was sexually harmed?

HEARST: Yes. I think it's more than implying. I think...

KING: Should she tell everything that happened to her?

HEARST: I can say if it were my daughter, there simply be no sexual abuse. That would be it. And that...

KING: But she might have to testify to that at a trial, though, right?

HEARST: She needs a lawyer, and I guess if they want to subpoena her and force her, you know, maybe they could. I think there's no reason why we have to know about something like this. This is a little 15-year-old girl. She's going to grow up. She's going to be, you know, 25, 45, 65. She doesn't need to have this.

I mean, I have visions of the day of her wedding, you know -- Remember, Elizabeth Smart she was the one that -- it's just totally unreasonable.

KING: In other words, it has no relation to the kidnapping. She can testify to being kidnapped and being held. She doesn't have to say anything else. Is that your point?

HEARST: Well, I think life in prison is life in prison. And also, I think we should keep in mind there will probably be two trials, one state, one federal. She's going to be beginning a very long, horrible ordeal. She really does need counsel to help her get through this, because as loving and, you know, truly lovely as her parents seem to be, they're thinking everything good is going to happen from here on out and it's potentially could be very, very bad for this little girl, and they need a lawyer who can get in between investigators and the daughter and lay rules.