Posted on 08/31/2002 10:26:34 AM PDT by IamHD
Possible, but not probable.
There was no obvious reason for the Newhouse woman to come forward with her story either, but she did. It was discounted later. No video and pictures as she had originally stated. She also accused the lawyer of a crime.
I believe she was after the reward money and I can also believe that Moul may be after it too. If Ricci did it, his story would help convict him and thus he would be entitle to some of the reward money.
Well!!! we can't have THAT !!
without leaving a shred of forensic evidence.
No hair fibers,
fingerprints,
blood
or other tell-tale clues have been discovered connecting Ricci to the crime.
Hmmmm, so nothing, nada, gilch,zero evidence, forensic or otherwise has been discovered....Hmmmmm...he sounds like the perp to me.
Next thing you know, we will discover he had a stupid alibi that he was sleeping with his wife or something !!!
With intriguing circumstantial evidence -- failed lie detector tests, a dubious alibi and a history of brazen nighttime home break-ins specifically targeting children's rooms -- police say Ricci fits almost seamlessly into a scenario of a desperate, drug-addled burglary attempt gone awry.
We have gone over the dubious alibi, but this is the first I've heard of a failed lie detector test. We also knew he was a cat burglar but the targeting of children's rooms is very interesting. I posted the other night about my suspicions of his motivation in trying to get his job back after the initial theft. He tried to convince Ed that he wasn't the guilty handyman in the theft when in fact he was. Was he conning Ed because he really needed the job or was it because he had developed a fixation on Elizabeth? Was he stealing items from children's rooms because they wouldn't be reported or did he have a thing for children and the items they possessed? Very strange MO if you ask me.
I am not convinced that this was a burglary gone awry. Why go to all of the trouble to hide the Jeep before the crime for a simple burglary? It doesn't add up in my book. I think that Richard was graduating to a new level of crime. Let me speculate here. It may not have been his idea. Perhaps his accomplice is somebody that he met in the drug subculture that convinced him that kidnapping a pretty young girl for ransom would net much more than a hundred burglaries. And maybe they could also enjoy the fruits of this budding young woman. "And if you do this, I'll supply you with all the drugs you need." It is reported in the article that RR was a hard-core heroin addict with a costly habit. The level of his drug problem has not been mentioned before. I have no idea who Richards accomplice was but I am convinced that if RR was involved, he was not in it alone. We really know nothing about the guy who picked Rick up at Moul's. I hope that LE does because this guy could be very dangerous to the community at large.
Ricci knew of small yet valuable items kept on the girls' dressers. But Ricci's simple plan was foiled when Elizabeth -- a light sleeper -- awoke to find the man she recognized lurking in the darkened room.
Could it be that Richard grabbed something off of the dresser while he was grabbing Elizabeth? Maybe it was a burglary gone bad. Why hide the Jeep? I would like to know positively if something was taken from Elizabeth's room. They probably won't tell us what it was because it would be material to the case but just knowing something was taken would shed some more light on this.
but altered that description about a week after Elizabeth disappeared based on more extensive interviews a specially trained investigator conducted with Mary Katherine.
Ah the mystery of the hat discrepancy is finally put to rest.
Elizabeth, wearing red satin pajamas and a pair of sneakers her captor ordered her to grab, was roughly led down the stairs and out of the house, the 9-year-old would later tell police. When Elizabeth fell and skinned her knee on the driveway, Mary Katherine heard her faint yelp of pain - the last sound she would hear from her sister.
Doesn't sound like the perp was in the house for very long at all. Whatever he said must have really scared Mary Katherine for her to wait to inform her parents even after she knew they were out of the house.
In fact, a minority of police investigators interviewed by The Tribune expressed skepticism over this scenario.
I'll take some comfort knowing that I'm hangin with the majority on this one. The lack of fingerprints is problematic though. Richards hair could have been in a net and pushed up under the golf cap and there would be no reason to suspect he'd leave any blood. But we know that MK saw the backs of his hands. Could have been driving gloves with open backs I suppose. That would go along with his outfit. Does anybody else have any ideas here? I know that some of you will say that this leads towards the neighbors or a family member. I'm sure LE is checking everyone out whose prints they did find. It is a shame that the crime scene was contaminated. The Smarts can certainly be chastised for this unfortunate error in judgment. Does it point to a conspiracy? I don't think so. It tells us that they weren't very sophisticated when it comes to the ways of the world. This has been debated and probably will continue to be hashed over. I don't think that it rises to the level where I would cast suspicion towards the family.
Ricci surreptitiously took the vehicle from his lot May 30
My goodness, this IS new and quite interesting. For those of you who don't like sandude's speculation you can stop reading now. I've written before on this subject. In my thinking, this twist adds credibility to the planned kidnapping scenario. Let's examine Ricci's perfect crime, the one where Mary Katherine doesn't wake up and see him.
The woman calls ahead to clear the way for Rick picking up the Jeep. The claim is, they don't have the money to pay but they need it for an emergency that's come up. Moul agrees and is expecting Rick to come by and pick it up but he somehow gets the Jeep off of his lot without talking to Moul or any of his workers. Moul isn't particularly suspicious because of the previous phone call. Now the Jeep goes to the accomplices where it can be hidden for a day or so before the kidnapping. Lois' dad dies and the plan has to go on hold because of all the extra family staying at the Smarts home. On the night of the crime they take the Jeep out of its hiding place and drive to Arlington Hills. After they grab Elizabeth the plan is to surreptitiously return the Jeep to the garage within the next day or so. This gives Rick real deniability if he is ever questioned because nobody would have actually seen him in the Jeep during the time in question. He could then go back to the garage a few days later, pay his bill and be on his way.
As I've said before, Mary Katherine's witnessing of the crime changed the whole dynamic. Now they can't ask for a ransom (if it was ever planned to ask for a ransom, hard to tell) because of the heat. Either the group as a whole or someone within the group decides that Elizabeth has to be silenced or they're all going to hang. The deed is done and now the body must be disposed of somewhere along ways from Salt Lake. There were to many searches going on in the immediate area. Once again they take the Jeep out of it's hiding place when it's dark and make the long drive into the country side. Neither one of them know just how hot the Jeep may be on that day. For all they knew, LE may have already zeroed in on Richard and there could be an all points bulletin out for the vehicle. It had to have been a nerve-racking trip. There is no way that the accomplice wants that Jeep anywhere near his home now. It would only be a matter of time before LE came looking for it. So they take the Jeep back to Moul's garage. Why they didn't clean it out before showing up is mysterious. Maybe they had other things on their mind, I don't know. Why didn't they wait until Moul's had closed and then dropped it off? Again, I don't know. There are problems here that still need further analysis.
Does this help exonerate Richard? I don't think so. Some will say that maybe somebody else took the Jeep on the 30th of May. It's possible but Moul is sure that Rick brought it back and he wasn't complaining about why Moul let the Jeep get out of the shop.
There is one other point to mention in this discussion. If the Jeep was taken surreptitiously and it was planned that way then one would have to take a harder look at Angela as being the woman who made the phone call. What if Moul were to call the Ricci's to confirm that they had picked up the Jeep after it disappeared from his lot? The conspirators had to have looked at that as a possibility unless. If Angela wasn't in on the plan then what would she have told Moul? There is no logical answer to this question. Perhaps Angela knows much more than she is leading us to believe. Perhaps the woman who made the call told Moul that Rick would be coming after hours to get the vehicle and to leave the key under the floor mat. We need more data to determine anything for sure.
"I'm not saying I won't someday call Ricci our main suspect, but if I ever do, I will lay out the evidence against him."
At first glance I didn't like the sound of that statement. But what it sounds like is that they are still looking at other avenues in this case. If none of them bear any fruit then Dinse will release all that he has on Richard to the public. I would have liked to have it laid out this next week sometime so that we FR detectives could get some more work done but it is fair for him to want to wait a bit. As long as they are actively investigating this then that is good. I would be totally satisfied if they solved the case and found that Richard had nothing to do with this crime. So far though, he is the only person who has any kind of evidence pointing towards him. It is circumstantial, but it is better than no evidence.
They aren't made up by anyone..they are out there for anyone to hear or read. That is a shame, because that is where the people are getting doubt. It isn't the PD that is saying these thngs, it is the Smart family. That is sad.
I really think unless there is something new, statements like Michael Vigh and Kevin Contera's in The Salt Lake City Tribune by Cynthia Smart Owens, shouldn't be said again. She said....
Family members are "quite convinced there was somebody with Richard. . . . There's so much evidence that someone else was involved," said Cynthia Smart Owens, one of Elizabeth's aunts.
In the same article (see above by spore), it is reported that there is no evidence. Who is fabricating? That is what is so frustrating. Also this, in ref. to any accomplice
but are unable to believe that Ricci was smart enough to have committed the crime without leaving a shred of forensic evidence. No hair fibers, fingerprints, blood or other tell-tale clues have been discovered connecting Ricci to the crime. And without finding Elizabeth --alive or dead -- police seem unable to make a case against anybody.
If there was evidence, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Ed Smart continues to make statements that just don't hold up to scrutiny. He keeps changing his story on how the abductor got in.
Has it ever occurred to you that Ed is speculating about how the perp got in - just as we are.
1) through window When the police didn't believe any man could get through the window, then
2) He left the garage door open and he must have waited for hours
3) He left the alarm off at night.
4) Ricci had a "potential" key.
He's guessing. He doesn't know how the perp got in any more than we do, yet you think he is obfuscating. He even sounds like he is guessing.
None of these things by themselves are incriminating, it's the pattern that Ed Smart has of embellishing his stories over a period of time.
I see nothing indicating embellishment. People embellish to make themselves look better. Ed wants his daughter back.
I don't believe that the police told him not to discuss the description of the abductor when he was first interviewed. The police obviously didn't connect Ricci in the beginning and the idea is to catch the abductor not play games with the public. When asked by Fox News reporter several times, he finally gave the description that the guy was "Caucasian". The first 24 hours is the most critical to solve an abduction case.
It is not only likely, but probable that the police asked him to withold some details of the perps description - not to prevent the public from finding the perp, but to provide confirmation if a perp was caught. That's SOP. You didn't give a date of the Fox interview, but it sounds like it was in the first few hours when Ed and the entire family was in a rattled state.
What lies and distortions are you talking about? Many have expressed opinions on this case, not stating it as fact.
I wasn't referring to you in any way. There are several posters that are repeatedly posting blatant lies on these threads - as facts.
It was the day after he had a collaspe. I was thinking at the time, he would have access to drugs from the hospital (sedatives) that he could use to defeat any test. His brother Tom evidently didn't pass. At least that is what Tom indicated when he said he was being looked at by the police and volunteered that he had been given a polygraph. A polygraph is not allowed in court because they are notoriously inaccurate anyway and are used to scare people that are easily intimidated.
Polygraphs are widely used to rule people out. I have personal experience with two individuals who beat a polygraph - the first time. They failed miserably the second time. The police/FBI are aware of such devices used to beat a polygraph. They are fully aware of Ed's circumstances AND he passed the polygraph, just as Ricci failed.
I did not claim he knew Ed Smart. I asked the question. I asked it because I would like to know what reason he had to go to the meetings (service) for Elizabeth. You would usually attend if you knew someone in the family. I am surprised that a transient would go if he did not know someone in the family. This was one of the reasons that Edmunds was a suspect because he attended this meeting for Elizabeth. The police must have originally thought it was peculiar.
It wasn't a meeting - it was a candlelight vigil - attended by thousands, if not tens of thousands of people, so much so, that police were actively involved in crowd control. The entire community became involved in the case. Peculiar or not, Edmunds was never named a suspect in the case.
If I was to read only your post, I would conclude it was you. The article didn't say there was "no evidence". It said there was no physical evidence. One shouldn't expect any given that Ricci had access to the house and ES had access to the Jeep.
At least WE haven't lost our sense of humor.
You cynicism totally ignores the high probability that she was in on it too. After all it was a woman claiming to be Mrs. Ricci who called Ricci demanding that they pick up the Jeep. Maybe someone convicted of dealing dope conjures up all kinds of confidence with you, but it doesn't wash with me.
Ya, there I go again - confusing you with facts.
Ahhh, let's go back to the article, ok? Quote:
They say that while Ricci's history suggests his possible involvement, they remain flummoxed by the complete absence of forensic evidence to tie him to the crime. Those doubters acknowledge the wealth of unanswered questions, but are unable to believe that Ricci was smart enough to have committed the crime without leaving a shred of forensic evidence. No hair fibers, fingerprints, blood or other tell-tale clues have been discovered connecting Ricci to the crime. And without finding Elizabeth --alive or dead -- police seem unable to make a case against anybody.
Yep, that's correct !
Why didn't MK go tell her parents THEN when she heard her yelp? She had to know by this that they were out of the house..Have the LE checked the driveway for any skin from her skinned knee or any hair?
Ooppssss..Probably wouldn't be able to locate anything due to the neighbors and family showing up before the police.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,405027869,00.html?
Or having a nice Sunday visit with Elizabeth, who is now three months pregnant with the baby of some rich old Mormon elder in a faraway county. /sarcasm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.