Elizabeth Smart Thread, 9/26/02 to ???

His crimes were not netting him that much.

Apparently not. At least, not the crimes that he got CAUGHT for.

Thanks for reminding me of that PERSONAL INJURY settlement Angela got, with the help of that "trial lawyer". I'll bet it wasn't the last one she'll ever get. It may not even have been the first.

That was another reason why Rick really was lucky when he hooked up with Angela. A nice-looking woman, already had a roof for both of them, tolerant of a little self-medicating, and a nice hunk of money to help him pay all the fines and restitution from his criminal court sentences.

Angela passed a polygraph.

Who says??? Angela and her lawyer?? On TV--not under oath?? Knowing as they do that the police and especially the FBI will not publicly reveal the polygraph results, and in fact will neither confirm or deny the results on anyone? Not reliable, as far as I'm concerned. That's like saying Gary Condit passed a polygraph.

Angela has a conviction for forging checks. She actually physically served time in the penitentiary for it. Women defendants on property crimes aren't given time on their first offense (though if they break probation, there will be a backup prison sentence for them) unless there is some sort of negative history. LET'S SEE HEIDI'S CONVICTION OF A CRIME.

How do we know Heidi was never given a polygraph?

A polygraph is an interviewing tool. It does not tell whether a person is lying or not. That is one reason they are not admissible in court. It is used to create an atmosphere in which the interviewee is more likely to give up information to police. This is done by having the person do a "test run" first, in which they answer questions whose answers are known by them, and to the interviewer. They are even instructed on this test run to answer one question falsely. Then the interviewer "reads" the results of this test run to the interviewee, and "tells" him which answer came out "lying." But the interviewer knows anyway which answer was false, b/c it was he who told the interviewee to answer it falsely.

All this does is give most interviewees faith in the power of the polygraph to tell when they are lying. Their believing that the police can "tell" when they are lying makes many a person decide to just spill their guts. It's a power-of-suggestion thing. And who is there to question the judgment of the police as to how they read the polygraph results? They can never be cross-examined on how they get these "results", b/c nothing to do with the polygraph is admissible in court.

As far as Ed saying Ricci left his handyman job on good terms, leaving under suspicion of theft is not leaving on good terms. Ed would know that if he didn't have such a weird way of looking at things. He appears to have a large capacity for denial (as does Angela.) Also, Ed could only speak for himself. For all he knew, Ricci did not consider himself to be "on good terms."

"There is no question there is a connectivity between Mr. Ricci, these charges and the Smart case, etc."

They have to find the body b/f they charge anyone. It would be very risky to try anyone for the abduction w/o knowing if Elizabeth is alive or dead, especially since she's almost surely dead.

And once they indict someone for Elizabeth's murder, or just for her kidnapping, that starts the legal clock running, and they can't slow it down. They might have ended up convicting Ricci of kidnapping, when he'd really done murder, and then if they later got evidence of his having done murder, double jeopardy would have prevented them from ever convicting him of the murder.

Come on, if Ricci was the first guy on the list given to the police, Red Flag.

Not sure what you mean here. The list given police by Ed Smart? I don't know that he WAS the first guy, or was even on the first list of people they told police Elizabeth knew.

Remember, a parole/probation officer is not necessarily the enemy of his clients. You know they will often give a person a chance to clear up when he is slacking off on terms such as drug use. I've gotten them to give people another chance b/f filing a request that the people's probation/parole be revoked.

Who knows what Ed at first told police about Ricci, if he even mentioned him? Ed is so weird, he's going around thinking he and Ricci were on the best of terms, when he knows he fired Ricci and that Ricci later lied to him to get back working for Ed. That's why I'd like to know more about the relationship btw Ed and Rick.

Thanks for the sources for some of Angela's statements. Not only that, but I know she said one time on TV, that she'd have "felt" it if he'd gotten up to go to the bathroom, and she didn't "feel" it. Then I saw her on TV later, and this time she said he'd gotten up that night to go to the bathroom one time.

Not to mention that if she was asleep, she wouldn't know. Not to mention the report from Carma Tolman that Angela asked people if they'd seen Rick leave that night. Oh, wait, I forgot--Carma is a liar, and so is her son Thurber. People around here are SURE Carma and Thurber are liars, but they are SURE Angela is truthful at all times. Never mind that all 3 of these people were friends, next-door neighbors, and associates. We're supposed to believe that there was this bright line btw the character of Angela, as opposed to the characters of Thurber and his mother. WHERE ARE THURBER'S AND HIS MOTHER'S CONVICTIONS FOR FORGERY? Where are their convictions for ANYTHING?

Not to mention that Angela has incentive to lie or refuse to tell about Rick's activities.

His mom, his siblings?....I mean, aside from anything said at the funeral--that doesn't count.

Right. It would be pretty hard to count anything Ricci's mom or siblings said about him at the funeral, anyway, since they COULDN'T MAKE IT TO THE FUNERAL, ACCORDING TO ANGELA.

There was Mr. Mitchell, the employer. He said Rick was an excellent employee. Rick had worked for him, I think, no more than a month. Mr. Mitchell clearly believes that given a chance, even a repeat offender can turn into a law-abiding citizen. Also, Mr. Mitchell said on TV one time that Rick was at work on June 5. He was later shown to be wrong about that. What else was he wrong about, I wonder?

We never heard Word One from Ricci's own mother, except one statement: something to the effect of "he's had problems, I've told them that...I've always stayed in touch with him."

I can't wait to see some poster bring up that Ricci's mother-in-law spoke up for him. She also said Ricci never hurt anyone. Seems she didn't know that he'd shot a police officer. I'd say that was "hurting" the person who was shot, but of course this is open to interpretation, don't you think?

Perhaps some of the posters can start a discussion of whether the wounds of that police officer from Ricci's sawed-off shotgun were serious enough to qualify as being "hurt." They could also discuss whether it really hurt that pregnant woman in the bank that Ricci was indicted for robbing, while wearing a ski mask and carrying a gun (and not a "small black handgun"), when Ricci made her lie on the floor. I would think that at least the pregnant woman's feelings were hurt. Thinking that you and your unborn baby are likely to die in the next minute or so qualifies in my book as being hurt.

anybody could have found a less risky way to get Liz.

I agree! ESPECIALLY, a family member could have found a less risky way to get Liz.

Ricci may not have been a genius, but look how well he pulled off the burglary of Lin Lee's room in the Adams home. She actually woke up from the slight noises he made. He was STILL able to get away with it!!

I don't look upon Madelyne Gorman/Toogood, the child-beating mom, as a genius. But she is currently beating the system big-time!

now you're getting closer...etc.

Running shoes are specially made to have thick soles. Men's black dress shoes have thin soles.

How do you really know if Mary K. was asked about height in that way--"how much taller was he than Elizabeth?" That is just speculation by us. How do you know Mary K. said "he was about 2 inches taller?"

How do you know Elizabeth "has no breasts?" All I've heard around here is how "the pictures we have of Elizabeth aren't up-to-date!!!!!!!!"

The person who suggested to me that she might have been slumping said if she was, she was doing it b/c she didn't have a bra on at the time, perhaps had her hands crossed in front of her. All speculation, but certainly in the pictures of Elizabeth, she would be wearing a bra if she needed one--those pictures were taken in public, not in her bedroom at night. So she wouldn't be slumping in those pictures.

The e-mailer added TWO inches to Elizabeth from the running shoes' thick soles--not 4 inches. No way should we add FOUR inches to the height of the man, if he was wearing black dress-style shoes. Maybe an inch.

So if we add 2 inches to Elizabeth's height, we pretend she was 5'8". Then we add an inch to Ricci's height, so we pretend he was 6'1". That gives a 5 inch difference. So if they had taken Elizabeth's true height, 5'6", and added 5 inches, that would make the hypothetical man 5'11". That's at least close to what they estimated his height to be.

I hope you're not saying that serious alcoholism is a "whimsical pastime."

I doubt that every heroin addict always has enough heroin or methadone readily available to keep him/her calm and on an even keel.

A poster on another forum described his/her work with heroin addicts in some clinic/hospital ward. The poster said that sometimes they wanted to "check in" in order to clear out their system. This would then enable them, after their discharge from treatment, to get their "fix" from a lesser amount of heroin than it would have required b/f they went in for treatment. This was b/c their tolerance would have been higher b/f they got clean, and the amount necessary for the fix would have been escalating and thus costing more and more. They didn't have the money for that, so they'd want to get "clean" in order to be able to buy less and still get the fix.

This poster also said that those heroin addicts who had some sort of coverage, be it government or private, would call and ask "how long has it been since I was in?" They knew the exact timing of how long they had to wait btw cleansing hospital stays, in order to have each hospital stay paid for by their provider.

The poster also said that while on the ward, the addicts would beg to have one of those intravenous tubes inserted--the kind that stay in your skin, like the little thing that is used for an IV. (Those tubes are kept in on patients who need very frequent injections of some sort of medicine, as in chemotherapy, at least how chemo used to be.) The reason they wanted the little tube to stay in their skin was so they could have a friend come by to visit--and the friend could shoot them up through the little tube, and there'd be no needle mark.

I am not trying to say that being on a heroin high (or low) would make a person likely to run out and break in and kidnap a girl. As I said to Freedox, it's hard to see how a using heroin addict would be motivated to do anything that energetic. All I'm saying is that it was a documented fact that Ricci was a heroin addict, that a person once addicted must deal with it for life, and that the prognosis is poor for the person going for a very long time w/o falling off the wagon. Ricci's track record (no pun intended) looks to have been pretty bad, as far as falling back into using again and again.

Do you agree that a heroin addict who is NOT currently high, but who is beginning to need a fix, can get pretty desperate?

My point exactly. I wonder why his own family didn't go to his funeral. Doesn't sound like they want anything to do with him, dead or alive.

Mr. Mitchell teaches a course at the prison. Bless his idealistic heart. I'm sure there are some career criminals who do turn their lives around. I've never met any of them, but I am perhaps cynical, having made the acquaintance of too many of them.

Sure, career criminals are sometimes accused of involvement in crimes they do not commit. They also commit lots of crimes for which they do not get caught. Although they should not serve time for that which they did not do, it does not follow that a wrongful accusation transforms them into law-abiding citizens.

Please, don't get anyone started on whether the police officer Ricci shot was hurt. If anyone says it was the cop's fault, I think I will throw up, and I don't want to ruin my keyboard.

My keyboard will also suffer if anyone says that Ricci was kind to the pregnant woman because he let her lie down.

I'm afraid I'm of the "leopards don't change their spots" persuasion. Whether Ricci was involved in Smart case or not, and I think he was, his recent past proves beyond doubt that he had not changed one whit.

Ricci was a violent sociopath, IMO.

"You are obviously not paying attention. The better informed posters on these threads have long contended that Ricci had an accomplice that went inside the house."

so then MK could not have recognized the voice and could not identify who she heard and saw....then all this exp. that Ricci had with going into houses at night to steal with people sleeping is wasted and all his exp. with the inner workings of the house is wasted too since "the better informned posters" contend that he Ricci did not go into the house..

you cannot have it both ways....either Ricci did it based on the fact that HE knew the house and it was HIS M.O. to go into houses at night or HE DID NOT....

It seems people can find any scenario to make Ricci the perp, no matter how ambiguous but heaven's , just don't draw anyone else respectable into the equation.....

Just based on the 'eyewitness' account alone, Ricci is innocent.

NO, based on the so-called eyewitness account, THE CASE AGAINST RICCI IS NOT PROVED. The case against OJ was not proved, according to the judgment of the court. Does this mean OJ is "innocent?"

based on that fact, a real lawyer given half a chance in a Utah court, could win a multi-million dollar libel suit against the "Smart clan."

Pure, unadulterated BULLCRAP!!!

1. Find all the statements made by the "Smart clan" about Ricci in public. You will find precious little in which any of them said anything negative. Only Ed appears to have done so. And he took forever to say it. And when he did say it, he was clearly expressing his OPINION that Ricci was "involved." NONE OF THEM EVER CAME OUT AND SAID, "RICCI DID THIS CRIME." Far from it. As for Ed's opinion, there is a small matter of the First Amendment, which does provide some slight protection to speakers/writers in this country, even in places like New York, California, or Oregon.

2. Anything said about Ricci after his death cannot be the basis for a defamation suit. Defamation=libel, slander.

3. In order to prevail in a defamation suit, a person would have to show that his reputation was harmed. They'd have to have something good about their reputation b/f they were defamed, in order for the defamation to cause it harm. Ricci's reputation b/f all this--was it excellent? Was it even good?

4. What damages did Ricci suffer through having his name put out in public as a "person of interest" in the Smart case? Was he refused employment b/c of it? I doubt it, since I heard it's easy to find work in prison, although I've also heard the pay isn't good. Did his wife, stepson, and in-laws reject him b/c of it? No, it even seems to have made them love him more.

Who will bring this "multi-million dollar libel suit?" I thought a defamation action was personal. Let's ask Cookiedough if she knows. There is no more Richard Ricci to be the plaintiff in this action. While the executor/administrator of a dead person's estate can bring some suits in their behalf, I don't think defamation is one of the causes of action they can bring on behalf of a dead person.

"The Smart clan" is not a legal entity. Such a suit would have had to be brought against an individual in this case.

Truth is a defense in a defamation action. Did any member of "the Smart clan" make an untrue defamatory statement about Poor Richard?

Anyone with the filing fee can sue someone. Winning is another matter.

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.