Posted on 10/26/2002 5:29:22 PM PDT by Palladin
Expert Offers 'Some New Leads' in Smart Case
Saturday, October 26, 2002
BY KEVIN CANTERA and MICHAEL VIGH
As police investigating Elizabeth Smart's kidnapping became stymied by a dearth of solid leads over the months, the case has grown conspicuously cold.
That could change following a recent visit from renowned forensics expert Henry Lee, who was recruited to examine evidence in the mysterious kidnapping. Lee, who has worked on such high-profile cases as the O.J. Simpson trial and the disappearance of congressional intern Chandra Levy, told The Salt Lake Tribune this week he gave investigators "some new leads to follow" in Elizabeth's June 5 abduction.
Citing a confidentiality agreement with police he signed before gaining access to forensic evidence in the case, Lee wouldn't discuss his findings specifically.
Chris Thomas, speaking on behalf of Elizabeth's father Ed Smart, confirmed Friday that Lee gave law enforcement "many recommendations" on how to proceed. "The police said they would pursue those leads. . . . From our understanding, investigators have been very busy, since [Lee] left," Thomas said. "It has given the family a lot of hope that things are progressing in a positive way."
The 14-year-old girl was snatched from her bedroom in the early morning hours by a gun-wielding intruder -- a crime witnessed only by her younger sister.
Lee's examination of a kitchen window screen led him to back an early police theory that the screen was cut from inside the home, possibly as a diversionary tactic by the abductor, multiple law enforcement sources tell The Tribune.
Police have been unable to determine if the kitchen window was the actual point of entry into the Federal Heights home. Investigators' skepticism is grounded in the lack of scuff marks around the kitchen window and the belief that anyone squeezing through the small window would have awakened family members.
"I went through the house and did look at a lot of evidence . . .I examined the screen and the window," said Lee, refusing to say what he determined from the analysis.
Thomas said Lee did not discuss his findings with Ed Smart or other family members because of the confidentiality agreement.
While Salt Lake City Police Chief Rick Dinse welcomed Lee's input, he said: "I don't think there was anything that [Lee] found that will change much." Dinse said he expects Lee, who was originally recruited into the investigation by Ed Smart, to provide police with a written report.
Though Dinse has not publicly ruled anyone out, the chief has called the late Richard Ricci, who worked in the Smart home as a handyman last year, the No. 1 potential suspect. Ricci, who was being held at the Utah State Prison on alleged parole violations, died in August from a massive brain hemorrhage.
He was also charged with robbing the Smart home of jewelry and other items and an earlier night-time burglary of a home nearby while he worked in the neighborhood.
hm.....
well, the thing is .....whoever did this wanted to make it look like there was an actual abduction from the outside ...up from the chair and thru the window.....
now ask yourself....who would want what ever happened to Liz to seem like an outside job???? why would Ricci care....why would any crook care what it looked like?
on the other hand, you would care if you had a key to the house, and everybody knew it...
Ricci could have had a key.....so could how many others.....
doesn't a relative or neighbor of yours have a spare key to your house?.....that is a custom a lot of neighbors do.....
Ricci is a fine target...a fine creep to pin this on as well as his slimy friends....but since there is not one stitch of evidence that he went and took Liz and apparently no evidence of one of his friends....then it makes just as much sense to look at Ricci and his friends as well as other "respected" members of the community....members that might have access to a key ......or knowledge about the lack of the alarm system being turned on....or knowledge that the garage door would be left open for a while ....
if this crime had happened in Podunk Alaska, and you read that a rich man just happened to leave his garage door opened and just happened to not put the alarm system on and whose dtr just vanished during the night.....in any other case other than this one everyone here would see big old red flags.....
honestly, that is not true at all....
the police often let a person hang themselves with their own words....the cops are under no obligation to be absolutely honest when speaking of their investigation....
The reason the intruder went through the charade of putting the chair at the window and cutting the screen was because he knew the fact he had a key, knew the family didn't use the alarm, and knew he could use the key to walk in the front door would lead police to his accomplice and planner of the kidnapping, Ricci. Ricci knew the police would be coming to visit him anyway.
The police would know, as someone who had access to the house for an extended period, Ricci would have had opportunity, as Ed Smart has said, to have gotten a key. Who else would have tried to hide the fact they came in the front door with a key? Uncle Tom Smart? The Mormon bishop? No, it was a Ricci accomplice, to be sure, executing Ricci's plan and covering for Ricci.
There is also a product called (I think) New Skin.
I have a bottle of that right here. I use it for small cuts on me and my kids. I haven't noticed if it filled in the cracks good enough to take away finger prints. I may need to experiment.
That is definately something to consider.
This is kind of a back of the hand compliment for you from lakey here. She's telling you you're not very bright about this case, but you're not as bad as Sherlock. Congratultions, you're coming up with the 'logic free' folks!
The kidnapper wore a white baseball cap. I also think I remember from the early days of the case police saying he kidnapper didn't wear gloves but I'm sure they would have at least when they opened the front door and other doors in the house.
How many of those other "respected" members of the community (quoting varina here) committed another crime (robbing a bank) also with a 9mm pistol, broke into another house on the Smart's block, and bragged to his ex-con friends how easy it is to break into the Smart home?
....but since there is not one stitch of evidence that he went and took Liz and apparently no evidence of one of his friends....
You don't know what evidence the police have. The police said they will not make an arrest until Liz shows up or her body is found. They don't want to try the kidnapper and then have more evidence turn up.
http://groups.google.com
Law and order Cajun style. Don't be soft with criminals, make up the evidence to make sure they get convicted.
"So the police can tell a suspect 'your prints were found on the murder weapon' when in fact the police have no such information. The technique can yield false confessions with inexperienced criminals or retarded people since they figure the police have them set up. The con-wise know that the police are blowing smoke if the con-wise are innocent."
Covering one's tracks would be a good idea for any crook. But what I want to know is, what do those four dots mean? It makes me think the really important part of your reply has been removed.
Gee, two out of three ain't bad! What you consider "slamming others" is consistantly pointing out wild-eyed theories without any supporting facts, pointing out flaws in logic and common sense, and taking posters to task for smearing the victims in this case without any evidence whatsoever. A perfect example is a post claiming something was amiss because Ed always wore beige slacks at press conferences. How lame is that? (Never mind that the preponderence of men's slacks in any men's store are beige.)
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.