Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Leads In Smart Case
The Salt Lake Tribune ^ | October 26, 2002 | Kevi Cantera and Michael Vigh

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.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: elizabethsmartcase; henrylee; newleads; utahdisappearance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 481-493 next last
To: jandji
i think it has every thing to do with the origin of the statement. the key phrase here would be, "Police discovered a wrought-iron chair below the Smart family's kitchen window the morning Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her bedroom, her father says" ..notice the police don't say they 'discovered' a chair, ED says the police 'discovered' a chair.

You are trying to ignore the key point. Was there or was there not a chair? We know that there was. What the hell difference does it make who spilled the beans to the press?

81 posted on 10/28/2002 3:00:42 AM PST by Jolly Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: jandji
i play golf, and am very familiar with golf gloves, almost all male style gloves cover the back of the hand. however, something just occurred to me, the white baseball cap became a tan scottish golf cap, or Driving cap. driving gloves and driving hat? what do you think?

I say I made the exact same point over two months ago.

82 posted on 10/28/2002 3:01:55 AM PST by Jolly Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: cherry
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.....

You really have a "rich" thing, don't you? In Utah, Texas and a lot of other places where there is a culture of trust (an obviously foreign concept to you), people leave their doors, windows, and garage doors open all the time. My neighbor left his garage door open for about five years. One day his BMW disappeared. Guess what? He still leaves his garage door open most of the time.

In the Peoples Republic of California I set my home alarm all the time. In Texas I usually don't bother because of the much lower crime rate; concealed carry laws; the right to shoot-to-kill anyone on your property after dark; a vigorously enforced death penalty.

You can keep harping about Ed's "red flags" until hell freezes over, but it doesn't mean squat AND doesn't prove anything.

83 posted on 10/28/2002 3:16:49 AM PST by Jolly Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: jandji
ricci knew the police would be looking at him, so why bring the jeep back to moul. especially windows down, all sweaty, mud covered. ricci worked saturday till at least 5pm. that jeep has an air conditioner. if the jeep was functional when ricci supposedly took it from the repair shop, why would he take it back?

You really ought to start reading at the beginning of the Smart threads and catch up. You have missed a great deal - intentionally or unintentionally.

Case in point: Ricci originally took the jeep in for two repairs. One was the fuel pump which caused him to have to tow the jeep to Moul's. The other (which I don't recall - Sherlock can probably provide the details) wasn't critical to the operation of the vehicle. Ricci took it back to have that done after he took it out before repairs were complete because of an "emergency".

84 posted on 10/28/2002 3:27:32 AM PST by Jolly Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: jandji
"Liz was also at the ceremonies" no actual proof of this statement.

You are mistaken.

85 posted on 10/28/2002 3:28:54 AM PST by Jolly Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

Comment #86 Removed by Moderator

To: jandji
No, they would not be easier to identify. There would be no distinctive, unique whorls, hence no fingerprints.
87 posted on 10/28/2002 5:03:07 AM PST by cookiedough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: jandji
It would not take a genius to kidnap Liz.

Fact is, Ricci is a suspect because he had the means and the opportunity, and he would not divulge what he knew about the situation with the Jeep. Furthermore, like the vast majority of criminals, Ricci committed more crimes than those for which he was convicted. He wasn't a guy who got caught every time he committed a crime. In fact, if Liz hadn't been abducted, it is doubtful the cops would have nabbed him the B& E at the Smart's neighbors, the robbery at the Smart house, or the bank robbery.

I've met a lot of criminals in my line of work, and I've yet to meet a genius. Granted, a few of them were smarter than most, but those few did not waste their time on crimes against persons -- instead, they went after the big money.

Did you have the impression that Polly Klass' killer was a genius? (He entered her home, abducted her from her bedroom while she was in the company of her friends, and killed her. Then he disposed of her body.)

It doesn't take a genius to kidnap a person at gunpoint, and kill them. It takes a violent sociopath or psychopath, that's all.

Before you argue the point, my viewpoint is that any crime committed with a gun is a crime of violence.
88 posted on 10/28/2002 5:15:07 AM PST by cookiedough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: jandji
The police being at a "huge disadvantage" is a conclusion. Please enlighten us as to how you reached it.
89 posted on 10/28/2002 5:16:29 AM PST by cookiedough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Green
JG, I know you didn't mean to discriminate against the gray and navy slacks at the men's store. They demand to be counted!
90 posted on 10/28/2002 5:19:40 AM PST by cookiedough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: jandji
ricci hadn't been in the smart house for a year. ed also said he never gave any of the workers keys. so ricci would have to find a set of keys, take them, copy them, slip the keys back into the house. hope that the keys would still work a year later, despite the fact the smart's had been ripped off by the workers. and also know the alarm system would be shut off.

Ed Smart said after Ricci's death there was a good chance Ricci got a key to the house. You should keep up with the facts in the case, I notice you missing things that are well know frequently in your zeal to defend Ricci for whatever your reason is. Ricci's boasts to his buddies about what an easy rip off the Smart house was and the easy pickings there is a giveaway he knew the Smarts didn't use the alarm. Why do you try to defend the indefensible, do you think the police are stupid?

91 posted on 10/28/2002 5:23:36 PM PST by Sherlock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: jandji
...he couldn't have gotten smarter.

He certainly didn't get smarter, this crime was was his stupidest yet. Especially the part about parking his Jeep away from the trailer park for a week then taking it back filthy wearing a machette in broad daylight and then trying to tell police he never had it.

92 posted on 10/28/2002 5:28:54 PM PST by Sherlock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: jandji
... if the jeep was functional when ricci supposedly took it from the repair shop, why would he take it back?

Because he's a moron? Bad judgement in a post-homocidal depression? He had told Moul he wanted other repairs then took it back, somehow he thought this would work into his plan of having access to the Jeep while being able to claim he never had it. Like when he loaned his buddies his truck and they robbed the food bank with it but then he got caught with the stolen food. Not the sharpest tack in the box. Unfortunately this caper cost him his life. Will be interesting to find out if they were after ransom or just a good time before going back to the big house for his drug use he had gotten caught at by his probation officer.

93 posted on 10/28/2002 5:35:02 PM PST by Sherlock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Green
Smear the victims. "Beige" slacks?

If I ever, EVER, made a comment on Ed's slacks, I would not have used the word "beige." Tan, a light tan, would have been my description of the color.

Secondly, JG, Elizabeth is the victim! Until LE says the family members (neighbors & friends, too) have been completely cleared, they remain persons whose actions, and lack of action, continue to need further investigation.

One of Ed's first actions is a strong reason for suspicion, not so much of Ed being the culprit, but whether a gun was mentioned at that time, plus the lack of the public being allowed to hear the 911 tape.

As for MY wild theories, I had one main theory. It hinged on Moul's accuracy. I stand by it.

From the very beginning, JG, you slammed anyone as "ridiculous," then switched to calling them "sophomoric" when their opinions didn't jibe with your attempts to sway everyone to "Ricci is guilty" when even the police couldn't tie him to the crime. Some people may have left these threads later on because of my remarks, but plenty more left early on because of your remarks.

And that's exactly the way you want it. I don't know what your vested interest is in this case, whether or not you're just a person who always wants to be an attention grabber via insults for a sense of power. Or, if you know more about the workings, finances, etc., perhaps sexual practices of higher ups, of the LDS church - have a need to protect the image, to scare off anyone who might be so inclined to give us some deep details.

As for patting yourself on the back for what you say I consider "slamming others," while good you are only pointing out "flaws in logic and common sense, and taking posters to task for smearing the victims in this case without any evidence whatsoever," JG, you overlook that you have provided no proof either of Ricci's guilt. What has been reported in media is often in error, therefore not always a source of concrete, credible proof.

94 posted on 10/28/2002 8:22:57 PM PST by lakey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

Comment #95 Removed by Moderator

To: Jolly Green
You are trying to ignore the key point. Was there or was there not a chair? We know that there was. What the hell difference does it make who spilled the beans to the press?

difference is the source of the information. the only source for the chair, is ed. notice the difference in the quote about the chair at the wright home. "Salt Lake County sheriff's deputies reported that the screen covering the 15- year-old's window was cut and that a chair was found by the window."

96 posted on 10/28/2002 10:29:54 PM PST by jandji
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Sherlock
You don't know what evidence the police have

Police have publicly stated that they have no evidence linking Ricci to Liz's disappearance.

97 posted on 10/28/2002 10:35:08 PM PST by jandji
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: cookiedough
No, they would not be easier to identify. There would be no distinctive, unique whorls, hence no fingerprints.

they would be infinitely easier to identify in this case. the perp's smoothed fingertips would be so different than all other 'whorl prints' in the house. the perp's fingertips would be so distinctive, because he had no 'whorls'.

98 posted on 10/28/2002 10:47:08 PM PST by jandji
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Sherlock
The kidnapper wore a white baseball cap.

Of course you know the difference between a baseball cap, and a scottish style cap, is fairly extreme.

99 posted on 10/28/2002 11:00:09 PM PST by jandji
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Green
Ignition. What date? Which was first, the ignition or the fuel pump?
100 posted on 10/28/2002 11:10:32 PM PST by lakey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 481-493 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson