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

[stlnative]

New thread...

[Devil_Anse]

"if there is none of the owner's DNA in a vehicle used by him"

If that is the case, I'd say someone did rather too good a job of cleaning it, wouldn't you think?

Or, more likely, the National Enquirer was sloppy in their stale rehash of what we already suspected, that there was no significant forensic evidence found inside the jeep.

[Devil_Anse]

The SLCPD will be faulted in some quarters no matter what they do. If they call someone a suspect (which is still not as drastic as what Chief Carona did in the Runnion case, and he is called a hero), then they are "rushing to judgment." If they refuse to let anyone see them focusing on any particular person, then they are "incompetent."

The police will not be able to satisfy police-haters no matter what they do.

[Devil_Anse]

"to sum up the case in a nutshell"

Do you mean the case against Richard Ricci? The case against Ricci is dead. There will be no prosecution.

Had Ricci lived, and had there never been any more evidence than what we think we know (from our extensive reading of media reports), there would not have been enough evidence to convict Ricci. As far as we know, there was no confession, no eyewitness identification, and no forensic evidence. There were no telling admissions of any fact tending to put Ricci in that bedroom, either. There was some circumstantial evidence. A large body of circumstantial evidence would have been enough to indict and even convict Ricci, but what we know of is not a large body of circumstantial evidence.

There may have been a voice identification of Ricci by Mary Katherine. That might have gotten him indicted, but I feel sure that Mary Katherine could have been made to waver in this by a defense attorney at a trial. From what we've heard, she was by no means certain about everything that happened. Plus, Ricci's guaranteed presumption of innocence would have been required to be weighed by a jury against this one small snippet of proof. The burden would have been on the prosecution.

Just b/c there is a presumption of innocence in the official criminal prosecution, doesn't mean that idle speculators are required to give that presumption when they express opinions. This point is shown by the fact that varina davis and others have been free to practically strap Spencer Dixon into the electric chair, without so much as one iota of proof that he ever even met Elizabeth Smart.

[varina davis]

Then I assume it must be perfectly OK with you for Prince Ricci to mess around with a sixteen year old, correct?

Your statement has absolutely nothing to do with what I said in my post.

[Jolly Green]

Too bad Westerfield didn't have Angela advising him then, he could have dumped the RV somewhere and said someone stole a set of keys to it a month before.

Not to mention having the support of the "little woman" behind him - winning over the hearts and minds of the logic-challenged.

[varina davis]

This point is shown by the fact that varina davis and others have been free to practically strap Spencer Dixon into the electric chair, without so much as one iota of proof that he ever even met Elizabeth Smart.

Your personal vendetta against me is really in full swing today. Your statement is total foolishness and your spewing of venom is living up to your screen name.

[Jolly Green]

Your statement has absolutely nothing to do with what I said in my post.

It has everything to do with it, you twit. Trace it back to where you said:

I have read the daughter was 16 years old, which is not exactly a child.

Answer the question: Then I assume it must be perfectly OK with you for Prince Ricci to mess around with a sixteen year old, correct?

[varina davis]

Answer the question:

Put a sock in it, JG, your tail end is showing.

[Jolly Green]

Put a sock in it, JG, your tail end is showing.

You really ought to bow out gracefully. You aren't even smart enough to follow your own statements in your own threads and yet you think you can follow the complexities of the Smart case. That's hillarious.

[ChocChipCookie]

You know, one possible explanation for what at least LOOKS LIKE incompetence on the part of LE is that the SLCPD and FBI aren't exactly on the friendliest terms. It wouldn't be the first time that local LE has tried to protect their "turf" from the Feds. There could be some underlying issues between these two agencies that have slowed down the investigation.

[ChocChipCookie]

but I also am amazed that someone who didn't pay their bill regularly would be so demanding that they'd insist the repair be completed in less than a day.

I'm not an apologist for the Riccis, but if I made such a call to a busy auto shop and they told me something like, "I'll have to get back to you on that. We're pretty busy right now." and then never called back, it wouldn't make me suspicious.

If the timeline that Sherlock has described is true, then I agree with you, Devil. It really is odd that she'd make that call so quickly, especially if she had another vehicle to use. BTW, do we know if the Jeep was "his" car or was used more often by Angela? Also, I was under the impression (not sure where I read this) that the Jeep had been towed in for more than one repair, which would explain why Ricci returned it.

One other Jeep thought (and I am getting so bored with this Jeep thing), but if Moul's repair shop has been accurately depicted by scaredkat, then I am even more surprised that they would give the Jeep a good washing before returning it to the Riccis.

[Jolly Green]

I am even more surprised that they would give the Jeep a good washing before returning it to the Riccis.

There is specualtion on that, but I doubt if a small shop like Moul's even has a car wash AND certainly wouldn't wash it by hand. I haven't seen it from a credible published source.

[varina davis]

Threaten someone else. You've become a bigger joke than this investigation.

Well said, spore-gasm.

[Devil_Anse]

"Wow the Quadrangle of Fear! I'm shaking in my cowgirl boots, JG."

"Brave brave Sir Robin,
Sir Robin ran away!
(He was not at all afraid to be mashed into a pulp...)"---Monty Python

[Devil_Anse]

"Answer the question."

And, whaddya know, she still hasn't answered the question!

Face it, Jolly Green, she uses the time-honored technique of: "When you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bulls--t!"

[sandude]

I also am amazed that someone who didn't pay their bill regularly would be so demanding that they'd insist the repair be completed in less than a day.

I've never heard that the Ricci's were dead beats. Moul has said that he liked Richard and that would indicate that they were either timely in their payments.

[Devil_Anse]

In the interest of quelling further forum intrigue, Jolly G. (I can hear the yawns from the others already!), I must tell you that I, like you, would be willing to suspect any member of Elizabeth's family of some sort of foul play, if only I could figure out why they would want to do such a thing.

I have tried to come up with a scenario which might explain someone in the family abducting and/or doing away with Elizabeth, but in order to back it up with a reason, I have had to speculate on possible divorce rumblings btw Ed and Lois--and we just have nothing substantial that I've ever heard that would point to that. I have even considered if maybe Ed thought of his daughter Elizabeth in the same way that (family killer) John List thought of his children, but, again, nothing that I know of indicates such a thing.
As I told one of our fellow posters, if we ever heard that there was some mental illness somewhere on the part of one of Elizabeth's relatives, especially a male relative, the idea of family involvement might take on some life. But we hear of no such thing, nor do we hear of any of the family having ever committed a crime in the past.

If Ed Smart cozied up too much to Richard Ricci, perhaps getting involved with some sort of shady deals with him, as some have suggested, then he is certainly guilty of stupidity.

None of my speculations is based on any knowledge beyond what the media has told the public--and it is all pure speculation, and I certainly don't present any of it as fact.

Like you, I am willing to consider family as suspects if we, the public, were to hear even one little shred of factual information which would serve to provide a motive. That shred of factual info does not seem to be out there at present.

[Devil_Anse]

I saw Moul on Ashleigh Banfield. Unfortunately, I missed his Primetime Live interview, and wish I had a transcript.
I remember, I think, that Moul said that the Riccis still owed him money. If anyone has a transcript of the Banfield interview, I could check my memory.

[Devil_Anse]

Your memory is correct, as to there being more than one thing that was supposed to be done to the jeep at Moul's. I think in addition to the repair, there was supposed to be an oil change, and that oil change couldn't be done on the first go-round b/c the jeep was removed so quickly.

There have been many different listings of what the work was, that was supposed to be done on the jeep. Fuel pump, ignition, oil change. I'm confused about it at this point. Angela could have cleared up our confusion, but she is just not the type to give a clear, definite, understandable account. (And after all, she owes no explanation to the public. I don't know why she has bothered to go back on LKL. She ought to go home and try to resume her life as best she can.)

You have a very good point about, why would some fly-by-night auto repair (if that's really how it is) be washing a car when no wash was paid for? Plus, one media report said they got all the mud off, so much so that the soil sample people couldn't even get a sample from the wheel wells. That sounds like detailing to me, and detailing costs money--no way is an auto shop going to do it for free!