Smart Case, July 26, 2002

07/26/02 | Jolly Green

[Jolly Green]

Time Line
05/30/02	Thursday	~ Ricci returns to pick up his Jeep at the auto repair shop before the shop has a chance to fully fix it He tells the repairman that it needed for an emergency.
06/04/02	Tuesday	~ Ricci is at work from about 9am to 5:30pm ~ Ricci claims he spends the evening with friends
06/05/02	Wednesday	~ 1:05am - 2 cars are spotted on the SLC Shriner's Hospital Parking Lot by a hospital security guard, two blocks from the Smart residence ~ 1:30am (approx) - Elizabeth is kidnapped from her home ~ 1:30am - Ricci claims to be in bed asleep with his with wife. ~ Ricci is scheduled to be off work all day today. ~ 7:21am - Rachel/Amber alert is issued and national media is involved. ~ 8:30am - Ricci and his neighbor talk about the kidnapping of Elizabeth, Ricci seems to know too much information about it. ~ Sometime during this day Ricci is visited by police in regards to Elizabeth's kidnapping as reported by Angela Ricci (Richard A. Ricci's Wife which is an ex-convict herself) ~ Ricci is seen by his neighbor digging a hole by his (Ricci's) trailer early in the morning. (heard the neighbor say this on TV)
06/06/02	Thursday	~ Ricci is scheduled to work from 9am to 5:30pm today, but instead works from 10:30am to 7:00pm ~ Police talk to Ricci this day about the Elizabeth Smart kidnapping. (The media is reporting this, so it could be wrong)
06/08/02	Saturday	~ Ricci returns the Jeep to the repair shop to get it fixed. The Jeep is muddy and the repair shop owner sees Ricci remove seat covers from the back of the jeep and place them into a plastic garbage bag that already contains other stuff in it. Also the repair shop owner said a muddy post hole digger was in the back of the Jeep, Ricci removes this also. Ricci has a man waiting across the street to give him a ride. Ricci takes the plastic bag and contents along with the post hole digger with him. Also there is 500 to 1000 extra miles on the Jeep since Ricci picked it up on May 30th, 2002.
06/14/02	Friday	~ Ricci is taken into custody for a parole violation, this being the 2001 robbery of the Smart Home in which he admitted to.
Special thanks to Brigette for starting this timeline.

[Sherlock]

...that made him a reporter who could quite naturally be expected to leak information that the SLCPD/FBI didn't want leaked.

Uh, isn't the reason for a sketch to get it out to the public so the kidnapper can be found? They don't want a description of the kidnapper 'leaked'? I don't get it?

[Neenah]

Interesting, brigette. Hopefully it will be answered soon.

I hope this doesn't go like Jonbenet'.

[Neenah]

Well, none of us know the "why" on any of this. But one thing we can say is it is very strange.

[Jolly Green]

We didn't get this idea from FR, we got it from everything we've read and heard in the media on the subject. It is the police blinders that have led some to another conclusion.

The police have not in the past and will not in the future tell us or the media everything they are or are not doing.

The point is, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference either way whether Ed initiated, the SLCPD approved, or Ed initiated without their fore knowledge. The end result is the same and it is that very result that is important.

We know from the O'Reilly/Klaas interviews that Klaas/Boylan were not allowed to proceed - during the period when Ed was hospitalized. We also know from Boylan herself, in spite of the Klaas conjecture and inuendo, that police sometimes have very valid reasons for not producing sketches. She repeatedly complemented the SLCPD/FBI for their handling of this very issue.

Why is it that the when and why of how she came to be there, is more important than what she had to say? Why should we put more weight on words from a month ago of Mark Klaas who had access to ZERO evidence in the case than we should the words of Boylan who has been able to interview the key witness in the case? In my opinion your focus is misplaced.

[Neenah]

He quite likely was trying to say "brother's daughter".

I remember watching it when it happened,and sat there after he talked, and said "what did he say?".

He was all over the map. I don't remember him saying "my brother's daughter", because that woulld have explained what he was talking about. He was all over the map in that bizaare interview.

Maybe we can find the transcript.

[Jolly Green]

I think Ricci was suspected when the theft occurred, but he talked his way back in with Ed Smart and Ricci probably pointed his finger at some other worker.

Ricci attempted to get back in good graces with Ed after the theft, claiming that he wasn't the one, but Ed didn't rehire him.

[Jolly Green]

I think that's about when they decided they wanted her, yesterday. I think they adapted to the events. I think Ed Smart was what brought her in. I'm certainly not moved by some Johnny come lately story out of the SLCPD nearly a week later.

What difference does it make? The police didn't want a sketch revealed (for very valid reasons according to Boylan) and it hasn't been. Guessing at the timing or motivation on this particular event doesn't buy us much.

[stlnative]

Where did you get this from...? My understandig is he did rehire him as Ricci worked in the home up until September of 2001 and the theft was known to happen in June 2001.

[Jolly Green]

I don't remember him saying "my brother's daughter"

I'm not saying he said "daughter" only that he got cut off before he could. Some of these interviews are really disjointed. Look at the O'Reilly/Klaas interview.

[Jolly Green]

My understandig is he did rehire him as Ricci worked in the home up until September of 2001

I remember the specifics, but not where and when. I think it was a TV interview. I

[stlnative]

The theft occurred in June of 2001... Ricci and other people were let go as Ed did not who stole from them. Then Ricci was already in the deal with Ed over the Jeep. Ricci was allowed to work in the home again so that the debt of the Jeep could be paid off. Ricci worked for Ed at a rate of $8.00 hour. So I assume that if the agreed price on the Jeep was for example $2000.00 then Ricci had to work for at least 250 hours in the home. Chances are they Jeep was sold for that $2000.00 as it is worth more than that at this day and age. Ricci was let back in due to the debt on the Jeep and Ed needing someone to finish the work. Ricci employment ended in the home in September of 2001 (I heard Ed say this on TV during in a media conference right after Ricci's name broke in the news) The debt was on the Jeep was paid off at that time.

[Jolly Green]

I understand what you are saying, but that contradicts what I saw i.e. Ed saying all three were fired at the same time and none were hired back, even though Ricci came around later and asked for the job back.

[stlnative]

Sorry for the typo's as always. I am feeling under the weather. I just had to put another pet asleep today. I had to put another one asleep last week.

What I wrote is my true understanding of what happened. I know Ricci was working in the home as of September 2001. 3 months after the theft occurred. Ricci was fired, but was let back in. I assume he talked his way back in and Ed knew he needed the work done and Ricci had the Jeep and was trying to work off the payment on it. No charges were taken on the theft because they did not know who the thief was and the police would have had to search each of the workers homes. Ricci gets arrest on June 14th, his alibi on the night of the kidnapping is not holding up. Ricci house is inspected and they find items in it were stolen from the Smart home and reported in June of 2001. I am sure they confronted Ricci with what they found in his home and he was caught red handed and made the confession of stealing the goods from the Smart home. Then Ed Smart is told by police what they found in Ricci home and that Ricci confessed to stealing from the family home.

[Jolly Green]

Hot Flash: There would be a sketch if MK could have provided sufficient detail. In all probability, the perp was wearing a stocking over his head, which the police won't confirm or deny.

Hotter Flash: I may have been wrong. That seemed like the only plausible reason for not having/releasing a sketch. We now know from Boylan that there is a reason, but we still don't know what it is.

P.S. I saving all of your, Sherlock's, and my posts for later use by our grandchildren, LOL.

[stlnative]

How did Ricci pay for the Jeep then if he was fired after the Theft of the Smart Home? Ed Smart said Ricci worked in his home for a few months. The last time he worked in the home was in September of 2001 as Ed Smart said on TV. Common sense says he was fired in June and then rehired so that the Jeep debt could be paid off.

[stlnative]

Do you agree that Ed Smart said Ricci worked in the home as late as September 2001? If not... then what few months did Ricci work in the Smart home? When was Ricci fired? Didn't Ed say that Ricci & him parted in good graces in September of 2001?

I am just trying to understand what you believe happened. I know what I heard, but what you heard may be different than what I heard.

[Sherlock]

What difference does it make? The police didn't want a sketch revealed (for very valid reasons according to Boylan)

I think you got the wrong interpretation on this. This is what Boylan said:

There were many questions raised about why there wasn't a sketch forth coming from very early on. In this case, and for very legitimate reasons.

I read this as saying people had very legitimate reasons for raising questions about why there wasn't a sketch forth coming from very early on. The praise I've heard Boylan has for SLCPD/FBI is they didn't bring in a sketch artist with books of facial features which would have required her to undo damage done by these earlier attempts and MK's testimony has been preserved. Likewise a sketch was never released to help find the kidnapper and he has never been brought in. And I hope he doesn't strike and potentially kill another child before they decide to take him off the street.