from a "Case Study for Applied Criminal Psychology"

case files, articles, etc

Postby Ausgirl » Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:15 am

Thanks, NR. Like yourself, I'm not trying to develop a hard and fast scenario, but just exploring the different combinations of facts for the one that makes the most sense.

NR, you were the one who mentioned 'blood out the back" - did you mean inside the rear of the house, rather than in the yard?

Where at the house are both car and stairs? Back or front of property, I mean, as well as in relation to each other.

I think the document does a decent job at analytical thinking, at least as well as anyone can presented with the mess of facts and semi-facts that comprise this case.

As for Justin. Personally, I'm not discounting him, wholly, but it could be useful to look at evidence and theories from angles both with and without his perception of what went on. I don't at all think he should be ignored, but it doesn't hurt to look from an utterly objective angle at the hard evidence, either.
User avatar
Ausgirl
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:35 pm
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Postby not sure » Fri Aug 06, 2010 12:58 pm

Josh, question...what was Dana strangled with? One of the phone cords? hands? something else? Was he strangled or smothered? Smothering may be the reason the cushion was on the floor?
User avatar
not sure
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:52 pm
Location: stuck in the middle with you
Has thanked: 351 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Postby Night Rider » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:00 pm

Ausgirl, there is too much confusion about the evidence to speak accurately. I just read somewhere else that someone said that there was blood spatters on the ceiling, that has never been mentioned on these main boards.

Sometime in the past it was mentioned that there have been blood on the back door itself, but that may have been a matter of confusion. I can't remember if there was any serious blood in the kitchen, which was between the main room and the back stairs.

The cabin faced east, and the Seabolt's cabin was on the left. Both had a long setback from the north-south road, about 110 feet. Sue's car was at the rear of the cabin, access was from the loop road, no parking in the front, too narrow.

Johnny's room was down on the lower level, at the bottom of the stairs. Look at the thumbnail up at the top of these pages, that's the window for his room, on the lower left of the photo.

It was said that the first responders did scour the area for any footprints and tire tracks and things like that. No one has ever said that they have determined that Johnny and Dana entered from the front door. Nor if those "waffle stompers" were traced away from the cabin. It's my thought that if there was more than one perp, that one may have entered from the front, and others may have come from the rear, but that is just a guess.
Last edited by Night Rider on Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Night Rider
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Sacramento
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Postby Magnum PI » Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:04 pm

NR...Does anybody know for sure if there was blood spatter on the ceiling? As far as i can tell there should have been! How high were the ceilings in Cabin 28?
User avatar
Magnum PI
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:33 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Postby Night Rider » Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:47 am

As I said, no one else has ever said that, I guess maybe "Blood everywhere" could have included that. Maybe the real details of the scene are that gory, that's cool with me, remember the victims.

As to the ceiling, take a look at the photo just posted by Josh on Facebook, the one showing Doug Thomas looking at the wall. Since it shows the front door, that should give people a perspective. I'd guess that it was no more than about 7.25 ft tall.
Night Rider
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Sacramento
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Postby dmac » Fri Aug 13, 2010 5:17 am

I'd say the front area of the cabin (that addition which included the front door and window, as well as the boy's closet) was far shorter than 7'- looking at the photo of D Thomas NR speaks of, he's hunched over, and just shorter than the door. The ceiling in that front addition was about 3" higher than the top of the door.

The rest of the cabin's ceilings were 6"-8" taller than that front addition.
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3215
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Postby Magnum PI » Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:49 am

Thanks dmac and night rider for the info.
User avatar
Magnum PI
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:33 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Postby meankitty » Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:39 am

It has been said somewhere that there was blood on the ceiling. Before Josh posted the picture, I always though the cabin had wood paneling, but I guess that was put in later.
meankitty
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:17 am
Location: Quincy
Has thanked: 626 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Postby dmac » Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:57 am

I was incredibly surprised to see healthy, strong wood paneling replace the entire front area of the interior of the cabin (28). Some have a hard time accepting the fact several families lived in c28 after the crimes. Thankfully, photos prove otherwise.

Remember the metallic wall-flashing and burn on the floor of the living room (near where the couch used to be) in the 3-part video cabin tour? That's where a paying resident, long after the crimes, was allowed to install a wood-burning stove/fireplace. Nobody but a landlord would install such cheap flashing, yet allow a newly-installed wood stove to burn virtually through the floor. Nobody but a lame-brained landlord could possibly care to that illogical degree. Were it simply a resident's idea, the flashing would never have been discussed, purchased, nor implemented.

I've seen that same crap flashing in photos of other cabins, after 81. It reminds me of how Keddie was flushed down a toilet, not why. Keddie, to my eye, is still a beautiful place.
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3215
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Postby not sure » Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:38 am

The paneling discussion here reminded me to ask about the dark "stain"(?) on the wall above the couch (upper right near the kitchen entrance) in the crime scene picture (the shot taken from the front door through to the kitchen) on the Facebook page.

Josh, any comments about what that darkness on the paneling was?
User avatar
not sure
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:52 pm
Location: stuck in the middle with you
Has thanked: 351 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Postby Ausgirl » Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:12 pm

TinyDancer wrote:"I found a long buried post somewhere else, the person who was quoted said: "Look for a Pedo around the resort property, that's your killer".....

Indeed, wasn't it stated by the profilers that the kidnapping of Tina looked planned?

If she were the target, this would make sense.


Okay - I just now read the post where Josh says that Tina's earlier interview with the police concerned abuse.

By whom? - I think this is kind of really important a factlet. Has anyone ever released that information?

Might that make some kind of sense as to why Tina was taken? If her kidnap was indeed planned, that'd possibly be why.

-- Was it usual for Tina to stay home when Sheila went to the Seabolt's?
- Whose idea was it for her stay home?
User avatar
Ausgirl
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:35 pm
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Postby Night Rider » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:43 pm

That's one of my big hangups in the case, Mr. Seabolt said one thing back then in the timeline, then in the VHS tape Mrs. Seabolt said something contradictory.

Mr. Seabolt said at the time that Tina HAD been there, and at 9:30 she asked what time it was and then went back to her cabin. While Sheila has said that she went to the Seabolt's at about 10:00pm.

In the VHS tape, Mrs. Seabolt said that Tina asked if she could stay there and She said no, that is was for the older girls.

Mrs. Seabolt did say in the tape that Sue did NOT have a phone. Then there was that famous "Sue spread her legs" post on Cabin28 a long time ago, which some people attributed to Mrs. Seabolt.

Not saying that any of this is correct, but I have always had some problems with what the Seabolt's have said, or not said.
Night Rider
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Sacramento
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Previous

Return to keddie files

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest