UVA student missing

[Anonymous]

Video of JM today:
http://wtvr.com/2014/09/25/jesse-matthew-hannah-graham-abduction-suspect-in-court/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Press conf. at 3:00 today. Perhaps some forensic info or maybe they found HG.

Or extradition news

yeah, it might be. I'm hoping, hoping, hoping, that in the hours that they have been questioning him, he finally told them where her body is and they have recovered it. It just breaks my heart that she is in all likelihood dead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Press conf. at 3:00 today. Perhaps some forensic info or maybe they found HG.

Or extradition news

yeah, it might be. I'm hoping, hoping, hoping, that in the hours that they have been questioning him, he finally told them where her body is and they have recovered it. It just breaks my heart that she is in all likelihood dead.

You are aware he is not answering any questions. He has an attorney and no attorney would permit his client to answer questions.

And this is quite apart from the obvious assumption you are making that HG is dead and that JM is the killer. I guess you don't believe in a person being innocent until proven guilty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Press conf. at 3:00 today. Perhaps some forensic info or maybe they found HG.

Or extradition news

yeah, it might be. I'm hoping, hoping, hoping, that in the hours that they have been questioning him, he finally told them where her body is and they have recovered it. It just breaks my heart that she is in all likelihood dead.

You are aware he is not answering any questions. He has an attorney and no attorney would permit his client to answer questions.

And this is quite apart from the obvious assumption you are making that HG is dead and that JM is the killer. I guess you don't believe in a person being innocent until proven guilty.

Not when you find her blood in the trunk of his car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something does not add up. This guy supposedly was able to hide a person or body that thousands can find no trace of but when he fled he left his noticeable hair the same, remained with the car the police were looking for, and pitched a tent in what seems like plain view? Makes no sense. It's like he just wanted out of town but wasn't really hiding.

I would imagine that he was focused on getting to the border as quick as he could. It would be hard to cut his hair while driving and he probably underestimated just how national this news had become. When he bolted from town he hadn't been charged with anything, forensics hadn't come back - he was just putting as much distance between himself and the troubles back home as he could.

We don't know the timeline but it seems like he left the police station in his sister's car and just kept on driving without stopping. I imagine he stormed out of the station leaving his mom and uncle there -- not stopping to bring them home and back a bag first. That would explain why he didn't change his noticeable hair -- he wasn't home where he could have grabbed a set of clippers. He camped because I imagine he turned on the radio at some point between Va. and Texas and heard his name, so he may have known that he couldn't go into a hotel and swipe a credit card if authorities were looking for him. Surprising that he had a tent in the car though. He apparently did stop in a convenient store in Galveston where he asked the clerk whether it was safe on the beach and the clerk sold him mosquito repellant and allowed him to fill a jug of water -- guess the jug was in the car? What I don't get is why he stopped at all -- why not just keep driving all the way to Mexico and then take a break? Though who knows if he had or was using a cell phone. I doubt he knew exactly where he was going and somehow just got on the highways and ended up in Galveston; he possibly needed a break to figure out how to get from there to the Mexican border and how to cross without ID and decided to get some sleep first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Press conf. at 3:00 today. Perhaps some forensic info or maybe they found HG.

Or extradition news

yeah, it might be. I'm hoping, hoping, hoping, that in the hours that they have been questioning him, he finally told them where her body is and they have recovered it. It just breaks my heart that she is in all likelihood dead.

You are aware he is not answering any questions. He has an attorney and no attorney would permit his client to answer questions.

And this is quite apart from the obvious assumption you are making that HG is dead and that JM is the killer. I guess you don't believe in a person being innocent until proven guilty.

presumptions of innocence are for the jury...I don't have to presume he is innocent. Of course, I can also change my mind if evidence points another direction. Yes, With what I know now, I suspect he is guilty...but I 'm not in a position to sentence him to jail. His day in court will come.

[Anonymous]

What does everyone think of the restaurant's statement that Graham was never in the bar, but waited outside for Matthews. very strange.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Press conf. at 3:00 today. Perhaps some forensic info or maybe they found HG.

Or extradition news

yeah, it might be. I'm hoping, hoping, hoping, that in the hours that they have been questioning him, he finally told them where her body is and they have recovered it. It just breaks my heart that she is in all likelihood dead.

You are aware he is not answering any questions. He has an attorney and no attorney would permit his client to answer questions.

And this is quite apart from the obvious assumption you are making that HG is dead and that JM is the killer. I guess you don't believe in a person being innocent until proven guilty.

Not when you find her blood in the trunk of his car.

Has this been reported?

[Anonymous]

"we can't assume that folks have enough information to assess what's important and what's not" - longo, in news conference

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What does everyone think of the restaurant's statement that Graham was never in the bar, but waited outside for Matthews. very strange.

Maybe as they were walking she told him she was supposed to go to a party and she was lost. I could see him telling her he used to be a cab driver and can drive her to the party, but that he needs to stop into Tempo for a minute. Perhaps she knew she wouldn't get in because she's underage. And maybe she texted her friends while he was in there. But wouldn't she then have included in the text that she's getting a ride?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Press conf. at 3:00 today. Perhaps some forensic info or maybe they found HG.

Or extradition news

yeah, it might be. I'm hoping, hoping, hoping, that in the hours that they have been questioning him, he finally told them where her body is and they have recovered it. It just breaks my heart that she is in all likelihood dead.

You are aware he is not answering any questions. He has an attorney and no attorney would permit his client to answer questions.

And this is quite apart from the obvious assumption you are making that HG is dead and that JM is the killer. I guess you don't believe in a person being innocent until proven guilty.

Not when you find her blood in the trunk of his car.

Has this been reported?

Not that I have seen reported anywhere. I think PP is just making up crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many defense attorney in criminal cases who never ask the defendant whether he/she committed the crime. They cannot ethically be aware of some fact and then let the defendant lie about it in court.

Our system of justice requires a defendant to be afforded counsel against the government that often has a lot more in the way of resources. Many defendants, including innocent people, don't receive competent representation especially when they have to rely on public defenders - not a knock on public defenders because they are often over-burdened with very limited resources.

But they still can have an opinion about whether the defendant has indeed committed the crime?

I am the former public defender. I had a client who was a suspect in a murder. The body was missing. Long story but I felt pretty certain that he did it, even though he denied it. Then the supposed "victim" showed up alive and well and it turned out he had run off.
My opinion doesn't matter. I can be wrong. What maters is if they prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What does everyone think of the restaurant's statement that Graham was never in the bar, but waited outside for Matthews. very strange.

Particularly when witnesses saw them having a drink together, right? I think the bar is trying to cover their butt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Press conf. at 3:00 today. Perhaps some forensic info or maybe they found HG.

Or extradition news

yeah, it might be. I'm hoping, hoping, hoping, that in the hours that they have been questioning him, he finally told them where her body is and they have recovered it. It just breaks my heart that she is in all likelihood dead.

You are aware he is not answering any questions. He has an attorney and no attorney would permit his client to answer questions.

And this is quite apart from the obvious assumption you are making that HG is dead and that JM is the killer. I guess you don't believe in a person being innocent until proven guilty.

Not when you find her blood in the trunk of his car.

Has this been reported?

Not that I have seen reported anywhere. I think PP is just making up crap.

What is the evidence for "intent to defile", though? They can't just make that up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many defense attorney in criminal cases who never ask the defendant whether he/she committed the crime. They cannot ethically be aware of some fact and then let the defendant lie about it in court.

Our system of justice requires a defendant to be afforded counsel against the government that often has a lot more in the way of resources. Many defendants, including innocent people, don't receive competent representation especially when they have to rely on public defenders - not a knock on public defenders because they are often over-burdened with very limited resources.

But they still can have an opinion about whether the defendant has indeed committed the crime?

I am the former public defender. I had a client who was a suspect in a murder. The body was missing. Long story but I felt pretty certain that he did it, even though he denied it. Then the supposed "victim" showed up alive and well and it turned out he had run off.
My opinion doesn't matter. I can be wrong. What maters is if they prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

How many times was the victim actually dead... and the suspect murdered them?