UVA student missing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is not cooperating! Several times at the press conference the chief said "we want to talk to him," and "we want to have a conversation with him." Its possible he said he had a drink with her before he shut up or that he said nothing at all and they know this from the bartender.

But he has not been interviewed by the police.

That's wrong. They have talked to him and said they want to talk to him more.

+1

PP has already convicted the guy in their mind. Case closed, pp knows everything, apparently even more than the authorities.

In all seriousness, there is nothing to conclude the guy has been uncooperative. He's spoken to police. He's not running or hiding from them. He seems open to communicating with them, if they call on him again for further questioning (and he has already been questioned, and given his story to authorities).

Although I realize news sources can get their info wrong, this article states that the police want to talk to him. It doesn't sound as if the person of interest is readily available.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Va-Seeks-Volunteers-in-Search-for-Hannah-Graham-275710631.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is not cooperating! Several times at the press conference the chief said "we want to talk to him," and "we want to have a conversation with him." Its possible he said he had a drink with her before he shut up or that he said nothing at all and they know this from the bartender.

But he has not been interviewed by the police.

That's wrong. They have talked to him and said they want to talk to him more.

+1

PP has already convicted the guy in their mind. Case closed, pp knows everything, apparently even more than the authorities.

In all seriousness, there is nothing to conclude the guy has been uncooperative. He's spoken to police. He's not running or hiding from them. He seems open to communicating with them, if they call on him again for further questioning (and he has already been questioned, and given his story to authorities).

Although I realize news sources can get their info wrong, this article states that the police want to talk to him. It doesn't sound as if the person of interest is readily available.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Va-Seeks-Volunteers-in-Search-for-Hannah-Graham-275710631.html

Yes, and in police speak, that means they want to keep him around for further questioning. Meaning he's already spoken with police, but they're not done with him yet. Nothing about the man indicated in the slightest, that he's uncooperative.

[Anonymous]

Clarification: police spoke with him informally when they went to execute the search warrant, but have not questioned him formally yet.

Press conference coming up at 3 to release new info: however Hannah has not yet been found and no one has been arrested yet.

https://twitter.com/Parker8News

[Anonymous]

I'm thinking the dreads guy did not do it. If he did I have to think they would've found something in his car or apartment to be able to arrest him. I'm more suspicious of the white guy following her and ducking in a doorway. I am shocked by all of the crimes on women in Charlottesville. I always thought it was a nice safe college town.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is not cooperating! Several times at the press conference the chief said "we want to talk to him," and "we want to have a conversation with him." Its possible he said he had a drink with her before he shut up or that he said nothing at all and they know this from the bartender.

But he has not been interviewed by the police.

That's wrong. They have talked to him and said they want to talk to him more.

+1

PP has already convicted the guy in their mind. Case closed, pp knows everything, apparently even more than the authorities.

In all seriousness, there is nothing to conclude the guy has been uncooperative. He's spoken to police. He's not running or hiding from them. He seems open to communicating with them, if they call on him again for further questioning (and he has already been questioned, and given his story to authorities).

They have called on him again for further questioning and he's not talking. There may be valid reasons for this - as a lawyer, its certainly what I would advise -- but you are just wrong that he is in some kind of ongoing cooperative relationship with the police. Why would the chief say several times "we want to talk to him?" if they were, already?

I think you are the one who has reached premature conclusions. All I'm saying is that he isn't talking. Thats just a fact, its what the chief said. Did he do it? I have no idea. This is what we know:
1. Hannah was drunk and lost.
2. Dreadlocks guy turned to follow her and soon after was seen with his arm around her.
3. They went to a bar, for about 15 minutes.
4. The police believe she was in his car and they drove away. On that basis, they got a warrant to search his car and whatever they found led them to get a warrant, meaning probable cause to believe there's evidence of a crime, from a judge.
5. While they executed the warrant, he spoke to them. It was not an interview and we don't know how long the conversation was or what he said. For example, did he deny driving her away? We don't know. Even if it denied it to his mother, we don't knnow what he told the police.
6. Whatever was said while the police were executing the warrant was not enough for the police. They would like to talk to him some more. For some reason, they haven't. We can assume he has declined to speak to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm thinking the dreads guy did not do it. If he did I have to think they would've found something in his car or apartment to be able to arrest him. I'm more suspicious of the white guy following her and ducking in a doorway. I am shocked by all of the crimes on women in Charlottesville. I always thought it was a nice safe college town.

Any 30 something guy , who does a 360 on seeing a drunk, stumbling young girl, entices her into a bar to ply her with more drinks, is not looking out for her, period. No matter what his grandma says. I don't believe the guy who was lurking in the doorway was innocent either.. This creep just beat him to it.
The way I see it, dreads is suspect #1

[Anonymous]

Since there are lawyers reading this: would the police have checked JLM's car for DNA? Are they able to do this without getting his permission? Also, how many days does it take to process DNA....there were 3 bags of evidence removed from his apartment two days, would that be long enough to get DNA testing done?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm thinking the dreads guy did not do it. If he did I have to think they would've found something in his car or apartment to be able to arrest him. I'm more suspicious of the white guy following her and ducking in a doorway. I am shocked by all of the crimes on women in Charlottesville. I always thought it was a nice safe college town.

Any 30 something guy , who does a 360 on seeing a drunk, stumbling young girl, entices her into a bar to ply her with more drinks, is not looking out for her, period. No matter what his grandma says. I don't believe the guy who was lurking in the doorway was innocent either.. This creep just beat him to it.
The way I see it, dreads is suspect #1

[Anonymous]

Thanks to whoever corrected the spelling in the heading!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since there are lawyers reading this: would the police have checked JLM's car for DNA? Are they able to do this without getting his permission? Also, how many days does it take to process DNA....there were 3 bags of evidence removed from his apartment two days, would that be long enough to get DNA testing done?

There is a lower level of suspicion needed to search a car because cars can go away. I'm sure they checked for everything but if they already know she was in the car I assume it was something that would produce results in a very short period of time, like fingerprints. DNA take a while to process. I don't believe they could have DNA results already but DNA isn't the obvious thing to do initially anyway. They'll look for things like blood, hair, and I'm sure they tried to and possibly got the outfit he had been wearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since there are lawyers reading this: would the police have checked JLM's car for DNA? Are they able to do this without getting his permission? Also, how many days does it take to process DNA....there were 3 bags of evidence removed from his apartment two days, would that be long enough to get DNA testing done?

There is a lower level of suspicion needed to search a car because cars can go away. I'm sure they checked for everything but if they already know she was in the car I assume it was something that would produce results in a very short period of time, like fingerprints. DNA take a while to process. I don't believe they could have DNA results already but DNA isn't the obvious thing to do initially anyway. They'll look for things like blood, hair, and I'm sure they tried to and possibly got the outfit he had been wearing.

Thanks for your reply. I'm hoping that is not what they are planning to announce at the press conference. (finding blood, etc), but the timing seems like it would be about right.

[Anonymous]

Could the dreads guy and standing in the doorway guy have worked together to do something to her?

[Anonymous]

Where are you getting info about a press conference?
I've checked online and can't find anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where are you getting info about a press conference?
I've checked online and can't find anything.

I just answered my own question. WashPo has info on press conf today at 3.

[Anonymous]

Just asking: is this regarded as a competent police force?