UVA student missing

[Anonymous]

Now down the rabbit hole of they were secret friends...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what is going on is he was with her, knows what happened to her or who she went with, but is afraid to give too much information because as a black man who is a POI in a case with a missing white girl, chances are good it will all get pinned on him. Black men have a mistrust of police. He's absolutely hindering the case, but I think he's terrified to come to them and say what he knows, who she went with, what that person did with her or where they took her because he's afraid it's all going to fall on him.

I don't have sympathy for the guy. I just find it hard to believe he personally killed her. He doesn't fit the profile for this type of crime. I think he definitely knows much more than he's telling the police and possibly is involved in whatever DID happen to her in a tangential way (handing her off, taking her somewhere questionable, etc.) but killed her- I'm not buying it yet.

The outpouring of sympathy for this guy is amazing. If he knows what happened ; ie she's dead. Speak up mofo

i wouldn't call this sympathy - i'd call it questioning. just like practically every other post on this thread - PP has a theory

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone wonder if the lawyer he spoke to has shared any info?

He's not allowed to -- confidentiality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think his lawyer said "you are looking at 30 years ..." and he fled.

Nope, he couldn't have said that. Former criminal defense lawyer who has contributed to this thread. At your initial meeting with a client you can't possible say what they are looking at without having seen the evidence, not to mention he hadn't been charged yet. Its possible that he said something that set him off, but I doubt it. He wouldn't have been able to say anything at that point except keep your mouth shut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you playing race just STOP. He is being looked for because he was the last person seen with her and she is missing. And he fled. And then something else emerged which led them to issue a warrant for him - which they did not do immediately. He is under scrutiny because of his actions, NOT BECAUSE HE IS BLACK!

No one, NO ONE, is saying that this is happening to him because he is black, rather his actions to me and many others could be the actions of a guilty man or an innocent man who fears the justice system. If it were my son and I knew he was innocent, I'd still be scared shitless for him. Black men do not get a fair shake in this country's justice system. Do you deny that fact? Can you not understand that maybe he is uncooperative because he fears cooperating will not work in his favor even if there's nothing to hide? People are coerced into false confessions more than you'd believe. He is already being assumed guilty. Being a black male and the last person to have seen a missing white girl, in a case where the police are under huge pressure and the public is screaming for answers is a dangerous and scary situation. I don't know if he's innocent or guilty, but I sincerely doubt his chances of a fair trial.

Yes, of course AA men should have reason to be skeptical of our criminal justice system, but its a stretch to say he can't have a fair trial. AA men are acquitted all the time. I don't know this area, but it sounds like it won't be an all white jury. I agree that as a AA he is likely more distrustful of the system, but I don't see a rush to judgment here (they held off on charges until they had sufficient evidence) and while race affects all sorts of things in the system, I wouldn't assume it is the most important factor here.

[Anonymous]

I think it's a little weird that she would go have a drink with this guy. When I was 18 if a 32 year old stranger asked me to have a drink in a bar I would have said no thank you. Anyone else think it's strange ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a little weird that she would go have a drink with this guy. When I was 18 if a 32 year old stranger asked me to have a drink in a bar I would have said no thank you. Anyone else think it's strange ?

I feel the same way. But she was apparently quite intoxicated... I still don't think I would've gone with the guy though. But I am not her...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a little weird that she would go have a drink with this guy. When I was 18 if a 32 year old stranger asked me to have a drink in a bar I would have said no thank you. Anyone else think it's strange ?

It is very strange. As an UVA alum, it it pretty rare to hang out with townies. Undergrads stick to Rugby Road and the Corner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Murderers don't typically sashay in to the police station looking for a lawyer. I think this dude knows something, but he is not the guy. I think he handed her off. Consider the charge - kidnapping with intent to defile.

They are turning up the heat on him so he turns.

Thats the language in the statute. They have evidence -- we don't know what it is -- that he took her.

As far as murderers going into police stations, that doesn't seem strange to me at all when your name and picture are all over the place. You need a lawyer, what else are you going to do? Innocents people don't typically lead cops on a high speed chase. To me this is all of a piece -- the guy was panicking. The first stop on his panic -- OMG I need a lawyer -- was the police station. The second stop was to run.

I don't know if he did it but you certainly don't know that he didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a little weird that she would go have a drink with this guy. When I was 18 if a 32 year old stranger asked me to have a drink in a bar I would have said no thank you. Anyone else think it's strange ?

No it's not. I liked older guys in my early 20s. They usually had fun hobbies, interesting occupations, and treated me with admiration that I enjoyed ( of course they just wanted a piece of ass but I was too young to realize it).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a little weird that she would go have a drink with this guy. When I was 18 if a 32 year old stranger asked me to have a drink in a bar I would have said no thank you. Anyone else think it's strange ?

No it's not. I liked older guys in my early 20s. They usually had fun hobbies, interesting occupations, and treated me with admiration that I enjoyed ( of course they just wanted a piece of ass but I was too young to realize it).

This is weird you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are some things I find troubling about this:

Police searched Matthew's car and house thoroughly one time and had the evidence tested, and did not seem to have enough evidence to charge Matthew with abduction. If she had gotten in his car, wouldn't there have been some evidence that she had been in there?

Then Matthew went to the police station to request and talk to a lawyer, at which point he ran and the police (probably based on his running) got another warrant to search his apartment again and took out more clothing. Then announced they really, really wanted to talk to him, and then they issued a warrant for his arrest for abduction with intent to defile.

The thing is, she was at the bar with Matthew at around 12:45 or 1 (I think). Then her last communication is a text 20 minutes later saying she is lost, and she is steps from the Route 29 corridor where 4 other girls have been abducted.

She doesn't say anything in her text about being with Matthew or being in a car. If she is lost, she was probably alone. And this was AFTER she had been at the bar with Matthew.

So to believe Matthew was involved in her disappearance, I think you need to believe either that he was with her in the bar, left her, she sent the text (while apparently alone), then he circled back and found her again -- OR -- that he abducted her and then sent the text himself to throw people off.

I find it hard to believe that a person who did either of those things would voluntarily show up at a police station to ask for a lawyer. Maybe.

How many people in this thread will believe that if a strand of Graham's hair, for example, was found in Matthew's apartment during the second search, it is evidence if Matthew's guilt and not cross contamination or cops planting evidence on purpose to get an arrest warrant? Probably almost everyone.

It just seems very sketchy. I hope it is resolved in a way that doesn't create a greater rift between races in our country.

You have it all wrong.

She went to the bar AFTER her 1:06 text.

They went back to the house with another warrant AFTER they had (1) had the previous evidence analyzed and possibly (2) had other witnesses come forward because they advertised what he and his car looked like. Then they filed charges.

Police planting evidence? Now you've jumped the shark. No one believes that. You don;t even know what the evidence is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree it is weird that she texted she was lost after she was seen w him. Why would she text that if they were together?

Again, she texted BEFORE she was in the mall and he put his arm around her and BEFORE they went to the bar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok so I'm a corporate lawyer so only know a little about criminal law from school. If JM's lawyer knows where he is, doesn't his lawyer have to tell police? The crime fraud exception to the attorney client privilege?

His lawyer doesn't know where he is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think his lawyer said "you are looking at 30 years ..." and he fled.

Nope, he couldn't have said that. Former criminal defense lawyer who has contributed to this thread. At your initial meeting with a client you can't possible say what they are looking at without having seen the evidence, not to mention he hadn't been charged yet. Its possible that he said something that set him off, but I doubt it. He wouldn't have been able to say anything at that point except keep your mouth shut.

He did not say it like "30 years is your sentence..." He said it like "... you did what? " and the guy figured it out himself. Everyone knows what happens after a conviction..