Nona Dirksmeyer, 2005 Miss Arkansas pageant contestant found dead in her apartment

[FDInLaw]

I agree with you. May i ask, are you of any relation to Nona? However, I just do not understand with the wounds on her, how the person could have killed her in less than 10 min. It just seems to me that it would have to take longer!!:shrug:From Gibbon's closing argument:

In Gibbons’ estimation, he didn’t go there to kill her, but simply to see her.
That all changed once Jones arrived at Dirksmeyer’s home, Gibbons speculated, due to a “confluence of two events.” One, he “very probably” saw a text message sent to Dirksmeyer at 11:04 a.m. by James “Trey” York, a biology lab partner with whom Dirksmeyer went on at least one date in the months before her death. The message said, “Call me, please,” according to testimony.
“Then, ladies and gentlemen,” Gibbons said, “I think he found the condom wrapper.”
Jones told Russellville Police Department investigators during a statement on the night of the murder that he and Dirksmeyer did not use condoms.
At this point, Gibbons said, Jones flew into a rage and, in a moment of “total disregard for human life” “made it his conscious object to end the life of NONA DIRKSMEYER.” He speculates the attack was accomplished in three stages: first, Dirksmeyer was hit with a fist or the heel of a palm in the temple and face area. Dirksmeyer, stunned, was likely only “passively” trying to defend herself, possibly by hunching her shoulders and drawing her arms in toward her chest.
Gibbons indicated the fact that “Nona wasn’t fighting” was likely because she was being attacked by her boyfriend of nearly five years, and simply could not accept the reality of what was occurring. Gibbons speculated she may have thought to herself “this cannot be happening.”
Then, she was subjected to a series of stabs and slices with a knife — four stabs and 17 slices, to be exact. None of the knife wounds were fatal, a fact which Gibbons said was “evidence of a relationship that will not let that knife be put in deep enough to kill” — a relationship such as the one Dirksmeyer had with Jones, according to Gibbons.
Finally, in what Gibbons called “the coup de grace,” Jones, after wiping his bloody hand on the carpet next to Dirksmeyer’s passive form, grabbed a silver floor lamp that sat in the southeast corner of Dirksmeyer’s apartment, right by the doorway to her kitchen, and used it to administer two blows to her head. He speculates she was facedown on the carpet of her living room when the lethal blow penetrated the back of her skull three-eighths of an inch.


http://www.couriernews.com/archived_story.php?ID=15437&Search=nona%20dirksmeyer

Guess I don't see why this would have taken as long as you suggest. I don't think the Defense made an argument for a long period either. :shrug:

No, I am not a close relation of Nona's. I did speak with her a few times. My impression was that she was a kind and intelligent girl with a great sense of humor. . . her dry wit really cracked me up. She had a lot going for her. :rose:

[lorettalockhorn]

Gee, can't a girl pretend to be smart and have original ideas??? :tongue:


LMBO! :biggrin:


Oops!!!!!!!! :punch:

You know how literal I can be. I shouldn't state the obvious.

Well, except to comment on your beauty, brains and wealth. :hat:

[FDInLaw]

Oops!!!!!!!! :punch:

You know how literal I can be. I shouldn't state the obvious.

Well, except to comment on your beauty, brains and wealth. :hat:Oh. . . I'm glad I wasn't snacking. . . it would be all over my computer screen LOL!

:seeya:

[lorettalockhorn]

Oh. . . I'm glad I wasn't snacking. . . it would be all over my computer screen LOL!

:seeya:


LMAO We don't get enough spit-takes in this thread!! :biggrin: :beer: :hat: :D ;) :tongue:

[WonderWoman]

I can't imagine a frenzied attack taking very long at all once Nona was down.


All I said was, it was my opinion, I did not say that it was a fact. :mad:
I know wat the facts are!

[WonderWoman]

LMBO! :) Okay, so I have given you a hard time before. :o

You have a good point though. My guess. . . maybe Gibbons is personally convinced that Kevin is the killer, and being a professional realizes that a fresh perspective would be good for the case at this point. :shrug:

There is no MAYBE about it...David Gibbons will always think that Kevin is the killer!:rolleyes:

[FDInLaw]

There is no MAYBE about it...David Gibbons will always think that Kevin is the killer!:rolleyes:
Are you saying that there will never be any reason for him to change his mind? :shrug: I thought that you were hopeful that there was.

[sweetgranny]

All I said was, it was my opinion, I did not say that it was a fact. :mad:
I know wat the facts are!
Well who is snippy now? :shrug:

[WonderWoman]

Are you saying that there will never be any reason for him to change his mind? :shrug: I thought that you were hopeful that there was.

No, Im not saying that. He was just so dead set on the fact that Kevin killed Nona. After the verdict was read, the news crew caught David Gibbons outside and he would not comment because he knew that he was wrong from the beginning. He knew that he did not have a solid case against Kevin. He just needs to give up on that! He should be worried about finding the "real killer" and give up on Kevin. As well as Nona's step father. When the verdict was read, he said to Kevin, "You got away with it, didnt you Kevin." As well as Nonas mother, she said she was thinking about persuing a civil suit against Kevin. She doesnt need to worry about that. If I were her, Id be worried about finding the "real killer.":shrug:

[WonderWoman]

Well who is snippy now? :shrug:

I was just stating my opinion. I am aware of the facts. I wasnt trying to be snappy granny!:)

[FDInLaw]

No, Im not saying that. He was just so dead set on the fact that Kevin killed Nona. After the verdict was read, the news crew caught David Gibbons outside and he would not comment because he knew that he was wrong from the beginning. He knew that he did not have a solid case against Kevin. He just needs to give up on that! He should be worried about finding the "real killer" and give up on Kevin. As well as Nona's step father. When the verdict was read, he said to Kevin, "You got away with it, didnt you Kevin." As well as Nonas mother, she said she was thinking about persuing a civil suit against Kevin. She doesnt need to worry about that. If I were her, Id be worried about finding the "real killer.":shrug:
What if they are right and "real killer" is Kevin??? :(

[FDInLaw]

All we have at this point is dna on a condom wrapper. . . that's not enough to exonerate Kevin especially when the wrapper could have been the trigger that set him off. There is not going to be an arrest unless more is found. I think a lot of folks are getting way to excited about this. We all need to wait and see if there is any more evidence before coming to a conclusion.

"You can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first."

All the wishful thinking in the world is not going to build a case against this other guy. We need to wait for the facts.

[lorettalockhorn]

All I said was, it was my opinion, I did not say that it was a fact. :mad:
I know wat the facts are!


Nothing wrong with opinions; they're like assholes, everyone has one. I think that if you read the entire thread, you will see why yours (opinion, not the other) is in the minority.

[sweetgranny]

All we have at this point is dna on a condom wrapper. . . that's not enough to exonerate Kevin especially when the wrapper could have been the trigger that set him off. There is not going to be an arrest unless more is found. I think a lot of folks are getting way to excited about this. We all need to wait and see if there is any more evidence before coming to a conclusion.

"You can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first."

All the wishful thinking in the world is not going to build a case against this other guy. We need to wait for the facts.

Very well said FD

[WonderWoman]

Nothing wrong with opinions; they're like assholes, everyone has one. I think that if you read the entire thread, you will see why yours (opinion, not the other) is in the minority.

I understand that. I am new to the thread....:rolleyes:

[LurkerNoMore]

LMBO! :) Okay, so I have given you a hard time before. :o

You have a good point though. My guess. . . maybe Gibbons is personally convinced that Kevin is the killer, and being a professional realizes that a fresh perspective would be good for the case at this point. :shrug:

I think that it is a credibility issue in the event that evidence points to someone else. I don't think you'd have the same prosecutor prosecuting two different people for the same crime. That would be an easy way for the second defendant to walk. It's just a smart precaution.

[WonderWoman]

What if they are right and "real killer" is Kevin??? :(

Then if he is the "real killer" he should be punished with the worst penalty. Clear as glass! You know?:D

[WonderWoman]

All we have at this point is dna on a condom wrapper. . . that's not enough to exonerate Kevin especially when the wrapper could have been the trigger that set him off. There is not going to be an arrest unless more is found. I think a lot of folks are getting way to excited about this. We all need to wait and see if there is any more evidence before coming to a conclusion.

"You can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first."

All the wishful thinking in the world is not going to build a case against this other guy. We need to wait for the facts.


I like your quote!! lol! :tongue:

[Amy]

I think a large part of the problem that I have with this logic, is that Kevin for some reason thought that Nona was still alive, even though it should have been fairly obvious that she wasn't. So much so that he covered her body with his own to keep her warm. And most people know not to tamper with a crime scene, yet these three stooges didn't seem to have enough sense among them to act on that.

Especially if one of the 3 claims to watch CSI type shows a lot. That one should know to not do anything to contaminate what obviously has to be a crime scene. Which is why my first tho't was that he INDEED was making an effort to do just that.

[FDInLaw]

I like your quote!! lol! :tongue:Grumpy Old Men is a classic! :biggrin:

[FDInLaw]

Then if he is the "real killer" he should be punished with the worst penalty. Clear as glass! You know?:DHuh? You lost me. Justice is not always served.

[FDInLaw]

I think that it is a credibility issue in the event that evidence points to someone else. I don't think you'd have the same prosecutor prosecuting two different people for the same crime. That would be an easy way for the second defendant to walk. It's just a smart precaution. I agree.

[sweetgranny]

Especially if one of the 3 claims to watch CSI type shows a lot. That one should know to not do anything to contaminate what obviously has to be a crime scene. Which is why my first tho't was that he INDEED was making an effort to do just that.
My very thought! If she had beend dead since 11 (or even 1) in a house with the thermostat at 50 degrees on Dec 15, then there had to be NO DOUBT she was dead and had been for a while and He "knows about crime scenes" and still contaminated it and his mother stood there and let him

[WonderWoman]

Huh? You lost me. Justice is not always served.

Im sorry. In my opinion, If the jury thought that Kevin was the real killer, then they would have convicted him. It is just not adding up to me. You need more than a handprint on a lightbulb and a handprint in the blood to convict someone. There is not enough evidence. :shrug:

[Amy]

Im sorry. In my opinion, If the jury thought that Kevin was the real killer, then they would have convicted him. It is just not adding up to me. You need more than a handprint on a lightbulb and a handprint in the blood to convict someone. There is not enough evidence. :shrug:

It is not always that a jury does not think a particular defendant is the killer. In some cases, the jury DOES think the defendant is guilty, but cannot convict him/her BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED. Or, in some cases, evidence that WOULD have allowed them to convict a defendant was NOT presented, and they had to vote on only what was presented at the trial.

[WonderWoman]

It is not always that a jury does not think a particular defendant is the killer. In some cases, the jury DOES think the defendant is guilty, but cannot convict him/her BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED. Or, in some cases, evidence that WOULD have allowed them to convict a defendant was NOT presented, and they had to vote on only what was presented at the trial.


I think that the evidence was presented pretty clear!! It takes more to convict someone than a handprint!

[ifIwereU]

Im sorry. In my opinion, If the jury thought that Kevin was the real killer, then they would have convicted him. It is just not adding up to me. You need more than a handprint on a lightbulb and a handprint in the blood to convict someone. There is not enough evidence. :shrug:

if Nona had been shot and there was a handprint in her blood on the gun, would that be enough?

[WonderWoman]

if Nona had been shot and there was a handprint in her blood on the gun, would that be enough?


If the timeline matched up?? And there were no other people that could be possible suspects.....:shrug:

[LurkerNoMore]

All the wishful thinking in the world is not going to build a case against this other guy. We need to wait for the facts.

I agree with you. We need the facts. I sometimes feel that I have been too quick to think other people are guilty (TY, JM) and that, in my quick judgment, I do just what I think law enforcement did to Kevin.

I am worried that if they are building another case, the press release messed it up, meaning the person who left the wrapper knows who he is. If this other person did kill Nona, he knows to really cover his tracks now, or lay low, or go into hiding. I really hope this person has already been interviewed.

The defense is taking a risk here. If the person can be crossed off, it looks bad for Kevin. But on the other hand, no matter what, if the dna is identified, maybe we will see more pieces of the puzzle. The person whose dna was on the wrapper needs to explain how the condom got there. Was he there that day? If so, why? Why didn't he come forward already? Why didn't he help the case by explaining how the condom wrapper got there? Or was this from days before? And he didn't even know his condom wrapper was an issue in the case. Or was he never there and it was planted? The DNA match SHOULD answer some of those questions.

I am running all sorts of what ifs in my head from the list of the suspects we've discussed. If the DNA was someone none of us have considered, what then? Is there an alibi? In going back that far, people's memories may have changed, meaning, can this person create an alibi? Or maybe he's already, knowing this was coming, worked to "jog" his friends' or families' memories to create an alibi? Far fetched but I'm just thinking of all the possibilities here. I don't see how there is middle ground here. If it is explained away, there goes Kevin's safety net of saying someone elses' DNA was found. If it turns out to be the DNA of someone who lied and really was there, or was there and shouldn't have been, well, it's a whole new ballgame. It means less if the condom can be explained and it was a person who was supposed to have been there at some point and it just didn't get thrown away.

I wonder if any of this will be mentioned on 48 Hours, and if so, how much?

[LurkerNoMore]

if Nona had been shot and there was a handprint in her blood on the gun, would that be enough?

Not if Kevin found her, the gun was laying on her, and he moved the gun. And not if his prints weren't on the handle of the gun, but were on the barrel. And not if there were other unidentifiable prints on the gun. I'd have to look at more.

[ifIwereU]

If the timeline matched up?? And there were no other people that could be possible suspects.....:shrug:
to most this will be redundate, but KJ did not have an alibi for much of the time period in which Nona was believed to be murdered......based on his statement, I think he was cleaning his room.
I am not sure what time line you are referring to, but the plumbers left around 10:06 A.M. and if even you beleive poor little grandma....she saw him around 11:30.....that's plenty of time
I don't beleive her mainly because KJ didn't even mention her in his initial interviews or in the time line he wrote out for the PD the night she was murdered....seems contrived to me, but you may beleive her. Even if you do, there still was plenty of time to do the deed. JMO

[WonderWoman]

to most this will be redundate, but KJ did not have an alibi for much of the time period in which Nona was believed to be murdered......based on his statement, I think he was cleaning his room.
I am not sure what time line you are referring to, but the plumbers left around 10:06 A.M. and if even you beleive poor little grandma....she saw him around 11:30.....that's plenty of time
I don't beleive her mainly because KJ didn't even mention her in his initial interviews or in the time line he wrote out for the PD the night she was murdered....seems contrived to me, but you may beleive her. Even if you do, there still was plenty of time to do the deed. JMO


Why would his grandmother lie?? :shrug:

[ifIwereU]

Why would his grandmother lie?? :shrug:

to protect someone she loves....happens all the time

[lorettalockhorn]

I agree with you. We need the facts. I sometimes feel that I have been too quick to think other people are guilty (TY, JM) and that, in my quick judgment, I do just what I think law enforcement did to Kevin.

I am worried that if they are building another case, the press release messed it up, meaning the person who left the wrapper knows who he is. If this other person did kill Nona, he knows to really cover his tracks now, or lay low, or go into hiding. I really hope this person has already been interviewed.

The defense is taking a risk here. If the person can be crossed off, it looks bad for Kevin. But on the other hand, no matter what, if the dna is identified, maybe we will see more pieces of the puzzle. The person whose dna was on the wrapper needs to explain how the condom got there. Was he there that day? If so, why? Why didn't he come forward already? Why didn't he help the case by explaining how the condom wrapper got there? Or was this from days before? And he didn't even know his condom wrapper was an issue in the case. Or was he never there and it was planted? The DNA match SHOULD answer some of those questions.

I am running all sorts of what ifs in my head from the list of the suspects we've discussed. If the DNA was someone none of us have considered, what then? Is there an alibi? In going back that far, people's memories may have changed, meaning, can this person create an alibi? Or maybe he's already, knowing this was coming, worked to "jog" his friends' or families' memories to create an alibi? Far fetched but I'm just thinking of all the possibilities here. I don't see how there is middle ground here. If it is explained away, there goes Kevin's safety net of saying someone elses' DNA was found. If it turns out to be the DNA of someone who lied and really was there, or was there and shouldn't have been, well, it's a whole new ballgame. It means less if the condom can be explained and it was a person who was supposed to have been there at some point and it just didn't get thrown away.

I wonder if any of this will be mentioned on 48 Hours, and if so, how much?

Something tells me that plenty of people who had been in Nona's apartment (probably ever) made mental note of their alibis as soon as they found out she was murdered.

Does anyone remember who/if anyone volunteered DNA in this case?

[lorettalockhorn]

Why would his grandmother lie?? :shrug:


You're kidding right? :shrug:

It's interesting to me that KJ's co-worker didn't see him until much later than Granny Jones claimed in court. Even if she did see him at 11:30, he had plenty of time to do the murder.

[WonderWoman]

You're kidding right? :shrug:

It's interesting to me that KJ's co-worker didn't see him until much later than Granny Jones claimed in court. Even if she did see him at 11:30, he had plenty of time to do the murder.


What key facts lead you to believe that Kevin killer her?:shrug:
All I want is your oppinion....

[LurkerNoMore]

Something tells me that plenty of people who had been in Nona's apartment (probably ever) made mental note of their alibis as soon as they found out she was murdered.

Does anyone remember who/if anyone volunteered DNA in this case?

I'm talking degrees of separation here... as far as remembering, I was referring to friends and relatives of the owner of the DNA on the condom wrapper. Having no connection to Nona and after all this time, would they remember where they were on 12/15/05 to support the DNA owner's alibi, if he has one or makes one up? I realize this is taking many jumps in conclusions.

[FDInLaw]

I agree with you. We need the facts. I sometimes feel that I have been too quick to think other people are guilty (TY, JM) and that, in my quick judgment, I do just what I think law enforcement did to Kevin.

I am worried that if they are building another case, the press release messed it up, meaning the person who left the wrapper knows who he is. If this other person did kill Nona, he knows to really cover his tracks now, or lay low, or go into hiding. I really hope this person has already been interviewed.

The defense is taking a risk here. If the person can be crossed off, it looks bad for Kevin. But on the other hand, no matter what, if the dna is identified, maybe we will see more pieces of the puzzle. The person whose dna was on the wrapper needs to explain how the condom got there. Was he there that day? If so, why? Why didn't he come forward already? Why didn't he help the case by explaining how the condom wrapper got there? Or was this from days before? And he didn't even know his condom wrapper was an issue in the case. Or was he never there and it was planted? The DNA match SHOULD answer some of those questions.

I am running all sorts of what ifs in my head from the list of the suspects we've discussed. If the DNA was someone none of us have considered, what then? Is there an alibi? In going back that far, people's memories may have changed, meaning, can this person create an alibi? Or maybe he's already, knowing this was coming, worked to "jog" his friends' or families' memories to create an alibi? Far fetched but I'm just thinking of all the possibilities here. I don't see how there is middle ground here. If it is explained away, there goes Kevin's safety net of saying someone else's DNA was found. If it turns out to be the DNA of someone who lied and really was there, or was there and shouldn't have been, well, it's a whole new ballgame. It means less if the condom can be explained and it was a person who was supposed to have been there at some point and it just didn't get thrown away.

I wonder if any of this will be mentioned on 48 Hours, and if so, how much?Excellent post! The fact that you are thinking this through and sharing your thoughts adds a lot to the board. At this point we do not even know who we are talking about here. How much can we even conjecture without that knowledge? If the dna is from one of the original suspects and they have already been checked out extensively, what then? If this is a new person in the mix and the Defense has jumped the gun, how likely is this individual is going to cooperate with the police now??? If this does end up on 48 Hours, that's a lot of pressure to put on someone. IMO this may really bite Kevin's gang in the butt. It is a whole new ballgame IF there is more evidence that puts this new suspect at the scene the day of the murder. I just hope this PR stunt has not harmed the investigation.

[TJEddie]

Just popping in to contribute to the case library......there are some interesting tidbits here.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/48hours/main3802230.shtml

http://www.christiancountyheadliner.com/site/tab6.cfm?BRD=2841&dept_id=603534&newsid=19264548&PAG=461&rfi=9

http://www.atkinschronicle.com/dovnews1.htm

[FDInLaw]

Just popping in to contribute to the case library......there are some interesting tidbits here.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/48hours/main3802230.shtml

http://www.christiancountyheadliner.com/site/tab6.cfm?BRD=2841&dept_id=603534&newsid=19264548&PAG=461&rfi=9

http://www.atkinschronicle.com/dovnews1.htmThanks Eddie! :seeya: It's good to see you! Did you post these over on helpfindthemissing.org ?

[LurkerNoMore]

Just popping in to contribute to the case library......there are some interesting tidbits here.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/48hours/main3802230.shtml

http://www.christiancountyheadliner.com/site/tab6.cfm?BRD=2841&dept_id=603534&newsid=19264548&PAG=461&rfi=9

http://www.atkinschronicle.com/dovnews1.htm

From the CBS LINK:

"But it was a single word during the trial that would change everything.

After the trial the case really heats up. As Jones' defense team continues their probe, will new evidence lead to a new investigation?"

What was the single word? And after the trial the case heats up?

This thing is going to be spun to pieces I fear. Not good for Nona's family or Kevin's. I hope I am wrong.

[lorettalockhorn]

What key facts lead you to believe that Kevin killer her?:shrug:
All I want is your oppinion....

LOL You want key facts? Or opinions?

Kevin had motive, opportunity and forensic evidence, the bloody print being the most obvious, all pointing to him as Nona's murderer.

[lorettalockhorn]

I'm talking degrees of separation here... as far as remembering, I was referring to friends and relatives of the owner of the DNA on the condom wrapper. Having no connection to Nona and after all this time, would they remember where they were on 12/15/05 to support the DNA owner's alibi, if he has one or makes one up? I realize this is taking many jumps in conclusions.

I hear ya. I would imagine that if someone does suspect that his/her DNA is on the wrapper, they will have used their friends and relatives to the Nth degree in preparing an alibi. Of course, if that wrapper came out of the trash, or from one of KJ's or Nona's friends/lovers/partners, they could be totally in the dark. It has occurred to me many times that the reason that Kevin wanted RW at the scene was to set him up and that the wrapper might indeed have Ryan's or one of Ryan's partners DNA on it.

Two things strike me when considering that this could have been a stranger perp, 1) a convicted criminal, one whose DNA is in the database would be the last person that I can imagine leaving behind a condom wrapper, and 2) a stranger would have zero reason to tamper with the cellphone/battery.

[FDInLaw]

From the CBS LINK:

"But it was a single word during the trial that would change everything.

After the trial the case really heats up. As Jones' defense team continues their probe, will new evidence lead to a new investigation?"

What was the single word? And after the trial the case heats up?

This thing is going to be spun to pieces I fear. Not good for Nona's family or Kevin's. I hope I am wrong.

Good question! Could the word be "tacky". . . it seemed to be a big issue during the trial. I really don't know. . . gonna go :read: it again. . .

Well, this answers our question (like we are shocked :rolleyes: ) 48 Hours is going to present the new evidence.

[hawgustusgloop]

From the CBS LINK:

"But it was a single word during the trial that would change everything.

After the trial the case really heats up. As Jones' defense team continues their probe, will new evidence lead to a new investigation?"

What was the single word? And after the trial the case heats up?

This thing is going to be spun to pieces I fear. Not good for Nona's family or Kevin's. I hope I am wrong.

The word is "tacky" if I had to guess, but I don't know. And speaking of tacky, the spin has already begun. Just take a look at the press release spewed out by the "Jones Defense Team" in the Atkins Chronicle link TJEddie posted above. I guess we are supposed to feel sorry for the Jones family.....maybe they'll set up a defense fund. :eek:

[WonderWoman]

LOL You want key facts? Or opinions?

Kevin had motive, opportunity and forensic evidence, the bloody print being the most obvious, all pointing to him as Nona's murderer.


What, just what if, Nona had another lover, and that person came into her apartment and saw the condom wrapper, dont you think that would make them mad. What if another lover didnt know about Kevin.... all youare going by is the stupid handprint......:shrug:

[lorettalockhorn]

Just popping in to contribute to the case library......there are some interesting tidbits here.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/48hours/main3802230.shtml

http://www.christiancountyheadliner.com/site/tab6.cfm?BRD=2841&dept_id=603534&newsid=19264548&PAG=461&rfi=9

http://www.atkinschronicle.com/dovnews1.htm

Gary Busey! :seeya: Thanks! I'll take issue with the statement in that second link about the condom wrapper pointing to Nona's relationships outside of hers with KJ, since I think it was planted. I'm wondering why The Headliner is making that assumption. But that's just me.

[lorettalockhorn]

Good question! Could the word be "tacky". . . it seemed to be a big issue during the trial. I really don't know. . . gonna go :read: it again. . .

Well, this answers our question (like we are shocked :rolleyes: ) 48 Hours is going to present the new evidence.

I assumed that the word was "tacky" too, since that seems to be where Bacon really took the heat.

[lorettalockhorn]

What, just what if, Nona had another lover, and that person came into her apartment and saw the condom wrapper, dont you think that would make them mad. What if another lover didnt know about Kevin.... all youare going by is the stupid handprint......:shrug:

No, I am not only going by the stupid handprint. But you would have to read the thread to know that, and that would be a lot of work for a newcomer. Or anyone else who has stumbled in so long after Nona's murder.

Have you only recently heard about the case?

[WonderWoman]

No, I am not only going by the stupid handprint. But you would have to read the thread to know that, and that would be a lot of work for a newcomer. Or anyone else who has stumbled in so long after Nona's murder.

Have you only recently heard about the case?

NOPE!

[FDInLaw]

The word is "tacky" if I had to guess, but I don't know. And speaking of tacky, the spin has already begun. Just take a look at the press release spewed out by the "Jones Defense Team" in the Atkins Chronicle link TJEddie posted above. I guess we are supposed to feel sorry for the Jones family.....maybe they'll set up a defense fund. :eek:
Unbiased reporting at it's finest lol! :D

[lorettalockhorn]

The word is "tacky" if I had to guess, but I don't know. And speaking of tacky, the spin has already begun. Just take a look at the press release spewed out by the "Jones Defense Team" in the Atkins Chronicle link TJEddie posted above. I guess we are supposed to feel sorry for the Jones family.....maybe they'll set up a defense fund. :eek:


Well, since we're talking tackiness, I'll be tacky and add that I've heard that the Joneses split up. I can imagine the enormous emotional and financial stress that they've been under and wonder if the spin and the image renovation is part of the problem. Also wonder who got custody of Grandma. She and Janice are surely very tight after going through the ordeal of the trial together.

[FDInLaw]

Well, since we're talking tackiness, I'll be tacky and add that I've heard that the Joneses split up. I can imagine the enormous emotional and financial stress that they've been under and wonder if the spin and the image renovation is part of the problem. Also wonder who got custody of Grandma. She and Janice are surely very tight after going through the ordeal of the trial together.

Yenta (YEN-tah) is a Yiddish word referring to a busybody or gossipmonger. Most definitions refer to it as a gossipy woman; a blabbermouth, who can't keep a secret, who spreads rumors and scandal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yenta

[lorettalockhorn]

Not to mention:

quidnunc

quid?nunc ?? (kwdnngk) KEY ?

NOUN:

A nosy person; a busybody.

[FDInLaw]

Not to mention:

quidnunc

quid?nunc ?? (kwdnngk) KEY ?

NOUN:

A nosy person; a busybody.If it's true, call me a prude, but I'm not happy that anyone's marriage is a casualty of this mess. :(

[lorettalockhorn]

If it's true, call me a prude, but I'm not happy that anyone's marriage is a casualty of this mess. :(


Good Lord, it doesn't make me happy either; I wonder if this spin effort on KJ's reputation (if that is what it is in the proximity of the airing of the 48 Hours program) is part of the problem. I cannot help but think that the defense putting out press releases and leaking information to the press is systemic of something within what I perceive to be a dysfunctional family.

[FDInLaw]

Good Lord, it doesn't make me happy either; I wonder if this spin effort on KJ's reputation (if that is what it is in the proximity of the airing of the 48 Hours program) is part of the problem. I cannot help but think that the defense putting out press releases and leaking information to the press is systemic of something within what I perceive to be a dysfunctional family.I'm sorry. I didn't mean to suggest that you were happy about it. :(

I'm not sure I understand the last part of your post here. . . I would imagine that what is going on now is nothing compared to the stress of having your child on trial for murder. . . I haven't had ANY chocolate all day, so I might be totally missing what you ar trying to say.

[lorettalockhorn]

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to suggest that you were happy about it. :(

I'm not sure I understand the last part of your post here. . . I would imagine that what is going on now is nothing compared to the stress of having your child on trial for murder. . . I haven't had ANY chocolate all day, so I might be totally missing what you ar trying to say.

hehehe I gave up chocolate for Lent AND I'm in a triple bio-rhythm slump. So I'm not surprised I'm not making sense.

I am simply wondering if the timing of the 48 Hours segment, the identification of the DNA, the defense putting out information (that they had apparently agreed not to) and what looks to me like a last ditch effort to put some spin on KJ's reputation at any cost, isn't the straw that broke the camels' back. For all I know, the rumor cannot be substantiated. I perceive the Jones family to be extremely dysfunctional. Of course, it's possible that we know more about some facets of Kevin's life than his parents; like his comments at Crunk on Commerce for instance. Surely that would make even JJ wonder WTH is wrong with the boy. The rents might not know that he was arrested for public intox on the anni of Nona's murder. But if they do, knowing these things would be extremely stressful; it would bring home that Kevin doesn't seem to be capable of counting his blessings.

Sorry for the novel. ;)

[FDInLaw]

hehehe I gave up chocolate for Lent AND I'm in a triple bio-rhythm slump. So I'm not surprised I'm not making sense.

I am simply wondering if the timing of the 48 Hours segment, the identification of the DNA, the defense putting out information (that they had apparently agreed not to) and what looks to me like a last ditch effort to put some spin on KJ's reputation at any cost, isn't the straw that broke the camels' back. For all I know, the rumor cannot be substantiated. I perceive the Jones family to be extremely dysfunctional. Of course, it's possible that we know more about some facets of Kevin's life than his parents; like his comments at Crunk on Commerce for instance. Surely that would make even JJ wonder WTH is wrong with the boy. The rents might not know that he was arrested for public intox on the anni of Nona's murder. But if they do, knowing these things would be extremely stressful; it would bring home that Kevin doesn't seem to be capable of counting his blessings.

Sorry for the novel. ;)Have you noticed that you and I have a knack for killing threads??? :o

[lorettalockhorn]

Have you noticed that you and I have a knack for killing threads??? :o


:punch: :beer:

[upallnight]

Some questions for discussion.

What does it take for a special prosecutor to be appointed?

Did Gibbons have to sign off on it?

RPD?

A judge?

Did the evidence have to be presented to them first and reach a certain level before they investigated?

What is the significance of the timing of the press release? Is it connected to 48 Hours or just a coincidence?

If the DNA was from that of an "old suspect" that we've discussed on this board, would that alone get a special prosecutor appointed?

What would make the identification of the DNA significant enough to basically reopen the investigation and get a special prosecutor appointed?

If it's just DNA - so what. I think there'd have to be something else. Maybe unless it was someone who absolutely should not have been in her apartment with a condom.

Someone raised a good point. How was the DNA matched? Was it someone already in the system or did someone willingly submit DNA for comparison?

FD, Loretta, Hawg, Up: If this points to someone else, what would it take for you to consider them as a suspect?

If someone else is arrested, how would the public or a jury view a situation where the prosectutors once said, beyond a reasonable doubt, Kevin did it, but now, beyond a reasonable doubt, this person did it?

So many questions.
What does it take for a special prosecutor to be appointed?
Hi Lurker, well I am no pro but I think a special prosecutor can arrise from a conflict of interest felt by the prosecutor of a said case, requested by the prosecutor who like Gibbons, already had the case tried.
Also, if it is seen in higher eyes not all the evidence was investigated like it should have been.
Also, if it is thought that someone tried to cover up evidence that was involved in a trial to their benefit.
There may be more, I am not sure how to word the above, but for the most part, I think it comes down to a better look at the evidence from a third party with no prior involvement in the case. Either requested by the original prosecutor him/herself or requested from higher up the chain of the law, like maybe the attorney general in some cases depending on the nature of the case.
FD, Loretta, Hawg, Up: If this points to someone else, what would it take for you to consider them as a suspect?
For me, I would need to see evidence that pointed toward that person. No different than with KJ. Understand, I in no way want an innocent person to be found guilty. I would go by the evidence and if they have evidence that shows someone else killed Nona, I would be the first to say, follow through, if enough evidence is there, take it to trial. Then, hopefully a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. I would never want KJ to be wrongfully convicted or anyone else. All I can do is follow the evidence like I have done with what they had on Kevin. To date, the evidence points to him. It may change, but IMO not just due to the condom wrapper at this point. If more evidence is said that could change my view, but it would have to be stronger than what they have on KJ or enough to at least put r/doubt in there that Kevin may be innocent. I just want the truth.
If someone else is arrested, how would the public or a jury view a situation where the prosectutors once said, beyond a reasonable doubt, Kevin did it, but now, beyond a reasonable doubt, this person did it?
I agree, I think I covered that above.
If there is to be a civil trial against KJ in the future, I think his attorney's would do what ever they can to try to put r/d in any minds they could before the actual trial. Is there a cut off in which a civil trial can be filed toward Kevin? I will have to try to look that one up.
With that said, I am waiting to see who and if they give a name of the person the DNA belongs to and can they place that person at the murder scene. If so what other evidence do they have to offer. It simply comes down to justice for Nona and that means to convict the murderer and only the murderer. Nothing else would be Justice For Nona.
Like Christina, I have gone over many things but I still stand strong on the evidence points toward KJ to date.

[lorettalockhorn]

Upall, I did some research months ago about the statute of limitations for wrongful death and I believe it is three years. However, since Nona was a minor at the time of death, the period may be three years from the time of her 21st birthday(tolling). I believe that there are also special rules of discovery which may attach. Sorry, I couldn't find the answer in this thread and don't remember my source. I'll look again.

Arkansas 2 years medical malpractice, 3 years wrongful death.

http://www.urethrotomy.com/statute/index.htm

This is not an AR government site, but seems like what I've read elsewhere.

[upallnight]

First, What are you thinking, asking me if I was with Kevin? NO!! If I was, I think that Id know a little more about this case than I do! The only evidence that they have against Kevin is the handprint in the blood and one handprint on the murder weapon. The person that killed Nona had to hold on to that lamp with more than one hand. It was a floor lamp, rather large, that would require you to use both hands. There are several people that could qualify as a "suspect"!!!

Ok, sorry I asked. The evidence they have against KJ is evidence and the only thing they have now that I am aware of is DNA on a condom wrapper that does not belong to KJ. It is not a crime to lay a condom wrapper on a counter unless it was planted. Maybe they have more DNA of the same to show whoever the DNA belongs to can actually be ther murderer. I don't know. Maybe the killer had on gloves at one point, I don't know. As far as others qualify as a suspect, maybe they will announce they have actual evidence against someone else. All I am saying is the evidence points toward KJ in my mind for now. Will that change, I don't know, I will wait to see if they are blowing in the wind or actually can produce enough evidence to charge someone else. I never said I thought every thing that should have been done was done, (that is an ongoing issue) just that with what was given into evidence points toward KJ. We will see what happens next. I just do not understand why the defense never followed through with this before KJ's trial, just does not make sense to me, and that being in the best interest of KJ and Nona and their families alike. I to still have questions about some things.:seeya:

[upallnight]

The only evidence is that his handprint was in the blood where he found her and a handprint on the murder weapon. That is not very much evidence!
But it is evidence, and I wonder why some friends and family seemed to all of the sudden know where he was at certain times but in the beginning it was a tale of a different story. Plus one of the contract workers had a different time version from the other contract worker was and one is a friend of the family. There was no maybe from the one that was not a friend of the family, he seemed true to what he was saying and had no reason to say otherwise. It's those seemingly little things that bother me.
Plus that must have been some talk with his mom that late into the night after KJ left Nona's. Is it possible KJ found a condom wrapper at Nona's or do they have more evidence against someone to go with that condom wrapper? But still why a condom wrapper but no sexual intercourse? And where is that stick that secured the sliding door? Ugggggh! Why was her cloths taken her? Seems staged to me but who staged it? I could go on and on until brain overload. Why was KJ so insistant on touching, moving her body even after rescue arrived? He was told not to, he ignored that. For what reason. Who know's, like I said, I to have question's that I hope one day will be answered.

[upallnight]

I think a palm print on the murder weapon in victim's blood is much more significant than DNA on condom.....considering no signs of sexual assault and yet the lamp is what killed her. I also put credence in the fact the blood was not clotted on the lamp but the blood on jones hands at the PD was clotted.....JMO That seems to me to indicate the print on the lamp was there at a different time and much earlier than the time of discovery. If the prints on the weapon that Bacon suggests could be compared are compared to that of the DNA donor on the condom then we have a whole new ball game. But any defense attorney is going to point to Jones prints as a premises to exonerate this new suspect. JMO:(

Well said and I agree.

[upallnight]

To answer your question. . . I would need some evidence that puts this new suspect at the crime scene the day of the murder.

No, it is no coincidence that this was released before the 48 Hours show. Kevin's defense agree NOT to release this information until the new PA had a chance to investigate it. . . they were NOT good to their word. Think about it, if investigators are on the verge of catching the "real" killer why on earth would Kevin's side jeopardize that investigation? If they are paying their own personal dollars to bring about justice for Nona why would they compromise it??? Don't be blind folks, this isn't about justice, this is a PR stunt. Just like all the others. I hope it blows up in their faces. :mad: This is just an attempt to whitewash a murderer IMO. I personally am livid and will have a barf bag
handy on Saturday. :cool:

Fed, you are on top of it that's for sure! This was not suppose to have been told at all for now until investigation was complete.

[upallnight]

I will say that a press release from the defense is pretty meaningless in and of itself. We need to hear it from the special prosecutor.
Yep, I smell a rat.
:mad:

[upallnight]

The lamp was in three pieces and the top part, with the bulb intact, was laying about a foot from Nona's body. Jones said in a police interview that he straddled her body when he found her. In that position-the bulb was to his right and slightly behind him. The prosecution (thru Bacon's testimony) tried to show that it would have been difficult for Jones to place a palm print on the light bulb.
But when the picture was placed on the TV, and the defense crossed, it appeared that Jones could have touched the lightbulb.

I agree this is exactly what the defense tried to show and guess it worked, but the way I saw it, KJ would have really had to do some painful twisting to put that print on that bulb where is was. Even if KJ's reaction was to lay on Nona to keep her warm, why would he twist so to put a print on that light bulb? Seems to me more of the whole hand would have come in contact with it, it would seem more natural to me that way. I felt the light bulb was to far away to happen the way the defense played it out. I agree with the prosection on this one but that is JMO. I do respect your view though Christina, just do not agree with it.

[upallnight]

I'm not here to convince anyone KJ is the killer. I would love for someone to convince he is not. That is why I continue to come back here and post. Thus far no one has been able to do that....in my gut, I don't want to believe that a killer is walking amoung is. If there is a chance that this new DNA test will prove KJ was not the killer and someone else was....I am all for it and I then I can sleep better at night knowing that a kid found "not guilty" was indeed innocent.

I agree, and the killer still walks free!

[upallnight]

Also, the pictures of Kevins hands at the RPD, showed no cuts or anything. You would think that the person that killed her, would have some kind of cuts or sctatches of some sort on their hands from fighting with her.????:shrug:

If Nona knew her attacker maybe she was more in a shield mode than an attack back mode. Maybe she tried to talk to this person that killed her through the pain of the cuts and the hold of her attacker. Maybe the attacker had so much control over her all she could do was shield herself. Who knows if Nona could do unto this killer as this killer did to her. She was not a cruel person, she may have tried to protect herself to the best of her ability, but I do not think she could have been as evil to this killer as the killer was to her even if she was to have survived the nightmare. I thought about the killer maybe having cuts after we found out what happened to her, but then again that is not always the case. If I was being cut I would most likely shield myself from the pain. If I could focus enough to try to get something to fight back I would to try to save myself. I guess it depends on who you are and how one responds to something like this. If I was attacked by someone I loved it would be a much more difficult thing to harm them even if I was being harmed. That is unless it was an abusive relationship anyway and had I had already suffered physical pain from this person. If I felt the need to protect my children, then I feel I would go into overdrive to do what ever necessary to protect my children. I am not saying it was someone she knew or loved etc., but if it was KJ that killed her, she must have had some deep feelings for him and maybe she did not think the attack would result in her death. But maybe she did not have the chance to save herself period. It could have been she was under total control of a complete stranger. Just no evidence to that yet. No one heard or saw anything during this attack. Seems to me maybe the killer knew when best to attack and what door to exit. Also knew to take the stick for whatever reason. Maybe it was the only way to get back in, JMO until proven otherwise. Who know's maybe I am 100% was off here.

[upallnight]

I agree with you. May i ask, are you of any relation to Nona? However, I just do not understand with the wounds on her, how the person could have killed her in less than 10 min. It just seems to me that it would have to take longer!!:shrug:

Correct me if I am wrong but was it not said that Nona maybe could have been saved possibly if medical help would have been called in to help her (in a timely manner of course) but instead was not so she was left there to die. Maybe the attacker thought she was already dead upon the final blow. Maybe the attacker could have cared less. IMO the attacker may have thought she was dead otherwise, she maybe could ID this person. Either way I do believe she laid there to die and the attacker must have wanted her dead or thought she was dead and took his/her sorry butt out the back door with stick in hand running to mamma so to say.

[upallnight]

Why would his grandmother lie?? :shrug:
OMG, please some families would go to hell and back for them! And out of the blue, she was with him. Seems she would have remembered that up front just like she said she gave him lunch money. Maybe in the best interest of Kevin not Nona if she lied and I think she did.

[upallnight]

I'm talking degrees of separation here... as far as remembering, I was referring to friends and relatives of the owner of the DNA on the condom wrapper. Having no connection to Nona and after all this time, would they remember where they were on 12/15/05 to support the DNA owner's alibi, if he has one or makes one up? I realize this is taking many jumps in conclusions.

Um, I sure hope so if the wrapper was put there by you know who. KJ's mom did not know he was at Nona's (back in town from school) so maybe Nona did not expect him to come in when he did, maybe that wrapper was in a trash can or somewhere in her house and Gibbons was right, it pissed KJ off to no end.
But then again if that's all they got, it is not enough IMO. But then again I am thinking civil trial possibly coming, let's see what we can do to throw a curve in it. Might work with the right evidence, the proof is in the evidence***better have more!

[upallnight]

Well, since we're talking tackiness, I'll be tacky and add that I've heard that the Joneses split up. I can imagine the enormous emotional and financial stress that they've been under and wonder if the spin and the image renovation is part of the problem. Also wonder who got custody of Grandma. She and Janice are surely very tight after going through the ordeal of the trial together.

Also wonder who got custody of Grandma***L you crack me up! Good One!

[Amy]

OMG, please some families would go to hell and back for them! And out of the blue, she was with him. Seems she would have remembered that up front just like she said she gave him lunch money. Maybe in the best interest of Kevin not Nona if she lied and I think she did.

The trouble I have with Grandma's testimony is mostly that it seemed to come at a later date. It's not like this woman was some passerby that had to be tracked down for her version. I would imagine that Grandma would be aware of the interest in KJ about the same time KJ and his parents knew, IMO.

It would seem to me that, if indeed there had been contact with Grandma on the day in question, she is one of the first ones KJ would have mentioned as seeing and talking to. His timeline of seeing the contractors at the house and the worker at the station would have included seeing and talking to Grandma at such and such a time. Grandma would have (IMO, based on her defending him in trial) immediately told LE of her contact with KJ on that day.

IMO

[FDInLaw]

A judge has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate new evidence in the unsolved murder case of Arkansas Tech University student Nona Dirksmeyer, attorneys confirmed Thursday.

Judge Dennis Sutterfield of the 5 th Judicial District appointed Jack McQuary, who works for the Little Rock-based Arkansas Office of Prosecutor Coordinator. McQuary said his appointment was made in the past month, but he couldn’t recall the exact date.

McQuary confirmed only that he was investigating the Dec. 15, 2005, slaying of Dirksmeyer, 19. He would not comment specifically on the investigation’s focus or what prompted it.

But Russellville lawyer Michael Robbins, who successfully helped defend Dirksmeyer’s boyfriend, Kevin Jones of Dover, now 22, said, however, that he believed “the primary reason” for McQuary’s appointment was new DNA evidence uncovered by Jones’ defense team. A jury acquitted Jones of first-degree murder in July.

“I’m glad to see he’s been appointed and that this is being taken seriously,” Robbins said.

Jones, his mother and a friend of his found Dirksmeyer’s nude body lying in a pool of blood on her Russellville apartment’s living-room floor.

Russellville Police Department detective Mark Frost said in an affidavit accompanying Jones’ arrest in April 2006 that police found Jones’ bloody fingerprint on a lamp used to bludgeon Dirksmeyer. The defense later countered that Jones could have touched the lamp after Dirksmeyer was dead.

David Gibbons, 5 th Judicial District prosecuting attorney, has said Dirksmeyer was choked and beaten, stabbed and slashed with a knife on her face, shoulders and throat. The base of the floor lamp fractured her skull.

On Wednesday, Robbins released a statement that the defense had learned that DNA on a condom wrapper found 4 feet from Dirksmeyer’s body in her apartment turned up DNA that matched, not Jones’, but that of “a viable suspect in the case.” Robbins said the defense immediately turned over the evidence to prosecutors.

During Jones’ trial, the defense faulted the prosecution for not analyzing DNA recovered from the condom wrapper. Frost testified that he was told by state Crime Laboratory technicians shortly after Dirksmeyer’s death that the wrapper could not be tested for DNA and fingerprints. The detective said he later learned that he had misunderstood. Authorities have said they never found a condom. Robbins, commenting Thursday on why it took so long to find a match for the DNA, said, “Because [the defense has ] had to do it. We don’t have the resources the state has. We can’t compel people to give us a DNA sample.... We had to track down people we felt were suspects in our mind.” Frost also wrote in the arrest affidavit that he believed the condom wrapper was placed on a kitchen counter in Dirksmeyer’s apartment “to make it appear as if rape was the motive for the attack.” Police have said there was no sign of sexual assault. Rather, Gibbons, speaking at the time of Jones’ arrest, described the killing as a crime of passion “and a loss of temper, rage.” Robbins refused to comment Thursday on why the person whose DNA proved a match was a “viable” suspect. Robbins also declined to say whether Dirksmeyer knew that person. No one is in custody in the case, McQuary said.

Contacted Thursday, Gibbons declined to confirm McQuary’s appointment. McQuary, however, confirmed that under the way the system works, the district’s prosecutor — Gibbons — would have had to request that a judge appoint a special prosecutor.

In a brief statement, Gibbons said, “That case is an open file. It’s being investigated. Work is currently being done. I have no other comment on the investigation.” After Jones’ acquittal, Gibbons was asked about a renewed search for Dirksmeyer’s killer. He said at the time that the case would remain open but added, “We have no evidence to suggest anyone other than who we tried.” Dirksmeyer’s mother and stepfather, Carol and Duane Dipert, did not return a call seeking comment early Thursday. . .


http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/216115/

[WonderWoman]

But it is evidence, and I wonder why some friends and family seemed to all of the sudden know where he was at certain times but in the beginning it was a tale of a different story. Plus one of the contract workers had a different time version from the other contract worker was and one is a friend of the family. There was no maybe from the one that was not a friend of the family, he seemed true to what he was saying and had no reason to say otherwise. It's those seemingly little things that bother me.
Plus that must have been some talk with his mom that late into the night after KJ left Nona's. Is it possible KJ found a condom wrapper at Nona's or do they have more evidence against someone to go with that condom wrapper? But still why a condom wrapper but no sexual intercourse? And where is that stick that secured the sliding door? Ugggggh! Why was her cloths taken her? Seems staged to me but who staged it? I could go on and on until brain overload. Why was KJ so insistant on touching, moving her body even after rescue arrived? He was told not to, he ignored that. For what reason. Who know's, like I said, I to have question's that I hope one day will be answered.


Are you of any relation to Nona or any of her family?

[CSOKC]

Are you of any relation to Nona or any of her family?


I agree with you. May i ask, are you of any relation to Nona? However, I just do not understand with the wounds on her, how the person could have killed her in less than 10 min. It just seems to me that it would have to take longer!!


I don't understand why you keep asking people this question. I don't see that it has anything to do with the matter at hand.

[WonderWoman]

I don't understand why you keep asking people this question. I don't see that it has anything to do with the matter at hand.

I dont see why you would put your 2 cents in....:cuss:

[FDInLaw]

I dont see why you would put your 2 cents in....:cuss:Keep in nice. :punch:

We don't want to lose our forum here!

[WonderWoman]

I think that it is time that I leave the board!:mad: :seeya:

[FDInLaw]

I think that it is time that I leave the board!:mad: :seeya::seeya: See ya!

[FDInLaw]

Oh wait, was I suppose to beg you to stay??? :biggrin:

We've had a good number of "goodbye cruel world" posts on this board. . . I've even given at least one lol.


Back to the case. . . any more speculation about who this new suspect might be???

[WonderWoman]

Oh wait, was I suppose to beg you to stay??? :biggrin:

We've had a good number of "goodbye cruel world" posts on this board. . . I've even given at least one lol.


Back to the case. . . any more speculation about who this new suspect might be???


You lost me?:shrug:

[FDInLaw]

You lost me?:shrug:Awww, don't mind me, my dysfunctional family taught me the fine art of sarcasm. You keep that innocent mentality of yours, it's cute. :)

So, you're back. Any thoughts on who this new suspect might be? Do you think he is one of the originals or totally new???

[lorettalockhorn]

I don't understand why you keep asking people this question. I don't see that it has anything to do with the matter at hand.


Hey CS! Long time no :seeya:

What I don't get is why someone who isn't new to the case hasn't simply read the forum instead of badgering people for opinions that have been stated ad nauseum. (Let alone read about the trial testimony to understand how the murder was relatively swift from the point of view of the living.)

Looks like we had another GCB. Oh well.

[CSOKC]

Hey CS! Long time no :seeya:

What I don't get is why someone who isn't new to the case hasn't simply read the forum instead of badgering people for opinions that have been stated ad nauseum. (Let alone read about the trial testimony to understand how the murder was relatively swift from the point of view of the living.)

Looks like we had another GCB. Oh well.
Hey! I haven't posted lately, but I have been checking in on the forum regularly.

I keep thinking that the DNA has to be from one of the original suspects for them to be making such a big deal out of it. Of course, that is only my opinion, so I could be completely wrong. I don't have a clue as to who it would be though. Anyone else?

[lorettalockhorn]

Hey! I haven't posted lately, but I have been checking in on the forum regularly.

I keep thinking that the DNA has to be from one of the original suspects for them to be making such a big deal out of it. Of course, that is only my opinion, so I could be completely wrong. I don't have a clue as to who it would be though. Anyone else?

I can't remember who volunteered DNA in the case. And IDing the DNA doesn't mean that the wrapper wasn't planted. Dumb luck if that wrapper came from the trash and the donor is being framed. And nasty business if KJ used a wrapper from one of his friends. But, considering the orgiastic behavior of his crowd, I'm not surprised that he has access to his buds' condom stashes. (Assuming that they even use condoms during their voyeuristic gangbangs.)

I'm still wondering why a sex offender would be dumb enough to leave behind a wrapper and would have any interest in tampering with her cell phone.

[lorettalockhorn]

Hey, didn't Wacky Waldo post a couple of goodbyes to the board? Anyone seeing a pattern here?

[WonderWoman]

Awww, don't mind me, my dysfunctional family taught me the fine art of sarcasm. You keep that innocent mentality of yours, it's cute. :)

So, you're back. Any thoughts on who this new suspect might be? Do you think he is one of the originals or totally new???

I have no clue. I just wish someone had guts enough to turn themselves in! I feel that Nona's family has gone through this long enough!

:rose:

[WonderWoman]

Hey CS! Long time no :seeya:

What I don't get is why someone who isn't new to the case hasn't simply read the forum instead of badgering people for opinions that have been stated ad nauseum. (Let alone read about the trial testimony to understand how the murder was relatively swift from the point of view of the living.)

Looks like we had another GCB. Oh well.


Explain to me. Whe is GCB?:confused:
Didnt know that i did anything to you do piss you off or make you mad.
Sorry if I did.:(

[CSOKC]

I can't remember who volunteered DNA in the case. And IDing the DNA doesn't mean that the wrapper wasn't planted. Dumb luck if that wrapper came from the trash and the donor is being framed. And nasty business if KJ used a wrapper from one of his friends. But, considering the orgiastic behavior of his crowd, I'm not surprised that he has access to his buds' condom stashes. (Assuming that they even use condoms during their voyeuristic gangbangs.)

I'm still wondering why a sex offender would be dumb enough to leave behind a wrapper and would have any interest in tampering with her cell phone.
Oh I completely think the wrapper was planted. No way would someone be stupid enough to leave their DNA on a silver platter basically for the LE to find. I think it was probably found in a trash can or something like upall had mentioned. I still wonder where the actual condom went though...

[FDInLaw]

I can't remember who volunteered DNA in the case. And IDing the DNA doesn't mean that the wrapper wasn't planted. Dumb luck if that wrapper came from the trash and the donor is being framed. And nasty business if KJ used a wrapper from one of his friends. But, considering the orgiastic behavior of his crowd, I'm not surprised that he has access to his buds' condom stashes. (Assuming that they even use condoms during their voyeuristic gangbangs.)

I'm still wondering why a sex offender would be dumb enough to leave behind a wrapper and would have any interest in tampering with her cell phone. LMBO. . . you and your use of words. . . I just can't eat and post while your around!

You do have an excellent point. . . why would he care about the cell phone? Did he take the battery just to insure she could not call for help if she came to?

[FDInLaw]

I have no clue. I just wish someone had guts enough to turn themselves in! I feel that Nona's family has gone through this long enough!

:rose:
My prayer from the beginning. :rose: :(

[Amy]

I can't remember who volunteered DNA in the case. And IDing the DNA doesn't mean that the wrapper wasn't planted. Dumb luck if that wrapper came from the trash and the donor is being framed. And nasty business if KJ used a wrapper from one of his friends. But, considering the orgiastic behavior of his crowd, I'm not surprised that he has access to his buds' condom stashes. (Assuming that they even use condoms during their voyeuristic gangbangs.)

I'm still wondering why a sex offender would be dumb enough to leave behind a wrapper and would have any interest in tampering with her cell phone.

I'm trying to figure out--what DNA? Now, a fellow removes a condom from the wrapper and of course his fingerprints would be on the wrapper. He lays the wrapper down, tosses it aside, whatever. He makes use of the condom, and disposes of it in whatever manner. Now, the wrapper is just laying there tossed aside, it seems. He obviously didn't pick it up and move it after he had "stuff" on his fingers, else one would think he would have also disposed of the wrapper.

So, how would his DNA get on it? Oh, maybe he ripped the wrapper open with his teeth. Just tho't of that.

Then, if KJ picked up the wrapper from some place else to plant it, he would have planned to murder Nona? He would have had to use a tissue or something to handle it with, else his prints would also be on the wrapper, I would think. I'm just trying to visualize kids picking up empty condom wrappers and sticking them in their pockets in case they ever need to frame a pal. Or for any other reason, really. But, as was noted in the quoted post, that crowd does some things that are over the top for me.

[lorettalockhorn]

LMBO. . . you and your use of words. . . I just can't eat and post while your around!

You do have an excellent point. . . why would he care about the cell phone? Did he take the battery just to insure she could not call for help if she came to?

I really think the killer knew that she was dead when he left the apartment. He made all those cuts on her body and at some point she wasn't flinching anymore. :( And had enough knowledge from some source to know that turning down the heat could engineer a false time of death or at least leave a wider window of opportunity.

[lorettalockhorn]

I'm trying to figure out--what DNA? Now, a fellow removes a condom from the wrapper and of course his fingerprints would be on the wrapper. He lays the wrapper down, tosses it aside, whatever. He makes use of the condom, and disposes of it in whatever manner. Now, the wrapper is just laying there tossed aside, it seems. He obviously didn't pick it up and move it after he had "stuff" on his fingers, else one would think he would have also disposed of the wrapper.

So, how would his DNA get on it? Oh, maybe he ripped the wrapper open with his teeth. Just tho't of that.

Then, if KJ picked up the wrapper from some place else to plant it, he would have planned to murder Nona? He would have had to use a tissue or something to handle it with, else his prints would also be on the wrapper, I would think. I'm just trying to visualize kids picking up empty condom wrappers and sticking them in their pockets in case they ever need to frame a pal. Or for any other reason, really. But, as was noted in the quoted post, that crowd does some things that are over the top for me.

I've always thought that the wrapper was torn open with the user's teeth and when KJ copped it, he wiped it carefully to remove his own fingerprints (and any others at the same time). It may never have occurred to him that there might be saliva in the torn part of the wrapper, for instance.

[Amy]

I really think the killer knew that she was dead when he left the apartment. He made all those cuts on her body and at some point she wasn't flinching anymore. :( And had enough knowledge from some source to know that turning down the heat could engineer a false time of death or at least leave a wider window of opportunity.

Maybe someone who watches CSI shows and maybe there was an episode that included that type of thing? I don't know if it was CSI, but there has been a program on where the husband killed the wife, turned down the thermostat and left on a fishing trip. Only, he waited a couple of days then called a good buddy to go to the house alone to discover the body.

Hmmm....didn't KJ first send his buddy over alone to try to "contact" Nona?

[Amy]

I've always thought that the wrapper was torn open with the user's teeth and when KJ copped it, he wiped it carefully to remove his own fingerprints (and any others at the same time). It may never have occurred to him that there might be saliva in the torn part of the wrapper, for instance.

But, wouldn't he WANT the saliva to remain (and the other guy's fingerprints, if it was possible to leave those but remove his) in order do the framing?

[lorettalockhorn]

Maybe someone who watches CSI shows and maybe there was an episode that included that type of thing? I don't know if it was CSI, but there has been a program on where the husband killed the wife, turned down the thermostat and left on a fishing trip. Only, he waited a couple of days then called a good buddy to go to the house alone to discover the body.

Hmmm....didn't KJ first send his buddy over alone to try to "contact" Nona?

Not familiar with that episode; there is one from 2003, Entrance Wounds that includes some elements, such as lowering the thermostat to alter the time of death. Haven't seen it.

[lorettalockhorn]

But, wouldn't he WANT the saliva to remain (and the other guy's fingerprints, if it was possible to leave those but remove his) in order do the framing?

Well, maybe not. Maybe KJ just wanted the wrapper to suggest that there had been someone or anyone in close proximity timewise. Like I say, it could be dumb luck that the wrapper actually contained any DNA. Aren't those wrappers slick? Wouldn't they be easily wiped clean, or at least any vestiges of fingerprints would be too damaged to ascertain? Maybe Kevin doesn't use his teeth to open a condom package, so it didn't occur to him that other people do. It could be a complete and total fluke.

[LurkerNoMore]

I've always thought that the wrapper was torn open with the user's teeth and when KJ copped it, he wiped it carefully to remove his own fingerprints (and any others at the same time). It may never have occurred to him that there might be saliva in the torn part of the wrapper, for instance.

I just do not buy that the condom wrapper was a plant.

I've spent a lot of time thinking about the condom wrapper and the cell phone. I don't think the killer was some criminal supermind who could not have messed up and left the wrapper. I honestly think the condom wrapper was his mistake. I hope it will be his undoing. We'll see.

The phone - I doubt we will ever know. I lean toward that the battery fell out in some sort of struggle. I don't think the phone was tampered with. I don't know where the battery ended up. Sometimes I wonder if it wasn't just overlooked somehow. I don't think the cell phone is as central to this case as we want to make it.

[LurkerNoMore]

Well, maybe not. Maybe KJ just wanted the wrapper to suggest that there had been someone or anyone in close proximity timewise. Like I say, it could be dumb luck that the wrapper actually contained any DNA. Aren't those wrappers slick? Wouldn't they be easily wiped clean, or at least any vestiges of fingerprints would be too damaged to ascertain? Maybe Kevin doesn't use his teeth to open a condom package, so it didn't occur to him that other people do. It could be a complete and total fluke.

I just don't think a fluke would get you a special prosecutor.

[CSOKC]

I just do not buy that the condom wrapper was a plant.

I've spent a lot of time thinking about the condom wrapper and the cell phone. I don't think the killer was some criminal supermind who could not have messed up and left the wrapper. I honestly think the condom wrapper was his mistake. I hope it will be his undoing. We'll see.

The phone - I doubt we will ever know. I lean toward that the battery fell out in some sort of struggle. I don't think the phone was tampered with. I don't know where the battery ended up. Sometimes I wonder if it wasn't just overlooked somehow. I don't think the cell phone is as central to this case as we want to make it.
The cell phone may not be a big deal, but I disagree that the battery could have been overlooked. To this day it still hasn't been found, and there have been two different sets of tenants in her old apartment. If the battery was still there, someone would have found it.

[lorettalockhorn]

I just don't think a fluke would get you a special prosecutor.

HUH? How does anyone know whether or not the DNA is a fluke or dumb luck or anything else until it's identified and the donor is investigated? Don't see what the big whoop is about a special prosecutor is. The appointment makes perfect sense to me; what bugs me is the secrecy in how it was done. We don't live in Iraq. (Even though our taxes are paying for it. But that's another rant.)

Gibbons asked for a special prosecutor; sounds like he simply doesn't want to continue on a case where he has already brought charges against the killer who cannot be tried again for the same crime.

[ifIwereU]

The cell phone may not be a big deal, but I disagree that the battery could have been overlooked. To this day it still hasn't been found, and there have been two different sets of tenants in her old apartment. If the battery was still there, someone would have found it.
I agree, cell phone was on the floor, with back and battery gone...and alas the stick is gone....why remove the stick from the door and also take it with you.....was it one of the weapons....was the cell phone used as a weapon...those are alot easier to conceal under your jacket than a broken floor lamp. Maybe they were used as weapons or were touched by the prepatrator and he /she felt he should take them...the less things left in the apartment lessens the chance of being detected. but why take the phone's battery and not the phone.....seems it was left because there was clue on it......that the prept felt might stir investigators in a certain direction.....maybe I am over analysing......Condom wrapper is still a mystery....doens't fit with a stranger rape situation....at what time was the prep going to put it on and then use it....before the attack? when the odds she might fight back are greater? during the attack when he's controlling her with at least one hand and stabbing with the next? after the attack? when she's lifeless on the floor......and yet there was not signs that she was in fact raped even when she's lifeless on the floor.....

[ifIwereU]

HUH? How does anyone know whether or not the DNA is a fluke or dumb luck or anything else until it's identified and the donor is investigated? Don't see what the big whoop is about a special prosecutor is. The appointment makes perfect sense to me; what bugs me is the secrecy in how it was done. We don't live in Iraq. (Even though our taxes are paying for it. But that's another rant.)

Gibbons asked for a special prosecutor; sounds like he simply doesn't want to continue on a case where he has already brought charges against the killer who cannot be tried again for the same crime.

And Gibbons thinks/knows he tried the right guy....I think, though, that its a classy move on his part to step aside and say....you know, maybe I'm jaded in my view....let me give it to someone who can look at it and make decisions not based on how its going to be perceived in the media or by the community....thumbs up in my book.

[lorettalockhorn]

And Gibbons thinks/knows he tried the right guy....I think, though, that its a classy move on his part to step aside and say....you know, maybe I'm jaded in my view....let me give it to someone who can look at it and make decisions not based on how its going to be perceived in the media or by the community....thumbs up in my book.

Absolutely thumbs up to Gibbons. Thumbs down to Camp Kevin for breaking the apparent agreement and for showboating. Hopefully the investigation and justice for Nona hasn't been compromised. And maybe thumbs down to Sutterfield for holding secret court session(s) and/or to our local media for not warning us that maybe, just maybe KJ isn't the only one to keep an eye on.

I think it was mentioned earlier in the thread that maybe the phone wasn't taken because it could be tracked. But techtarded me doesn't know if it has to have been used to be tracked, not sure why (s)he couldn't just take it and dispose of it along with the stick.

[christina]

The owner of the condom wrapper dna is invited into the apartment by Nona, the pre sex act is in play, he puts the condom on, she changes her mind, he goes nuts and kills her, leaving with the condom on his person.
This scenario covers most of the bases-someone Nona knew and let into the apartment, no sign of sexual assault, no condom found.
Police found(or initially saw) the phone under the kitchen table which was at the other side of the kitchen from the living room, suggesting to me it was thrown during a struggle. After killing her the murderer could have just grabbed what he saw-the battery-and left. I have always assumed the murderer left by the front door because of the blood spot by the lightswitch by the front door.
Wasn't the apartment manager asked about the thermostat/heat problems in Nona's apartment when she was questioned?
I want to see if the latent print on the murder weapon-base of the lamp-matches the owner of the dna.

I agree it was a good move for Gibbons to ask Judge Sutterfield to appoint another prosecutor.

[christina]

Absolutely thumbs up to Gibbons. Thumbs down to Camp Kevin for breaking the apparent agreement and for showboating. Hopefully the investigation and justice for Nona hasn't been compromised. And maybe thumbs down to Sutterfield for holding secret court session(s) and/or to our local media for not warning us that maybe, just maybe KJ isn't the only one to keep an eye on.

I think it was mentioned earlier in the thread that maybe the phone wasn't taken because it could be tracked. But techtarded me doesn't know if it has to have been used to be tracked, not sure why (s)he couldn't just take it and dispose of it along with the stick.

Where does this information come from?

[lorettalockhorn]

The owner of the condom wrapper dna is invited into the apartment by Nona, the pre sex act is in play, he puts the condom on, she changes her mind, he goes nuts and kills her, leaving with the condom on his person.
This scenario covers most of the bases-someone Nona knew and let into the apartment, no sign of sexual assault, no condom found.
Police found(or initially saw) the phone under the kitchen table which was at the other side of the kitchen from the living room, suggesting to me it was thrown during a struggle. After killing her the murderer could have just grabbed what he saw-the battery-and left. I have always assumed the murderer left by the front door because of the blood spot by the lightswitch by the front door.
Wasn't the apartment manager asked about the thermostat/heat problems in Nona's apartment when she was questioned?
I want to see if the latent print on the murder weapon-base of the lamp-matches the owner of the dna.

I agree it was a good move for Gibbons to ask Judge Sutterfield to appoint another prosecutor.

After an early morning test, another exam scheduled and a busy day beyond that, she sets up a booty call. And then changes her mind inciting the bludgeoning. After the murder, the killer takes the battery thinking it's the phone, yet leaves the condom wrapper behind. hmmm Interesting.

Regarding "this information", I have no link. Hope it won't ruin my cred with anyone to say that word on the street is that the defense and/or Jones' connections who are leaking information to the press (and that there was an agreement not to talk). Oh, wait, we know that since they are credited with the content of the press releases. Why they are doing it is anyone's guess. Just hope it doesn't negatively affect the investigation. Kudos to the Dirksmeyers and Diperts for keeping mum.

[upallnight]

Are you of any relation to Nona or any of her family?

No I am not.

[ifIwereU]

The owner of the condom wrapper dna is invited into the apartment by Nona, the pre sex act is in play, he puts the condom on, she changes her mind, he goes nuts and kills her, leaving with the condom on his person.
This scenario covers most of the bases-someone Nona knew and let into the apartment, no sign of sexual assault, no condom found.
Police found(or initially saw) the phone under the kitchen table which was at the other side of the kitchen from the living room, suggesting to me it was thrown during a struggle. After killing her the murderer could have just grabbed what he saw-the battery-and left. I have always assumed the murderer left by the front door because of the blood spot by the lightswitch by the front door.
Wasn't the apartment manager asked about the thermostat/heat problems in Nona's apartment when she was questioned?
I want to see if the latent print on the murder weapon-base of the lamp-matches the owner of the dna.

I agree it was a good move for Gibbons to ask Judge Sutterfield to appoint another prosecutor.

that is definately a plausable scenerio, but the wrappers location is just unorthodox to me.....but then again with todays youth anything is possible.

I also think that if someone got that angry enough to kill someone because there sexual advances were denied...and they were far enough into the act to put a condom on.....someone would have to be extremely angry....if that were the case I think they would have went ahead with the deal and got their jollies off by having sex with the person they just murdered for refusing to.....I mean if that were the root of their anger.....they say that rape is a crime commited out of anger

[lorettalockhorn]

Rape is a control issue. I cannot think of a person with more vested interest in controlling Nona than Kevin.

BTW, do we know if the DNA belonging to the viable suspect is male? Has (s)he been hauled in yet?

[upallnight]

I'm trying to figure out--what DNA? Now, a fellow removes a condom from the wrapper and of course his fingerprints would be on the wrapper. He lays the wrapper down, tosses it aside, whatever. He makes use of the condom, and disposes of it in whatever manner. Now, the wrapper is just laying there tossed aside, it seems. He obviously didn't pick it up and move it after he had "stuff" on his fingers, else one would think he would have also disposed of the wrapper.

So, how would his DNA get on it? Oh, maybe he ripped the wrapper open with his teeth. Just tho't of that.

Then, if KJ picked up the wrapper from some place else to plant it, he would have planned to murder Nona? He would have had to use a tissue or something to handle it with, else his prints would also be on the wrapper, I would think. I'm just trying to visualize kids picking up empty condom wrappers and sticking them in their pockets in case they ever need to frame a pal. Or for any other reason, really. But, as was noted in the quoted post, that crowd does some things that are over the top for me.


I know what you mean, but maybe the condom wrapper was in a trash can or somewhere at Nona's house and the killer was a jealous boyfriend and found it, saw the text message from York saying please call me and the rage was beginning. The killer may even have presented it to Nona. If KJ watched alot of crimes shows, he would know how to prevent fingerprints. It could have been placed there after the attack maybe. Maybe the prosecution presented the actual events as closely as they happened. Makes more sense to me than the killer leaving it laying around with DNA on it. I don't know?:shrug:

[upallnight]

I really think the killer knew that she was dead when he left the apartment. He made all those cuts on her body and at some point she wasn't flinching anymore. :( And had enough knowledge from some source to know that turning down the heat could engineer a false time of death or at least leave a wider window of opportunity.


Good point L, and the engineer makes a strong point also, so to speak.

[TJEddie]

Just to toss another thought into the mix, it was noted in the (admittedly rather effusive) Atkins Chronicle article that the condom wrapper was "just one of the pieces of evidence that indicated there was another perpetrator, not Kevin Jones." Wonder what else they've got.

[hawgustusgloop]

Does anyone know what kind of condom wrapper we're talking about here? I am not sure it makes a difference really, but different brands have different types of wrappers. Some have a paperish-foilish wrapper, and some (like the kind that are distributed for free) have more of a cellophane-type wrapper. I'm not sure about the kind that come from truckstop vending machines. I am just trying to picture whether or not someone would leave fingerprints. Someone said a million years ago on this thread that prints might not show up on a condom wrapper, but I would imagine it would depend on what the wrapper is made of (among other things). If it is made of a material that catches prints easily, then it would seem a lot more likely that someone wiped the prints clean and probably planted it rather than someone inadvertently left it there but left no prints on it.

[lorettalockhorn]

Just to toss another thought into the mix, it was noted in the (admittedly rather effusive) Atkins Chronicle article that the condom wrapper was "just one of the pieces of evidence that indicated there was another perpetrator, not Kevin Jones." Wonder what else they've got.

The lamp is what comes to mind; there was a print there. But wouldn't in be inconclusive unless it was in blood or mixed with something that would prove it was made that day? Otherwise, it could be the print of the lamp inspector, or lamp store clerk, or a lamp customer, or anyone who helped Nona move, etc. I suppose there was other evidence collected that day that hadn't been thoroughly tested.

Does anyone know what kind of condom wrapper we're talking about here? I am not sure it makes a difference really, but different brands have different types of wrappers. Some have a paperish-foilish wrapper, and some (like the kind that are distributed for free) have more of a cellophane-type wrapper. I'm not sure about the kind that come from truckstop vending machines. I am just trying to picture whether or not someone would leave fingerprints. Someone said a million years ago on this thread that prints might not show up on a condom wrapper, but I would imagine it would depend on what the wrapper is made of (among other things). If it is made of a material that catches prints easily, then it would seem a lot more likely that someone wiped the prints clean and probably planted it rather than someone inadvertently left it there but left no prints on it.

Exactly, it seems like placing the wrapper would leave prints or smears or something. If it was clean except for the DNA, it would seem that it had been placed using something to prevent prints, like a tissue for instance.

I guess it's all more clear now why Gibbons wasn't prepared to release the case files.

[christina]

that is definately a plausable scenerio, but the wrappers location is just unorthodox to me.....but then again with todays youth anything is possible.

I also think that if someone got that angry enough to kill someone because there sexual advances were denied...and they were far enough into the act to put a condom on.....someone would have to be extremely angry....if that were the case I think they would have went ahead with the deal and got their jollies off by having sex with the person they just murdered for refusing to.....I mean if that were the root of their anger.....they say that rape is a crime commited out of anger

I agree with that. But then, we are trying to understand the mind and actions of an obviously sick person.

The counter the condom wrapper was sitting on was immediately adjacent to the living room, Nona's body was within 4 feet.

[FDInLaw]

The lamp is what comes to mind; there was a print there. But wouldn't in be inconclusive unless it was in blood or mixed with something that would prove it was made that day? Otherwise, it could be the print of the lamp inspector, or lamp store clerk, or a lamp customer, or anyone who helped Nona move, etc. I suppose there was other evidence collected that day that hadn't been thoroughly tested.



Exactly, it seems like placing the wrapper would leave prints or smears or something. If it was clean except for the DNA, it would seem that it had been placed using something to prevent prints, like a tissue for instance.

I guess it's all more clear now why Gibbons wasn't prepared to release the case files.IIRC we had the pleasure of having a forensic expert from the UK on here ages ago (might have been a different thread). . . didn't he say that due to the smooth surface, no prints would have been left unless they were made in something (such as blood)? At first I thought the wrapper must have been wiped clean but if this is the case then it didn't need to be. Still, it might have been if it was a plant.

When we finally hear more about the suspect in question, we will have to start from square one with Kevin out of the picture. It will be interesting to see if this person fits the evidence on the scene. I'm betting that if it is going to work it will have to be someone she knew. This was a rage killing IMO.

[Brown hound]

[
I also think that if someone got that angry enough to kill someone because there sexual advances were denied...and they were far enough into the act to put a condom on.....someone would have to be extremely angry....if that were the case I think they would have went ahead with the deal and got their jollies off by having sex with the person they just murdered for refusing to.....I mean if that were the root of their anger.....they say that rape is a crime commited out of anger[/QUOTE]

[LurkerNoMore]

On my satellite, it has 48 Hours "Who Killed the Beauty Queen" on at 8, and "Where's Our Baby" on at 9. This conflicts with everything else, including the CBS site, which says that the "Beauty Queen" episode is on at 9, Central time. It could be that my satellite program guide is wrong, but does anyone else have a way to check?

[FDInLaw]

On my satellite, it has 48 Hours "Who Killed the Beauty Queen" on at 8, and "Where's Our Baby" on at 9. This conflicts with everything else, including the CBS site, which says that the "Beauty Queen" episode is on at 9, Central time. It could be that my satellite program guide is wrong, but does anyone else have a way to check?Thanks for the heads up! :seeya:

I noticed yesterday that Nona's case now has a whole hour. :rose:

[Brown hound]

It is time to start looking at ALL the evidence. The time frame, the handprint on the bulb (why didn't the bulb break?), the condom with another man's DNA, these are things that can not be explained. And, please, he lowered the temp to distort the time frame? He's not THAT smart. Forensics is not part of an engineering program, especially since he was in the pre-requisite part of the studies at the time. I think that some of you would still think KJ did it, even if someone else were tried, convicted and confessed. If KJ would had been convicted, I would have believed he did it, but 12 people who heard all the evidence found him NOT GUILTY.

[ifIwereU]

It is time to start looking at ALL the evidence. The time frame, the handprint on the bulb (why didn't the bulb break?), the condom with another man's DNA, these are things that can not be explained. And, please, he lowered the temp to distort the time frame? He's not THAT smart. Forensics is not part of an engineering program, especially since he was in the pre-requisite part of the studies at the time. I think that some of you would still think KJ did it, even if someone else were tried, convicted and confessed. If KJ would had been convicted, I would have believed he did it, but 12 people who heard all the evidence found him NOT GUILTY.

well, we are entitled to our opinion
do you think the OJ jury still thinks he is innocent?

[ifIwereU]

I agree with that. But then, we are trying to understand the mind and actions of an obviously sick person.

The counter the condom wrapper was sitting on was immediately adjacent to the living room, Nona's body was within 4 feet.


Christina, weren't her pants pulled completely inside out with the panties in them? If I am right on that, how would that play into your scenerio? seems if Nona willing undressed they would not have been off that way...if they were pulled off after she was murdered it brings me right back to "why not go through with it"....do you remember at trial if any blood was found on the pants?

[christina]

Christina, weren't her pants pulled completely inside out with the panties in them? If I am right on that, how would that play into your scenerio? seems if Nona willing undressed they would not have been off that way...if they were pulled off after she was murdered it brings me right back to "why not go through with it"....do you remember at trial if any blood was found on the pants?

Yes, her pants were off with the panties still inside them. The suggestion by the prosecution was they were pulled off of her. The crime scene photos however showed a couch heaped with clothes and an apartment in a generally messy condition. And if I remember, testimony was that was the normal condidition of her apartment and she preferred dressing downstairs in the living room.
After seeing and hearing this, I did not put much stock in the prosecution's theory of the jeans. They also presented a witness that remembered specifically what shirt she was wearing in class that morning. But the police never testified to finding or seeing that shirt.
Blood on the pants- my memory is none was found on them.

[christina]

On my satellite, it has 48 Hours "Who Killed the Beauty Queen" on at 8, and "Where's Our Baby" on at 9. This conflicts with everything else, including the CBS site, which says that the "Beauty Queen" episode is on at 9, Central time. It could be that my satellite program guide is wrong, but does anyone else have a way to check?

I found the same thing.

[christina]

IIRC we had the pleasure of having a forensic expert from the UK on here ages ago (might have been a different thread). . . didn't he say that due to the smooth surface, no prints would have been left unless they were made in something (such as blood)? At first I thought the wrapper must have been wiped clean but if this is the case then it didn't need to be. Still, it might have been if it was a plant.

When we finally hear more about the suspect in question, we will have to start from square one with Kevin out of the picture. It will be interesting to see if this person fits the evidence on the scene. I'm betting that if it is going to work it will have to be someone she knew. This was a rage killing IMO.

With that thought in mind, what are the common areas of agreement?

It was someone she knew, or at least had some sort of contact with.
It was a rage killing-not planned out since a murder weapon on the scene was used and the beating was about the head and shoulders.
There are fingerprints(a fingerprint) on the murder weapon that have not been matched to known people in the apartment.


What else?

[christina]

Just to toss another thought into the mix, it was noted in the (admittedly rather effusive) Atkins Chronicle article that the condom wrapper was "just one of the pieces of evidence that indicated there was another perpetrator, not Kevin Jones." Wonder what else they've got.

Good question. Would only that piece of evidence cause the judge to appoint a special prosecutor, or would it take more?
Also, will the RPD be asked to be involved in further investigation or will the sp bring in others?

[upallnight]

On my satellite, it has 48 Hours "Who Killed the Beauty Queen" on at 8, and "Where's Our Baby" on at 9. This conflicts with everything else, including the CBS site, which says that the "Beauty Queen" episode is on at 9, Central time. It could be that my satellite program guide is wrong, but does anyone else have a way to check?
Mine says the same but conflicted also. Not sure, set to record from 8 to 10 just in case I am out, still not sure I wish to see it all but it may be wise to, could help clear up some things, but then again maybe not. No name to match the DNA, or maybe the DNA of viable suspect just means DNA is of a living person because of viable DNA::shrug:
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
vi·a·ble /ˈvaɪəbəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[vahy-uh-buhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. capable of living.
2. Physiology. a. physically fitted to live.
b. (of a fetus) having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.

3. Botany. able to live and grow.
4. vivid; real; stimulating, as to the intellect, imagination, or senses: a period of history that few teachers can make viable for students.
5. practicable; workable: a viable alternative.
6. having the ability to grow, expand, develop, etc.: a new and viable country.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1820–30; < F, equiv. to vie life (< L vīta) + -able -able]

—Related forms
vi·a·bil·i·ty, noun
vi·a·bly, adverb


—Synonyms 5. practical, feasible, usable, adaptable.

[upallnight]

It is time to start looking at ALL the evidence. The time frame, the handprint on the bulb (why didn't the bulb break?), the condom with another man's DNA, these are things that can not be explained. And, please, he lowered the temp to distort the time frame? He's not THAT smart. Forensics is not part of an engineering program, especially since he was in the pre-requisite part of the studies at the time. I think that some of you would still think KJ did it, even if someone else were tried, convicted and confessed. If KJ would had been convicted, I would have believed he did it, but 12 people who heard all the evidence found him NOT GUILTY.

Tried, convicted and confessed, is different. I would not think KJ did it if evidence show differently, of course not. That's what we want, to follow the evidence. If all evidence has not been shown then let it be shown. The DNA on the condom wrapper to this point means nothing unless they can prove more. Maybe they have more, that's what we want to know. Seems like if they did it would be made public, there is a murderer walking somewhere! Seems like if they can pin point this person the first order of business would be to get him/her off the streets.

[lorettalockhorn]

What questions/issues are you hoping to see addressed by the 48 Hours program?

Don't know if any of the jury was interviewed, but chief in my mind is how they came to the unanimous verdict so quickly; the first vote was not 100% not guilty. How were unconvinced jurors converted in such a short time; there were some pretty technical issues involved. Will the fact that one of the jurors had ties to Ryan Whiteside be addressed?

Can we imagine that the timely leaking of the new DNA evidence will have created the need for editing of the original content?

And OT: Does anyone but me wonder just how long the defense has had the identity of the DNA donor and has just now put out press releases to coincide with the program?

[lorettalockhorn]

IIRC we had the pleasure of having a forensic expert from the UK on here ages ago (might have been a different thread). . . didn't he say that due to the smooth surface, no prints would have been left unless they were made in something (such as blood)? At first I thought the wrapper must have been wiped clean but if this is the case then it didn't need to be. Still, it might have been if it was a plant.

When we finally hear more about the suspect in question, we will have to start from square one with Kevin out of the picture. It will be interesting to see if this person fits the evidence on the scene. I'm betting that if it is going to work it will have to be someone she knew. This was a rage killing IMO.


I do remember that poster and the discussion, but not the username. I'm not sure that all condom wrappers are created equal. Some may be more condusive to yielding evidence than others.

[hawgustusgloop]

Those posts came from a person with the screen name "hOTwIREd." Here is the main one about the condom wrapper:

It is a good theory. However, fingerprints on a condom wrapper could easily be wiped off by the very nature of how the packet it torn open - the pressure of the fingers pressing down on the wrapper to grip it can completely obliterate the ridge detail, just leaving the clear outline of a fingerprint. In that case.

The fingerprints on a glossy surface could easily be wiped off, but being selective and only wiping some marks off and not others is not easy - unless the fingerprints are visible (and the person wiping the marks would need to know which ones to wipe off and which to leave behind). Condom wrappers do not have very much surface area and handling them to remove some marks and not others would be quite difficult, in my opinion.

I would have thought that low copy number DNA profiling could have been used in an attempt to extract DNA from where the fingers have pressed wown hard on the wrapper. Not that this is anywhere near 100% successful at giving results.


The DNA from saliva from the person using their teeth to tear open a condom wrapper is very insightful. I always look for indications of how a condom wrapper is opened to decide if fingerprinting or swabbing for DNa is the better option for evidential recovery.

I have examined many condom wrappers in the past and only once recovered a partial fingerprint. Most times I am just frustrated to see a perfect silhouette of a finger and thumb combination where too much pressure was applied to leave any ridge detail.

Obtaining a DNA profile from the saliva on the torn part of the wrapper would be another option (I swab cigarette lighters left at scenes - not for the skin cells on the 'striker' wheel, but the other end, having seen many people hold their lighters in their mouth whilst handling a cigarette - and get results (not always, but then you can never be sure that the lighter was held in the mouth)).
I would consider it at a sexual offence scene - if I could get authorisation for low copy number DNA profiling. I am not sure that the standard DNA profiling extraction technique would produce sufficient DNA to get a profile and would go for fingerprinting instead.


Digressing somewhat away from crime detection and the discussion in hand...
Regarding tearing open a condom wrapper with the teeth - I would have thought that this is a risky business - the condom may get perforated by the teeth.

[lorettalockhorn]

The Courier hasn't updated yet; this is today's article:

Special prosecutor appointed to Dirksmeyer case

Defense teams says DNA found on condom wrapper matched to "viable suspect"

By Mary Kincy Benefield
crime@couriernews.com

More than two years after her murder - and nearly seven months after a Franklin County jury found her longtime boyfriend, Kevin Jones not guilty of the crime - a spcial prosecutor has been appointed to investigate the death of Nona Dirksmeyer, according to a press realease issued Friday by Dennis C. Sutterfield, administrative judge for the 5th Judicial District.
Dirksmeyer, an Arkansas Tech University music major and the reigning Miss Petit Jean Valley at the time of her murder, was found bludgeoned to death inside her South Inglewood Avenue apartment by Jones, his mother, Janice Jones, and Ryan Whiteside on the evening of Dec. 15, 2005.
The appointment of the special prosecutor, Jack McQuary of Little Rock, came at the request of 5th Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney David Gibbons, according to the release, which did not specify when McQuary was appointed, other than to say the action was "recent".
Gibbons on Thursday declined to comment on the appointment, or any other aspect of the case, other than to say the matter was under "active" investigation. He did not specify what agencies might be involved in the investigation.
McQuary, a deputy prosecuting attorney for the 6th Judicial District, also declined comment when contacted Thursday, saying he could not confirm whether a investigation was ongoing due to ethics concerns.
"What I can [say] is that, yes, as a special prosecutor I've been asked to look at certain things dealing with [the Dirksmeyer] case," he said.
On Wednesday, Michael Robbins, one of three attorneys who represented Jones during his trial for Dirksmeyer's murder, issued a press release to several media outlets in which he claimed the defense team - in conjunction with ongoing efforts to realize "Justice for Kevin Jones," in addition to Dirksmeyer - recently received information that DNA found on a condom wrapper at the scene had been matched to a "viable suspect" in the case.
During Jones' trial, prosecutors argued the condom wrapper - on which experts previously found Y-chromosome DHA exclusive of Jones - may have been a "trigger," sending Jones - who told police he and Dirksmeyer did not use condoms - into a fit of rage.
Following McQuary's appointment, Sutterfield ordered the record surrounding the matter sealed "subject to further order of [the] court following completion of [the] investigation," citing the possibility that "the premature release of sensitive information surrounding [the] investigation" might jeopardize both McQuary's and law enforcement's ability to effectively proceed with the investigation, according to his release.

All typos are mine. The information about the DNA being Y-chromosome type answers my earlier question. The bolding is also mine; used to demonstrate what I earlier referred to as "showboating". Glad to know that the record was sealed after proceedings and not before.

[christina]

What questions/issues are you hoping to see addressed by the 48 Hours program?

Don't know if any of the jury was interviewed, but chief in my mind is how they came to the unanimous verdict so quickly; the first vote was not 100% not guilty. How were unconvinced jurors converted in such a short time; there were some pretty technical issues involved. Will the fact that one of the jurors had ties to Ryan Whiteside be addressed?

Can we imagine that the timely leaking of the new DNA evidence will have created the need for editing of the original content?

And OT: Does anyone but me wonder just how long the defense has had the identity of the DNA donor and has just now put out press releases to coincide with the program?

Although I generally respect how 48 Hours handles shows/issues, because they are ultimately in it for ratings, I dont expect too much from it.
I am curious to see who they did interview. Remember, one member of the jury was a classmate of Gibbons.
I thought 48 Hours has been working on this for awhile-would think the new evidence being brought out prior to the airing of the show would cause the producers to add an addendum.
I wonder how long everyone(defense, prosecutor, judge) has had the information of the dna donor. But from your previous remarks about the defense's release of the information my guess is you see them as "damned if they do and damed if they don't". Looking back on the prosecution and police's handling of the investigation on Jones-what's happenning now is much more secret/undercover. They were in the paper with quotes, on this forum and didnt stop until a gag order was put in place.
Maybe this time the judge is controlling it sooner?

[ifIwereU]

Yes, her pants were off with the panties still inside them. The suggestion by the prosecution was they were pulled off of her. The crime scene photos however showed a couch heaped with clothes and an apartment in a generally messy condition. And if I remember, testimony was that was the normal condidition of her apartment and she preferred dressing downstairs in the living room.
After seeing and hearing this, I did not put much stock in the prosecution's theory of the jeans. They also presented a witness that remembered specifically what shirt she was wearing in class that morning. But the police never testified to finding or seeing that shirt.
Blood on the pants- my memory is none was found on them.

yes, I remember the apartment was somewhat unkempt....but IIRC the only clothing items on the floor were the pants/panties and a bra.... all closer to the body than the condom wrapper......everything else was in fact on the sofa.....that's why I cannot dismiss it. is it important to consider that the only thing she was wearing were socks?

[ifIwereU]

[QUOTE=lorettalockhorn;9091053]

The information about the DNA being Y-chromosome type QUOTE]

it being Y chromosome type DNA answers alot of questions for me..

[lorettalockhorn]

Although I generally respect how 48 Hours handles shows/issues, because they are ultimately in it for ratings, I dont expect too much from it.
I am curious to see who they did interview. Remember, one member of the jury was a classmate of Gibbons.
I thought 48 Hours has been working on this for awhile-would think the new evidence being brought out prior to the airing of the show would cause the producers to add an addendum.
I wonder how long everyone(defense, prosecutor, judge) has had the information of the dna donor. But from your previous remarks about the defense's release of the information my guess is you see them as "damned if they do and damed if they don't". Looking back on the prosecution and police's handling of the investigation on Jones-what's happenning now is much more secret/undercover. They were in the paper with quotes, on this forum and didnt stop until a gag order was put in place.
Maybe this time the judge is controlling it sooner?

The court system in this country is an open one, I am mollified after Sutterfield's statement, since the information was sealed after the proceedings to protect the investigation.

The Courier and the media in general has a fiduciary responsibility to report to their subscribers. But since the proceedings were sealed, I am satisfied by their lack of reporting.

It would appear that the defense, despite the seal, despite the risk of compromising ethics and the investigation, chose to make a premature press release. Meh

I know that there are people who have nothing but disdain for the press; there was plenty of uproar for instance when CH started the ball rolling on the rape investigation and The Courier reported it. Ryan Whiteside even considered a lawsuit. The family of one of the boys involved wrote a scathing letter to the editor even after the twerp admitted to sex with the girl.

The media can't win for losing. IMO

[FDInLaw]

[QUOTE=lorettalockhorn;9091053]

The information about the DNA being Y-chromosome type QUOTE]

it being Y chromosome type DNA answers alot of questions for me..Care to share more? :shrug:

[christina]

yes, I remember the apartment was somewhat unkempt....but IIRC the only clothing items on the floor were the pants/panties and a bra.... all closer to the body than the condom wrapper......everything else was in fact on the sofa.....that's why I cannot dismiss it. is it important to consider that the only thing she was wearing were socks?

I am thinking you are right, that the clothes she wore that day were the only ones around her on the floor. Also, it was said she changed downstairs and that the apartment, due to a faulty heater, was usually cold-thus the socks only maybe?
And where oh where was the green(?) shirt she wore to class that morning?

[lorettalockhorn]

[QUOTE=ifIwereU;9091056]Care to share more? :shrug:


I think that quote belongs to IfIwereU (I hate when the board does that!)

I honestly didn't remember that it had ever been pointed out in court that the DNA was Y-chromosome type. I had asked last night (?) if we knew for certain that the DNA has been identified as male or female.

It did it again!

[upallnight]

What questions/issues are you hoping to see addressed by the 48 Hours program?

Don't know if any of the jury was interviewed, but chief in my mind is how they came to the unanimous verdict so quickly; the first vote was not 100% not guilty. How were unconvinced jurors converted in such a short time; there were some pretty technical issues involved. Will the fact that one of the jurors had ties to Ryan Whiteside be addressed?

Can we imagine that the timely leaking of the new DNA evidence will have created the need for editing of the original content?

And OT: Does anyone but me wonder just how long the defense has had the identity of the DNA donor and has just now put out press releases to coincide with the program?

I would like to know why the unconvinced jurors changed their minds also. That always worried me. While on jury duty, I never changed my vote and that was going over and over evidence etc., (not in this trial of course-I was not on that jury). I was committed from the start to see it through no matter how long it took.
I don't know as for Whiteside, but that is true it is so unjust!
I really don't think the show will go into details like we all wish it would. :shrug:
The DNA I think is just another way to throw the uh oh in there, but did not work for me. Proves nothing about who killed Nona so far, IMO.

[hawgustusgloop]

What questions/issues are you hoping to see addressed by the 48 Hours program?

Don't know if any of the jury was interviewed, but chief in my mind is how they came to the unanimous verdict so quickly; the first vote was not 100% not guilty. How were unconvinced jurors converted in such a short time; there were some pretty technical issues involved. Will the fact that one of the jurors had ties to Ryan Whiteside be addressed?

Can we imagine that the timely leaking of the new DNA evidence will have created the need for editing of the original content?

And OT: Does anyone but me wonder just how long the defense has had the identity of the DNA donor and has just now put out press releases to coincide with the program?

Another thing about the jury....from the interviews I read, I got a clear impression that those jurors did not just think the prosecutor did not prove his case, they believed K.Jo was INNOCENT. Maybe, just MAYBE I could stretch my mind around the idea that the case wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but I just can't see how anyone could conclude he was definitely innocent. And don't even get me started on the foreChristian. I would love to see juror interviews.

I am anxious about how this program is going to be slanted....a murderer walks free? An innocent man wrongfully accused yet vindicated by the justice system? Objectively somewhere in the middle? I wonder how this might differ from the Dateline program?

[JustCallMeNora]

Why does the defense need an "uh-oh" at this point? They have already won their case. Jones was acquitted. Why do they need to "clean up" Kevin's image? Just like on here, people are going to believe what they want about him, no matter what, even if someone else confesses, is tried and convicted.:shrug: The fact that everyone thinks this is some great stunt pulled by the defense is crazy. Sounds to me like they are trying their best, where no one else has, to bring closure to both families.



http://webwarper.net/ww/~av/lycos.com ]

[Posted by 8 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]

[ifIwereU]

[QUOTE=ifIwereU;9091056]Care to share more? :shrug:

I was being sarcistic...DNA is such a complex area...my understanding from reading several articles found on the web..it is, in a sense similar to miticontrial (sp) DNA...in that it can't conclusively be pinned to one definate person but can be used to exclude person/s:shrug: ...which is what I believe the defense did with Jones. I may be wrong if someone knows more about the vast world of DNA please enlighten.

[ifIwereU]

I am thinking you are right, that the clothes she wore that day were the only ones around her on the floor. Also, it was said she changed downstairs and that the apartment, due to a faulty heater, was usually cold-thus the socks only maybe?
And where oh where was the green(?) shirt she wore to class that morning?

the sweather might have been what the perp used to wipe his hands off with and might have been used to conceal the phone battery and stick when he left the apartment....I think whoever did it had to either wash their hands or wipe them with something. not sure there was ever any tesitimony to her sweater.

[christina]

Another thing about the jury....from the interviews I read, I got a clear impression that those jurors did not just think the prosecutor did not prove his case, they believed K.Jo was INNOCENT. Maybe, just MAYBE I could stretch my mind around the idea that the case wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but I just can't see how anyone could conclude he was definitely innocent. And don't even get me started on the foreChristian. I would love to see juror interviews.

I am anxious about how this program is going to be slanted....a murderer walks free? An innocent man wrongfully accused yet vindicated by the justice system? Objectively somewhere in the middle? I wonder how this might differ from the Dateline program?


I would hope the focus is on the tragedy of Nona's murder. I was not aware of a Dateline show- when was/is it?

[christina]

the sweather might have been what the perp used to wipe his hands off with and might have been used to conceal the phone battery and stick when he left the apartment....I think whoever did it had to either wash their hands or wipe them with something. not sure there was ever any tesitimony to her sweater.


Good point. The testimony was by the classmate who saw her in class that morning. I think it was part of the prosecution's timeline witnesses. He specifically described the shirt, but no one ever testified to finding/seeing it.
The stick lost interest to me when the a spot of blood was found on the stove and next to the front door switch. Since then I assumed the murderer left by way of the front door-which is less obvious because the slider opens onto a travelled street.

[christina]

[QUOTE=FDInLaw;9091059]

I was being sarcistic...DNA is such a complex area...my understanding from reading several articles found on the web..it is, in a sense similar to miticontrial (sp) DNA...in that it can't conclusively be pinned to one definate person but can be used to exclude person/s:shrug: ...which is what I believe the defense did with Jones. I may be wrong if someone knows more about the vast world of DNA please enlighten.

This is funny because I too assumed you knew about dna!
There was testimony about what kind of dna (please dont think I took that detailed of notes!!!)it was and what they could determine with it. They knew it was male and it excluded Jones and Whiteside. They offered their dna, I can't remember what other males did- anyone?

[lorettalockhorn]

Another thing about the jury....from the interviews I read, I got a clear impression that those jurors did not just think the prosecutor did not prove his case, they believed K.Jo was INNOCENT. Maybe, just MAYBE I could stretch my mind around the idea that the case wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but I just can't see how anyone could conclude he was definitely innocent. And don't even get me started on the foreChristian. I would love to see juror interviews.

I am anxious about how this program is going to be slanted....a murderer walks free? An innocent man wrongfully accused yet vindicated by the justice system? Objectively somewhere in the middle? I wonder how this might differ from the Dateline program?

Since it's a given that murderer walks free, I can see that they would ask both; if KJ is that man and point out that her was vindicated by the system.

[lorettalockhorn]

Why does the defense need an "uh-oh" at this point? They have already won their case. Jones was acquitted. Why do they need to "clean up" Kevin's image? Just like on here, people are going to believe what they want about him, no matter what, even if someone else confesses, is tried and convicted.:shrug: The fact that everyone thinks this is some great stunt pulled by the defense is crazy. Sounds to me like they are trying their best, where no one else has, to bring closure to both families.



http://webwarper.net/ww/~av/lycos.com ]

[Posted by 8 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]

Jones was found not guilty, but I don't know a single person in The Real World who believes that he is. He doesn't seem willing or capable of reinventing himself, what with his party behavior and another arrest under his belt.

And after reading Sutterfield's and McQuary's statements to the press, I don't believe that the defense making a statement on Wednesday is either in the best interest of the investigation, nor was it ethical. How can that be construed as promoting closure?

[FDInLaw]

Why does the defense need an "uh-oh" at this point? They have already won their case. Jones was acquitted. Why do they need to "clean up" Kevin's image? Just like on here, people are going to believe what they want about him, no matter what, even if someone else confesses, is tried and convicted.:shrug: The fact that everyone thinks this is some great stunt pulled by the defense is crazy. Sounds to me like they are trying their best, where no one else has, to bring closure to both families.



http://webwarper.net/ww/~av/lycos.com ]

[Posted by 8 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]
You must not live in a small town if you do not understand why Kevin's family would wish to redeem Kevin's (and consequently there own) image.

Timing is the reason I am questioning their intention.

[lorettalockhorn]

With that thought in mind, what are the common areas of agreement?

It was someone she knew, or at least had some sort of contact with.
It was a rage killing-not planned out since a murder weapon on the scene was used and the beating was about the head and shoulders.
There are fingerprints(a fingerprint) on the murder weapon that have not been matched to known people in the apartment.


What else?

Sorry, didn't see this earlier. I agree with the first premise, don't imagine that it's a stranger.
Agree with the second to a degree, I do think that if it was Kevin, that he expected to have it out with her that morning and I do think he parked nearby and walked the rest of the way to spy on her.
Re: #3, has anyone been ruled out, or in?

[FDInLaw]

If the dna from the condom wrapper has in fact determined a new viable suspect, it might be a good idea for us to start a new thread for discussion. Christina's post is a good one, and we will all need to start at the beginning. Just a thought. I'm out of here for the night.

HUGGERS all around ~ FD

[upallnight]

[QUOTE=JustCallMeNora;9091079]Why does the defense need an "uh-oh" at this point? They have already won their case. Jones was acquitted. Why do they need to "clean up" Kevin's image? Just like on here, people are going to believe what they want about him, no matter what, even if someone else confesses, is tried and convicted.:shrug: The fact that everyone thinks this is some great stunt pulled by the defense is crazy. Sounds to me like they are trying their best, where no one else has, to bring closure to both families.
Well, first of all, atleast you respond to what you want to. Second of all I for one am not crazy if that is what you mean. How do you know it is not a stunt. I don't know..... I like you believe what the evidence has shown to date. It is my opinion and mine alone that they have not proven differently to date. They only have offered DNA on a condom to the public. Is there something else I have missed to put someone else other than KJ at scene of the murder? Any prints in Nona's blood? Any name at all that they can match the DNA to and have evidence that could convict this person if so? I like you believe what I want. You have your Opinion, and I have mine. Yes, you are right, they did win the murder case. No one said they did not. That was public information. Seems if they really had more to charge anyone else they would do so ASAP. Or, maybe they really don't and only have DNA on a condom which does not prove that whomever the DNA (alone) belongs to killed Nona. As far as them cleaning up Kevin's image, I am not worried about his image. KJ alone has done enough damage it that area himself IMO. This is about Finding Justice For Nona. KJ was accused and tried and found not guilty. If his defense has evidence another person murdered her, by all means
I want that to be shown. Then again, why the hell come out with something that means absolutely nothing like the DNA alone and maybe even was asked not to at this point. And, I never said anything that they was trying to clean up his image. But I do have my opinion and will continue to do so even if it pisses you off. How do you know what my personal feeling toward KJ or Nona is. You don't do you? Again, I have based my opinion on the evidence to date. Believe me it is not just on here people believe what they want to.
Well, channel 5 just stated KJ's attorney say DNA points to one suspect. Talked of the 48 hour story tonight. We will see if they have more than DNA on the condom wrapper. I can tell you straight up front, in no way do I want KJ to have to live with people thinking he is the murderer of Nona even if he was tried and found not guilty if he did not kill her. I want the one who did kill her to have to pay that price. It is all about Nona, not Kevin. If no evidence is brought foward to charge another person, can you practice what you preach and see that not guilty does not mean innocent? I will be very happy if it can be proven someone else killed her, and I DO NOT say that just because I think it is what you want to hear. It is MY true feelings. Ok, now I got that out, just saying I am not closed to the idea someone else could have done it. I really don't know like everyone else here including you my friend.

[christina]

Sorry, didn't see this earlier. I agree with the first premise, don't imagine that it's a stranger.
Agree with the second to a degree, I do think that if it was Kevin, that he expected to have it out with her that morning and I do think he parked nearby and walked the rest of the way to spy on her.
Re: #3, has anyone been ruled out, or in?

Oh man, I do not know where I put my notes from the trial!!!!
I am thinking the fingerprints they had were Jones, his mother, Whiteside and Nona's mother. Again, I think it was Bacon that said he could get a match from the latent print(s?) on the base of the lamp.

[christina]

If the dna from the condom wrapper has in fact determined a new viable suspect, it might be a good idea for us to start a new thread for discussion. Christina's post is a good one, and we will all need to start at the beginning. Just a thought. I'm out of here for the night.

HUGGERS all around ~ FD


Good point.

[TJEddie]

About those fingerprints on the lamp.....

"BACON, who is a certified latent print examiner, said he was unable to match latent prints found on the floor lamp base and on the lamp pole near the base with known prints from Jones, Janice Jones, Ryan Whiteside or James “Trey” York.
When questioned about state crime lab fingerprint examiner Bobby Humphries’ decision that the same latent prints were unsuitable for comparison, BACON said, “I respect his opinion.”
“Does that make him wrong?” Phillips asked.
“No,” BACON said. He added the prints were unsuitable for comparison through the Automated Fingerprint Identification System, a computerized database used by law enforcement to help identify fingerprints.
He said there was no way to tell when the prints were made, and there was a possibility that the prints were Dirksmeyer’s. Her fingerprints were not recorded after death. He said no other fingerprints were brought to him for comparison."

(Don't know if this link will work, but it's from the Courier archives, search word Bacon.)
http://www.couriernews.com/archived_story.php?ID=15414&Search=bacon

[lorettalockhorn]

Thanks! The link works A-OK fine.

[JustCallMeNora]

[QUOTE=JustCallMeNora;9091079]Why does the defense need an "uh-oh" at this point? They have already won their case. Jones was acquitted. Why do they need to "clean up" Kevin's image? Just like on here, people are going to believe what they want about him, no matter what, even if someone else confesses, is tried and convicted.:shrug: The fact that everyone thinks this is some great stunt pulled by the defense is crazy. Sounds to me like they are trying their best, where no one else has, to bring closure to both families.
Well, first of all, atleast you respond to what you want to. Second of all I for one am not crazy if that is what you mean. How do you know it is not a stunt. I don't know..... I like you believe what the evidence has shown to date. It is my opinion and mine alone that they have not proven differently to date. They only have offered DNA on a condom to the public. Is there something else I have missed to put someone else other than KJ at scene of the murder? Any prints in Nona's blood? Any name at all that they can match the DNA to and have evidence that could convict this person if so? I like you believe what I want. You have your Opinion, and I have mine. Yes, you are right, they did win the murder case. No one said they did not. That was public information. Seems if they really had more to charge anyone else they would do so ASAP. Or, maybe they really don't and only have DNA on a condom which does not prove that whomever the DNA (alone) belongs to killed Nona. As far as them cleaning up Kevin's image, I am not worried about his image. KJ alone has done enough damage it that area himself IMO. This is about Finding Justice For Nona. KJ was accused and tried and found not guilty. If his defense has evidence another person murdered her, by all means
I want that to be shown. Then again, why the hell come out with something that means absolutely nothing like the DNA alone and maybe even was asked not to at this point. And, I never said anything that they was trying to clean up his image. But I do have my opinion and will continue to do so even if it pisses you off. How do you know what my personal feeling toward KJ or Nona is. You don't do you? Again, I have based my opinion on the evidence to date. Believe me it is not just on here people believe what they want to.
Well, channel 5 just stated KJ's attorney say DNA points to one suspect. Talked of the 48 hour story tonight. We will see if they have more than DNA on the condom wrapper. I can tell you straight up front, in no way do I want KJ to have to live with people thinking he is the murderer of Nona even if he was tried and found not guilty if he did not kill her. I want the one who did kill her to have to pay that price. It is all about Nona, not Kevin. If no evidence is brought foward to charge another person, can you practice what you preach and see that not guilty does not mean innocent? I will be very happy if it can be proven someone else killed her, and I DO NOT say that just because I think it is what you want to hear. It is MY true feelings. Ok, now I got that out, just saying I am not closed to the idea someone else could have done it. I really don't know like everyone else here including you my friend.


I am not really sure what this long tirade is about because it really doesn't make much sense. As for me being pissed off I am not. As for you being pissed off, I have done nothing you or anyone else should take offense to except state my opinion, which last I checked this is a public forum entitling any member to do so as long as they state such, which I DID!

I simply was stating that IN MY OPINION, the defense is not "showboating". Their part is over. They don't have to donate their time and money for the likes of Kevin Jones. For them to be doing so, I feel they must truly be looking for justice.

I very much hope for justice4nona and closure for her family. You can say other wise all you want, but I know what is in my heart. I am not doubting what is in yours, so please don't doubt what is in mine.

[lorettalockhorn]

[QUOTE=upallnight;9091093]


I am not really sure what this long tirade is about because it really doesn't make much sense. As for me being pissed off I am not. As for you being pissed off, I have done nothing you or anyone else should take offense to except state my opinion, which last I checked this is a public forum entitling any member to do so as long as they state such, which I DID!

I simply was stating that IN MY OPINION, the defense is not "showboating". Their part is over. They don't have to donate their time and money for the likes of Kevin Jones. For them to be doing so, I feel they must truly be looking for justice.

I very much hope for justice4nona and closure for her family. You can say other wise all you want, but I know what is in my heart. I am not doubting what is in yours, so please don't doubt what is in mine.


Sheesh, don't think that I would label upall's heartfelt post as a tirade. I was the one who characterized the premature press release as showboating. How can you NOT consider that a breach after reading The Courier's article from today?

BTW, the 48 Hours that is airing now is Where's Our Baby?, even though my DISH guide says it is the Who Killed the Beauty Queen? episode. The guide is indicating that Where's Our Baby? will be shown at 9pm CST. :shrug:

[ifIwereU]

Why does the defense need an "uh-oh" at this point? They have already won their case. Jones was acquitted. Why do they need to "clean up" Kevin's image? Just like on here, people are going to believe what they want about him, no matter what, even if someone else confesses, is tried and convicted.:shrug: The fact that everyone thinks this is some great stunt pulled by the defense is crazy. Sounds to me like they are trying their best, where no one else has, to bring closure to both families.



http://webwarper.net/ww/~av/lycos.com ]

[Posted by 8 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091079&posted=1#post9091079 ]

I am certainly not questioning the defense teams motives....I do, however, think the timing of the release of new evidence could have waited....who knows maybe the police are about to make an arrest and the defense wanted to make sure the public knew it was because of something they did.....after all they would want the publicity....

[lorettalockhorn]

From today's Courier:

McQuary, a deputy prosecuting attorney for the 6th Judicial District, also declined comment when contacted Thursday, saying he could not confirm whether a investigation was ongoing due to ethics concerns.

Following McQuary's appointment, Sutterfield ordered the record surrounding the matter sealed "subject to further order of [the] court following completion of [the] investigation," citing the possibility that "the premature release of sensitive information surrounding [the] investigation" might jeopardize both McQuary's and law enforcement's ability to effectively proceed with the investigation, according to his release.

[JustCallMeNora]

I am certainly not questioning the defense teams motives....I do, however, think the timing of the release of new evidence could have waited....who knows maybe the police are about to make an arrest and the defense wanted to make sure the public knew it was because of something they did.....after all they would want the publicity....

I could see wanting credit for that after all that has happened..

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://algart.net/ww This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/~av/lycos.com

[JustCallMeNora]

From today's Courier:

McQuary, a deputy prosecuting attorney for the 6th Judicial District, also declined comment when contacted Thursday, saying he could not confirm whether a investigation was ongoing due to ethics concerns.

Following McQuary's appointment, Sutterfield ordered the record surrounding the matter sealed "subject to further order of [the] court following completion of [the] investigation," citing the possibility that "the premature release of sensitive information surrounding [the] investigation" might jeopardize both McQuary's and law enforcement's ability to effectively proceed with the investigation, according to his release.

Maybe there simply is no issue.....

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091106&posted=1#post9091106 ]

[lorettalockhorn]

Maybe there simply is no issue.....

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=9091106&posted=1#post9091106 ]

From today's Courier:

Sutterfield ordered the record surrounding the matter sealed "subject to further order of [the] court following completion of [the] investigation

Seems like a breach to me. Maybe you have more information than the rest of us?

So, what's with the extraneous links in your posts? They don't seem to be the links that you claimed before to have access to, the audio tapes.

[ifIwereU]

well, I thought it was very pro-Kevin.....after all...he was acquitted I guess I should have expected it. I thought it was funny that they said his life was put on hold for 18 mos....guess they didn't get the memo about RW's big party that almost got KJ's bond revolked....

I bet Bacon will reconsider his wording the next time he looks at a print in blood on a murder weapon.

[ifIwereU]

There were also portions of the interview done the night of the visitaion that were not played at trial....there were strong denials during that statement that I did not expect. apparently they posted more of the interrogation on their website which is where I am headed. Nona's female friend that was interviewed did not testify at the trial....alot of Nona's other friends sure had a different opinion than she did about NOna and KJ's relationship....I wonder if they were interviewed for the show.....and how did they choose her, I guess because of the beauty pageant angle.

all in all....my opinion has not changed

[FDInLaw]

HOLY CRAP! There are 1,450 people viewing this forum right now!!!! :eek:

Good golly!

[lorettalockhorn]

Holy Crap! Could the defense's press release been more timely? We have to wonder what CBS had to edit out to allow for their showboating re: new DNA results.

[christina]

There were also portions of the interview done the night of the visitaion that were not played at trial....there were strong denials during that statement that I did not expect. apparently they posted more of the interrogation on their website which is where I am headed. Nona's female friend that was interviewed did not testify at the trial....alot of Nona's other friends sure had a different opinion than she did about NOna and KJ's relationship....I wonder if they were interviewed for the show.....and how did they choose her, I guess because of the beauty pageant angle.

all in all....my opinion has not changed

I was fascinated to see portions of the taped interview done the night of the visitation-correct, none of that was shown at trial. Were you there too?
Also, to have it confirmed the interview(looked like an interrogation to me) was 7 hours long with the polygraph at the end. Wow.

I thought that young lady was one of the ones that testified early one at the trial-darn-wish I could find my notes!!

And on a side note- I was derided earlier on this forum for mentioning there were two cards- and tonight when they showed the crime scene photos again-they were clearly two on the table in the living room. Totally not important except to make this old feeble mind of mine feel a bit better.

I concur-all in all my opinion did not change either.

[ifIwereU]

well I watched the statements on the 48 hours website....it would have been nice to see them in full context....I still think it is just down right odd that he would out right remember touching the card...remember "stradling" her body remember not looking into the back door when he first gets there...and not remember touching the lamp...he remembers minut details remembers touching the blood to see how fresh it was....putting his hand in the wound, but doesn't remember touching what was obviously the murder weapon. Even looking at the pictures tonight on TV....he knew it was the murder weapon....and he knew she was murdered and still continued to fondle her dead body to such an extreme that he got blood over his face and hands...did anyone notice how clean his pants were....

I also thought it was intriguing on the video his extreme interest in the time of death and how it relates to his whereabouts....IMO it shows that he knew the TOD was crucial to his timeline....

[JustCallMeNora]

I was fascinated to see portions of the taped interview done the night of the visitation-correct, none of that was shown at trial. Were you there too?
Also, to have it confirmed the interview(looked like an interrogation to me) was 7 hours long with the polygraph at the end. Wow.

I thought that young lady was one of the ones that testified early one at the trial-darn-wish I could find my notes!!

And on a side note- I was derided earlier on this forum for mentioning there were two cards- and tonight when they showed the crime scene photos again-they were clearly two on the table in the living room. Totally not important except to make this old feeble mind of mine feel a bit better.

I concur-all in all my opinion did not change either.

My opinion did not change either, only more enforced. All in all a good show.
[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?t=250375&page=220 ]

[upallnight]

[QUOTE=upallnight;9091093]


I am not really sure what this long tirade is about because it really doesn't make much sense. As for me being pissed off I am not. As for you being pissed off, I have done nothing you or anyone else should take offense to except state my opinion, which last I checked this is a public forum entitling any member to do so as long as they state such, which I DID!

I simply was stating that IN MY OPINION, the defense is not "showboating". Their part is over. They don't have to donate their time and money for the likes of Kevin Jones. For them to be doing so, I feel they must truly be looking for justice.

I very much hope for justice4nona and closure for her family. You can say other wise all you want, but I know what is in my heart. I am not doubting what is in yours, so please don't doubt what is in mine.

Good, I'm sooooo glad your not pissed. And you are correct, it is a public forum.
But, I disagree the defense part is over as far as KJ's trial But if they are doing what they stated, to find the true murderer I just think they have a long way to go, or short depending on if they have more evidence against this viable suspect. Good for them with the donations of time and money. But then again, it could bite them in the butt, it could go either way. Time will tell. If they truely have enough evidence to build a case and an arrest of someone else to happen, that would be good for Nona and Kevin. If not, then I will be disappointed in them completely. I don't doubt what is in your heart. I know we all want what is right and just.
IMO the 48 hours show did not change my mind. If anything it just made me more suspicious of the wrapper and it being planted due to no other evidence to go with it. Thank God it did not show much of the crime scene photo's as shown in court. It was heart breaking to see them. Wonder where was Hiram (KJ's father), why was he not interviewed by 48 hours, and if so why was it not shown on air? He has always been beside KJ, why not on such a public show like 48 hours?:shrug:
Oh, well--peace to you friend and Justice For Nona:seeya:

[ifIwereU]

I also did some research on the prosecutions expert blood witness Tom Beval...who determined the print was not clotted and left at the time the murder occurred not at the time of the discovery....fascinating guy with a lot of accolades (sp)...and has written several books...wonder why the jury discounted his testimony?

[christina]

I also did some research on the prosecutions expert blood witness Tom Beval...who determined the print was not clotted and left at the time the murder occurred not at the time of the discovery....fascinating guy with a lot of accolades (sp)...and has written several books...wonder why the jury discounted his testimony?

Good discussion on Bevel earlier in the forum. Not impressive at the trial, prosecution did not provide him with all the information he needed, and he practically did a total backtrack on his opinion under cross exemination.

[christina]

HOLY CRAP! There are 1,450 people viewing this forum right now!!!! :eek:

Good golly!

S'pose they'll be new posters soon?

[JustCallMeNora]

S'pose they'll be new posters soon?



[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?t=250375&page=220 ]

Sounds like it could get interesting.....

FD. Loretta, haven't really heard from your thoughts...

[christina]

I was glad they interviewed some jury members-now one question is answered-one said she thought he was innocent and one said he was not proven quilty.
I was also glad to hear the one tell when/how they prayed.

[JustCallMeNora]

I was glad they interviewed some jury members-now one question is answered-one said she thought he was innocent and one said he was not proven quilty.
I was also glad to hear the one tell when/how they prayed.

Yes, definitely cleared up some confusion that has gone on here in the past. They appeared of average intelligence as well, not otherwise.

[Manning]

well I watched the statements on the 48 hours website....it would have been nice to see them in full context....I still think it is just down right odd that he would out right remember touching the card...remember "stradling" her body remember not looking into the back door when he first gets there...and not remember touching the lamp...he remembers minut details remembers touching the blood to see how fresh it was....putting his hand in the wound, but doesn't remember touching what was obviously the murder weapon. Even looking at the pictures tonight on TV....he knew it was the murder weapon....and he knew she was murdered and still continued to fondle her dead body to such an extreme that he got blood over his face and hands...did anyone notice how clean his pants were....
I also thought it was intriguing on the video his extreme interest in the time of death and how it relates to his whereabouts....IMO it shows that he knew the TOD was crucial to his timeline....

Yes, I wondered how he got so much blood on the BACKS of his hands and under his eyes, but none on his pants.

[upallnight]

I also did some research on the prosecutions expert blood witness Tom Beval...who determined the print was not clotted and left at the time the murder occurred not at the time of the discovery....fascinating guy with a lot of accolades (sp)...and has written several books...wonder why the jury discounted his testimony?

I really think the word tacky played a major roll in KJ being found Not Guilty. If indeed the blood looked the same 5 days later on the light bulb, it played to major of a role to the jury. It would have clearly been my understanding that tacky today and tacky 5 days later is one in the same, meaning dry. That alone leads me to Kevin was found not guilty of murder but does not mean he is innocent. Only 1 of the 3 jury women said she thought he was innocent. The other said not enough evidence to find him guilty to sum it up. Tacky I tell you, it freed KJ because the jury could not see it as being dry. Could have been alot different if the jury viewed it tacky then tacky 5 days later means the same thing dry, just worded wrong maybe I don't know.

[lorettalockhorn]

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://webwarper.net This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?t=250375&page=220 ]

Sounds like it could get interesting.....

FD. Loretta, haven't really heard from your thoughts...


Don't have any new thoughts other than what the defense's grandstanding may have detracted from the original content.

And I'm still wondering about the superfluous links in your posts.

[lorettalockhorn]

I was glad they interviewed some jury members-now one question is answered-one said she thought he was innocent and one said he was not proven quilty.
I was also glad to hear the one tell when/how they prayed.

It would have been preferable for the juror(s) to have explained why the panel voted not guilty. In light of the prayers, it could be coercion.

[hawgustusgloop]

Yes, definitely cleared up some confusion that has gone on here in the past. They appeared of average intelligence as well, not otherwise.
I guess that depends on your perspective.

[hawgustusgloop]

Isn't it reasonably likely those were Nona's? I thought the medical examiner neglected to take her prints? I could be mistaken, but I thought that was the case.

Still waiting for JCMN's audio links!

[lorettalockhorn]

Call me crazy, but I'm thinking that those prints could have been from most of the world.

Well, you know what I mean.

[TJEddie]

If anyone's looking for a little variety in their reading, there's a comment section on the CBS website:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/48hours/main3802230.shtml#ccmm

[lorettalockhorn]

If anyone's looking for a little variety in their reading, there's a comment section on the CBS website:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/07/48hours/main3802230.shtml#ccmm

Crazy stuff in there. Makes our resident troll look less insane. LMAO at the poster who once revived a kitten by small chest impressions. :beer:

[Amy]

Isn't it reasonably likely those were Nona's? I thought the medical examiner neglected to take her prints? I could be mistaken, but I thought that was the case.

Still waiting for JCMN's audio links!

I wonder why her prints were not taken? It seems that would be important in a murder case, where they would want to know the source of all the prints left at the scene. How much time are they (were they) spending on trying to identify unknown prints which might very well belong to the victim?

On one program, an ME says, they only test what LE or the DA request. They might have samples of something, but they are never tested because they are not asked to do so. Altho, it would seem to me that the ME should be intelligent enough to just run a full autopsy, test and report everything.

Seems that, even if the prints weren't obtained at autopsy, at one point early on they could have obtained her prints. Someone should have realized the importance of this.

[Amy]

[QUOTE=ifIwereU;9091081]

This is funny because I too assumed you knew about dna!
There was testimony about what kind of dna (please dont think I took that detailed of notes!!!)it was and what they could determine with it. They knew it was male and it excluded Jones and Whiteside. They offered their dna, I can't remember what other males did- anyone?

Did they "offer" their DNA, or was it requested because they were at the murder scene? TIA.

[Amy]

Sure am unhappy that I missed the show. I would have anyway, as I was to work last night, but was sent home sick. I had the tv on, but didn't even make it thru the baby show.

I wonder how long before it will be re-aired? Thanks to all for the info about the show.

[nobody]

I'm hearing about a neighbor, "with a criminal record". Rumor says that his DNA was linked to the condom wrapper after further testing. I watched the show, but didn't recall that being mentioned - however I'm just hearing it. I think it's the same guy that lived in her complex, knocked on her door earlier to ask about a dead cat - but not for sure.
Then again, I have to think "what a dumb and careless thing to do - if he were to leave a condom wrapper at the scene." not sure i'm buying. his attention to nona did buy creep points though.

[ifIwereU]

Crazy stuff in there. Makes our resident troll look less insane. LMAO at the poster who once revived a kitten by small chest impressions. :beer:


after reading the comments on the CBS website....I almost spilled my coffee....the show covered 1/4 of the actual case and left all of info untouched (its a one hour show), IMO....i hope the peeps from that forum don't migrate their way over here.....I don't have enough valium.

[Brown hound]

Jones was found not guilty, but I don't know a single person in The Real World who believes that he is.

Speak for yourself. I guess people who don't agree with you are not in the "REAL WORLD"

[ifIwereU]

I'm hearing about a neighbor, "with a criminal record". Rumor says that his DNA was linked to the condom wrapper after further testing. I watched the show, but didn't recall that being mentioned - however I'm just hearing it. I think it's the same guy that lived in her complex, knocked on her door earlier to ask about a dead cat - but not for sure.
Then again, I have to think "what a dumb and careless thing to do - if he were to leave a condom wrapper at the scene." not sure i'm buying. his attention to nona did buy creep points though.

you say its rumors....is your source creditable...can you tell us anything else...what kind of record are we talking her....hot checks, burglary, rape? i don't recall any mention of the "dead cat" story....if your info is good....could be a big deal.....then again....was it someone else that Nona might have had a relationship with?

I think i understand now why the second interrogation was not played at court....the video made him look like a little kid getting picked on by the police. I know the PD was just doing their job and they had to confront him about the palm print...had to be done...because in the first interview he said he didn't touch it...that would have raised a red flag to anyone.

[christina]

I wonder why her prints were not taken? It seems that would be important in a murder case, where they would want to know the source of all the prints left at the scene. How much time are they (were they) spending on trying to identify unknown prints which might very well belong to the victim?

On one program, an ME says, they only test what LE or the DA request. They might have samples of something, but they are never tested because they are not asked to do so. Altho, it would seem to me that the ME should be intelligent enough to just run a full autopsy, test and report everything.

Seems that, even if the prints weren't obtained at autopsy, at one point early on they could have obtained her prints. Someone should have realized the importance of this.

It was very frustrating to see/hear all the things the police did not obtain/search. We would have had more answers than questions maybe. Examples- they took the time to pull the entire toilet off to check for the condom but did not check any surface in or around it for prints- they didn't secure Jones car/truck to check for blood-and most importantly, there was virtually no security of the crime scene(remember the cell phone being moved).
Seeing/hearing some things last night that were not in the trial helped me to agree with the defense's use of the terms tunnel vision and group think. They may have interviewed 40-50 people, but 4 days after the murder-Jones was the only one they were looking at. It appears any real investigation stopped and from then on it was only about finding things to prove Jones did it.

[christina]

you say its rumors....is your source creditable...can you tell us anything else...what kind of record are we talking her....hot checks, burglary, rape? i don't recall any mention of the "dead cat" story....if your info is good....could be a big deal.....then again....was it someone else that Nona might have had a relationship with?

I think i understand now why the second interrogation was not played at court....the video made him look like a little kid getting picked on by the police. I know the PD was just doing their job and they had to confront him about the palm print...had to be done...because in the first interview he said he didn't touch it...that would have raised a red flag to anyone.

But he held to the same story for 7 hours of interrogation. What I saw in that tape was a young man trusting the police, understanding their authority, wanting to help them but freaking out when he realized they were pinning the murder on him. He offered to give them anything they wanted, he was totally cooperating with them sans a lawyer. He did not look like a "really intelligent young man thinking he was smarter than the cops".
Agreeing with the courts, I had little faith in a lie detector prior to this, but knowing/seeing the conditions in which they administered it, I have no faith in the result.

[christina]

you say its rumors....is your source creditable...can you tell us anything else...what kind of record are we talking her....hot checks, burglary, rape? i don't recall any mention of the "dead cat" story....if your info is good....could be a big deal.....then again....was it someone else that Nona might have had a relationship with?

I think i understand now why the second interrogation was not played at court....the video made him look like a little kid getting picked on by the police. I know the PD was just doing their job and they had to confront him about the palm print...had to be done...because in the first interview he said he didn't touch it...that would have raised a red flag to anyone.

I remember something about a cat and a neighbor. I am thinking its the neighbor who also saw York at Nona's apartment.
Saying he did not remember touching anything and finding a palm print on a light bulb a foot from the body he admits to straddling-does not raise a red flag for me. In the current interview he says to this day he does not remember touching anything. That is plausible since many more important things were going on in his mind.
Let's remember to apply the same standard to all. The defense has been derided for their press release. We have been told by some on this forum there was an agreement that the defense broke. But when sources were asked for......

[ifIwereU]

Let's remember to apply the same standard to all. The defense has been derided for their press release. We have been told by some on this forum there was an agreement that the defense broke. But when sources were asked for......

I think Loretta cleared that up with the quote from Courier....I don't expect names to be mentioned...I would however like to know any addtional information that Nobody might like to offer....the dead cat story is something that, I for one, don't recall seeing on here...maybe it came from a different forum....anyway, I'm just curious....

I also agree with you that KJ seemed very cooperative and had very strong denials however the portion I saw was only about five minutes of a 7 hour interrogation. I would LOVE to see more.

[ifIwereU]

I remember something about a cat and a neighbor. I am thinking its the neighbor who also saw York at Nona's apartment.
Saying he did not remember touching anything and finding a palm print on a light bulb a foot from the body he admits to straddling-does not raise a red flag for me. In the current interview he says to this day he does not remember touching anything. That is plausible since many more important things were going on in his mind.
Let's remember to apply the same standard to all. The defense has been derided for their press release. We have been told by some on this forum there was an agreement that the defense broke. But when sources were asked for......

not remembering touching the MURDER WEAPON should be a big deal. If he is stradling her body....unless he has catorsionistic(sp) abilities it seems very unlikely he would have been able to reach it....he said that he laid on top of her to keep her warm...why were his arms stretched to that degree....I believe Bacon's theory that it couldn't have been done with out him putting his body in such a position that he would have been in an uncomfortable state....and I think he would have remembered that....but these are just my opinions...nothing more

[lorettalockhorn]

Jones was found not guilty, but I don't know a single person in The Real World who believes that he is.

Speak for yourself. I guess people who don't agree with you are not in the "REAL WORLD"


What part of the subjective personal pronoun I do you not understand? I was speaking for myself. LMAO

[upallnight]

Sure am unhappy that I missed the show. I would have anyway, as I was to work last night, but was sent home sick. I had the tv on, but didn't even make it thru the baby show.

I wonder how long before it will be re-aired? Thanks to all for the info about the show.

CBS has many shows that can be downloaded in full. You could check their home page to see if the 48 hour show can. I do this on survivor all the time while on the road or in the air & if can't watch it on tv right away. Lap tops, can't live without them. Anyway maybe will work for you.

[JustCallMeNora]

I think Loretta cleared that up with the quote from Courier....I don't expect names to be mentioned...I would however like to know any addtional information that Nobody might like to offer....the dead cat story is something that, I for one, don't recall seeing on here...maybe it came from a different forum....anyway, I'm just curious....

I also agree with you that KJ seemed very cooperative and had very strong denials however the portion I saw was only about five minutes of a 7 hour interrogation. I would LOVE to see more.

Well, from what I have seen and read on here, considering the press they always gave on these stories, and who the managing editor is, The Courier is not much of a credible source in my opinion. JMO

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://algart.net/ww This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/~av/lycos.com ]

[lorettalockhorn]

The Courier's site isn't updated yet, but this is one of the articles published today:

Gibbons: "Misunderstanding" provides portion of unreleased Dirksmeyer case file to television show

The many twists and turns of the ongoing investigation into the murder of Dover High School graduate and Arkansas Tech University student Nona Dirksmeyer - now entering its third year - perhaps lend themselves, in their complexity, to misunderstanding and confusion.
Apparently, elements of those states may have spilled over into other arenas surrounding the case, as police interview footage part of the cases's unreleased investigative file was seen on national television Saturday night due to "misunderstanding."
The footage in part depicts images captured at the Russellville Police department on Dec. 15, 2006 - the night of Dirksmeyer's murder. The footage is of Kevin Jones, Dirksmeyer's boyfriend and the man ultimately charged with - and acquitted of - her murder, in a police interrogaton room, and has, along with the rest of the investigative file, been repeatedly denied to The Courier in response to Arkansas Freedom of Information (FOI) Act requests.
Most recently, on Dec. 17, 2007, 5th Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney David Gibbons declined a verbal FOI request for the file on the basis it was part of an ongoing investigation.
When asked last week how the footage - first shown to a television audience in a preview that aired Feb. 2 - was obtained, Gibbons said he did not release it, and was "checking" on the situation.
"I believe that it may have been released as part of an interview," he said. "That was done through a misunderstanding."
He said he had no knowledge of how the same program obtained crime scene photos depicting Dirksmeyer's slain form.

hmmm I thought RPD had turned their files over to Gibbons. And I guess I assumed that Gibbons had turned his over to McQuary.

There is another article about the DNA evidence, but it's pretty long. Bottom line: we don't know who's DNA it is.

All typos are mine.

[lorettalockhorn]

Well, from what I have seen and read on here, considering the press they always gave on these stories, and who the managing editor is, The Courier is not much of a credible source in my opinion. JMO

[Posted by 12.213.80.38 via http://algart.net/ww This is added while posting a message to avoid misuse.
Try: http://webwarper.net/webwarper.exe Example of viewing: http://webwarper.net/ww/~av/lycos.com ]


Well, you just have to wonder why if Sutterfield and McQuary have been misquoted by The Courier, why they haven't spoken up about it.

[JustCallMeNora]

What part of the subjective personal pronoun I do you not understand? I was speaking for myself. LMAO

Why are you always so defensive and nasty when someone disagrees with you? You don't have to take it so personally......

[JustCallMeNora]

Well, you just have to wonder why if Sutterfield and McQuary have been misquoted by The Courier, why they haven't spoken up about it.

This was my thoughts. Sounded like something the Courier fabricated.... Maybe out of spite????

[LurkerNoMore]

Watching 48 Hours was my first chance to ever see Nona, other than in photographs. She radiated and was beautiful and talented, and with her murder we lost a good one.

[LurkerNoMore]

I'm still digesting what I thought of the show. Overall, there was less spin toward either side than I was expecting.

I don't think the show would change anyone's mind. You all know my bias - I don't think Kevin did it. With my bias in mind, here are some first thoughts:

It was interesting watching Kevin in the interrogation, and how, as someone said here earlier, it was like the police picking on a little kid. If he withstood 7 hours of that - he was in no mental state to then turn around and take a polygraph.

It was also interesting to see how Kevin was distraught at the funeral, after much talk here of the moment, caught on camera, where he laughed. I never put stock in that moment. The video we saw last night did not show him laughing.

For me - after being involved here for so long - 48 hours was like watching a movie after you've read the book - you are left wanting so much more.

[ifIwereU]

I remember something about a cat and a neighbor. I am thinking its the neighbor who also saw York at Nona's apartment.
Saying he did not remember touching anything and finding a palm print on a light bulb a foot from the body he admits to straddling-does not raise a red flag for me. In the current interview he says to this day he does not remember touching anything. That is plausible since many more important things were going on in his mind.
Let's remember to apply the same standard to all. The defense has been derided for their press release. We have been told by some on this forum there was an agreement that the defense broke. But when sources were asked for......
by the way, I never asked for the source only additional information...everyone is creditable until it proven otherwise (just like Jones) JMO

[ifIwereU]

I'm still digesting what I thought of the show. Overall, there was less spin toward either side than I was expecting.

I don't think the show would change anyone's mind. You all know my bias - I don't think Kevin did it. With my bias in mind, here are some first thoughts:

It was interesting watching Kevin in the interrogation, and how, as someone said here earlier, it was like the police picking on a little kid. If he withstood 7 hours of that - he was in no mental state to then turn around and take a polygraph.
It was also interesting to see how Kevin was distraught at the funeral, after much talk here of the moment, caught on camera, where he laughed. I never put stock in that moment. The video we saw last night did not show him laughing.

For me - after being involved here for so long - 48 hours was like watching a movie after you've read the book - you are left wanting so much more.

maybe I misunderstood, but based on my observations the polygraph came first....then the interrogation....looks like they spoke for a few minutes then asked him to take the polygraph...from there the basis of the interrogation revolved around his failing it and his print on the bulb.....I could be wrong...the way they splice and dice the video could all be out of context....
interesting article in the courier...How did CBS get the photos and video....courier must be pissed

[lorettalockhorn]

Why are you always so defensive and nasty when someone disagrees with you? You don't have to take it so personally......

You'll just have to pardon me if I don't consider many people hiding behind screennames, sometimes multiple screennames, and IP maskers to be in The Real World. By TRW, I meant people that I talk face to face with. Don't take it so personally.

This was my thoughts. Sounded like something the Courier fabricated.... Maybe out of spite????

Wow! Conspiracy theory much? Wouldn't it be embarrassing if The Courier had to print a retraction and admit they fabricated a press release by an adminstrative judge and a special prosecutor. hmmm

[lorettalockhorn]

I'm hearing about a neighbor, "with a criminal record". Rumor says that his DNA was linked to the condom wrapper after further testing. I watched the show, but didn't recall that being mentioned - however I'm just hearing it. I think it's the same guy that lived in her complex, knocked on her door earlier to ask about a dead cat - but not for sure.
Then again, I have to think "what a dumb and careless thing to do - if he were to leave a condom wrapper at the scene." not sure i'm buying. his attention to nona did buy creep points though.

The cat story sounds familiar.

[lorettalockhorn]

maybe I misunderstood, but based on my observations the polygraph came first....then the interrogation....looks like they spoke for a few minutes then asked him to take the polygraph...from there the basis of the interrogation revolved around his failing it and his print on the bulb.....I could be wrong...the way they splice and dice the video could all be out of context....
interesting article in the courier...How did CBS get the photos and video....courier must be pissed


I haven't looked at the time stamps on the interrogation videos yet, that may give us some help to determine the timeline of the polygraph. You're right about the editing capabilities and how it can be used to editorialize. I did have to laugh a little when Kevin was talking about his view of law enforcement as authority figures. He sure as heck hasn't demonstrated much respect for LE from what I can tell. Wonder if his most recent arrest (that we know of) could have been avoided if he hadn't blown his cool.

[hawgustusgloop]

I'm hearing about a neighbor, "with a criminal record". Rumor says that his DNA was linked to the condom wrapper after further testing. I watched the show, but didn't recall that being mentioned - however I'm just hearing it. I think it's the same guy that lived in her complex, knocked on her door earlier to ask about a dead cat - but not for sure.
Then again, I have to think "what a dumb and careless thing to do - if he were to leave a condom wrapper at the scene." not sure i'm buying. his attention to nona did buy creep points though.

Welcome back!:beer:
Good to see you posting here again.

What else do we know about that guy? Isn't he a bounty hunter or something? Didn't he live there with his wife or girlfriend? It all kind of runs together after awhile.

[lorettalockhorn]

I'm hearing about a neighbor, "with a criminal record". Rumor says that his DNA was linked to the condom wrapper after further testing. I watched the show, but didn't recall that being mentioned - however I'm just hearing it. I think it's the same guy that lived in her complex, knocked on her door earlier to ask about a dead cat - but not for sure.
Then again, I have to think "what a dumb and careless thing to do - if he were to leave a condom wrapper at the scene." not sure i'm buying. his attention to nona did buy creep points though.

This is what you posted on 7/21/07:

I had not heard anything about this car, until now: "James Evans also resides in the Ingelwood Apartments. He said that he and his wife are both bail bondsmen. He reported that he saw Dirksmeyer's car at her apartment at 8:10 a.m. He said around 2:30 p.m. he was talking to his brother outside the apartment complex. He said her car was in front of her apartment and that he also saw a green SUV. He said he had been to her door earlier in the week when he was inquiring about a dead cat he had found. He reported that Nona answered the door. He told the jurors that he did not see any damage to the door frame earlier in the week."
Reference...http://www.atkinschronicle.com/dt1.htm

[Brown hound]

I reviewed the RPD video, and this is the best time frame of the video that I could come up with

1716 Frost asks KJ if he will take polygraph
1736 KJ being strapped into polygraph
1813 Polygraph still going on
1826 Person administering polygraph tells KJ he knows KJ killed Nona
1829 Frost starts in on palm print
1909 Still going...

As for the rest of the 7 hours, don't know if they occurred before or after this...

[ifIwereU]

This is what you posted on 7/21/07:


Now the green SUV I remember from Frost's testimony...defense tried to slam him saying that he never found out who was driving the SUV....Frost countered by saying it belonged to visitors of the last apartment on the end ...Christina, do you remember this from the trial...I think I'm right on that, maybe?

[ifIwereU]

I reviewed the RPD video, and this is the best time frame of the video that I could come up with

1716 Frost asks KJ if he will take polygraph
1736 KJ being strapped into polygraph
1813 Polygraph still going on
1826 Person administering polygraph tells KJ he knows KJ killed Nona
1829 Frost starts in on palm print
1909 Still going...

As for the rest of the 7 hours, don't know if they occurred before or after this...

Thanks, brown hound....well we know he missed the visitation because he was still being interrogated....it was interesting on show last night when KJ's mom said she was yelling during the interrogation for him to leave....didn't I hear/read it here somewhere where Daddy Jones threw a chair against the wall and was restrained or maybe even arrested? maybe he got his temper from Dad....some folks might call that a clue

[christina]

I reviewed the RPD video, and this is the best time frame of the video that I could come up with

1716 Frost asks KJ if he will take polygraph
1736 KJ being strapped into polygraph
1813 Polygraph still going on
1826 Person administering polygraph tells KJ he knows KJ killed Nona
1829 Frost starts in on palm print
1909 Still going...

As for the rest of the 7 hours, don't know if they occurred before or after this...

Did you get to review the whole tape?
Thanks for the timeline!

[christina]

Now the green SUV I remember from Frost's testimony...defense tried to slam him saying that he never found out who was driving the SUV....Frost countered by saying it belonged to visitors of the last apartment on the end ...Christina, do you remember this from the trial...I think I'm right on that, maybe?

Believe me- I am still digging for my notes?!?!?!?

[FDInLaw]

Believe me- I am still digging for my notes?!?!?!?:punch: Girl! Get your act together and find them already! :seeya:

[christina]

Thanks, brown hound....well we know he missed the visitation because he was still being interrogated....it was interesting on show last night when KJ's mom said she was yelling during the interrogation for him to leave....didn't I hear/read it here somewhere where Daddy Jones threw a chair against the wall and was restrained or maybe even arrested? maybe he got his temper from Dad....some folks might call that a clue

I am thinking/remembering the Jones' went to the visitation and when they did not see Kevin, found out he had stopped by the police station. They went over there and were denied being able to see him. They waited and waited(7 hours is a long time) and finally lost it-thus the mother shouting and the father throwing a chair. Appropriate? Probably not in the "normal" world, by then I have never been in their circumstance. I can only imagine the emotional roller coaster they were on. I would guess I would not sit quietly that long if I thought my child was in jeopardy.

[FDInLaw]

The Courier's site isn't updated yet, but this is one of the articles published today:

Gibbons: "Misunderstanding" provides portion of unreleased Dirksmeyer case file to television show

The many twists and turns of the ongoing investigation into the murder of Dover High School graduate and Arkansas Tech University student Nona Dirksmeyer - now entering its third year - perhaps lend themselves, in their complexity, to misunderstanding and confusion.
Apparently, elements of those states may have spilled over into other arenas surrounding the case, as police interview footage part of the cases's unreleased investigative file was seen on national television Saturday night due to "misunderstanding."
The footage in part depicts images captured at the Russellville Police department on Dec. 15, 2006 - the night of Dirksmeyer's murder. The footage is of Kevin Jones, Dirksmeyer's boyfriend and the man ultimately charged with - and acquitted of - her murder, in a police interrogaton room, and has, along with the rest of the investigative file, been repeatedly denied to The Courier in response to Arkansas Freedom of Information (FOI) Act requests.
Most recently, on Dec. 17, 2007, 5th Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney David Gibbons declined a verbal FOI request for the file on the basis it was part of an ongoing investigation.
When asked last week how the footage - first shown to a television audience in a preview that aired Feb. 2 - was obtained, Gibbons said he did not release it, and was "checking" on the situation.
"I believe that it may have been released as part of an interview," he said. "That was done through a misunderstanding."
He said he had no knowledge of how the same program obtained crime scene photos depicting Dirksmeyer's slain form.

hmmm I thought RPD had turned their files over to Gibbons. And I guess I assumed that Gibbons had turned his over to McQuary.

There is another article about the DNA evidence, but it's pretty long. Bottom line: we don't know who's DNA it is.

All typos are mine.I'd sure like to know what happened here! The Courier is not the only one asking about who released the crime scene photos, etc.

[FDInLaw]

I'm hearing about a neighbor, "with a criminal record". Rumor says that his DNA was linked to the condom wrapper after further testing. I watched the show, but didn't recall that being mentioned - however I'm just hearing it. I think it's the same guy that lived in her complex, knocked on her door earlier to ask about a dead cat - but not for sure.
Then again, I have to think "what a dumb and careless thing to do - if he were to leave a condom wrapper at the scene." not sure i'm buying. his attention to nona did buy creep points though.

Please tell us more about this if you can. :confused:

[lorettalockhorn]

I am thinking/remembering the Jones' went to the visitation and when they did not see Kevin, found out he had stopped by the police station. They went over there and were denied being able to see him. They waited and waited(7 hours is a long time) and finally lost it-thus the mother shouting and the father throwing a chair. Appropriate? Probably not in the "normal" world, by then I have never been in their circumstance. I can only imagine the emotional roller coaster they were on. I would guess I would not sit quietly that long if I thought my child was in jeopardy.


I'm not sure I would characterize that situation as jeopardy, but I am curious as to why the Joneses would sit for hours, to the point of such emotional frustration that they would act out in such a way, rather than calling an attorney.

[hawgustusgloop]

This was my thoughts. Sounded like something the Courier fabricated.... Maybe out of spite????

Fabricated? It sounds like you really have an agenda against the Courier. Maybe you should write a letter to the editor?

[hawgustusgloop]

The video we saw last night did not show him laughing.



Or another way to look at it is that CBS chose not to show the video of him laughing at her funeral.

[FDInLaw]

Fabricated? It sounds like you really have an agenda against the Courier. Maybe you should write a letter to the editor?
Maybe she already has??? :rolleyes:

[Brown hound]

"I don't know why someone would break in and hit her on the back of the head" -Kevin Jones, way too early in the investigation, before cause of death was determined

I think you need to change your qoute, last night we clearly saw that KJ knew cause of death (being hit on the back of her head) upon discovering the body. He made many references to this as an explanation of the blood all over him. Heck, anyone who talked to anyone in Pope County knew she was hit on the back of the head with a lamp by the next morning, and that doesn't make the rest of us murderers. It just gave another reason for change of venue.

[ifIwereU]

"I don't know why someone would break in and hit her on the back of the head" -Kevin Jones, way too early in the investigation, before cause of death was determined

I think you need to change your qoute, last night we clearly saw that KJ knew cause of death (being hit on the back of her head) upon discovering the body. He made many references to this as an explanation of the blood all over him. Heck, anyone who talked to anyone in Pope County knew she was hit on the back of the head with a lamp by the next morning, and that doesn't make the rest of us murderers. It just gave another reason for change of venue.


but if you will remember...Mama Jones thought it was accident on that night, wonder why she didn't think she had been wacked in the back of the head with the lamp...oh wait.......maybe it was because she was stradling the body, contaminating evidence.....

[hawgustusgloop]

"I don't know why someone would break in and hit her on the back of the head" -Kevin Jones, way too early in the investigation, before cause of death was determined

I think you need to change your qoute, last night we clearly saw that KJ knew cause of death (being hit on the back of her head) upon discovering the body. He made many references to this as an explanation of the blood all over him. Heck, anyone who talked to anyone in Pope County knew she was hit on the back of the head with a lamp by the next morning, and that doesn't make the rest of us murderers. It just gave another reason for change of venue.

I need food, water, shelter, oxygen, etc., but I don't think I NEED to change my quote. I think I will keep it, but feel free to make your own signature for your own screen name if you like.

I watched every second of that broadcast and did not clearly or even vaguely see anything like you suggest.

[hawgustusgloop]

KJ knew cause of death (being hit on the back of her head) upon discovering the body.

I completely agree with this statement. I think he definitely knew everything about the cause of Nona's death.

[lorettalockhorn]

we clearly saw that KJ knew cause of death (being hit on the back of her head)

I agree.

[lorettalockhorn]

but if you will remember...Mama Jones thought it was accident on that night, wonder why she didn't think she had been wacked in the back of the head with the lamp...oh wait.......maybe it was because she was stradling the body, contaminating evidence.....

The characterization of the crime scene as an accident has always puzzled me. :shrug: Did she think that Nona had accidentally been killed? Fell down, landing on an object that made the cuts on her body?

[ifIwereU]

but if you will remember...Mama Jones thought it was accident on that night, wonder why she didn't think she had been wacked in the back of the head with the lamp...oh wait.......maybe it was because she wasn't stradling the body, contaminating evidence.....

I wanted to make a correction that she WASN'T stradling the body, contaminating evidence....hard to proof read your own stuff...sorry about that

[upallnight]

"I don't know why someone would break in and hit her on the back of the head" -Kevin Jones, way too early in the investigation, before cause of death was determined

I think you need to change your qoute, last night we clearly saw that KJ knew cause of death (being hit on the back of her head) upon discovering the body. He made many references to this as an explanation of the blood all over him. Heck, anyone who talked to anyone in Pope County knew she was hit on the back of the head with a lamp by the next morning, and that doesn't make the rest of us murderers. It just gave another reason for change of venue.

After speaking to a few locals about the 48 hour show, all of them I have spoken to thinks KJ did it. Of course, I would think his attorney's directed him in what and what not to say to 48 hours. The 48 hour show seemed to only make their view lean more to he did it. If he loved Nona so much, why was he sleeping around as he said he did just prior to her death? His attorney's argued not have this testified to. Does not mean he killed her but seems to me if he loved her so much, he would not chance that love by having sex with an other girl. Of course, this was not testified to in court. He said on the 48 hour show he would not hurt her, did he think sex with someone else would not hurt her emotionally. I know he was speaking about physically hurt her but goes beyond me why he would even be with anyone else if he loved her so much! Even if the back of the head was not ever said, it is the actual evidence against him. One I spoke with said he is lying out his teeth, he did it, he is guilty as hell. We go through all the what if's etc., and still can not come to the feeling he is innocent. Wish we knew more about the name to the dna on the condom wrapper, maybe that is all they have like I said before. How did they get the DNA to match this person from this person. From something someone grabbed after this person either threw a cup away, etc., or from DNA the police or some law enforcement agency had on file and if so what was this person arrested for. But still, what else if anything does it have to do with Nona's murder. I am still open to further evidence if it is out there. Time will tell one way or the other.

[ifIwereU]

The characterization of the crime scene as an accident has always puzzled me. :shrug: Did she think that Nona had accidentally been killed? Fell down, landing on an object that made the cuts on her body?

maybe she thought she tripped over the lamp...

[ifIwereU]

I have heard rumors that he slept with one of Nona's friends after the murder (like within a few months) and also had sex after the murder with the same girl he had sex with the weekend prior to the murder...I also heard that she was going to testify at the trial...but was either not allowed to or was just not called....these, of course, are rumors....but whats that saying "where there's smoke......"

[Brown hound]

[[I watched every second of that broadcast and did not clearly or even vaguely see anything like you suggest.[/QUOTE]

KJ from 48 hours..."I felt around kinda on the back of her head and her hair was matted. It was a little sticky, I guess, but there was still some wet blood." If I see a gunshot to an abdomen, I can then assume this is cause of death if there are no other injuries that I see. If I see blood on the back of a persons head, in the absence of anything else, I can then assume this is cause of death until an autopsy disproves this assumption.

[upallnight]

I have heard rumors that he slept with one of Nona's friends after the murder (like within a few months) and also had sex after the murder with the same girl he had sex with the weekend prior to the murder...I also heard that she was going to testify at the trial...but was either not allowed to or was just not called....these, of course, are rumors....but whats that saying "where there's smoke......"

I know, lot's of rumors. Lot's of smoke to.

[upallnight]

[[I watched every second of that broadcast and did not clearly or even vaguely see anything like you suggest.

KJ from 48 hours..."I felt around kinda on the back of her head and her hair was matted. It was a little sticky, I guess, but there was still some wet blood." If I see a gunshot to an abdomen, I can then assume this is cause of death if there are no other injuries that I see. If I see blood on the back of a persons head, in the absence of anything else, I can then assume this is cause of death until an autopsy disproves this assumption.[/QUOTE]

I agree, he did tell 48 hours this, he was not on trial during this interview. He has had a long time to think about what he would say to 48 hours I am sure. I still do not get why he kept messing with her body, he was told not to by 2 different people at the scene that I remember, and I saw this testified to in court. These 2 people being there at the scene in their professional roles. Why in the heck did he do that?> In other words, back off Jack and let these people do their investigation. Seems they was dealing with trying to keep KJ away from the body so they could do their jobs a few times to many IMO. His pants did not show any blood that I could see. That is weird. He knew that back door normally had a security stick, why would he think he could get in the back way. And why did he not have his keys with him, was that normal for him or not. He had gone to Russellville earlier that day, why did he not stop by her home then to check on her if he was so worried about her? She was not due for another class until 2 I think. Why would he not have driven by her apartment before or after he did all these other things. He had time to eat with a friend etc., maybe he should have checked on Nona instead of that. I would think his parents would have allowed this being he was so worried. Yet he waited until he was on his way with his Mom to the Christmas party to get the ball rolling so to say. Does not take long to drive there, check on her and go back to Dover. So many question's I tell you!

[Amy]

I'm still digesting what I thought of the show. Overall, there was less spin toward either side than I was expecting.

I don't think the show would change anyone's mind. You all know my bias - I don't think Kevin did it. With my bias in mind, here are some first thoughts:

It was interesting watching Kevin in the interrogation, and how, as someone said here earlier, it was like the police picking on a little kid. If he withstood 7 hours of that - he was in no mental state to then turn around and take a polygraph.

It was also interesting to see how Kevin was distraught at the funeral, after much talk here of the moment, caught on camera, where he laughed. I never put stock in that moment. The video we saw last night did not show him laughing.

For me - after being involved here for so long - 48 hours was like watching a movie after you've read the book - you are left wanting so much more.

I always have trouble when someone is pointed out as callous, uncaring, (and in most cases, therefore the likely perp) just because s/he laughed at some point. Usually, from folks seeing pics, not the people who were actually in the vicinity at the moment. I would imagine that, at some point, people ARE going to laugh, smile, whatever. What if the laughter (or smile) was in response to some fond memory of the victim someone just reminder the laugher about? So, like you, I do not put much stock in a moment of laughter from any if the family or friends.

[lorettalockhorn]

KJ from 48 hours..."I felt around kinda on the back of her head and her hair was matted. It was a little sticky, I guess, but there was still some wet blood." If I see a gunshot to an abdomen, I can then assume this is cause of death if there are no other injuries that I see. If I see blood on the back of a persons head, in the absence of anything else, I can then assume this is cause of death until an autopsy disproves this assumption.

I agree, he did tell 48 hours this, he was not on trial during this interview. He has had a long time to think about what he would say to 48 hours I am sure. I still do not get why he kept messing with her body, he was told not to by 2 different people at the scene that I remember, and I saw this testified to in court. These 2 people being there at the scene in their professional roles. Why in the heck did he do that?> In other words, back off Jack and let these people do their investigation. Seems they was dealing with trying to keep KJ away from the body so they could do their jobs a few times to many IMO. His pants did not show any blood that I could see. That is weird. He knew that back door normally had a security stick, why would he think he could get in the back way. And why did he not have his keys with him, was that normal for him or not. He had gone to Russellville earlier that day, why did he not stop by her home then to check on her if he was so worried about her? She was not due for another class until 2 I think. Why would he not have driven by her apartment before or after he did all these other things. He had time to eat with a friend etc., maybe he should have checked on Nona instead of that. I would think his parents would have allowed this being he was so worried. Yet he waited until he was on his way with his Mom to the Christmas party to get the ball rolling so to say. Does not take long to drive there, check on her and go back to Dover. So many question's I tell you![/QUOTE]

He told 48 Hours that he had been calling Nona all day, but his cellphone records didn't prove that. Why would he be worried? Nona had an afternoon test scheduled and was planning dinner with her Little. He shouldn't have expected her to be at home, one of the things that made me suspect him early on.

[upallnight]

I agree, he did tell 48 hours this, he was not on trial during this interview. He has had a long time to think about what he would say to 48 hours I am sure. I still do not get why he kept messing with her body, he was told not to by 2 different people at the scene that I remember, and I saw this testified to in court. These 2 people being there at the scene in their professional roles. Why in the heck did he do that?> In other words, back off Jack and let these people do their investigation. Seems they was dealing with trying to keep KJ away from the body so they could do their jobs a few times to many IMO. His pants did not show any blood that I could see. That is weird. He knew that back door normally had a security stick, why would he think he could get in the back way. And why did he not have his keys with him, was that normal for him or not. He had gone to Russellville earlier that day, why did he not stop by her home then to check on her if he was so worried about her? She was not due for another class until 2 I think. Why would he not have driven by her apartment before or after he did all these other things. He had time to eat with a friend etc., maybe he should have checked on Nona instead of that. I would think his parents would have allowed this being he was so worried. Yet he waited until he was on his way with his Mom to the Christmas party to get the ball rolling so to say. Does not take long to drive there, check on her and go back to Dover. So many question's I tell you!

He told 48 Hours that he had been calling Nona all day, but his cellphone records didn't prove that. Why would he be worried? Nona had an afternoon test scheduled and was planning dinner with her Little. He shouldn't have expected her to be at home, one of the things that made me suspect him early on.[/QUOTE]
I totally agree, she would have been gone. And the cell phone records did not pan out with his statement. Down right lied I think.

[lorettalockhorn]

I wonder why her prints were not taken? It seems that would be important in a murder case, where they would want to know the source of all the prints left at the scene. How much time are they (were they) spending on trying to identify unknown prints which might very well belong to the victim?

On one program, an ME says, they only test what LE or the DA request. They might have samples of something, but they are never tested because they are not asked to do so. Altho, it would seem to me that the ME should be intelligent enough to just run a full autopsy, test and report everything.

Seems that, even if the prints weren't obtained at autopsy, at one point early on they could have obtained her prints. Someone should have realized the importance of this.

Just to differentiate Nona's prints from anyone else's shouldn't there be some way to ascertain her prints? For instance, if she used birth control, wouldn't she be the only one who had handled the package? Wasn't there something in her purse or apartment that contains only one set of prints that can be assumed to be hers? She was never printed by an agency in case of kidnapping? Or was that just big deal when My Little Love was a youngin?