Hard to make murder charges stick?

According to Channel 9 News here in D.C., prosecutors say they have a "very circumstantial" case that may be difficult to prove. That without definitive cause of death information, they may not be able to prove that BF's version of events is NOT what happened.

No speculation as to what is going to happen at this point.

WUSA-TV

Originally posted by Rowan Again
According to Channel 9 News here in D.C., prosecutors say they have a "very circumstantial" case that may be difficult to prove. That without definitive cause of death information, they may not be able to prove that BF's version of events is NOT what happened.

No speculation as to what is going to happen at this point.

WUSA-TV

I hope for Ms. Pelasara.....that this is not the case.

Great link, thank you Rowan.

My opinion: Richmond cops need to learn not to not talk so much. They would otherwise have the opportunity to make the Fawley side sweat it out, trying to guess exactly what evidence they do have against him. If Fawley thinks you might have a pair of aces when in reality you only have a pair of twos, he might run his own mouth more.

The more he talks, the less you have to prove in court. So far his own implication of himself has been the cop's best asset it seems.

Frankly, I have no sympathy in listening to the prosecution whine about how evidence is circumstantial and how difficult it will be to try this case. A little girl was brutally raped, murdered, and dumped like a piece of garbage along the side of the road. Richmond cops know this and it's now their job to build a case and take Fawley down, no matter how difficult the circumstances.

Modesto, California, site of the Laci Peterson murder, proved that a small town in cooperation with multi-agency law enforcement CAN successfully prosecute a murder case with only circumstantial evidence. Richmond has much more to go on already that prosecutors in Modesto ever had and their main player, Scott Peterson, now sits not-so-smugly on death row in San Quentin.

Richmond needs to make sure their collective brains are fully engaged before further attempting to actuate their mouths.

Originally posted by RugerDog
Great link, thank you Rowan.

My opinion: Richmond cops need to learn not to not talk so much. They would otherwise have the opportunity to make the Fawley side sweat it out, trying to guess exactly what evidence they do have against him. If Fawley thinks you might have a pair of aces when in reality you only have a pair of twos, he might run his own mouth more.

The more he talks, the less you have to prove in court. So far his own implication of himself has been the cop's best asset it seems.

Frankly, I have no sympathy in listening to the prosecution whine about how evidence is circumstantial and how difficult it will be to try this case. A little girl was brutally raped, murdered, and dumped like a piece of garbage along the side of the road. Richmond cops know this and it's now their job to build a case and take Fawley down, no matter how difficult the circumstances.

Modesto, California, site of the Laci Peterson murder, proved that a small town in cooperation with multi-agency law enforcement CAN successfully prosecute a murder case with only circumstantial evidence. Richmond has much more to go on already that prosecutors in Modesto ever had and their main player, Scott Peterson, now sits not-so-smugly on death row in San Quentin.

Richmond needs to make sure their collective brains are fully engaged before further attempting to actuate their mouths.

Excellent post Ruger! And I am 100% on the same page with you.

First off - the man has admitted having sex with a minor. Granted, that doesn't carry the death penalty but it's a start.

Second, he admits facilitating her death for God's sake. He said he "restricted her breathing" which resulted in her death. I'm trying to understand how anything LESS than a murder charge (although perhaps not a good 1st degree case unfortunately UNLESS they can prove that this is a pattern of conduct) could even be considered!

I've thought alot about this. I have a daughter couple years older than Taylor who is also in college so have tried to put myself in Taylor's place that night based on my daughter's experiences.

She goes back to her room expecting to be in for the night. That's not an option because of her roommate. So she grabs keys, phone and ID. She's only been at school 2 weeks. It's 10:30 at night. She has a couple of hours to kill. Where does she go? To the home of someone she knows. Fawley.

I believe she went there to kill time, and he forced himself on her and he killed her. I think it happened in Richmond. No way do I think she got in that car to drive to Mathews, and his story is completely disingenious.

He raped her, killed her and stashed her. Period. Wouldn't even surprise me if the SOB had sex with her after she was dead. NOTHING would surprise me at this point.

I've asked for this before, and can't seem to find it. Can someone clarify the plastic bag for me?

First I heard that her remains were in a plastic bag but I don't think that was true. Was there a plastic bag over her head, as some have suggested? What is the significance of the plastic bag?

TIA for the information.

Can someone tell me which link to click on Rowan's linked site? I don't see one relating to this case.

TIA

Originally posted by Hey Paula
Can someone tell me which link to click on Rowan's linked site? I don't see one relating to this case.

TIA

If you look down the list of news stories, it's listed. Earlier it was a banner as well. Here you go Taylor

Although, due to BF's account of how Taylor died, this doesn't appear to be a Murder One case, I wouldn't be too quick to discount it being applied, or even for it to stick, in this case.

BF has lied and changed his stories. He kept his version of Taylor's death to himself until after her body was found, and he was already arrested on unrelated charges.

I believe LE has quite a bit of evidence against BF, which, IMO, prompted his "confession".

The fact that Taylor was placed in a plastic bag, casts doubt that this was an accident, as people don't normally carry trash bags in their car.

I believe that BF interspersed truth with lies in his stories. The fact he mentioned a plastic bag having been thrown over his head in "his abduction", claiming he was taken to a remote area, are eerily similar to how and where Taylor's body was found.

I still maintain the the time BF purchased that gas can prove to be a crucial piece of evidence in this case. If it was purchased on his way to Mathews Co, then his story of "sex gone wrong" is a flat out lie, since the attendant stated BF was alone in Taylor's car.

If BF purchased that gas on his way to Mathews Co, Taylor was already deceased, and her body was either in the trunk of her car, or on the floor of the back of her car.

Also, a number of girls/women that BF had been involved with, claimed he tried to choke them, and Erin Crabill stated that BF "wasn't into" erotic asphyxiation. This lends support to intentional murder, not accidental death during sex.

IMO

they gotta find his camera.

Originally posted by Rowan Again
According to Channel 9 News here in D.C., prosecutors say they have a "very circumstantial" case that may be difficult to prove. That without definitive cause of death information, they may not be able to prove that BF's version of events is NOT what happened.

No speculation as to what is going to happen at this point.

WUSA-TV

Personally I think that the details fo BF's story are hog wash. he killed her but I doubt it was by accident and if those investigators had any sense that they could prove that his actions after the murder prove the murder was not accidental. Why did he go through all that trouble of fabracading an abduction story and switching license plates. He is coniving and violent and calculating we know that from his past and how past girlfriends have complained about his odd behavior. I think he went into a rage and killed her. It may not have been pre-meditated but not accidental.

Anyone know if the LE has hired a psych eval from their side to evaluate Bennyboy?

Originally posted by ANGRYWOLF
you don't know that well...at 10:30m at night..makes no sense.....A lot of universities have their libraries open late at night..why not go there ? At UT the "strip " is open till the wee hours of the morning...although..she might not be allowed in some of the places because you have to be at least 18..but at 10:30 there should have been some place/honky tonk for college kids she could have gone to...maybe met some new people if she was "curious"...makes no sense she would go to some strange guy's pad to kill time...where she might be all alone with him....and knowing guys like I do..being one..not a surprise he would want to sleep with her as she was an attractive girl...and most women don't want to be someone's plaything.....

I don't think she went there, her mother doesn't think she would have went there. That is why I think there was a second person involved. We will never know how she ended up there unless someone else comes forward. He may have been waiting for her outside her dorm and saw his chance, grabbed her, etc.

Originally posted by kbean520


Personally I think that the details fo BF's story are hog wash. he killed her but I doubt it was by accident and if those investigators had any sense that they could prove that his actions after the murder prove the murder was not accidental. Why did he go through all that trouble of fabracading an abduction story and switching license plates. He is coniving and violent and calculating we know that from his past and how past girlfriends have complained about his odd behavior. I think he went into a rage and killed her. It may not have been pre-meditated but not accidental.

Anyone know if the LE has hired a psych eval from their side to evaluate Bennyboy?

1. They will have to order a psych it's part of the court system, IF he is charged to see if he is fit to stand trial.

2. They will try to make a murder case w/what they have and I think the bag shows pre-meditation, if I were on the jury, I would think so.

3. They will try and prove he is lying.

4. They have his "police report" and his "confession". This hows he made a false report w/police to cover his butt.

5. Now that they have more clues, I have no doubt they are re-questioning ppl and trying to see if ANYONE hard/saw anything out of the ordinary.

Personally, I think if the interogated the creep enough, and tell him they have evidence that shows otherwise, etc. Even if they make it up, he'd crack and tell the real story. We still don't know what his friends know, and if they are in front of a Grand Jury, they HAVE to talk.

Can someone please explain the plastic bag to me? Where was it? Fingerprints? I've missed the whole plastic bag part of this.

Originally posted by Rowan Again
Can someone please explain the plastic bag to me? Where was it? Fingerprints? I've missed the whole plastic bag part of this.

BF claimed that during his abduction a plastic trash bag was placed over his head.

Taylor's remains were in a plastic trash bag.

Thus, some believe that BF used the plastic bag on the head story in case forensics point to his dna/fingerprints on/in the bag.

That is what I gather of the plastic bag link.

too late to edit my post - meant to add that i do not see how BF thought by adding the bag story would gel if that self-same bag ends up containing Taylor. To my mind it implicates him further. Perhaps he thought to implicate his abductors in Taylor's death?? Makes no sense that abductors would simultaneously abduct him then later kill a woman he hung around with. Maybe he wanted to specifically implicate his ex as being a jealous ex-lover intent on hurting him and killing his new friend Taylor??

still makes no sense - too coldwar espionagish

Originally posted by anima
BF claimed that during his abduction a plastic trash bag was placed over his head.

Taylor's remains were in a plastic trash bag.

Thus, some believe that BF used the plastic bag on the head story in case forensics point to his dna/fingerprints on/in the bag.

That is what I gather of the plastic bag link.

So her remains WERE in a plastic bag? Then the "scattered remains" story is false?

Originally posted by Rowan Again




So her remains WERE in a plastic bag? Then the "scattered remains" story is false?

from the news accounts her remains were in a plastic bag - but in the same sentence other remains were strewn around. when i read it - it made no sense to me unless "some" of her remains were in the bag and some were outside of the bag - i'll try to find a link to the story and post it on this thread

Originally posted by anima
from the news accounts her remains were in a plastic bag - but in the same sentence other remains were strewn around. when i read it - it made no sense to me unless "some" of her remains were in the bag and some were outside of the bag - i'll try to find a link to the story and post it on this thread

Thank you! I have never really gotten this part of the story straight. The local newspaper in Diggs had a very good story on the body recovery - and it described the body as being together to the extent that they dug a trench under and around it and lifted it out in total. Which would dispute the scattered remains thing, wouldn't it??

Originally posted by Rowan Again


Thank you! I have never really gotten this part of the story straight. The local newspaper in Diggs had a very good story on the body recovery - and it described the body as being together to the extent that they dug a trench under and around it and lifted it out in total. Which would dispute the scattered remains thing, wouldn't it??

I read the same account you mention and it does indeed contradict the other news accounts about the remains and the state they were found in. Still looking for a good link.

Originally posted by anima
I read the same account you mention and it does indeed contradict the other news accounts about the remains and the state they were found in. Still looking for a good link.

Again, my thanks

link to BF's abduction account. scroll down to where he said that they put a bag over his head.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/ori..._abducted.html

[nibblet]

I read the Diggs/Mathews site account also where they carefully dug a trench around/under her to keep everything together.

When I read about the scattering, I didn't take it more than some small parts around her body in general by small animals.

Originally posted by anima
link to BF's abduction account. scroll down to where he said that they put a bag over his head.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/ori..._abducted.html

You know? There's not alot that could make me laugh out loud in this case, but by god .. THAT did.

What a MORON. Now, if he's trying to do that long convoluted thing about the abduction, and the same abductors mighta taken Taylor, and so the plastic bag .. OMG .. that's just FUNNY it's so ridiculous.

But then again. Fawley is about one slice short of a loaf here.

Originally posted by nibblet
I read the Diggs/Mathews site account also where they carefully dug a trench around/under her to keep everything together.

When I read about the scattering, I didn't take it more than some small parts around her body in general by small animals.

nibblet, did you end up going last week? If you'd prefer not to answer, I'll understand

Originally posted by Rowan Again


You know? There's not alot that could make me laugh out loud in this case, but by god .. THAT did.

What a MORON. Now, if he's trying to do that long convoluted thing about the abduction, and the same abductors mighta taken Taylor, and so the plastic bag .. OMG .. that's just FUNNY it's so ridiculous.

But then again. Fawley is about one slice short of a loaf here.

yeah..what i call bird bread...old stale bread i throw out for the birds.

link to account of bag found with remains: (there is another but i have not found it yet)

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet...=1128767569784

Pelasara is convinced that the injuries Fawley said he suffered at the hands of his alleged abductors were "defensive wounds inflicted by my daughter as she fought for her life.

"His story about the abductors putting a plastic bag over his head tells us that he is trying to account for the possibility that his fingerprints or DNA evidence might show up in the plastic bag he put my daughter in," the mother added.

"I expect that when he is further confronted with the mounting evidence against him, his story will further change," Pelasara said. "And I will be here protecting my daughter's memory and correcting his lies."

Thank you anima!

Let me ask you guys this?

WTH would he be doing with a large plastic trash bag if they were going to the beach to take pictures?

I am convinced he killed her in Richmond and drove her down there.

Originally posted by anima
yeah..what i call bird bread...old stale bread i throw out for the birds.

Originally posted by Rowan Again
Thank you anima!

Let me ask you guys this?

WTH would he be doing with a large plastic trash bag if they were going to the beach to take pictures?

I am convinced he killed her in Richmond and drove her down there.

smacks of premeditation to me. i do not think he killed her in richmond though - unless it was in some remote location where moving her body around AND committing the murder would go unseen. Plus - I have it in my head that besides wanting to return to the dumping ground later for trophy retrieval - he took pictures. IMO, this case could be wrapped up if that camera can be found.

Originally posted by anima
smacks of premeditation to me. i do not think he killed her in richmond though - unless it was in some remote location where moving her body around AND committing the murder would go unseen. Plus - I have it in my head that besides wanting to return to the dumping ground later for trophy retrieval - he took pictures. IMO, this case could be wrapped up if that camera can be found.

Well, I agree about the camera regardless of where it happened. But I just am having trouble wrapping my brain around her jumping in that car and heading to the Bay at that time of night. But then again, I was a college freshman once too.

perhaps he was telling a half truth about the plastic bag - only HE put the bag over her head.

Originally posted by anima
perhaps he was telling a half truth about the plastic bag - only HE put the bag over her head.

yep.

I want to know what HIS definition of "restricted her breathing" is.

veracity, i have been thinking along the same line as far as when she left her room. iirc....he could see her car (when it was parked)from his place??

I have been reading everything I can find about this case and I really think I'm missing something here (even though everyone's gone over it countless times, I must be a bit slow )

This is what I'm not understanding:

1. He's confessed to killing her, whether accidental or not, and hid her body because he was scared. Obviously he knew she was going to be found in the bag, or near it. He confessed to being the hands of her death, so I would automatically assume he'd know his fingerprints would be on it. Why the big fuss over him using the abduction story as an excuse to having his fingerprints on the bag? (And I do realize that the bag could point to premeditation)

2. I automatically assumed she died the same night she was last seen (September 5th) which makes me think that Ben's (supposed) abduction happened AFTER he killed and hid her. So if the abduction story is true, the bag put over his head during the abduction wouldn't be the same bag he used to haul/hide Taylor's body. He would have already hid her at that point.

Maybe I've got this all wrong. Dates and times easily confuse me, but thank you to anyone that answers this for me!!

Originally posted by Veracity
And he has a police record that spans two to three states that shows a history of violence toward females, forcing women in his own family to seek court ordered protection from him.

women in his own family?? i didnt hear about that... do you have a link?

When BF claimed he was abducted, I believe he was either trying to establish an alibi through his COG, (consciousness of guilt) or a connection between his abduction and Taylor's disappearance.

Criminals often decorate their lies with truths. Having used a plastic bag to place Taylor's body in, and having taken her to a remote area, he used those facts to describe his contrived abduction.

BF didn't anticpate Taylor's body being found. Like all criminals, he likely believe he had cleverly disposed of her body, and even if her body was found, it would be blamed on others.

Once Taylor's body was found, BF had to have thought about evidence linking him to Taylor. That's why he claimed he had sex with her the same night. I also believe the gas purchase he made, midway between Richmond and Mathews Co with his credit card, and the fact the attendant identified him, were further incentive for him to confess.

I guess what I don't get is this. A man has confessed to "restricting the breathing" and causing the death of Taylor Behl.

How do we NOT get murder out of it. Regardless of his outrageous stories.

I cannot imagine.

[TN_Profiler]

Originally posted by Rowan Again
I guess what I don't get is this. A man has confessed to "restricting the breathing" and causing the death of Taylor Behl.

How do we NOT get murder out of it. Regardless of his outrageous stories.

I cannot imagine.

I think the thin legal line is going to reside with "intent". I would have been more open to the idea about a really stupid idea (erotic asphyxia) if it wasn't for Benny-boys own actions and behavior AFTER the fact.

If you look at what he has done after the fact, it clearly points to something far more violent than a bad sex idea getting out of hand. Here is why I believe there is no possible way this is an accident.

1. the unsolicited alibi. He clearly is explaining away any possible evidence that could link him to a person who HE already knows is dead, but the police are not even aware is missing.

2. he participates in her search efforts when he is the only person who knows that she is already dead. (ala Scott Peterson)

3. The car was missing for 2 weeks and he is now the person who admitted to being in it. Where was it? Hiding it makes me think he was possibly covering up evidence. If her death was an accident, then why hide the car for 2 weeks?

4. his on-line behavior ...... he never made a mention of the fact Taylor was missing even though he was writing a nightly dissertation on how his life was ruined by a former stripper/girlfriend. Strange behavior for a person who was intimate with her.

5. Disposing of her body in a highly remote location in a very crude manner. Not the work of a person who cared for her. He seemed to just have a bag handy to help conceal his "accident". Lord knows the first thing I would do if one of my friends drowned in my pool would be to put them in a garbage bag and drive them 75 miles into the wilderness and dump them in a ravine. Seems like the normal thing to do, yes?

If Taylor's death was a complete accident, why did he put so much effort into creating an alibi for himself, and point his finger at a few other people? He did not have any remorse what so ever. An accident is an accident. This my friends was no accident.


I don't think he hatched an elborate plan to kill her but I do think her rejection of a relationship with him pushed him over his psychotic wall and he killed her out of anger.

Thank you, Hey Paula!

I don't know why that didn't make sense to me before, but you've explained it well. Now I get it.

According to Channel 9 News here in D.C., prosecutors say they have a "very circumstantial" case that may be difficult to prove. That without definitive cause of death information, they may not be able to prove that BF's version of events is NOT what happened.

No speculation as to what is going to happen at this point.

WUSA-TV

___________________

Hmmm, I'm not sure how to insert this txt....but I was wondering if anyone can find the link to the News 9 report that talks about a "very circumstantial" case...the article that is up there doesn't talk about it.

Thanks!!

Originally posted by susan1
According to Channel 9 News here in D.C., prosecutors say they have a "very circumstantial" case that may be difficult to prove. That without definitive cause of death information, they may not be able to prove that BF's version of events is NOT what happened.

No speculation as to what is going to happen at this point.

WUSA-TV

___________________

Hmmm, I'm not sure how to insert this txt....but I was wondering if anyone can find the link to the News 9 report that talks about a "very circumstantial" case...the article that is up there doesn't talk about it.

Thanks!!

Listings of news stories change daily on home pages. Check the Taylor Behl coverage ..