Thursday, March 27, 2014

Charli Scott: Missing Person Case Now Homicide

Statement Analysis indicated the ex boyfriend Steven Capobianco for deception.  Maui police have reclassified the case from "Missing Persons" to "Homicide."

The family released the following statement:
It is with great sadness that we can confirm that the Scott family has been informed by the Maui police that the investigation into Charli's disappearance has been reclassified as a homicide investigation. Without disclosing details of the ongoing investigation we want to dispel rumors that Charli's body has been recovered. Sadly this is untrue. That said we feel strongly that evidence of this crime should be presented in court and not via rumors and shoddy news reporting.   We would like to thank the Maui police for their thorough work thus far and encourage the public to cooperate with them in their search to bring Charli and her unborn son's killer to justice.  Thank you and Mahalo for your thoughts and prayers.
Analysis:

The ex boyfriend Steven Capobianco, 24, spoke to media.  Here is his interview with analysis:


Mileka: "So tell me about what happened Sunday night."
Good solid question.  

Although it pinpoints time frame, and better is, "Tell me what happened...", we learn that the time in question is sensitive to the subject.  By asking "What happened?", the shorter question allows for the subject to begin the answer where he chooses.  It may have yielded more information.  For example, domestic disputes often have a lengthy introduction as the guilty subject will emphasis how it is "her fault", and "stall" the pace of the statement to stay away from the critical time period, which in this case, is Sunday night.  

What if the subject had been asked "What happened?" and began his statement with learning of her pregnancy?  This may have even revealed motive.  

In Analytical Interviewing, the Interviewer uses as few words as possible, as the information is not with the interviewer, but with the subject.  
Steven: "Sunday night? She picked me up from my house at 8:30, drove out to my truck that I got stuck in Keanae and she dropped me off at my truck -- it took me about 10 minutes to fix my truck, 'cause I had extra light tools with me at that time. And then we came back to Haiku. And I'm pretty sure I saw her lights in my rearview the entire time. I'm absolutely certain I saw her headlights in my rearview mirror until I got to Twin Falls and then I started speeding up 'cause I drive a little faster than she does."
1.  Answering a question with a question  

"Sunday night?"  He answers the question with a question, which is a pause to allow him to think, making the question, itself about Sunday night, sensitive to him. 

From Mark McClish:  "Are you having a surprise party for me?"   Answer:  "Am I having a surprise party for you?  Oh, no..."

Plan on the party.  

Principle:  When one answers a question with a question, the question itself is sensitive. 

2.  Dropped Pronoun

"Drove out" does not have a pronoun.  

Pronouns are instinctive for us as we use them from the earliest days of speech.  When someone drops a pronoun, the person is removing himself from the sentence.  Why does the subject wish to remove himself, and Charli, from this statement?

a.  Premise One:  Guilt.  It is possible, for example, that guilt will cause the dropped pronoun. 
b.  Premise Guilt:  Not Reality.   It is also possible that this did not take place, at all, that they did not drive together as he has reported.  

The analyst should be aware of both possibilities here, and see if the rest of the statement supports either of the premises. 

She picked me up from my house at 8:30, drove out to my truck 

"She picked me up from my house at 8:30" is very strong.  This is likely truthful.  

"drove out to my truck" does not say who drove.  What was expected?

a.  "We drove out to my truck"
b.  "She drove me..." or "She gave me a ride" and so on. 

There is a reason he does not want to be in her vehicle, driving to his truck.  

There is no "we" (connection) in driving to "my truck"; yet he uses "we" afterwards while being in different vehicles.  This is a disconnect for us, but not for him.  He must guide us.  We must have total faith in the subject to guide us. 

In the principle of "total faith", the dropped pronoun means we cannot have faith in this portion of the statement.  We can have faith that she picked him up from his house at 8:30" because he has firmly told us. 

We cannot have faith in the statement after that. 

Driving to the truck caused a dropped pronoun, but while allegedly in different vehicles, it produced the pronoun "we", which shows unity and cooperation. 

 Why would there be no unity before when they were physically together?

A dropped pronoun is a reduced commitment.  He does not say "She drove me" or "we drove" and there is a reason why he wishes to not commit to this statement.  It may be from a number of different causes, but for certain, a dropped pronoun is done for a reason.  We see this when teenagers do something wrong.  "Went to class" when skipped. There is a reduced commitment for a very good reason which the investigation will likely show. 

3.  Repetition:  

Anything that is repeated is important.  

We may not know why but it is important .  Note any word that is repeated and ask, "Why?"

Note the repetition of "my" truck, and not "the" truck after taking ownership.  Usually, someone will say "my" and then "the" following. The "truck" is of sensitivity to him. What is it about the truck that causes him to not use an article ("the") but the possessive pronoun?  An in depth interview likely revealed this answer.  

It is his truck, no doubt.  He has to claim ownership.  It is not her truck.  There is a difference, not so much 'de facto', but within his statement.  

Police should consider what value her truck held, versus his truck, and the element of greed.  (He would have had to pay child support)
4.  Question Boundary. 

He was asked "What happened?" which is appropriate.  When someone feels the need to explain "why?" instead of "What?", it should be considered very sensitive.  This is color coded in SCAN with blue, making it the highest level of sensitivity.  When there is more than one "blue" highlighted, it is an indication of extreme sensitivity, as Mr. Sapir calls it a "cluster of blues", and the interview (and investigation) should target itself within these two "blues."
He feels the need to explain this time period "ten minutes" which may be precisely where there is missing information. 
5.  Commitment:  

Commitment is seen with straight language.  

Note the reduced commitment with "pretty sure" but then the heavy emphasis of "absolutely certain", making seeing her headlights something sensitive to him. 

within this short statement,  information is missing, and it is very sensitive (the highest level of sensitivity) to the subject.  The Interviewer seems to grasp this. 

6.  The Reason Why:  

When one is asked "what happened?" but goes on to explain why something happened, it means that the subject anticipates being asked, "Why did you do that?" even before the question is asked.  This is highlighted by SCAN as very sensitive.  (highest) 

He then feels the need to explain why he sped away.  This is very sensitive to him.  That he drove away from Charli at a high speed is sensitive to him.  

7.  Unnecessary Information:  

The principle is this:  unnecessary information is very important to us.  It is part of the subject's language for some reason that we must learn. 

9.  "Extra light tools" instead of "tools" is unnecessary information, making it important to the subject.  It may prove that these "extra light tools" were part of the case.  They are important words even if we do not know why. 

10.  Time:  

 "At that time" indicates that he did not have his "extra light tools" with him at another time that he is thinking about.  What other time is he considering?

11.  Change of language.  

When language changes, there should be a change of reality within the statement.  If not, it may indicate that the subject is not working from memory.  Here are the typical examples:

"The car started to sputter and died.  I left my vehicle on the side of the road."  It was a "car" while it worked, but became a "vehicle" when it no longer worked.  When the subject picks it up from the garage when it is repaired, it will turn into a "car" again. 

When language changes, there must be a reason for it.  When there is change without a justification found within the statement, the analyst should be on the look out for deception, as it may not come from memory.  

Here we have two changes of language:  


Note that "rearview" became "rearview mirror" and "lights" became "headlights"; yet, there is nothing within the statement that appears to justify this change.  

This may be another indication of deception. 

It is possible that this drive, with Charli in his sights, did not even happen...

If it did, there is deception contained within, and the fact that the "truck" is repeated and with heavy ownership (pronoun) the deception is with the truck. 

Did he deceptively lure her someplace asking for a ride?  Did he get her out to the place where stripping down vehicles for profit takes place regularly?

or...

 Did the ride even take place?  

These are things the police will need to learn more about to get to the truth.  Subjects who lie bring more suspicion to themselves, even if they didn't "do it" but are deceptively hiding something else.  Best is to come clean, even if there is collateral criminal activity, than to be seen as completely deceptive. 

In this statement, with just one answer to a single question:

Deception indicated.


30 comments:

Jo said...

Could the "extra light tools" be what he returned with. A not so light tool used as the weapon and discarded somewhere?

Jen Ow said...

Hi Jo,

I have been stuck on the 'extra light tools' too.

My husband is a serious tool guy. (No I'm not calling him a tool, lol.) I asked him what 'extra light tools' meant, and he looked at me like I had two heads. I gave him the context of Capobianco saying that it took him '10 min to fix his truck because he had extra light tools with him', and he said the only thing he could think of, was that he meant he didn't have the right tools for the job. As in, 'I was extra light ON tools, so it took me awhile to do the job'. (Of course, this is interpreting Capobianco's words).

He said that sometimes a screwdriver or woodworking bit will be described as 'extra light', but in the context of car repair he couldn't think of anything else that it could mean.

It still makes no sense in the context of what Capobianco said happened. He first says that Charli picked him up and took him to pick up his STUCK truck. Then he explains why it took him awhile to FIX his truck. It is a change in reality, AND he answers a question that wasn't even asked. Plus if he had Charli pick him up specifically to retrieve the truck, why didn't he bring the appropriate tools? His whole story stinks!

Sella35 said...

@Peter, Off-topic-
I transcribed a 17 minute plus interview with Doug Herrmann, father of missing Adam Herrmann, if you are interested in using it.

http://sella35.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

9. "Extra light tools" instead of "tools" ......... They are important words even if we do not know why.

it was 8:30 at night? "extra light" are LED lights that attach to your tools so you can see what you are doing. It's like a brand name or something.

Carnival Barker said...


@Stella,

How did you get your transcript to format so nicely? When I transcribed Hannah Anderson's interview it kept getting all smashed together and unreadable.

Sella35 said...

@Carnival Barker- I used openoffice.org Writer it's free software that is similar to Microsoft Office. I just used the text editor and spaced and etc. It took me about 2 hours of typing it, since it was hard to understand at times and I would have to back up the video so much.

Shelley said...







I think the body was dismembered with “heavy tools” such as a saw….



I think that is why he added that comment in about having “extra light tools”

It could not have been him that cut up the body, he only had EXTRA light tools with him.



I also think he made the comment about it taking “10 minutes” as this may have been how it took him to dispose of the body (I think she was killed someplace else)

I think he was then desperate to put himself far away and be seen back in town as his alibi.


I was with her at my truck for 10 minutes with my extra light tools. I then drove away.

Shelley said...







I think the body was dismembered with “heavy tools” such as a saw….



I think that is why he added that comment in about having “extra light tools”

It could not have been him that cut up the body, he only had EXTRA light tools with him.



I also think he made the comment about it taking “10 minutes” as this may have been how it took him to dispose of the body (I think she was killed someplace else)

I think he was then desperate to put himself far away and be seen back in town as his alibi.


I was with her at my truck for 10 minutes with my extra light tools. I then drove away.

john said...

OT Update.

South Carolina attorneys weigh merits of gag order in Heather Elvis investigation

http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_7ba3c3ea-b5ce-11e3-a80f-001a4bcf6878.html

Hobnob said...

And then we came back to Haiku. And I'm pretty sure I saw her lights in my rearview the entire time. I'm absolutely certain I saw her headlights in my rearview mirror until I got to Twin Falls and then I started speeding up 'cause I drive a little faster than she does."

Note the change in pronouns.

WEcame back to hailku, I got to twin falls.

A change in language is a change in reality.

WE becomes I at Haiku since he was alone by the time he got to twin falls. I would be looking around Haiku, the last place they were togeather

Hobnob said...

Him introducing extra light tools into his statement is telling, it indicates sensitivity.
ASs o mentioned in the chatroom when we were looking at this case, most folk would use the generic word tools.

he introduces not only tools, but the additional qualifiers, light and extra, making this sentence highly sensitive.

I would have asked him what he means by tools, what is meant by light tools and what he means by extra light tools?

Extra light tools smacks of minimising, it makes me think small screwdrivers, small spanners.

There is a need for him to mention extra light tools which leads me to think she was murdered by a heavy tool such as a jack/crowbar/hammer or monkey wrench, something big and heavy.

Any one with a vehicle will usually carry a couple of tools for an emergency such as hammer, jack, monkey wrench or big spanners.

I would find out what tools his vehicle came with as part of the vehicle, what tools people knew he carried habitually and what tools seem to be missing that would normally be there ( favorite hammer or other tools)

I supect she was beaten to death using a tool hence his sensitivity

Anonymous said...

Sella,
this line stood out to me in the transcripts:

DH- (exhale) I have served what the court ordered me to serve, for what I did.

what I did. He hasn't said he didn't kill his son. He took responsibility for it in that sentence.


Kathead

Anonymous said...

I find this site interesting, yet, rarely have time to stop by. I'm glad I did for the Charli Scott case, may she rest in peace.

The line "extra light tools" jumps off the page for me. I've been on this planet 6 decades now, and never have I heard anyone use this term. It makes me think the boyfriend does not want anyone to picture with him carrying the heavy tools that he used to harm/kill poor Charli Scott. Tools are very sensitive for him.

Anonymous said...

Hobnob,
Twin Falls is about a mile BEFORE the turn toward Haiku (which would be taken to get to Steven's place on Kalipo,) off the Hana Highway, (when heading in the direction SC says they did.)

If things had gone according to SC's story in the interview, he and Charli would have each gone back to Haiku, but Charli would have continued to pass through Haiku and out to her apartment in Makawao.

Do you think that makes the change in pronouns even more significant?

Here is a google map marking the route between those three places:

https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=Twin+Falls+Maui+Farm+Stand,+Haiku-Pauwela,+HI&daddr=Kalipo+Place,+HI+to:Makawao,+HI&hl=en&sll=20.905725,-156.264296&sspn=0.04907,0.074587&geocode=FckYPwEd1Ouv9iFu58TVyfHIxSk535qLezWrfjFu58TVyfHIxQ%3BFQfTPgEdO0-v9ilf6tslJzWrfjH_TNkwAWpvZg%3BFXBAPgEdINqu9imnXiITZMtUeTGJel2YCydjng&oq=makawao&gl=us&mra=ls&t=m&z=13

Anonymous said...

SC: "And I'm pretty sure I saw her lights in my rearview the entire time. I'm absolutely certain I saw her headlights in my rearview mirror until I got to Twin Falls and then I started speeding up 'cause I drive a little faster than she does."

The change in language from "her lights" to "her headlights" may have something to do with the lights of the LED skull that was on the grill of her truck.

"Police sources also tell Hawaii News Now that the grill from Charli's SUV had been found. It was a recognizable part of the vehicle because of the skull ornament on it. When the missing 27-year old's SUV was found, it had been stripped, turned over, and burned but the grill was not in the surf area known as 'Jaws'. "
(from)
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24920248/maui-police-reclassify-charli-scott-case-as-homicide

"The grill and possibly other part of the SUV were found late last week in a home in Haiku but we're told the people in the home are not 'suspects' in this case."
(from)
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24885045/significant-developments-in-charli-scott-case

At the time of that article, SC was not listed as a suspect, (still a POI.) It may have been found at his residence, or someone else's in Haiku. (Police have not told the media.)

Hobnob said...

off topic

By Becky Johnson, North of England Correspondent

Former deputy speaker Nigel Evans has told a court he has never raped or sexually assaulted anyone.

The MP for the Ribble Valley is accused of using his political influence to take advantage of seven young men.

Giving evidence at his trial at Preston Crown Court, Evans denied all the charges against him.

Referring to allegations made by a 22-year-old student, Evans' barrister, Peter Wright QC, said to the MP: "The principal allegation here that you face is having raped and sexually assaulted a young man. Did you have sexual contact with him?"

"Yes, I did," Evans replied.

The barrister continued: "Did you engage in sexual intercourse with him?"

Evans repeated: "Yes, I did."

Mr Wright asked: "Was that in the bedroom of your house?"

Mr Evans said: "Yes, it was in Pendleton."

Mr Wright said: "In terms of that activity, was it with or without his consent?"

The MP said: "Absolutely with consent."

Mr Wright went on: "And in terms of your belief to his consent, was there ever any indication that he was not consenting?"

Mr Evans replied: "Absolutely not."

The MP was asked about another occasion in 2009 when, it is claimed, he put his hand inside the boxer shorts of a young man who was staying on the sofa at his constituency home after a party.

Mr Evans said: "I did get under the duvet or blanket and I did put my arm around him.

"We lay together for a while with my arm around him and his hand holding mine. When my hand started to move down, he slowly brushed it away."

The MP said he then tried again, adding: "That's when he exploded and said 'No'."

Mr Wright asked "Was there any further attempt to engage in sexual activity?"

Mr Evans replied "No. Not only not on that night but never again.


In statement analysis absolutely does not mean yes.or, in this case no

Notice he answers yes or no to all the questions without hestitation but changes his language when it comes to consent.

A change in language is a change in reality.

We ask if the change is warranted.

did you have sexual contact? Yes
truthful no deception indicated.

Did you engage in sexual intercourse with him?
Yes i did

again no deception.

Was that in the bedroom of your house?
Yes, it was in pendleton.
i would ask why he introduced pendleton instead of yes it was my house.

In terms of that activity was it with or without his consent? Absolutely with consent
Here we show sensitivity since he has changed from the usual yes in relation to non sensitive questions.
It is given sex took place, he changes to absolutely which does not mean yes.
If he cannot say yes with consent, i cannot say it for him.
This is sensitive.

And in terms of your belief to his consent, was there ever any indication that he was not consenting?
Absolutely not

Again this is highly sensitive absolutely does not mean no.
There was no indication on not consenting.

I would be asking what exactly was asked or said prior to and during the sex act.

As it stands, the defendant is indicating sensitivity over the consent issue.

http://news.sky.com/story/1233159/mp-nigel-evans-insists-he-is-innocent-of-rape

Anonymous said...

This case is so sad. I read about this a few years ago and I keep checking in for new information. It is sad how many cases that are similar in ways to Adams that seem so obvious that are not getting anywhere. I'm glad you posted this and I hope Peter can analyze the interview you transcribed.

Marbles cant leak for him said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Sella35 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sella35 said...

OT- Jordan Graham receives 30 years for killing her newlywed husband. She blindfolded him and shoved him off a cliff.


http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/27/justice/montana-newlywed-sentenced/

Anonymous said...

Hi there,

This is just a request as I can't find a message function on here!
Would anyone be able to analyse the 911 call made by Guy Heinze Jr? He was convicted of murdering his whole family despite a lack of evidence, but there was something fishy about it. I've had a go myself but would like a professional opinion :)

Link to transcript:

http://members.jacksonville.com/news/metro/crime/2009-08-31/story/transcript_and_audio_911_calls_in_brunswick_massacre_released



Skye x

Sella35 said...

@Skye anon 10:07 am-

Heinze: Hello. I just got home. My whole family’s dead.

Disptacher: OK, tell me what’s going on sir. What.

Heinze: I just got home. I was out last night(Inaudible) I got home just now and everybody’s dead. I went in. My dad’s dead. My uncle’s dead.

He starts with a greeting, he then establishes his alibi and he uses an added word "whole"....

He makes sure that the 911 operator knows that he went inside the home, this would be to establish an alibi for prints, or DNA evidence.

He states he "just" got home 3 times. To reinforce his alibi. His family also switches from "my whole family" to "everybody".

He says, "My whole family's dead." 5 times, 2 of those times were after he found out his cousin Mike was still breathing and not dead.

One time he is asked a specific question of how many, instead of saying a number to indicate the amount of people in his family, he again uses the phrase, "My whole family is dead."

Another time, the 911 is going to ask a question, "Ok, where were.."
Instead of allowing the 911 to finish the question, he cuts them off and again says, "my whole family is dead."

The transcript says "my dad, my mom, my uncle, my cousin" listening to the audio, I heard him say, "My dad, my uncle, my cousins" I never heard him say his mom and he said cousins, plural not singular.

It also left out where he says, "I was out last night and just got home."....again establishing an alibi and the word JUST is important he uses it twice in the same way, to establish his alibi and the fact that he would not have had time to kill the whole family, since he JUST got home.

Anonymous said...

O/T -- Peter, please analyze the parent's statement and tell us who killed this precious young girl?

Hundreds of friends and family members are still desperately hoping for answers in the killing of Pearland teen Arrijana Hill, who was found murdered in her family's home a full week ago.

A Pearland Police Department spokesperson told CutlureMap on Friday that there is still no new information being released with the case.

Police have revealed few details about the murder of 16-year-old Hill. They only say that she was found inside her parent's home in a gated community on East Cedar Hollow Drive, apparently stabbed to death according to the medical examiner.

"We don't have any answers. The biggest question is why. I can't make up any answers."
With so much mystery surrounding her death, friends and family found strength together through a prayer vigil held at the Cross Roads Community Church, holding hands and lighting candles in the memory of the fallen teen, earlier this week. At the end of the vigil, 300 balloons — in Hill's favorite color — were released into the sky.

Classmates from Pearland's Glenda Dawson High School were in attendance, many in disbelief about what had happened to their friend.

"Arrijana was a great person, a great classmate and a great teammate," her friend Richard Smith told KHOU Channel 11.

Friends said the teen was liked by all, and Hill was a member of both the track and volleyball teams.

"We don't have any answers," parent Akima Taylor told KHOU. "The biggest question is why. I can't make up any answers."

A wake for Hill has been scheduled for Friday at 7 p.m. at Cross Roads Community Church. The funeral service will also take place in the church on Saturday at 2 p.m.

Red Ryder said...

Anon, do you have a link to this article please? Any other info? Thanks.
I watched one news cast and the way LE spoke reminded me of when Leanne died, they expressed their "sympathy for the family's loss". This made me wonder if the report of stabbing was perhaps incorrect and it might be suicide involving blades of sorts, which would fit with the LE description of "not of natural causes". Just a thought.

john said...

Hi Red Ryder,

Ive just googled and read a few articles on this case. It seems to me that LE are reluctant to release any info.

They said the home owner found her, but would not release the ID of the home owner. Then in other articles, they say it was her father who found her, and called 911 at 5pm. Then, its reported that she was stabbed, then someone else says she was shot?. Its all a bit confusing.

Sadly though, it is being treated as a murder.

john said...

Confusing Reports, and this is just a few, all snipped.

Neighbors reported hearing gun shots but police have not revealed any details except to say the death was not from natural causes.

http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/pearland/news/pearland-police-investigating-murder-of-dawson-high-school-student/article_5257a2d7-ece9-5541-bec8-92d524b745be.html

Police have revealed few details about the murder of 16-year-old Hill. They only say that she was found inside her parent's home in a gated community on East Cedar Hollow Drive, apparently stabbed to death according to the medical examiner.

http://houston.culturemap.com/news/city-life/03-28-14-the-mystery-deepens-in-horrific-home-stabbing-murder-of-pearland-teen-police-offer-few-clues-in-girls-killing/

Hill was found dead by her father in her family's Pearland home in a gated community Friday afternoon. "I can not even describe to you how painful (this is) because it's an unexpected tragedy," Hartwell says.

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/story/25061706/2014/03/24/parents-speak-after-teenage-girl-is-murdered-inside-of-thier-home#ixzz2xI23Inzq

Police said a female resident made the disturbing find and dialed 911. Investigators have not identified the person who made that discovery.

Red Ryder said...

Hi John,there is a lot of conflicting information in those snips. i'm going to poke around and see if I can find anything on the 911 call. This is already days ago! As LE has designated this a homicide I can only wonder who are they protecting and why?~Red

Red Ryder said...

We don't have any answers," parent Akima Taylor told KHOU. "The biggest question is why. I can't make up any answers."

This is from Anon's post so I don't have the link. i wonder if both parents were standing together when this comment was made, otherwise the plural "we" is a red flag to me.

The "biggest" question is why. There are other questions but why is foremost and has not been answered yet. What are the other questions? I notice that the biggest question is not "who killed our daughter?", so that answer is presumably known.
The parent "can't" make up any answers, This sounds like "I have no idea", a way to turn off the flow of information.

Red Ryder said...

Hill leaves behind her parents and two brothers.
http://www.khou.com/news/local/Hundreds-pray-for-justice-in-mysterious-murder-of-16-year-old-Pearland-student-252368221.html


Another woman, the homeowner, made the discovery and called 911. Police got to the home just after 5 p.m.“

It kind of made me wonder if it was somebody that she knew and that was a sad thought. To think that that could happen to that sweet girl right at the end of the school year,” Laird said.(school counselor)

Anyone with information that could help solve this crime and bring Arrijana and her family justice is urged to call Brazoria County Crimestoppers at 800-460-2222.

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Woman-found-dead-inside-Pearland-home-251634001.html

From my gleanings it sounds like she was surprised in her home shortly after school. Whether her killer was someone she knew or did not know remains to be seen but I still find that one comment from the Mom odd. It must be an incredible shock to come upon your child like that. Mom is a nurse but would have been helpless to save her. What an awful feeling this must be.

LE are asking for tips called into Crimestoppers so it sounds like they don't have much of a direction to go with or they are playing close to the vest, there is almost nothing online about Arjiana. MSM does a poor job of interviewing people that's for sure!

Red Ryder said...

O/T Update of Volusia County skeletal remains.

"It's still too soon to say whether or not the skeletal remains found last week in Florida are linked in any way to the Heather Elvis case, according to Florida investigators.
A spokesman for the Volusia County (Fla.) Sheriff's Office said Thursday it would be at least another week or two before any results are known.
"The Medical Examiner's Office hasn't concluded its investigation yet," Gary Davidson, spokesman for the sheriff's office, said via email Thursday. "And when they do, the remains may require additional analysis. For that reason, we still have no idea who they belong to and, therefore, haven't ruled anyone in or out as far as a possible ID."

http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_4ed58492-b6ba-11e3-b1bb-0017a43b2370.html

This must be so hard for the Elvis family. Hard for every family waiting to hear if this is their person who is missing. My thoughts and prayers are with them.