Sunday, May 15, 2016

Katelyn Markham Part Two: John Carter Radio Interview


Filming documentary on the death of Katelyn Markham 

If you want training in Statement Analysis, the case of Katelyn Markham is a good example of what you will do.

Even if you are behind the scenes analyzing cases, and never receive the slightest credit, the satisfaction of doing thorough work, and knowing that you may assist in bringing justice to victims and their families, is worth the investment of hard work and dedication it takes to reach the status of professional.

Amateur work is interesting, but without formal training, accuracy will falter and discredit brought to our science.  Emotionalism has led to a myriad of false principles as people read into statements what they hope to see; rather than being enslaved to both the statement and principle.  This discipline comes through much hard work and repetition, as well as being held accountable for our work.

The analysis of John Carter's 911 call showed deception and guilty knowledge of the case.  He depersonalized her, distanced himself from her, and was deceptive about the location where he last saw her.

6 days later, he agreed to go on radio and it is here we find whether or not the analysis was accurate, or it was a failure.

We hold trainings for law enforcement, business, and private citizens.  Better still is the study at home, with 12 months of ongoing support, moving from strong foundation work, to Advanced profiling, and the admittance to regular monthly training with some of our nation's top professionals working on cases for law enforcement around the country.  This confidential work is extreme, but it produces accuracy and both strategy and tactics for the interview.  Sign up is through the web site, and tuition payments are available, with CEUs awarded for continuing work, from the University of Maine, Orono for those in need of licensing credits.


Hyatt Analysis Services

for seminars or training from home


John Carter Radio Interview

Psychologically, a guilty person has a need to put the victim on trial, find her guilty, for the purpose of self-justification.  We see this in subtle ways by those who are hiding their actions.  

In other settings, the greater the guilt, the more intense the reaction.  Keep this in mind for this, and some upcoming cases. 

This interview took place 6 days after he reported her missing.  The interviewers do not appear to have formal training with one, in particular, 'lecturing', empathizing, and asking compound and leading questions, which brings the focus away from the subject (John Carter) and on to self (interviewer).  In spite of these mistakes, there is still much information to be gleaned from the interview including some critical points.  This is not complete analysis, but a short analysis to learn if the 911 call analysis was correct or not by highlighting major points.  

Expectation:  Katelyn has been missing for 6 days at the time of this interview.  The impression of any interview is generally one of two things:

1.      The subject is working with the interviewer to facilitate the flow of information; or
2.     The subject is not working with the interviewer to facilitate the flow of information. 

J    'Justifiable' Homicide

     Consider that guilt will often lead the guilty subject to suppress the guilt by justifying the action.  We look for subtle disparagement or complaints about the victim.  

Given the nature of the relationship (engaged to be married) and length of relationship (6 years), the expectation is that the innocent subject will so treasure his final moments with Katelyn and feel desperation of missing her that he will put her on the typical pedestal that states only the best of Katelyn.  Guilty subjects assuage (or attempt to) the guilt by giving very low level or subtle insults to complain about her; giving cause to 'why' she had to 'die.'

  An easy example of this is the shaken baby where the killer says, "the baby would not stop crying" which is to blame the baby.  

      In the filming of the documentary on Katelyn's murder, I gave an example of what "missing" someone sounds like.  

    A man had taken care of his elderly mother-in-law for many years.  It was exhausting work and at night, he liked to relax watching the news, but was often annoyed by the sound of her rocking chair, in the room above his, going back and forth. 

    The day of her funeral he told me, "How I wish I could hear that noise again!"

   This is the sentiment we expect to hear. 

    We also expect a fiancee to have closeness (linguistic) and to express concerns for what she is experiencing right now, while missing.  

We look for any subtle complaints or ‘indictments’ of the victim by the guilty caller as a way of justification of what he did. 

Question for analysis:  Does Carter complain about the victim?

Given that he has been indicated for deception in the phone call, any complaint against the victim could be an attempt to alleviate guilt by justifying her death.  We expect rosy and emotional thoughts towards her, worried for her current state.  Will we find this, or will the analysis o the 911 call be affirmed by this interview?

We expect, after just 6 days, to have hope expressed. 

We expect him to be less than patient and less than polite with the police; who have failed to find
Katelyn.  Those who offer praise to police for not finding the victim may have a reason for this praise.  

We also note any past tense reference as belief or knowledge that she is deceased.

 It began by asking him how he was doing.  The expected here is "terrible, but what is Katelyn going through?" in some form.  

In the 911 call, he did not use Katelyn's name a single time, sans when he had to because the 911 operator asked him.  

He used extreme distancing language.  

He refused to initially answer the question about location where he last saw her.  

JC:  Um... Not - not too good. 

TJ:  John, let me ask you, when was the last time you saw Katelyn?

JC:  Um, I uh, saw her at her house, at uh... on Saturday night.

SS:  Last Saturday night.  And you thought nothing of it, it's like, "Love ya, see ya later."  What was the last communication you had with her?  Did you speak to her on the phone?

First he told Carter what Carter thought. 
Then, he asked a compound question which allows the subject to pick and choose which to answer.  Compound questions should be avoided.  
Although it will not highlight the interviewer, the analytical interview has the subject (the one with the information) doing 80% of the talking (or more).  

JC:  No, I, uh... she had sent me a, a few text messages after I left her house.

In the 911 call, he was asked if he had called her mother or anyone to which he answered that he called her father.  He did not say what her father said, nor did he offer any information in relation to the question.  Instead, he introduced the sensitive topic of Katelyn's cell phone.  This now tells us why he chose this method of 'script building' for the account.  

TJ:  Mmm.



JC:  Um, just, just a few things about, uh, some things she wanted me to do for her.  She, she was consistently busy, so I had to help her do a lot of things.

Here he is put out by her.  She was consistently busy so he had to help her do a lot of things.  This is a subtle complaint against her; not something we would expect to hear in such an emotionally critical time. 

Here we also have the explanation as to why he did something, upon leaving.  Here is the area of missing information from John Carter that is directly related to the disappearance of Katelyn Markham.  This 'leaving' is a strong indication of missing information.  It comes, again, at the point of departing her house.  Midnight, and the hours immediately afterwards, are highly sensitive hours to him of which the location of his whereabouts are something he does not want to talk about. 

SS:  And all of a sudden you don't hear from her.  When - at what point did you think, maybe there's a problem?

The interviewer should avoid making assumptions as well as compound questions.  The interviewer is feeding information that is likely untrue.  We should be careful how we word our questions as we may teach the subject how to lie. 

JC:  Um... well uh, after I went home, I sent her a good morning text message.  And then I woke up the next day, and normally she sends me a good morning text message... um, but at - you know, like - she sends me something back saying thank you, and all that stuff, but - um, she didn't, uh, send anything.  But that - that didn't entirely worry me, I just thought maybe she was busy or something, or she just woke up late for work or something.  But then uh... you know, there was just, uh... I sent - she sent me, uh - or then I sent her a few more text messages, no response, and all that stuff, and uh...

Here is a major jump in time.  He "left" her house (the point where the suppressed missing information exists) until the point of sending her a good morning text message.  This greeting is not unexpected:  its inclusion, however, is.  Then, he jumps another major time period (24 hours) and instead of telling us what happened, he tells us what 'normally' happens.  This is deception via missing information and a tangent meant to portray the time period as something normal when it was anything but normal.  

Next, he tells us what did not happen, and when something did not happen, he tells us what he did not feel.  This is deception indicated material.  He should be telling us what happened and what he felt; as humans mark time on what happens, and not what does not happen.  This 'negation' of information is critical and indicates artificial emotions presented.  

Police should seek to learn if he was sending those text messages from her phone to himself.  

SS:  And when she didn't show up for work to her job, then, then - then you knew something clearly was going on.


The interviewer does not ask questions, but leads him with information.  This impacts the response.  

JC:  Um, actually I had a feeling something was going on when I, uh, saw her car in the parking lot.  And, and I went up to her room, and her purse and keys were still there.



By using "actually" he is not going along with the assumption made by the interviewer.  Interviewers should ask short relevant questions and be quiet to let the flow of information continue. 

Do you notice that he has still not used Katelyn's name?

Other than when he had to, he did not use it a single time in the 911 call, and he has not used it in this interview either.  This is to affirm the analysis of the "problematic relationship" from the incomplete social introduction.  It is also affirmed by his complaints about her.  

TJ:  Wow.

SS:  Wow.

TJ:  John, what do you think happened?  Do you suspect foul play?

JC:  I - I really don't know.  Um, I've been asked this question a lot, and I really, I just have no idea.  I, I couldn't tell you.  Um.  I have the strongest, uh, thought that she would not run away. I mean there's no reason for her to go anywhere.  But other than that, I have no idea what could have possibly happened to her.


Note the stutter on the pronoun, "I", one of the most practiced words in the English language. This shows an increase in tension.  Note that he stutters on it twice, indicating anxiety. 
Note that he does not say, "I don't know" but that the "really" don't know; indicating that he does know "really"
He has "no idea" but then says he has the "strongest thought" that she did not run away, making "no idea" untrue.  
Note the sentence:  "I have not idea what could have possibly happened to her" has the additional word "possibly" added.



TJ:  Mm.  It's kinda strange that Katelyn would leave without her keys, right?  Did she leave her cell phone as well?

JC:  Uh, yeah.  She had her cell phone on her, apparently.  Um, to this day I still call it, just hoping that maybe she'll answer at some point in time, or something like that.

SS:  What's really unusual about this too, John, is that the car, keys, that's unusual - but the purse!



JC:  Yeah. 



SS:  I don't know any woman who doesn't take their purse with them.  When women go to the bathroom - when women are - wherever they are, they have their purse with them at all times.  For her just to take her cellphone may indicate to me, and possibly the police as well, that there was some foul play here, because certainly she's not going to you know, go somewhere.  Even if she decided, you know, "I want to leave and start another life," usually you're going to take something with you that's personal in nature.

Interviewer's speech allows Carter to simply agree.   This is an example of giving information rather than seeking it.  The giving comes from the one who does not have it, making it to expound ignorance. Analytical Interviewing gets information from the one who has it:  the subject. 

JC:  Yeah.  Exactly.  And the thing is, is um... she had sent me a picture of a picture of her, that her boss took of her from her internship.  I mean she had two jobs and her internship, and went to school full time.  So I mean, she was consistently busy, but that stress made her stronger.  I mean, she loved the fact that she was being so strong, and, and she was proud of herself.  I mean, there was no, there was no anger [rueful laugh], at all, when it came to, to high stress.  Um...

Justification.

Here is a past tense reference by Carter indicating belief or knowledge that she is dead.  At the time of this interview, she was only missing for 6 days and police had not revealed any details to cause anyone to conclude that she was dead.  Since he claims to the contrary, this is a significant point in his answer that should lead police to ask how he knows she is dead. 

the photo may speak to jealousies. Remember, he introduced the word "deception", in the negative, in the 911 call.  This may have been a final trigger for him. 

SS:  Right.  John Carter's with us, John Carter the fiance of Katelyn Markham.  Katelyn's been missing from Fairfield now for, um, it'll be a week tomorrow. And you're encouraged if you have any information to call Fairfield police as they continue to investigate this. I believe from what I understand, she was going to graduate from the Art Institute of Cincinnati sometime in the next 30 days, 45 days... September... she works at David's Bridal, so she has the two jobs there... You guys were planning to move out of state, in the late fall, early winter of this year and get married, right?



This is an example of how not to conduct an interview, but how to draw attention to oneself, instead.  

JC:  Well, uh, we weren't going to get married until way after we moved out.  Um, I mean, I wasn't rushing anything. I mean neither one of us wanted to.  The original plan was to actually leave in October, but then my brother was coming into town, so she and I suggested to just wait until after he came in town, so we decided to postpone it till November; and she could have easily have said, "I just don't want to go," and I would have been totally fine with that. There was no - you know, we weren't forcing it.  You know, we weren't trying to do anything we couldn't handle.



Note some critical points:

"We weren't going to get married" instead of "We're not going...." then we have a change from the important pronoun, "we" to the "I" about himself:  This is an indicator of stress and tension.  He mentions that he wasn't rushing anything, dropping the "we" that existed about not getting married. 

"We" or unity now exists in the context of not getting married.  This is a powerful negative. 

Note "we" weren't getting married also changes to "she and I"

Then he said that this was only "suggested" and that "she could have easily have said" giving a strong indication that they had a disagreement about getting married.  This is another indicator (see previous analysis) that the night that Katelyn was last with him, there was a blow out between them.  Here he tells us what she "could have" said and he would have been "totally fine" with it.  He does not say that this is what she said. 

This is a clear point of contention.  

Note that he reports what they "weren't" trying to do.  Most people report what they try to do.  This is very important information related to Katelyn's disappearance. 

Past tense references speak to knowledge or belief she is dead; yet, we look for a past tense reference that is void of all past tense events to prove this point.  



TJ:  John, how long have you guys, uh, been together?
JC:  We've been together for six years.
TJ:  Oh, that's a solid relationship right there.

Volatile relationships do go on for years.  It is foolish for interviewers to make such statements, rather than ask questions.  Training desperately needed for interviewers. 

SS:  How - where did you guys meet?

JC:  Actually, my sister had met her on MySpace when I was in high school and she was in high school, and she called me and told me, "Hey, I met this pretty girl, you want to come over and meet her too?"  And I was like, "Oh sure, yeah, why not," and I wound up meeting her, and you know, I guess... as they say, the rest is history.

Listen to him:  he has 'moved on' to nostalgia.  This is a signal, though not strong, that she might be dead.  We await further affirmation, but we can say that the processing has taken place.  

SS:  Yeah, and you've been an item ever since.  What are the reaction, because they've been rather tight-tipped, of her family... How close is she to her mom and/or dad, if either one - 

If there was domestic violence, this interviewer is not going to ask, instead concluding how "solid" an "item" they were.  Unfortunate. 

JC:  She - she was very close to both of them.  Um, she really, like, she really loved her parents very much and, um, they loved her back.  I mean, they, they - actually she's adopted, and they had adopted her, and I mean... they, they really loved her.  Very mu -  Er, they still love her.  Of course.

John Carter shows knowledge that Katelyn is dead, and even changes his language as he became aware of what he has just said.   

This is to show emotion that is in the past tense. Emotion is uniquely revelatory of a human being.  The emotion ends when the human life ends.  

  This is not an event that can be argued belongs in the past tense.  This is an instinctive use of the past tense to describe the state of emotion that should never cease.  

There is no greater proof of his knowledge or belief in her death than in "loved" here.  

That they were together 6 years, and engaged to be married, without the finding of blood or a body, there should be no past tense emotional language.  

TJ:  John, Katelyn sounds like such a nice girl.  Did she have any enemies, uh, ex-boyfriends, anything like that?

JC:  No.  I mean, she had an ex-boyfriend, but I mean, he was - you know, six years.  We've been together for six years.  I mean, that's - that's high school stuff, you know?

SS:  Yeah, okay.  And, and as far as police go, I'm sure they have talked to you extensively, as other family members have.  No suspects have been - they're obviously still treating this as a missing person - do they have any suspicions one way or the other if it's foul play, or she left on her own volition?

JC:  Um, well I, uh I mean the news has really been getting - the media has been getting more information than I'm getting, um, uh.  And they, they, I've heard that they were saying that, the police were saying that it was foul play, and then I'm hearing that's there's no signs of foul play.  So I really, I, I don't know.  I mean, I was the one who called in the police, and I was the one who was the first one to realize that she was gone.  Um, and I was in her room, I, I saw - like, I immediately went to her room when I was thinking, you know, "Oh my God, she might be gone" - and it didn't - it looked like she literally had disappeared.  Like just, like nothing seemed messed up, nothing seemed awry, really, and –

When he called 911, his priority was this:

1.  Greeting, make friends
2.  I am a good guy who does not break rules!  I must call before 24 hours...(time was running against him)
3.  I am the one searching for her (he had not)

Now here, he is the hero!  He called police!  This is instead of a denial.

Please note, that even without the understanding of Statement Analysis, that John Carter has a reason, only 6 days from her "disappearance" to justify himself.  

Note that he did not "call police" but "call in police", as in to a situation.  Here he attempts to portray himself as not having "done it", yet he never says he did not cause her disappearance. 
Note "immediately" as an additional and unnecessary word.  
Note his change of sentence:  he begins with the negative, "it didn't", but stops himself and reports in the positive.  
*He did not say "she disappeared" but only that it "looked like she literally had disappeared"; as there is a difference.  Lying causes internal stress and it is avoided whenever possible. 

SS:  Where was she the last time - I know you said you had texted each other, you had texted her, there was no response, you had talked the night before.  Um, the last time anyone saw her physically was when?

JC:  Uh, I saw her at 11 o'clock.  Or between 11 and and 11:30 last night.  Or, last night, I'm sorry - um, Saturday night.

We note the appearance of "I'm sorry" in any form as a possible indicator of guilt.  That it should come in to his language, given the deception, may be due to the internal guilt he feels over what happened, or possibly his deception to the interviewer.  This is repeated from the 911 call and is indicative of what is in his mind. . 

It was not likely an intended death; but from a build up of emotions and a specific trigger that night. 

SS:  Last Saturday night.
JC:  Yeah.
TJ:  That Saturday night, did she seem distracted, did she seem like something was on her mind?
JC:  Not at all.
TJ:  Nothing?
JC:  Totally normal night.

When someone uses the word "normal" it is a strong indicator that the night was anything but normal. 

SS:  And you had plans, and said "Hey, I'll see you tomorrow, or I'll talk to you tomorrow, hey, good luck at work tomorrow..."

foolish leading question.  

JC:  Absolutely.

SS:  That whole thing, and sometime in that point ... I know, and we'll play the 911 call here in a little bit here, you had mentioned that I think the Sacred Heart festival's going on up the street, and you seemed to indicate to the dispatcher that maybe something was go - I mean, had she planned to go to that festival, or - ?

JC:  No, she wasn't planning on going.  I mean, she was pretty much exhausted every night.  We had actually went Friday, and she didn't even really want to go Friday, but I, uh, I just was like, "Let's just go ahead and go, because it's not going to be every day that we have this festival"... and we used, we went every year, I mean since we first started dating we've gone every year.  And I don't know, I just kinda... the only reason why I brought it up when I called the police was because, I mean, there's so many different kinds of people there, it's not just you know, Catholics and things like that, it's all walks of life that go to that festival.

Recall that he has "no idea" yet he did have an idea, which he defends, when he attempted to blame someone attending the festival.  This debunks the statement of having "no idea" what happened to Katelyn; the one who's name he cannot use here, nor in the 911 call. 

SS:  Well, if you're from Cincinnati, you know you go to church festivals, even if you're not Catholic - it's just what people, what Cincinnatians do in the summer... and yeah, I think that's probably true to a degree... you just, when you have a large group of people, you certainly - you know, it draws a mixed crowd.

JC:  Yeah.  It's gotta be one out of however many people is a bad person, you know?

TJ:  John, you think something happened with that festival, huh.  That maybe someone saw her at the festival?

JC:  Honestly, at the time I did, but maybe it had nothing to do with it.  Maybe this person had been monitor-... or, or, you know - if - if she was taken, maybe this person had been watching for a long time.  I mean, they had to have known that she was going to be home alone, they had to have known, um, you know, when she was going to be home alone, and when I was going to leave, or, or what have you.  

Note "honestly" as a signal of deception.
Note "this" shows closeness
Note "person" is gender neutral.  Would he think a female did this?  Not likely.  Using gender neutral is more likely related to wanting to hide the gender of the guilty.  We expect some form of anger, like “maybe the kidnapper” or “the bastard who did this”

Note "if she was taken" contradicts the "no idea"

Note that having "no idea" is also debunked by the repetitive (sensitive) "they had to have known"

he called himself a "person" and the 'kidnapper' a "person"; soft language.  Guilty people do not wish to call themselves names. 

SS:  Yeah.  And you said you last saw her maybe 11, 11:30 Saturday and she was tired, she's going to go to bed -
JC:  Mmhmm.

SS:  Did the bed look like it was slept in at all, when you went over?

JC:  Yeah, I mean - she doesn't typically make her bed, so it was just - it always looks a little messy.

He again complains about her; little details of complaint.  It is in these little details that we see an entire build up where he puts her on trial, and condemns her; justifying her death. It is not so much a small complaint that matters;

It is a small complaint while she is missing that matters.  

SS:  Eh, who does.  Yeah.  So she may have - so, all right, something obviously happened - if she had slept in the bed - something - someone may have knocked at the door, she may have gone somewhere, um –

JC:  Yeah.

SS:  And this is just such an interesting - obviously in a sad way, but very interesting circumstances in how, how she disappeared.  Uh, Fairfield police, how've they been working with?

JC:  Um, the Fairfield police have actually been pretty good.  Um, they, they've - they're getting less sleep than I am, I feel like.  Um, they, you know, I - they called me at 10 o'clock last night to come in and help them out, and I'm just, I'm willing to do whatever I can, and give them whatever I can to, to help them.  Um, they've been really great, they've brought in other investigators, um, federal investigators even, and it's just been - they've been really helpful.

Note complimentary attitude towards Fairfield police uses the word "actually", indicating that he is comparing them to something else. 
Note the unnecessary "I'm willing to do whatever I can" 
Note "whatever I "can" indicates limitation. He is limited in what he can give them. 

*Complimenting police for failure to find is always something to take note of.  We would rather see anger, impatience, disappointment…

He praises police for failing to find her after only 6 days.  

TJ:  John, have they questioned anybody else besides yourself?
JC:  Yeah.  Um, they've actually called all known associates, um, as far as I know, um.  I have a lot of support from  friends and family, and they've been coming over and telling me that the police called them, the police called them, and so on - 

Note that he has a lot of support from "friends and family" but not from the police, who are "losing sleep"
This is an uncomfortable part for him, as he is admitting here that police have been asking questions about his background, personality, etc, of his friends, who are calling him and telling him that the police are asking about him.  This is completely lost on the interviewer who could have asked him what they were asking his friends but did not: 

SS:  Right.  And they're talking to neighbors, because you said she lives in an apartment, so everyone there has been questioned when they did their canvassing through the neighborhood too, and - and as far that concern - they have not ruled - they haven't basically ruled anyone out as a suspect, I'm assuming.
JC:  No, not at all.
SS:  Now did they tell you that while you are not being considered as a suspect, you haven't been ruled out?  Because you were the last one to see her.


JC:  Yeah.  I mean yeah, yeah.  I mean, and I - I - when I - even before - like, as soon as I - I don't know. As soon as the police were involved, I knew that I was going to be considered a suspect.  It's always going to be, you know, the, the last person to see her, and/or the closest person to her.  So, I mean, I'm the one who sees her every day.  I mean, you can't just rule out anybody, you know?


Note the stuttering "I" indicating tension and anxiety.  Note the stutters are close together on the one word in which a non-stuttering person should have no trouble with, since it is used by us, millions of times.  

SS:  Right.  On that note, John, because we've seen cases like this, um - do you have an attorney?  Did you decide to get a lawyer?
JC:  Um, I don't need a lawyer, because I did not do anything. 

Please note that this is a very sensitive statement.  Here, he explains why he does not need a lawyer, but is not able to bring himself to say he did not "do it"; only that he did not do "anything", which is vague.  He avoids saying, "I didn't kill Katelyn" or "I didn't cause Katelyn's disappearance."  This was the perfect place for it.  

TJ:  Good for you, John.  Good for you.  You've got nothing to hide, right?

SS:  And I'm not insin- John, I'm not, believe me, I'm not insinuating you are, but I'm just saying that -

In spite of the two hosts tripping on each other, here is another place for Carter to say "I didn't cause Katelyn's disappearance", using her name, his own pronoun, "I" (without stuttering) and specifically address her disappearance. 

JC:  Oh, no no no, I - and I understand that.  But I had a lot of family members come to me and say, "You should get a lawyer, you should get a lawyer," and I'm like, "No, there's no reason for me to, I didn't do anything."

Note the repeated "no", as well as the "I", stuttered with the word "and"
Note that he only repeats his unreliable denial; quoting himself with "I'm like..." rather than issuing a reliable denial. 


TJ:  Good for you.  John, I appreciate your courage doing something like that and coming on these airwaves, I mean, it's, uh -

JC:  Yeah, I'm just trying to do everything I can to make sure that Katelyn's name gets out there, and that more people hear her name and see her face, and so on.

Did he finally use Katelyn's name?

He did not refer to Katelyn Markham here.  He has successfully depersonalized her throughout.  Here, it is a reference to her name; not to her as a person.

Not once has he expressed any concern for what she is experiencing while missing.  

Note the lack of stuttering "I"

He's doing every thing "he can" which further affirms his limitations.  This is both unnecessary to say, given the context, and revelatory into his thinking.  He needs to persuade the audience that he is cooperating because he is not.  



SS:  Sure.  We're as you know a pretty big radio station, we've got a lot of people listening.  And John, I just want to pass out, to pass on the, you know, if you were at the festival last weekend, if you're in Fairfield or in that neighborhood, go online to our website at 700WLW.com, take a good look at Katelyn's picture, maybe you saw her, maybe you - you know, help police, help them fill in the blanks.  And if you know anything whatsoever, just give Fairfield police a call, and I'm sure that information will come in a lot, uh, very helpful.
TJ:  And John, I'd keep trying that cellphone.

JC:  Yeah, I, I, I will.  And I also wanted to announce that um, tonight at uh, 7 pm we're going to do a vigil, um, and, and, uh, and it's going to be at Fairfield West Baptist Church on Muskopf Road, and anyone's invited.  At 7 pm.

The stuttering "I" is repeated and it is heavy, indicating acute anxiety for Carter. 

SS:  Okay, Fairfield Baptist.  Got it.  We'll pass that on too.  Hey John, I really appreciate you coming on, though it's difficult under these circumstances and our thoughts and prayers are with you.  If you need anything or need to get some info out, I know you've got Pauly's number here, our producer, and we'll get you right on, buddy. 
JC:  Yeah, thank you very much.
SS:  Give our best to the family too.  We're thinking of them.
TJ:  Thanks John.
JC:  Thank you.
SS:  All right, there you go.
TJ:  It's tough.
SS:  All right, you heard John Carter the fiance of Katelyn Markham, she's been missing for 6 days now out of Fairfield. And as far as what may have happened, there's a lot of speculation out there - you know, when a woman disappears, oranyone disappears, but a woman - she leaves behind her keys, she leaves behind her purse - 
TJ:  That's foul play right there.

SS:  The only thing she had with her was her cellphone and she's not answering that right now, and simply walks away or disappears from a life that everyone around her seemed - uh, where she seemed to be happy, comfortable, and very pragmatic - clearly something's going on here that doesn't add up to someone maybe just leaving; or, maybe it does.

Analysis Conclusion 

The radio interview, though poorly conducted, affirms the analysis of the 911 call. 

Here, we are given a trial of sorts, where one should only speak of the most precious and lovely memories, holding on to hope, John Carter tells us how difficult Katelyn Markham was to deal with; from him having to deal with everything to her even being messy; she was a nuisance.  

He revealed that he knows she is dead.  He did not slip a single time into past tense; but did so regularly.  How this is done is significant.  

It is not only past tense references to events, but it is past tense references to Katelyn, as a human being, in the essence of "love."

Love seeks the highest good of its object.  In depersonalizing Katelyn, he ends or 'cuts off' the love she had for her family and he ends the love her family had for her.  Katelyn is no longer capable of loving, nor being loved, but there is something far worse in the context:

Katelyn is no longer worthy of the emotion of love.  

This is the height of depersonalizing a victim.  

He robs her of the ability to love others; just as he robs her family of the ability to love Katelyn.  They "loved" her but they can no longer love her:  just 6 days after she went missing.  

This is the ultimate "guilty verdict" in the "trial" of this 'very stressed', and 'messy' victim who 'had to' have things done for her.  Her death, in this sense, is her own fault as one who should have said how much he missed the little things about her, took the intimate 'little things' in life, and turned them against her.  It was his guilty verdict in life, to quell the guilt within in. 

In the 911 call, he offered no hope.  "I can't find her anywhere" though he had not searched for her.  Here we learn why:  she is dead.

In the 911 call he spoke only of his own emotions.  By telling us the color of his vehicle, he gave more information about his vehicle than he did Katelyn.  

He showed no concern for her well being in the 911 call, and here he also showed no concern:  because she is not in need of our concern. 

He showed extreme distancing language in the 911 call: he refused to use her name and had to be forced into it by the operator.  Here, he also refused her name and when it is finally uttered, it was no Katelyn of whom he referenced, it was her name.  

This distancing language depersonalizes his victim.  

She was not only a nuisance who put him out, she was not even a person worthy of a name.  

John Carter shows guilty knowledge in the death of Katelyn Markham.  


182 comments:

Buckley said...

Wow. Riveting. I'm so shocked he doesn't seem a suspect to LE.

Here is a major jump in time. He "left" her house (the point where the suppressed missing information exists) until the point of sending her a good morning text message. This greeting is not unexpected: its inclusion, however, is. Then, he jumps another major time period (24 hours)

I think the timeline he's conveyed is this: he leaves her house with documents, goes to burn them and texts her from burn site, goes home and dutifully texts her a "good morning" message that she'll get the next morning (so the jump/ time period is overnight, not 24 hours).

He seems to be in desperation mode, trying to prove to her (and us) what a great boyfriend he is. It reeks of someone desperately trying to hold on to a relationship that is slipping away.

lynda said...

Peter, does analysis show where the murder took place? Was it in her home or was it elsewhere? What indicators show that? I see that he has not kept his timeline straight. He changed his timeline to be 11, 11:30, 12:00. All three have been used as the time he last saw her.
When he says it is the last time he saw her does that indicate the last time he saw her alive or dead?

lynda said...

As of 2 years after her death, John Carter was still a pizza delivery boy. JMO is that Katelyn had outgrown him, he is not looking to better himself or have bigger goals than delivery pizza, she had 2 jobs, FT student, homework, etc. She was motivated. She was going places, and it wasn't to Colorado. I think that could have been the trigger. She dumped him that night.

Nic said...

JC: Yeah. Exactly. And the thing is, is um... she had sent me a picture of a picture of her, that her boss took of her from her internship.

I find this so odd. Is it suppose to be, "a picture of, a picture of her." Because "she took a picture of a picture her boss had of her on his phone would be odd. Why wouldn't she ask her boss to forward the picture? In any event, was he implying that her boss coveted his fiancee? (jealousy) He could have easily said, "She sent me a picture of her taken at work.



Nic said...

Um, they, they've - they're getting less sleep than I am, I feel like. Um, they, you know, I - they called me at 10 o'clock last night to come in and help them out

So he says he's sleeping pretty good. They're waking him up. Usually people who are bothered by serious events, can't sleep. He admits he's sleeping before 10:00pm.

Buckley said...

picture, um, of herself. It was like a picture of a picture, because she's very artistic and loves to show me her work, and stuff like that. So, uh, Katelyn sent me a picture of her, and that was the last message I got."

What does her being artistic and her boss taking a picture of her have in common? I'm confused.

Buckley said...

He does not say he was sleeping.

lynda said...

Nic and Buckley,

I think that John snapped that pic of a pic himself using that phone. Then he sent it to himself using her phone. All her things were in the bedroom, he took a pic of what he could that would "make sense" in his twisted head. That is the last text he received at 12:52 am. Katelyn was already dead and possibly dumped, he then sent that pic to his phone.

Her phone was turned off at 12:45, right after he sent the pic. LE explained that there was a 7 min lag between the time the pic was sent and he received the pic. He turned her phone off immediately after sending the text. I'm thinking he took her and dumped her body, went back to her house, grabbed her phone, took the pic, then sent the pic to himself from her house. Then he turned her own phone off and took it with him probably dumping it somewhere. His attempt at creating alibi.

I'm still stymied about the use of "document". What could that have possibly been?

Buckley said...

My hypothetical: she sent him off on an errand, he dutifully obeyed but felt rejected, she sent the pic, he got jealous at the mention of boss, went back to spy, as part, unlocked her door and snuck in thinking he would catch her with a man, an argument ensued about his jealousy...

ima.grandma said...

Should i assume you've asserted your power of eminent domain? and you're seeing what im seeing?

Buckley said...

No, I think eminent domain is overused and was too widely expanded by the Kelo decision. Plus my eyesight is bad; you can probably see way more.

lynda said...

OT Davey Blackburn

Did we know that the title to his March 29,2016 sermon was "It was a Setup"

I find it hard to even stomach looking at him. I want to listen to the sermon of "it was a setup" but so far, can't do that either.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...

dont forget about megan, tammy, miles, tatum, etc. etc. the list will expose a world-wide culture meant to destroy and rule.



https://likes.asos.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Feature-Image-credit-Iconic-Images-Alan-Aldridge-The-Beatles-Illustrated-Lyrics-Revolution-1968-by-Alan-Aldridge.jpg


http://m.likesuccess.com/quotes/31/1519387.png

Nic said...

Buckley said...
He does not say he was sleeping.


You're right. JC was saying that he felt LE was getting less sleep than him and then said they called him in at "10 o'clock last night". He didn't say he was sleeping so we can't say it for him.

Anonymous said...

Is the recording of the radio interview available? I would love to listen to it.

Nic said...

Lynda said:
I'm still stymied about the use of "document". What could that have possibly been?


That's what LE needs to investigate. When the reporters asked him what they were talking about the last time they were together and if they were talking about their future, he specifically referenced "the" document. He burned "documents" at a bon fire that night and he specifically referenced the documents being all hers, including her course schedules (which I personally wouldn't classify as something in need of being shredded/burned, but that's me.) That he lumped "the document" in with things like her schedule, (of all the things he burned he identified something school related,) piqued my interest in that regard. Her whole life was going to school f/t and working 2 p/t jobs to make ends meet. She was at the end of her CO-OP and nearing graduation. She would been actively applying for a full-time job, networking, emailing, responding to job postings at school to hopefully gain a starting position in her field. At least that's a new grad's aspiration. Projecting: My personal experience was that being in the top 5% of my graduating class opened doors for me.

Her family needs to check her PC history (if they still have it) and work backwards. They need to read her email. They need to go back to her employers at time of death to find out if they knew anything about jobs she might have talked about applying for. They need to follow-up with her friends she went school with. They need to look at her transcript and speak to one or more of her profs to find out if they were helping her to network for employment and whom she might have been referred/might have interviewed with.

There was something burned that JC did not want anyone to know about and I suspect that whatever it was would be evidentiary to motive. i.e., it would demonstrate that there had been a change of plans.

jmo

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Violet said...

ima.grandma, I am either behind on posts, or clueless, but what are all of the links about? I looked at a few of them but can't understand what you are implying, or trying to show?

Nic said...

Did Katelyn have an engagement ring? If yes, was it recovered when they found her remains?

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nic said...

From 2011 (9 On Your Side)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9i_JcqkGEE

I keep believing that, if she is somewhere in the worst case scenario, that she fights her way out. I keep wanting to believe that because she’s strong, I know she’s strong. So she’s gotta manage to make her way out.

Nic said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx368UG6408

People are going to say what they’re going to say. You can’t stop em.

I’m not going to acknowledge um, the ridiculous things people are saying because I know (clears throat) I mean nobody’s gonna know about me. They don’t know me. And uh, I know me, I know that I would never hurt Katelyn, ever, in a million years.

It’s pretty much it. There’s, there’s nothing. And it’s *horrific*. (emphasis JC)

I guess he didn’t know who I was and he was just like “I heard the boyfriend did it.” And just I was just like, “Im-I’m the boyfriend. I would never do anything to hurt her.


I wish there was a full transcript of this interview, or that it had not been edited.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nic said...

Um, I'm heading out there now, I, like, have been trying to get ahold of her and I decided to go by her house to see if she's okay, and her car's still there - she would be at work right now with her car. Which is why I'm like really freaking out.


SA aside, this behaviour really sticks in my craw. They had been together for six years, engaged for one. He was trying to get "ahold" of her (and) decided to go by her house to see if she was okay, and sees that her car is "still" there, but he doesn't stop and go in? That is unexpected. Why wouldn't he just pull in the drive way and stop in to check on her? Did he have a key? He could have knocked, and then if no answer just gain access via his key (if he had one,) and check on her and find out why she wasn't answering her phone. Or if no key, call the police... because he called her work? (No.) Called her friends? (No.) Called hospitals? (No.) But he sees his fiancee's car in the driveway implying that she's home and keeps on driving. Then he calls 911 without verifying that she's not in her house.


This is the definition of "would":
(expressing the conditional mood) indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation.

I am gobsmacked LE doesn't even considered this guy a person of interest

jmo

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
lynda said...


Nic said...
Did Katelyn have an engagement ring? If yes, was it recovered when they found her remains?


That's a big secret Nic. LE hasn't released that information. It would be important information to seeing how her engagement ring was JC's grandmother's ring, so an heirloom. I know we say it a lot, but Fairfield PD is totally inept. Why all the secrets 2 years after they found her body? Why no movement? Why not come right out and say that JC is a suspect? They have enough evidence to SAY IT.

Nic, you can get a full transcript of that interview you wanted if you go to the reddit thread for Katelyn Markham. They have everything organized and there is a link taking you to timeline, and one taking you to all media interviews, and they're all transcribed!

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

You sure are a comment hog, ima.grandma.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bottle Cap said...

Here's a detailed summary of the Katelyn Markham case.

http://kmdce.livejournal.com/1435.html

"This LiveJournal was created for the posting of long text documents related to discussions
on the Facebook group Katelyn Markham's Disappearance: Considering Everything."

Anonymous said...

Shadiness thing: he burns some of her stuff the last time he saw her.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
nolongeramusing said...

Imagrandma is the most obnoxious troll ever. I guess he got sick of the avinom sapir spelled backwards trolling and now gets his kicks posting endless amounts of links.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
lynda said...

I also meant to add as this is BIG NEWS

Katelyn's father has been quoted in numerous media sources saying that he is in possession of ALL the papers that JC said he burned. There was NO document burning! He lied. I also said previously that there weren't probably any bonfires going that night! There was an epic thunderstorm with high winds and rain. During the time he said he was burning documents (which he was not) at a bonfire (which wouldn't have been able to burn) The winds were so high that it collapsed a stage outdoors and I think people were killed.

Catch all the media on the reddit Katelyn Markham thread.

JC states that when he got up about 4 pm he saw that Katelyn hadn't texted or called back. He tried a couple times too..nothing. He then sets off to work. There are 2 ways that he can get to work and take the same amount of times. One of the ways he can get to work is by driving RIGHT PAST David Bridal, where Katelyn was working, where he would have seen her car there. Guess which route he took? NOT that one. So when he asks his boss later if he can go check on her, why? When he could have seen her car in her work parking lot and everything would be fine.

Lis said...

Lynda-

Katelyn's father has been quoted in numerous media sources saying that he is in possession of ALL the papers that JC said he burned. There was NO document burning! He lied.

Whoa! But what about "the" document, I wonder?

It's a shame the interviewer is so clueless on this one. It would've been great to see where he went without any clues.

This is all very fascinating. What is the district attorney like?

Anonymous said...

ImaGrandma, I'm not sure what's going on with you but your posts are excessive and are not making any sense. Do you think you may need some sleep?

John mcgowan said...

Fiancé Of Missing Fairfield Woman Speaks Out

He has ample opportunities to issue an "RD" here, especially since he is addressing the rumours that he is involved.

YT clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx368UG6408

Anonymous said...

Woah - i just watched the video posted at 4;18 - fascinating. how strange that I had searched quite thoroughly for videos/interviews of jC, and never ran across that one. i notice that TV station has comments disabled under all their youTube videos. I've been struggling to see that "I would never" isn't an RD - - suddenly i can see it, watching this video.

Anonymous said...

Don't you think that when a person says "i would never...' that is a strong denial? It seems like thinking/saying "I would NEVER' is a very strong denial, although i realize it seems to avoid directly addressing the question at hand; "Did you ?"

or is "I would never" kindof skipping over the question, and going above and beyond what was asked, but asserting "i would never".

Just as a thought problem, how does this work:

Q: Did you kill Susie Smith?

A; I would NEVER hurt Susie Smith!

Q: Okay, but did you kill her?

A: Yes.

Anonymous said...

Q; Did you eat the last of the birthday cake?

A: i would NEVER take the last of your birthday cake!

Q: yeh but my birthday cake is all gone - did you eat it?

A; oh, sorry - i thought it was leftover cake from the restaurant.

Wreyeter72 said...

Is anyone else pretty sure the manic, hate-spilling "ima.grandma"isn't THE ima.grandma we've known in the past? Either that or she's had a psychotic break - and that is very concerning.

lynda said...

Quote from tv interview that JC did shortly after she disappeared

Markham’s fiance, John Carter, asked the audience to remember that smile.
“I want people to smile like that when they think of her and not worry about her,” Carter said



Huh? Not worry about her? She's missing! He knows there's no reason to worry because she's dead already.

lynda said...

Where is Katelyn's mother that according to John she was so incredibly close too?

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Wreyeter72, yes I wonder if this really is Ima.Grandma or if it is, if she might be having a manic episode.

Nat said...

because "would (future tense) never" doesn't mean "didn't (past tense).

ifoundimagrandma said...

https://vine.co/v/ODdUV2u12h2

Buckley said...

Let her be guys- easy enough to scroll past if you don't like it. If "mean" words are the problem, don't contribute to it.

Lis said...

lynda said...

Quote from tv interview that JC did shortly after she disappeared

Markham’s fiance, John Carter, asked the audience to remember that smile.
“I want people to smile like that when they think of her and not worry about her,” Carter said

Huh? Not worry about her? She's missing! He knows there's no reason to worry because she's dead already.


Wow, that pretty much clinches it to me. Where did you find this quote, is the interview online?

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lis said...

Anon, you got me thinking about the use of 'never' and I looked up old posts to review. There is a good one at http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-word-never-in-analysis.html

'Would never' is weak. It may be true but there needs to be more information to assess it. If it is all the person is willing to say, then it is unreliable as a denial.

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

A gay pastor who claimed a Whole Foods bakery worker wrote a homophobic slur on a cake he bought has withdrawn his lawsuit.

Jordan Brown apologised to the retailer for using "the media to perpetuate this story" and for questioning their values.

He claimed last month he ordered a cake displaying the phrase "Love Wins" - a pro-gay marriage slogan - at Whole Foods' flagship store in Austin, Texas.

But he said he did not initially notice through the clear packaging that "Love Wins F**" was written on top of the dessert.

Mr Brown said in a statement on Monday morning: "I want to apologize to Whole Foods and its team members for questioning the company's commitment to its values, and especially the baker associate who I understand was put in a terrible position because of my actions.

"I apologize to the LGBT community for diverting attention from real issues. I also want to apologize to my partner, my family, my church family, and my attorney."

Whole Foods agreed to drop its counter-lawsuit following Mr Brown's apology.

A spokesperson for the store chain said: "We're very pleased that the truth has come to light.

"Given Mr Brown's apology and public admission that his story was a complete fabrication, we see no reason to move forward with our counter suit."

The supermarket chain had released security footage that showed Mr Brown buying the cake.

The label was on a different part of the box to how it appeared in a YouTube video he released, claiming it had not been tampered with.

Whole Foods had also said that the bakery worker who served Mr Brown is "part of the LGBTQ community".

http://news.sky.com/story/1697095/pastor-drops-whole-foods-gay-slur-lawsuit

Anonymous said...

I hate it when people "apologize" yet stop short of providing a meaningful admission of guilt.

tania cadogan said...

Would is future conditional.
It speaks to something in the future based on certain conditions being in place.

The example you gave :

Q: Did you kill Susie Smith?

A; I would NEVER hurt Susie Smith!


Here the kill is minimized to hurt.
He tells us what he would not do NOT what he did

Also he could say i did not hurt/harm Susie Smith, both of which would be an unreliable denial since he again minimizes kill.

A strong reliable denial.

First person singular I
Past tense Did Not
Event specific (in this case) Kill Susie Smith

Also be careful that the subject isn't repeating the interviewer's question in their answer which would also be an unreliable denial.

Did you kill Susie Smith?
No. I did not kill Susie Smith.

The denial must be freely given using the subject's own process of free editing.

CuriousGeorge said...

JC: Yeah. I mean yeah, yeah. I mean, and I - I - when I - even before - like, as soon as I - I don't know. As soon as the police were involved, I knew that I was going to be considered a suspect. It's always going to be, you know, the, the last person to see her, and/or the closest person to her. So, I mean, I'm the one who sees her every day. I mean, you can't just rule out anybody, you know?

When he says, "It's always going to be, you know, the, the last person to see her and/or the closest person to her" was he saying the suspect is always going to be this person or the guilty is always going to be this person. Is he possibly saying that it was him? It seems to me that he is saying the guilty party is always going to be the last person to see her/and or the closest person to her. Did I read that correctly?

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

http://www.examiner.com/article/murdered-bride-to-be-katelyn-markham-case-heats-up

There is a photo of the ring and it says that it has never been recovered. The ring is supposed to be a family heirloom so it has sentimental value to John and his family. It is unique and would be quickly noticed if it turned up in his circle of family or friends. The diamonds are distinctly shaped so even in a different setting they might be noticed.

If John did it and removed the ring, what would he do with it? He could never show it to anyone unless they already knew what he had done. If anyone has seen it since Katelyn disappeared then they would be involved for not reporting it. Would he throw away a family treasure, sell it, give it to someone or maybe drop it in his sock drawer?

HISG said...

Peter,

Brilliant analysis. Especially your catch at the end wherr he says her name referring not to her but to the object of her name itself. Good work!

Lis said...

This is from the summary of the case located at

-A male friend of KM's briefly visited the couple early Saturday evening. He noted that KM was in a bad mood, focused on her computer and not talking, and that JC was speaking for her. JC indicated to this friend that "homework" was the reason for KM's silence, and added that the couple had ingested psilocybin mushrooms. However, KM would have only been home from work for a few minutes at that time, if her co-workers' statement about everyone leaving at 8:25 pm is correct, so the mushrooms would not have taken effect yet.
-This male friend felt uncomfortable due to the tension he felt in the room, and left about 9 pm. He is the last known person to have seen KM except for JC.
-This friend's visit was never mentioned in any of JC's interviews, even when he described their normal, low-key Saturday night.


I would want to know if when he told the friend they had taken mushrooms, if it was in her hearing or said privately aside, where she did not hear or have a chance to deny or confirm it. It would also be good to know from friends if he was known to be untruthful as a matter of course.

Lis said...

It seems odd that someone would ingest mushrooms and then work on homework.

Lis said...

oops- forgot to paste the link, the summary is at http://kmdce.livejournal.com/1435.html

Nic said...

Anonymous said:
If John did it and removed the ring, what would he do with it?


Keep it. He could revisit it over and over again.

John mcgowan said...

OT Update:

And there you have it!

Whole Foods Anti-Gay Cake Slur
A Texas pastor falsely claimed that Whole Foods inscribed an anti-gay slur on his custom cake.


Texas pastor Jordan Brown finally admitted that his claim about finding an anti-gay slur on his Whole Goods cake was false:

Snipped:

Today I am dismissing my lawsuit against Whole Foods Market. The company did nothing wrong. I was wrong to pursue this matter and use the media to perpetuate this story. I want to apologize to Whole Foods and its team members for questioning the company’s commitment to its values, and especially the bakery associate who I understand was put in a terrible position because of my actions. I apologize to the LGBT community for diverting attention from real issues. I also want to apologize to my partner, my family, my church family, and my attorney..

http://www.snopes.com/2016/04/18/whole-foods-anti-gay-cake-controversy/

Hey Jude said...

That's such a rubbish apology - 'my actions' - he's not big enough to admit that he tampered with the cake.

Lis said...

Tania & John- Ha!
He's apologizing for "being wrong."
"I was wrong" is easier to say than "I lied" isn't it?

John mcgowan said...

Today I am dismissing my lawsuit against Whole Foods Market. The company did nothing wrong. I was wrong to pursue this matter and use the media to perpetuate this story. I want to apologize to Whole Foods and its team members for questioning the company’s commitment to its values, and especially the bakery associate who I understand was put in a terrible position because of my actions. I apologize to the LGBT community for diverting attention from real issues. I also want to apologize to my partner, my family, my church family, and my attorney...

Today I am dismissing my lawsuit against Whole Foods Market.

Note he says "today". This tells me he has previously considered owning up before "today". What has taken him so long to dismiss now? Has he had/got legal representation, and they have guided him, now, to publicly "apologize"?
What was his goal? What was the trigger, that led to this. "Charlie Rogers" maybe. LoL

Note also. "I want to apologize" This is not to say he is, but, that he "wants" to. To "dismiss" is not to apologise.

Order speaks to priority.

It is not until the 3rd sentence that his "apology" enters his statement.

"Lawsuit"
"LGBT"
"my partner, my family, my church family, and my attorney"

Isn't SA great!

tania cadogan said...

Hi Lis, yes.
he cannot bring himself to say i lied about the whole thing.
he cannot bring himself to say i faked a hateful comment on a cake to make money.

Instead he severely minimizes it down to being wrong to pursue this matter and using the media to perpetuate this story.

Wholefoods should refuse this so called apology and demand he admits that he lied about the cake, he wrote the offending language himself and that he tried to obtain money fraudulently.
He should admit he is a liar and a fake hoaxer so that he understands exactly what he tried to do, so others know what he tried to do, and that those who are thinking about doing something similar think again.

personally i would not have dropped my case against him.
there will always be those who will believe he was coerced into backing down and 'making a false confession' others who will believe he was bought off by the company for an undisclosed sum hence his non apology.

People who fake hate need to be prosecuted to make it clear it will not be tolerated and that it is a criminal act.

Even if they apologize, the damage is done to the business, people remember the alleged crime not the alleged apology.

There needs to be a penalty against the hoaxer.
It will make them realize they committed a crime plus it may act as a deterrent for others.

lynda said...

Lis..If you go thru with a fine tooth comb all the reddit links provided in Katelyn's thread, you can find pretty much every word he said, says.

Nic..Good point on the ring. Of course he kept it. It would be great if LE could come up a warrant for Gods sake for his house

That ring should have been recovered. Are people actually believing she was murdered by a serial killer and he took her ring? If JC didn't remove it from her hand, it should literally still be there unless an animal got to it and scattered bones. Even then, the animal probably wouldn't eat it. I assume (dangerous) they searched the area they found her body thoroughly. Pizza boy kept the ring, he will move away, he will get it reset, bada-bing! New ring!

lynda said...

Tania, ITA. Why do these fake haters keep getting away with this crap?

Nic said...

@ John, I transcribed the video not far above you. You just have to scrroooollllll up!, if you get my drift.

It's unfortunate that the video is heavily edited, I will check out reddit for the transcript.

I know me, I know that I would never hurt Katelyn, ever, in a million years.


Until then, the above statement from the video is really interesting considering that JC never used Katelyn's name. Yet here, he uses her name in the future saying he would never hurt her - in a million years.

He only talks about Katelyn, not anyone else. I find this so revealing! You can't hurt someone who's dead, but what about the other (live) woman/women his life? He doesn't talk about "never" hurting anyone else. Just Katelyn.





John mcgowan said...

lynda said...

Tania, ITA. Why do these fake haters keep getting away with this crap?

Hi

The majority don't any more, Lynda. "LGBT" community don't need it. I wonder what's missing in their lives, for them to allege such crimes. Maybe they just need an arm around their shoulder, a hug, and for someone to listen, for what ever reason. It costs nothing. Far less than a law suit will.

John mcgowan said...

Thanks, Nic

Nic said...

Another "bald" (contraband) statement. I checked Reddit, but the transcript is literally News 5's edited interview. Still, I would like to point something out that I find really interesting about "they boyfriend"


I guess he didn’t know who I was and he was just like “I heard the boyfriend did it.” And just I was just like, “Im-I’m the boyfriend. I would never do anything to hurt her.”

Here JC is parroting what he supposedly heard someone say, so it's contaminated. But I find it interesting that he would

1) use "the" boyfriend
not "her" boyfriend
not "Katelyn's" boyfriend
(bad terms, which we all suspect)

and....

2) he doesn't identify himself as Katelyn's fiance

He says the boyfriend wouldn't hurt her, but what about the fiance?

Nic said...

** Also, too, it could be leakage. i.e., the engagement had been broken.

Nic said...

lynda said:
If JC didn't remove it from her hand, it should literally still be there unless an animal got to it and scattered bones.


video here:
http://www.examiner.com/article/murdered-bride-to-be-katelyn-markham-case-heats-up

The man who found her remains was searching for scrap metal. His metal detector would have picked it up. Unless it did and he was instructed not to say anything about it. I was just wondering out loud if it had been recovered/JC was still in possession of it.

John mcgowan said...

Nic said...

@ John, I transcribed the video not far above you. You just have to scrroooollllll up!, if you get my drift.

Hi

I may have gone blind, lol. I can't find it. I went dizzy scrolling :/

Lis said...

Lynda-
I assume (dangerous) they searched the area they found her body thoroughly.

I found an article that makes me wonder-

http://www.wlwt.com/news/isp-additional-skeletal-remains-found-believed-to-be-of-katelyn-markham/25607626

The statements from police/coroner don't exactly inspire confidence in their thoroughness.

Nic said...

John said;
Hi

I may have gone blind, lol. I can't find it. I went dizzy scrolling :/


Here you go! (The "find" function helps!) :0)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx368UG6408

People are going to say what they’re going to say. You can’t stop em.

I’m not going to acknowledge um, the ridiculous things people are saying because I know (clears throat) I mean nobody’s gonna know about me. They don’t know me. And uh, I know me, I know that I would never hurt Katelyn, ever, in a million years.

It’s pretty much it. There’s, there’s nothing. And it’s *horrific*. (emphasis JC)

I guess he didn’t know who I was and he was just like “I heard the boyfriend did it.” And just I was just like, “Im-I’m the boyfriend. I would never do anything to hurt her.”


I wish there was a full transcript of this interview, or that it had not been edited.

John mcgowan said...

Thanks, Nic!

Nic said...

Regarding the 911 call (from part one).

She stays in a house by herself.

She stays in a house,

“she” JC doesn’t use her name
I would expect him to say “lives”, instead he says, “stays”
“stay” is not sitting (tension), it is remaining in the same spot/position/state


by herself

I would expect him to say, she lives alone.
She lives alone, instead she is in the same state, by herself

a house

“a” is not “her” house, it’s a location being introduced for the first time

_______________

The word stay is peculiar in that we say things like,
"I'll stay here while you..."
"We were forced to stay..."
"Could you stay here with me until..."

"Stay" is temporary. Now that I am more familiar with the case (her remains were found 30 miles away), I'm very confident that Katelyn was moved after the 911 call was made. In Peter's analysis, he noted a change in verb tense to present tense (stay). She could have actually still been alive at the time of the call.

JC references "a" house. (Location being introduced for the first time.)
So not where she would typically be found
- not at her house).
- and not at his house.

What about "a" house he would be familiar with but others would not be?

A couple of days ago I was watching a video about Katelyn's search and one of the volunteers referenced an abandoned road that people were scared to be on, especially at night, but that they would search the area if it meant that could find Katelyn. Is there an abandoned house at the end of that road? Are there many abandoned houses in the area?

Just throwing it out there.

lynda said...

"(clears throat) I mean nobody’s gonna know about me. They don't know me."

EVERYBODY knows about you Pizza Boy. They just can't prove it yet.

Would that turn of words be considered leakage or admission? Taken to me that nobody is gonna know that I'm the one that murdered her.

Lis said...

-When he saw her car at her home, it "made him worry" / he "had a feeling something was going on" / his "heart sank" / he "freaked out" / he "panicked" / he was thinking "Oh my God, she might be gone" (quotes of JC from different interviews).

The normal reaction to seeing her car there would be to assume she was there, and then to wonder why.

The first thought would be if she had called in sick/wasn't feeling well. The second might be to wonder if she played hooky. A third might be that she didn't feel well at work and came home early. A fourth might be to wonder if she'd come home early because work was slow/she had things to do at home. Fifth, maybe worry and rush to find if she was inside injured or something.

Immediately assuming she was missing because her car was there is unexpected, it skips the normal assumption that she would be where her car was and every normal assumption as to why she would be there.

If I had been trying to reach someone unsuccessfully and then went to their home and saw their car there, I would feel relief that 'oh, she's here at home' and then wonder why she hadn't answered her phone. My first thought would be that her phone had died or broken, secondly whether she wasn't feeling well/wasn't up to answering, or, depending on circumstances, whether she was angry at/avoiding me.

Assuming that she was missing when her car was there, before looking inside, is unexpected.

Lis said...

I read on one of those reddit links that she lived in the townhouse with her dad but he was in the process of moving out (was moving in with a girlfriend, I think) so she was effectively living there alone. But maybe it wasn't seen as a permanant residence?

John mcgowan said...

His distancing language away from Katelyn (9-1-1 call included) is nearly on a par with Police Chief William McCollum.

http://statement-analysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/911-call-of-chief-shoots-wife.html

Nic said...

Actually, nix the idea about a house he would be familiar with. He would say, "the" house.
i.e., the house at the top of the hill

"a" house = deception indicated.

jmo

Nic said...

@ lynda,

I know (clears throat) I mean nobody’s gonna know about me. They don’t know me. And uh, I know me, I know that I would never hurt Katelyn, ever, in a million years. And uh, I know me,

Change in pronoun and verb tense, change in realities

I know
(stops, self-censoring,)

nobody is gonna know about me
(future),
there is something about himself that he knows but nobody is gonna know about him/discover about him

they don't know me
truthful statement

and uh, (missing information)

I know me
I know I would never hurt Katelyn, ever in a million years.
conditional future
hurt minimizes what happened to Katelyn
ever, weakens assertion

So he talks about what he wouldn't do to her in the future, but does not say about his treatment of her in the past.



Anonymous said...

The pastor who accused the Whole Foods in Austin of writing a slur on his cake has officially apologized and recanted for fabricating the story. But even his apology sounds fake.

Buckley said...

The 911 operator was not familiar with where she lived so I'd expect if the choice is between "a" or "the" he'd choose "a". However, his answer "she lives in a house by herself" is outside the question he was asked, "where did you last see her?" The most direct answer to help the operator is "at her house at 123 Whatever Street."

John mcgowan said...

OT Update:

Medical examiner in Creato case had troubled history in Massachusetts.

His work was faulted in two cases in that state: one famous, one obscure


Long before the death of Brendan Creato, the work of Dr. Gerald Feigin, as a medical examiner was questioned in two Massachusetts cases in 1997. In the famous "Boston Nanny" case, British au pair Louise Woodward, was charged with murder in the death of her eight-month-old charge, Matty Eappen. In the more obscure case, middle school teacher David McHugh, the brother of the Rev. Brian McHugh, died after he was kicked in the head while breaking up a school fight.

Long Article:

Read More:

http://www.phillyvoice.com/medical-examiner-creato-case-has-history-massachusetts/

Nic said...

@ Lis,

In addition to what you posted you would expect, above, would you not stop, drop in and check on your fiance to find out why they were not responding to your text and calls, before calling 911? Or if you chose to keep driving because you saw his car home, would you call 911 to report his car in the drive-way? That's essentially what he did. He saw her car in her drive-way when it "would" have been at work (in another lifetime) instead of should have been at work. Maybe her car being in her drive way meant she was home sick and wasn't able to take call. But he leapt right to "missing".

His actions are cart before the horse. Out of order.

lynda said...

Lis..spot on about the feelings JC says he has upon seeing her car in the driveway. That has always bugged me, that he would get all worked up cuz he saw her car.

Buckley, ITA unexpected the choice of words when asked where she lived.

NEVER would , weakens statement by using the word NEVER according to Peter. But JC said would never. Is it just the word NEVER that weakens?

Buckley said...

911 call:

really nervous. Her car's still there, her purse is still -

The purse was in the apartment. So he has not called 911 before checking to see if she's inside sick.

Buckley said...

House, not apartment.

To add: it may well be he is lying about going in not knowing what to expect, but when he called 911, he knew the purse was in there, so we can't say "odd behavior not checking the house first."

Nanaof4 said...

Also, at this site on the slide show of the timeline:

http://www.wlwt.com/news/isp-additional-skeletal-remains-found-believed-to-be-of-katelyn-markham/25607626

September 8, 2011: Fairfield Police Chief Mike Dickey says no one has been ruled out as a suspect. Police began by investigating the only thing that was missing -- Markham’s cell phone. Police said they knew where Markham’s cell phone last pinged to a tower, “but we're not releasing any of that information,” Dickey said.

So, after all this time, LE is still sitting on some fairly important info. How would they hope to solve the case if they keep her whereabouts secret? People wouldn't generally make a connection with something they saw if they are told Katelyn may have been at this location.

lynda said...

It's like LE not releasing Davey's 911 call. Ridiculous. This poor girl has been dead 3 years and nothing has happened. The police chief came out later and said that JC is not a suspect or POI. Because some stoners said he was at a bonfire? Where they were stoned too? IF it even happened.

Katelyn's father does not interact with JC at all, nor did he during the searches. Katelyn's Uncle has openly challenged JC on the FB page asserting, "Why can't you ever SAY it" meaning he has never said that he did not kill her. Katelyns dad also told LE that JC had been in and out of the house at least 2 times before the police sealed it off.

Why does Fairfield even have this case? Why wasn't it transferred over to Indiana State Police since that was where her body was found? I think Fairfield PD is hopelessly inept.

Anonymous said...

It's because it was just a woman who was killed. Why ruin a young man's life over some "unfortunate' event? I've heard that maybe it was an "accident". i've heard neighbors have said they heard a loud yelling argument between and man and a woman that night. So, things got out of hand; it was an accident. he would never hurt her. One life lost is enough; why ruin another life?

HISG said...

Re: JC telling friend they had ingested magic mushrooms within minutes of her getting home

Is this leakage? Did he poison her? Did he tell friend they had taken magic mushrooms in case friend stayed longer and he were to witness Katelyn acting strange and disoriented from some kind of poison?

HISG said...

This seems to obvious to even point out, but does he not think it is strange to tell the interviewer that he sent her a good morning text before he goes to bed at night?!


JC: Um... well uh, after I went home, I sent her a good morning text message. And then I woke up the next day...

Anonymous said...

yeh texts are in the now. i have never sent a text for someone to 'find later', like in the morning.

Anonymous said...

rather, i would wait and send the text in the actual morning when i want the person to get it.

Ali said...

What is with the "Magic" tee shirt he is wearing in that interview? Some sort of taunt about the magic mushrooms?

I mentioned this on the other thread.
RE: the car. He makes two contradictory statements.

He says he went to her house at 7/7:30 BECAUSE that's what time she gets HOME from work.

Yet when he sees her car there he says his heart sank because she should still be at work.

So which one was it? Was she supposed to be at home at 7/7:30 or at work?





Buckley said...

I think the night-before, good-morning text fits with the many details of his desperately trying to hold on to the relationship. He went over and vacuumed her house for crying out loud!

Anonymous said...

email: sent for the recipient to find later.

text: sent for the recipient to get NOW.

HISG said...

Ali wrote

"What is with the "Magic" tee shirt he is wearing in that interview? Some sort of taunt about the magic mushrooms?"

I just watched that video. The T-shirt does seem like a taunt.

He seems very smart and creepy like he probably is into creating his own drugs or concoctions. I wouldn't be surprised if he poisoned her and hid her well, probably noone will ever find her.

HISG said...

Anon,

I agree. Texts are in the "now". So strange to do a "good morning" text the night before.

Buckley,

It could be that he was desperate, perhaps obsessive, fixated on Katelyn...then it might make sense he would do a good morning text the night before.

HISG said...

I think that when he says his heart sank when he saw her car in the driveway...it seems to be leakage that he brought her somewhere in HIS car, and that would be to her final resting place.

It's like he's leaking "my heart sank" that the car was still in driveway because the car was now ownerless and driverless stuck sitting in the driveway and of course it had not gone anywhere and was still in driveway.

It's leakage.



Ali said...

HISG,

Her body WAS found.

Bad Juju said...

HISG, they already found her.

Bad Juju said...

Jinx, Ali :)

Ali said...

Embedded confession? "...the boyfriend did it....I'm the boyfriend"

Ali said...

Buy me a coke, Bad Ju

HISG said...

Where did they find her?

Ali

Whoah...yeah that is an embedded confession.

Anonymous said...

I would never hurt her. Never EVER. Not in a MILLION YEARS.

Wreyeter72 said...

I am sincere in my concern. First, because I don't want anyone to think it really is her - she doesn't typically use nasty language and such. Second, I have to wonder if whomever it is has anyone watching over him/her and help is available. Mental illness is nothing to ignore. I hope all turns out well.

Anonymous said...

i think it's her. Seems an episode. I'm with you, let's see if we can help.

Buckley said...

On the good morning text- are we making the assumption he went home soon after the bonfire and the few texts "wish I were there to see" pic from boss, etc? He doesn't tell us that. He could have been out all night and got home in the morning- what's in between the texts she responded to and the good morning text is missing information.

Buckley said...

Who is "MSN" who saw John and Katelyn 8:30-9?

Anonymous said...

Buckley, It was a friend of theirs. His name is Mike I believe, can't remember. He stated that he went over to their house at 8:30-9:00 pm the night Kate went missing. She was sitting at the computer, not talking, in a bad mood. JC explained they had just used mushrooms. I think he left after about 20 min or so because he said there was obviously tension and he felt uncomfortable. I do not believe I have found where LE has confirmed this or not. Anyone?

Buckley said...

Whoever is writing the stuff on the FB group seems mighty protective of his identity.

So she ate shrooms after 8 pm and by midnight he left her alone so she could go to sleep?

Katprint said...

Regarding burning (or selling or otherwise destroying) the property of a missing person: If I were ever kidnapped and managed to escape from my kidnappers, then when discovered when I got home that my husband had burned my stuff or sold my car like Scott Peterson sold Laci's car before her remains were discovered -- and also consulted a realtor about selling their house -- I would pitch a huge fit. They say that Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned but that is a dastardly slight on the magnitude of the fury I would possess in that situation. The fury of scorned women would seem like It would be the end of the world; the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse would be walking their horses up the driveway of my home.

Katprint said...

I apparently hit enter too soon so the last sentence ended up kind of garbled but I think you get the gist.

I realize this isn't why people tend to preserve their missing loved one's belongings, bedroom etc. exactly as their loved one left it. However, whenever someone starts selling or destroying the belongings of some who is merely missing, without some strong evidence establishing a likelihood of death, it is extremely fishy regarding 1) the lack of emotional attachment to the items that represent a link to the missing person, as well as 2) the dismissal of any possibility that the missing person might return and be really pissed off about what happened to their stuff.

Lis said...

When her remains were found, it was much too late to get any time or cause of death. So how do we know JC's timeline even means anything, as far as the alibi with the friends goes? The last person to see her, other than him, was the male friend of KM's (BvB) who visited them briefly at her townhome and left by 9:00. She made one post to Facebook at 9:13. The last ping of the phone at 12:45 doesn't mean anything because we do not know who had her phone. Any texts he got, likewise, don't mean anything because there's no way to know for sure who sent them.

So it appears his whereabouts and doings between the hours of 9:00pm to 12:00am are uncorroborated. His friends say they were with him from around 12:00am to 4:00am? and then again, we do not know what he did from 4:00am to when he showed up for his shift at Papa John's at 5:00pm. And apparently he left work right away? because it says he arrived at her townhouse to 'check on her' at some time between 5:15pm and 7:58pm when he called 911.

This is another strange statement:
I mean, she loved the fact that she was being so strong, and, and she was proud of herself.

SHE -not he- loved the fact that she was strong and SHE was proud of HERSELF not he was proud of her.

HISG said...

Quite frankly, Katelyn was probably tired of him...John Carter, that is. Initially, she was taken in by his intelligence and his interest in dark and mysterious things, but, I am guessing soon tired of him when she realized he had little depth. She needed his help, he was always there, helping her, she thought, but actually, he was rather fixated, and, in a creepy way, obsessed, wanting all her attention on him.

I feel he decided to poison her, something creepy and dark, made himself feel clever, I'm sure it wasn't the first time, he had given someone something, a tainted drug, a mixed concoction.

They will never solve this case. Too much time has gone by. John Carter won't talk. He feels satisfied that Katelyn is now "his" to own forever.

Lis said...

Buckley and Anon, on this page which is said to be facts only http://kmdce.livejournal.com/3284.html
it states that "-A 3rd person, BvB, visited KM's place that night and left sometime around 9 pm."
So I'm assuming this much has been checked out and is a verifiable fact.

The page which contains more info (facts and statements)
has this further info:
"-A male friend of KM's briefly visited the couple early Saturday evening. He noted that KM was in a bad mood, focused on her computer and not talking, and that JC was speaking for her. JC indicated to this friend that "homework" was the reason for KM's silence, and added that the couple had ingested psilocybin mushrooms. However, KM would have only been home from work for a few minutes at that time, if her co-workers' statement about everyone leaving at 8:25 pm is correct, so the mushrooms would not have taken effect yet.
-This male friend felt uncomfortable due to the tension he felt in the room, and left about 9 pm. He is the last known person to have seen KM except for JC."


I have not seen an MSN referred to.

HISG said...

Re: JC telling friend they had ingested magic mushrooms within minutes of her getting home

Is this leakage? Did he poison her?


When remains were found, there was a plastic grocery bag over her head. Makes you wonder.

Buckley said...

Ok- I see on FB MSN stands for Mr Saturday Night, referring to the guy that stopped by st 8:30-9.

HISG said...

I just did some research online about this case, and it is more gruesome than I imagined. I just read that Katelyn was decapitated and as her head placed in a plastic bag.

There have also been other bodies dumped in the creekbed where she was found.

I still strongly suspect the boyfriend, but it does make you wonder about the remote possibility of a serial killer, unless, who knows, maybe John Carter is a serial killer. He certainly looks like one.

HISG said...

And why in the world would she have given him a bag of her old bills and documents to burn? Unless, of course, he burned them because there was a charge on there showing that he had used her credit card to buy an ax or something along those lines.

Violet said...

After reading that KM's remains were found in a bag, I believe we have been looking at this "burning of her documents" incorrectly. I think JC only said that to cover his tracks, in case someone witnessed him leaving with a bag...the bag KM was in.

Which means she never texted him about the documents to say that she wished she had been there to see them burn; he probably texted that to himself from her phone.

HISG said...

Violet wrote

"After reading that KM's remains were found in a bag, I believe we have been looking at this "burning of her documents" incorrectly. I think JC only said that to cover his tracks, in case someone witnessed him leaving with a bag...the bag KM was in."


I bet you are right. After all, I would think he had to have taken her body out of the house when he initially left since he has an alibi from 12-4 am.

And as far as the text that she allegedly sent him, you are so right, he had to have sent it to himself. What a bizarre thing for anyone to text anyway...why would she have wanted to see old documents burn?

John Carter is one shady SOB!

Lis said...

Hey, does this guy JC strike any of you as a little bit of a Casey Anthony? I mean, all these tangents about all the things he'd do for her, how busy she was, her 2 jobs, her artwork, how they usually texted each other, how proud she was of herself, 'bla bla bla'... It's that thing of distracting with lots of unimportant details to take the focus off the important main points.

So having read his statements I decided to watch an interview and get a feel for his person, so I watched this one http://s296.photobucket.com/user/crankycrankerson/media/Katelyn%20Markham%20-OH-/81911JohnCarter-interview001.mp4.html

What I see going on here is storytelling. Lots of persuasion. Chatty tidbits about her life and habits interspersed with chuckles. He doesn't often look up at the interviewer. He's a smooth talker. He feels in control of the narrative.

I know this part isn't statement analysis, but I couldn't help but notice that he has no sign of stress in his face, not a wrinkle. No sign of him missing sleep, missing meals, no sign of confusion or fear. His face -forehead, eyebrows, jaw- is smooth and relaxed. His hands gesture in a relaxed way, they aren't trembling or clenched in fear. He says he's "terrified" but there is not one sign of terror in his demeanor. He seems relaxed, actually, smiley and good natured. She disappeared on 8/14/11, I'm kind of confused as to the date of this interview- the transcript says 8/16/11 but the video is dated 8/19/11. Either way, she had been missing for some days and I would think the terrible stress would show on anyone who loved her.


Lis said...

Among the photos and videos dealing with this case http://s296.photobucket.com/user/crankycrankerson/media/Katelyn%20Markham%20-OH-/040715.green.2.jpg.html
there's a screenshot of WLWT5 news with this blurb on the screen:

Rayn Green, Private Investigator:
"Subject One took a polygraph and failed the polygraph in epic proportion, per the polygraph examiner."

I can guess who "Subject One" must be.

Lis said...

oops that's supposed to be "Ryan Green" ^

HISG said...

Short video clip of John Carter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9i_JcqkGEE

"If worst case scenario she's somewhere somehow I hope she fights her way out."

"She's strong."

HISG said...

Lis,

I just watched the video you posted.

Wow, he is super relaxed. It actually sent a chill up my spine. He is enjoying telling the story...he is proud of killing her and proud that he has gotten away with it. He actually reminds me of Dennis Rader (BTK)...very similar relaxed manner and enjoyment in recounting their story.

He did it. I've never gotten a chill up my spine before watching an interview with one of these suspected perpetrators before.

I would bet he's killed before and will kill again.

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

video posted by lis at 12:43; near end he is asked to describe their last hour together. Wow, what a blatant avoidance of a question! Going on about how busy she is and how much he likes to help her "That's just how i feel!" oh okay, thanks for telling us about your last hour together, ha ha!

Anonymous said...

Sounds like other people were involved... Also, sounds like police believe it was an accident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uz-4CP0a-9A

Nic said...

Here is the 911 transcript:

John Carter: Hi, my name is John Carter, I am calling - I know that you're not supposed to report a missing person after - before 24 hours, but my fiancee is missing, I can't find her anywhere.

911 Dispatcher: Okay, where'd you see her last?

J: Um, I saw her at like 12 o' clock last night. She stays in a house by herself, um, so, she - I'm just, I'm really nervous. Her car's still there, her purse is still -

D: Is there an address?

J: Yeah, 5214 Dorshire Drive.

D: 5214?

J: Dorshire, yes.

D: Okay. And you're out there now?

J: Um, I'm heading out there now, I, like, have been trying to get ahold of her and I decided to go by her house to see if she's okay, and her car's still there - she would be at work right now with her car. Which is why I'm like really freaking out.


D: What's her name?

J: Katelyn Helene Markham.


D: Have you called the hospitals or jails or anything?

J: Um -

D: Where was she at midnight last night when you last saw her?

J: She was at her house. She was going to bed. She wasn't going out to do anything, so she would've been in her bed. And I mean, I've been with her for 6 years - she's not deceiving, you know, she doesn't -

D: Okay, and you guys didn't have an argument or anything?

J: Not at all.

D: Okay. Is she on any medications or anything?

J: Not at all.

D: Has she had thoughts of suicide or anything like that?

J: No. Never. I... never.

D: All right. And have you talked to her mom or anybody like that, to see if maybe she's out shopping, or - ?

J: I called her father. The only thing that's not there is her cell phone, which is positive, but she's not answering it. So... and the Sacred Heart Festival is going on right up the street, and there's a lot of questionable people there, and it's just kind of. I'm sorry.


D: Okay, well, we'll go ahead and have somebody meet you there. What kind of vehicle are you going to be in?

J: A 2008 Ford Docus. It's red.

D: Okay, we'll have somebody come out and speak with you, okay?

J: Okay, thank you.

D: Mmmhmm. Bye.

J: Okay. Bye.

Nic said...

The dispatcher asks JC twice where did he see Katelyn last:

1) Where did you see her last?

Time: the past tense: saw her at 12 o’clock, last night
Location: present tense what Katelyn is doing: stays in a house by herself
Location #2: Katelyn’s house (car and purse)

2) Where was she at midnight, last night, when you last saw her?

Location: at her house
He reports what she was in the process of doing: - was going to bed

Then he reports what she wasn’t doing: going out to do anything;
…and then answers a question that wasn’t asked via the word, (so): she would’ve been in her bed. JC uses the future conditional in regards to Katelyn being in her bed.


Does anybody else notice that JC doesn’t associate activity with Katelyn?

He says, Katelyn stays in a house by herself.
He doesn’t say, She lives alone.

He says, she would’ve been in her bed.
He doest say, She would’ve been her bed sleeping/reading.

rob said...

OT:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/texas-pastor-who-accused-whole-foods-of-gay-slur-on-cake-drops-suit-apologizes/ar-BBt74QB?ocid=ansmsnnews11

If the gay/lesbian/transgender/etc group are really so discriminated against, why the need for so many lies on their part?

Looks like another hoax. Read the last sentence, I hope Whole Foods does not drop its suit. This needs to stop.

Anonymous said...

http://www.localnews8.com/news/extended-exclusive-interview-with-grandma-of-missing-toddler-deorr-kunz-jr/39482978

Has anyone analyzed this?

Nic said...

Earlier, John raised a good point. Why does JC say "her" bed?

Who else's bed would she be in?

Did JC have knowledge of Katelyn being in a different bed when he made the 911 call? Not sleeping. Not reading. Not sick in bed. Just in bed.

Nic said...

Buckley said...
911 call:

really nervous. Her car's still there, her purse is still -

The purse was in the apartment. So he has not called 911 before checking to see if she's inside sick.

May 16, 2016 at 5:49 PM



D: Okay. And you're out there now?

J: Um, I'm heading out there now, I, like, have been trying to get ahold of her and I decided to go by her house to see if she's okay, and her car's still there

_________

When JC first references the car and purse, it was when he was suppose to be reporting when he last saw Katelyn. He reports when he saw her 12 o'clock, but then what she is doing/her location in the present tense, and the present location of her car and purse (still there).

Further into the call he says he went by her house that day (trying to get ahold of her) prior to calling 911, not that he stopped in. The dispatcher assumes he's there (in the house), he is not.

Lisa21222 said...


Anonymous HISG said...
Re: JC telling friend they had ingested magic mushrooms within minutes of her getting home

Is this leakage? Did he poison her? Did he tell friend they had taken magic mushrooms in case friend stayed longer and he were to witness Katelyn acting strange and disoriented from some kind of poison?

May 16, 2016 at 7:11 PM

Lis said:

When her remains were found, it was much too late to get any time or cause of death. So how do we know JC's timeline even means anything, as far as the alibi with the friends goes?

May 16, 2016 at 10:07 PM

Hiding the body is more about destroying evidence (such as cause/time of death) I think. I do not think "the killer" intended that her body would never be found, but that when it was found, enough time would have passed to make her time of death, and perhaps the poison he used harder to discern.

Side Note> I looked over ima.grandma's Blogger profile, but there is no contact information to check in and see if the account has been hacked.

John mcgowan said...

I was doing some research and came across this. It was posted on 09-02-2011 on a forum talking about Katelyn. The forum is called "Mock Forums".
I'm unable to verify this as yet, as i'm still trying to find the OP on the FB page it links to. "Meg Meadows" is the alleged sister of John Carter.

http://mockforums.net/showthread.php?tid=6340&page=12


Commentators wrote:

"interesting comments by woman who says she is fiance's sister:"

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Katelyn-Ma...3891100350


"you can see her comments under this post, 65 various remarks:"

Megs Meadows

"I just want to thank everyone for their thoughts and concerns. Thank you for considering everything. Yeah, john is my brother but we all have to think outside the box. Katelyn has been my friend for almost 8 years and I miss and love her a lot. I just want her home. Thank you for all your ideas."

Then this:

09-02-2011

Posted by "Nina"


Megs Meadows:

"the scary thing is, what if it wasn't him? what if everyone has wasted their time for so long blaming one person when the person who actually did it is in front of your face?that's why i can't even face people because i'm sitting here blaming everyone and i mean EVERYONE. i'm driving down the highway thinking 'what if she's down there? what if she's covered by that shrub?' it's making me feel sick to my stomach"

Caps are not mine.



Posted by "Lady Cop:

09-03-2011


"Carter's sister 20 minutes ago on facebook:
(it was quickly deleted)


Megs Meadows

"Hey. I just wanted to say thank you for your efforts in finding katelyn. I'm not allowed to communicate about anything anymore so ill no longer be on this page. Also, I will not be seeing any of you at the searches because family members of both katelyn ad john (and john himself) are not allowed to search anymore. Please, keep doing what you all do, I know were going to find katelyn!"

Lisa21222 said...

If the "document" was a compromising photo of her, I could see her wanting it burned and wanting to be sure THE document was burned, and feeling more comfortable that it had been if she had seen it herself. But this sort of reminds me of an ex who made me burn all my letters/tickets/flowers/photos from anyone I had dated prior, even though I only kept selected things, like special occasions, birthday cards, and thank you note, which he considered inappropriate if I was seeing him.

That said, I am not one bit convinced this happened, though he COULD have come across things while cleaning her room that he wanted to get rid of.

John mcgowan said...

Vigil Held For Missing Fairfield Woman

John Carter:

"I-i-i really did not want it to go this far. I really wish she would've been home by now. You know, i-i-i didn't.. i wish this could've been just a party for her being home instead of..what it is..you know

https://youtu.be/Bt_kT0eXpAg?t=52

Lis said...

Good points, Nic. Really interesting about no activity associated with Katelyn.

He avoids giving clear answers to the questions he's asked, so that after he's done answering you still don't know exactly what happened, yet he talks on and on about peripheral things. This is what makes me think of Casey Anthony. Lots of distractions as opposed to clear answers.

Oh, John!

Megs Meadows:

"the scary thing is, what if it wasn't him? what if everyone has wasted their time for so long blaming one person when the person who actually did it is in front of your face?"


Even his sister knows in her heart. "What if" it wasn't him.... trying to imagine it not being him... she recognizes 'everyone' sees that he did it... the person who actually did it is "right in front of your face."

Lis said...

Her remains were found at a site where garbage was also dumped. I question whether that is a coincidence or did the person dump the garbage along with her body. Was all the garbage analyzed, was anything DNA tested? Have the police done *anything* to ascertain a connection? Fingerprints, DNA? They didn't even find all her remains the first time! I can't imagine the frustration of her father. There does not seem to be any concern with solving this case or bringing justice.

Lis said...

http://www.kltv.com/story/15384565/markhams-fiancee-explains-statement-on-nancy-grace

Markham's fiance explains conflicting statements made to Nancy Grace

Carter says he will no longer speak live on Grace's show, and will only speak to her producers. He feels her interviews stopped being focused on Katelyn and zeroed in on him.

John mcgowan said...

List of Facts & Statements


Important: This list includes the few known facts, but mainly relays the statements of the media, of law enforcement, of Katelyn Markham & John Carter's friends, family, and co-workers on Facebook, and of John Carter in his media interviews.

Some of these statements may be wholly true, some partially true, some not true at all. We don't know. This is just a compilation of what we've observed, as followers of the case who are not privy to law enforcement information. It may be enlightening to compare conflicting statements against each other which is why different versions of events are included.

Background Information

-KM was 21 years old at the time of her disappearance from her home in Fairfield, Ohio. She was reported missing by her fiance on Sunday, August 14, 2011.
-KM attended the Art Institute of Cincinnati, worked a co-op job at the book/supply store, had an internship, and worked a regular job at David's Bridal.
-KM was not taking medication, had never been suicidal [per her fiance], had no known drug problems or mental health problems [per Chief Dickey].
-KM had been engaged to her fiance JC for a year, and they'd dated for 6 years. They were introduced by a family member who was friends with KM.
-The couple had plans to move to Colorado in late November 2011, after KM graduated, and to marry a few years later, after JC turned 25.
-Not long before her disappearance, the couple made plans to move to Colorado with some friends. The move to Colorado was KM's idea, according to JC, and she was excited about it.
-KM was adopted. She did not have a good relationship with her mother (according to family statements), or, she had a very close relationship with both her parents (according to JC in an interview).
-KM shared a townhouse with her adoptive father David Markham but effectively lived alone at the time she went missing, as he had nearly finished moving in with his girlfriend by the time of her disappearance.
-JC lives with his mother and stepfather a few blocks from KM's townhome. He is a delivery driver for Papa John's Pizza. [Still true as of May 2013.]
-KM was supposed to move in with JC and his family sometime in late August or September 2011, to live there until the move to Colorado in November.
-KM had a small dog, Murphy, who was usually closed in the bathroom when she wasn't home; the dog's bed, food, and water were kept there.
-KM kept a spare key to her apartment hidden somewhere outside. JC had a key, as did her father DM.

Places and Distances

-JC's home is 0.2 miles from KM's home.
-KM's home is 0.4 miles from the Sacred Heart Church (festival location).
-KM's home is 2.5 miles from the Papa John's Pizza location where JC works.
-David's Bridal at Tri-County Mall is about 9 miles from KM's home and 6.5 miles from Papa John's.
-From Papa John's, it's is only 4 miles farther to visit KM's workplace than to go to her home.
-KM/JC's neighborhood is approximately 25 miles from where her remains were found, a creekbed near Cedar Grove, Indiana.

Cont..

John mcgowan said...

Cont..

-The disposal site is approximately 25 miles from, and directly en route to, property in Laurel, Indiana owned by JC's family.

_________________________________________________

Friday, August 12

-KM and JC originally had plans to visit with his father and step-mother in Ross OH, but KM was scheduled to work Friday evening. Until November 2011 we believed (via JC's stepsister MM) that both of them had cancelled, but received later information from JC's stepmother (DBC) that JC did visit his Ross family on Friday afternoon/evening, heading back home to Fairfield about 10 pm.
-KM and JC went to the Sacred Heart Church Festival on Friday night, August 12, with some friends. The festival ended at 12 midnight Friday & Saturday and at 9 pm on Sunday.
-JC said the couple went to the festival every year since they've been dating. They didn't go Saturday night, the night she vanished, but he persuaded KM to go Friday night, though she didn't want to because she was "pretty much exhausted every night."
-Some friends stated KM was upset because JC spent $100 on raffle tickets at the festival Friday night. Other friends said they were happy and in love that night, not fighting, and that John wouldn't do that.
-JC admitted in a later interview that he did spend $100 on raffle tickets, but said KM was not upset about it. "She thought it was a good idea. She was OK with it"

_________________________________________________

Saturday, August 13

-KM worked a shift at David's Bridal from 10 am to 8pm Saturday according to a schedule she sent a family member a few days earlier. DB was open to the public from 10:00 am to 7:00 pm.
-Assuming KM did work her full 10 hour shift, she either used her phone to access FB during work hours or had access to a computer, as she made comments to friends' Facebook pages occasionally throughout the morning, afternoon, and evening.
-A family member stated in late August 2011 (now deleted) that there were rescheduled plans to meet with JC's father and step-mother in Ross, OH, which were cancelled because KM was too tired. This may have been a misunderstanding (Friday versus Saturday night) of the people who noticed the family member's statement before it was deleted.
-JC's stepmother DBC stated in November 2011 that she and her husband went to visit their property in Indiana to clear away brush, staying till late Saturday night, thus they never had rescheduled plans with JC and KM for Saturday night in Ross.
-Update: The rural site where KM's remains were found is located directly en route between Fairfield OH and the Carter family's Indiana property.
-It is not clear when and whether JC's two stepbrothers (approximately 17 and 24 years old at the time) were at home in Ross that Saturday evening/night.
-JC said he got to KM's home about 7:30 or 8:00 that Saturday evening, August 13, 2011.
-KM's co-workers stated they all left David's Bridal together at 8:25 pm that Saturday night. This would place KM at home around 8:40 pm, assuming she didn't stop anywhere.
-KM and her uncle communicated that evening (and the prior evening) via Facebook message about some design work he wanted to hire her for. His last communication from her was at 8:49 pm Saturday night.
-KM posted a comment on a friend's FB page at 9:13 pm (confirmed). There are reports of another post or message via FB having been made by KM at 9:38 pm (unconfirmed). Her online activity seems to have ceased around this time.
-According to John Yang of the Today Show, JC said he and KM had a totally normal night watching TV. JC stated that they did not have an argument and that KM exhibited no odd moods or behavior.

Cont..

John mcgowan said...

Cont..

-A male friend of KM's briefly visited the couple early Saturday evening. He noted that KM was in a bad mood, focused on her computer and not talking, and that JC was speaking for her. JC indicated to this friend that "homework" was the reason for KM's silence, and added that the couple had ingested psilocybin mushrooms. However, KM would have only been home from work for a few minutes at that time, if her co-workers' statement about everyone leaving at 8:25 pm is correct, so the mushrooms would not have taken effect yet.
-This male friend felt uncomfortable due to the tension he felt in the room, and left about 9 pm. He is the last known person to have seen KM except for JC.
-This friend's visit was never mentioned in any of JC's interviews, even when he described their normal, low-key Saturday night.
-JC says KM was tired when he left her townhome. "She was going to bed. She wasn't going out to do anything, so she would've been in her bed." (911 call)
-JC says he left KM's home at 12 o'clock (per his 911 call), or at 11, or between 11 and 11:30, or between 11:30 and 12:00, depending on the interview.

Neighbor Notes on Saturday Night

-A neighbor who went out and came back that night (arriving home at 9:30 pm, departing for the nearby festival around 10 pm, returning home due to the storm about 11:15-11:30) says that neither the TV nor the livingroom light at KM's were on at any time, and said that no one appeared to be home. (He was able to see this easily because she usually left her back blinds open, and the units are close together.)
-The neighbor also reports that KM's car was parked in its usual spot at the times he came and went (9:30, 10 pm, and 11:20ish) - but JC's car, which was usually parked in the lot next to KM's when he visited her, was not there. The neighbor saw no non-resident cars that night. (The presence or absence of cars is noticeable to neighbors because the residents park in a small private lot together, very close to the building. Also, JC tended to park his car in the neighbor's spot, another reason the neighbor noticed it was not there.)
-The neighbor says he noticed no unusual noises from KM's that night, and in fact no noise at all. Sometime between 12 and 1, he believes around 12:45 am, he heard a car pull briefly into the parking lot, then pull out a matter of seconds later. He did not hear the sounds of any car doors opening/closing.
-Another neighbor said he also noticed a vehicle pulling in briefly sometime between 12 and 1, then driving away. It was not JC's car, and it had a boxy shape to the back end.
-This boxy car may be totally unrelated to the case, but it is the only unusual sound or sight reported by the townhouse neighbors that night, and it appeared during the same hour in which KM's last text was sent and the phone went dead, so a mention seems appropriate.
-There is a report of a neighbor in the subdivision behind the townhome parking lot (thus, not a resident in KM's building) hearing an argument between KM and JC, whose voices s/he recognized, time unknown.
-There is a report of a witness driving by the Sacred Heart Festival around 12:30 am who noticed two cars in the parking lot, with people handing a "body-shaped bag" (black garbage bag) from one car to the other. Police were notified but did not pursue this angle.


_________________________________________________


Cont..

John mcgowan said...

Cont..


Sunday, August 14 (Phase I) - Paper in fire.

-JC states that he joined 6 or 7 friends at one of their homes around midnight, at a location in Hamilton Ohio, approximately 5 miles north of KM's townhome.
-The male friend who visited JC and KM at her home earlier that night was not one of the friends JC met up with later that night.
-Because there was a fire pit at the home of the friend he visited, JC says he brought a "big old bag" of KM's papers (when acquired is unclear) that she wanted burned.
-JC did a lot of errands for KM, helping her out because she was so busy. He mentioned vacuuming her floors and doing other chores for her in his interviews.
-KM had requested that JC burn some old bills, class schedules, bank paperwork, etc. because she didn't want to put them out in her trash.
-KM was guided in this idea by JC's mother, who had recommended how long to keep various papers based on a financial magazine article.
-JC's mother said JC and KM often had friends over at her house for fires, and not owning a shredder, they thought that was the best way to get rid of papers.
-When Nancy Grace asked why they planned to burn the papers instead of tearing them up, JC said there was too much paper to tear.
-KM's current paperwork, bills, etc. were still at her apartment; JC only burned her old outdated papers. (It is not known how much paperwork the 21-year-old computer-savvy KM had accumulated.)
-According to JC, KM and JC texted about the paper-burning after he left her home. She texted him about the task as something she was asking him to do, and he replied that he'd take care of it; or, he texted her first and told her when the task was accomplished; and/or they texted each other during the process. (He gave inconsistent accounts of this.)
-In some of JC's accounts of the incident, KM's response to JC's texts about the burning was, "Oh, I kinda wanted to be there for it... but that's okay."
-JC's consoling response was that she could be there when he burned some of his papers the next night. It's not clear why he burned her papers without her, since it seems to have been important to her.
-It was raining that night in the Fairfield/Hamilton area, beginning after 11 pm with an actual storm coming through around 11:20. (This was the same night as the tragic Indiana State Fair stage collapse caused by wind gusts, which killed 7 people.) The rain stopped by or before 12:53 am, but resumed off and on after 2 am that night. Some areas experienced no rain, but the entire area experienced high winds.
-The paper-burning process (and the text exchange about the burning process) must have occurred sometime after 11:15 and before 12:45, by any of JC's own accounts of the night's events, thus evidently during the storm.
-When CNM, a male friend of the couple, visited a Facebook discussion on KM's disappearance, he was asked whether he knew anything about KM's papers being burned. He said oh yeah, KM had invited him to that a few days before she went missing, but that a paper-burning party didn't sound fun, so he didn't go. He added he didn't know where it took place or who was there.
-According to JC, the document-burning took place at the fire pit friend's house the night KM vanished. CNM and JC were supposedly together at this place and time, CNM having said he was with JC from 12 to 4 am, yet CNM seems to have been unaware of any fire.

Cont..

John mcgowan said...

Cont..


Sunday, August 14 (Phase II) - Post ignem.

-According to law enforcement, the phone's last complete communication with a cell tower (a "ping") occurred around 12:45 am Sunday. The phone has never been active since.
-According to friends and family of KM, she almost never turned her phone off, and was very attached and attentive to it.
-There are conflicting reports about whether KM's phone was turned off, and/or damaged, and/or the battery was removed. Law enforcement mentioned all these possibilities, though it is known whether that information could be ascertained remotely via her service provider.
-KM's phone's GPS was also turned off. It is not known whether the GPS function was manually turned off, or if it shut down automatically when the phone itself was turned off, or if it was a type of GPS that would only go dead once the battery was removed and/or phone destroyed.
-JC received KM's last text at 12:52 am. It was a picture message, a photo of a photo of KM taken by her boss at her internship.
-12:52 was the exact time JC quoted for two weeks for this text. Asked the time again on the second Nancy Grace show (Aug. 31, 2011), his final interview with the public, JC said, "I can't remember...12:45, 12:50-something." On September 5 his step-sister NW gave the time as 12:57. His other step-sister MM later quoted it as 12:52 again.
-JC seemed to state on the Aug. 31 Nancy Grace show that he left his friend's and went home around 2 am; or, that he got a message around 2 and left an unspecified time after that. [This is unclear.]
-2 friends who claimed to be with JC the night Katelyn vanished posted on the FB discussion group, were offended by the speculations about JC and stated that John was with them from 12 to 3 am.
-CNM, another friend, posted on FB a few days later that John had been with him from 12 to 4 am.
-The friends said their activities that night were watching TV and talking. When asked if they had a fire, one said he didn't want to get into specifics, and the other did not answer the question. The third (CNM) said only that KM had invited him to her document-burning event but he didn't attend.
-After leaving around 2 or 3 or 4 (?) am that night, JC went home, where he watched some TV shows, then sent KM a "good morning" text before falling asleep about 4:00 am.

Sunday, August 14 (Phase III) - Worrying About Katelyn.

-JC says he got up around 4:30 pm. His good morning text was unanswered, but he assumed KM had been running late for work and/or was busy.
-JC worked that Sunday at his job at Papa John's. According to his step-sister NW, his work shift began at 5 pm.

-Though somewhat concerned at not hearing from KM (she had been silent for 16 hours at the time he left for work), JC apparently did not drive by her house or look in on her, even to see if her car was at home. He has two equidistant routes via which he could go to work, one of which passes KM's place, but he took the other route.
-David's Bridal, where KM was scheduled to work that day, opens at 12 noon on Sundays and closes at 6 pm, but her shift was from 11 am to 7 pm.
-That Sunday, KM did not show up for work and did not call in.
-JC indicated that he texted and called KM "all day" (though apparently starting no sooner than 4:30 pm).

John mcgowan said...

-It appears that JC never called David's Bridal, KM's workplace, where she was supposed to be.
-JC's mother told the media he did not call David's Bridal directly because employees are not allowed to get phone calls or texts at work. If that's true, it's unclear why JC was worried at not hearing from KM during work hours.
-David's Bridal is a retail store open to the public, and could have been visited at any time by anyone concerned about KM's well-being that day.
-Employees of DB have since chimed in and said they were not allowed to have their personal cellphones on the floor, but that friends and family were allowed to call the store phone if they needed to reach an employee.
-After 18 hours of silence (though at 16 he was not unduly alarmed), JC became worried enough to leave work early (exact departure time unknown) to check on KM "at her house". He arrived there around 7 pm, or in some accounts "7:00, 7:30."
-This means he went from not being worried enough to call David's Bridal during her shift (which ended at 7) to being so worried he left his work to check on her (around 7) - a more or less instant transition.
-When he saw her car at her home, it "made him worry" / he "had a feeling something was going on" / his "heart sank" / he "freaked out" / he "panicked" / he was thinking "Oh my God, she might be gone" (quotes of JC from different interviews).
-The reason he usually gives for this reaction (including in his 911 call) is that she and her car were supposed to be at work, so seeing the car at her home was a sign something was wrong.
-In one interview, he said he went to her place at that time (7:00-7:30) because he expected her to be getting home from work around then. In that case, it's not clear why it should have alarmed him to see her car at home.
-He seems to want to cover all bases with his account: she should be home from work, but she should be at work. He went to her place because he expected her there, but he was alarmed when he saw her car (always when he saw her car - not just when he went inside). He called "everyone - where she could possibly be," but didn't call her workplace, where she should have been.

Sunday, August 14 (Phase IV) - Entry and 911 Call.

-JC was on the phone with his friend MR when he entered the townhouse (per MR's statement on FB).
-JC rushed into KM's apartment, using his key but not noticing whether the door was locked. (There is a deadbolt but he makes no mention of it.) Katelyn Markham was gone.
-None of her belongings were missing except her red Blackberry cellphone. Her keys and purse were in her 2nd floor bedroom. He tried calling her phone several times but did not hear it ringing.
-According to JC, KM doesn't ordinarily make her bed, so there was no way to tell whether she had slept in it the night before.
-There were no signs of struggle, forced entry, or anything unusual, except that her dog was shut in her 2nd floor bedroom, instead of the 1st floor bathroom where he was usually kept when she was out.
-Some pencils near a window and some hats that had been on the bedposts were knocked off, but JC said the dog could have done it.

-The dog had relieved itself in the bedroom, making it evident to JC that KM had not been home for some time.
-At this point JC "freaked out" and "immediately called friends, family, police" including his mother and KM's father.
-One of the friends he called was "Princess Mary Catherine" who reported on Facebook (April 2013) that he called her before calling 911, and told her KM hadn't gone to work that day. How he knew this is unclear.
-His call to 911 was made at 7:58 pm.
-In the 911 call, JC mentioned KM's purse being in her home, so (if truthful) he had to have been inside already. But when asked if he was at her home, he said he was "heading there now."

John mcgowan said...

-By his own account, JC had to discover KM was missing between 7 and 7:30, find her purse/keys still there, leave her apartment, then call 911 on the way back 30-60 minutes later.
-JC's step-sister MM said that when JC left it was to check with some friends who do not have phones, to see if they'd seen KM. But KM could only have been with those friends if someone had picked her up, of course, since her car was at her apartment.
-JC said that KM's father was with him when he went into the apartment. It is not clear whether this is true, or if true, whether it was the first or second time he entered.
-In the 911 call, JC told the dispatcher he couldn't find KM "anywhere," though he had not called or visited her workplace, where she was supposed to be from 11 am to 7 pm that day.
-JC told the dispatcher he's been with KM for 6 years, that she's "not deceiving," and that there were "a LOT of questionable people" at the Sacred Heart festival nearby that night.
-He told the dispatcher he's "like really freaking out" because her car is at home, though she should be at work "right now" - though by then she actually should have been home from work for about 40 minutes.
-A police officer called David's Bridal saying KM was missing. This call was probably placed after business hours and was forwarded to the manager, but it did take place sometime that Sunday, because a co-worker mentioned it on her FB around 11:30 pm that night.
-Friends heard JC's mother paging KM over the loudspeakers at the church festival sometime Sunday (presumably between 7:30 when JC called his family, and 9 pm when the event closed).
-According to JC's step-sister MM, LE collected all the keys to the TH when Katelyn was reported missing. According to JC's aunt KK, JC and his family had access to the TH until Wednesday when police changed the locks, which (again according to the aunt) was done because of JC's urging that foul play be considered and the apartment treated as a crime scene.
-Requests to MM to clarify the conflicting key information were not answered.


Testing, Testing... Is this thing on?

-Friends of KM & JC report he thought he failed the voice lie detector test the police gave him, because he was nervous.
-He posted on his FB wall regarding the test: "Went in and took a voice lie detector didn't do well very nervous"
-On August 25, Nancy Grace asked JC if he had taken a polygraph and he said yes. She asked if he had passed it and he said yes.
-On August 27 in an interview with WLW radio, Fairfield's Chief of Police Mike Dickey firmly refused to confirm or deny whether JC had even taken a polygraph test, much less passed it.
-On August 31, Nancy Grace asked JC again about the polygraph. JC said he had not taken one. Asked if he was willing to take one, he said yes.
-JC's family issued a statement later explaining that he had taken a voice stress analysis test, but mistakenly thought it was the same as a polygraph.
-The family's statement to the media regarding his confusion over what test he took, along with assertions of his exhaustion when he took it, never mentioned the results of the test, only the fact that he took one.
-JC later said he passed the voice stress analysis test. Or, in some interviews, he said he "believes" he passed it. His step-sister MM says that her family tells her that he passed it.
-JC's step-sister NW, when asked if JC passed, says only 2 questions were asked, and that the results of that type of test are not "pass/fail" in nature.

John mcgowan said...

Pings

-The media, reporting soon after KM's disappearance, said police refused to release the last cell tower "ping" location from KM's phone before it went dead.
-A local TV reporter said in August 2011 that Chief Dickey told her the ping was from "right before" KM went missing.
-In a Sept. 8, 2011 WLWT News article, Chief Dickey is quoted as saying: "From the very beginning, we've said that her phone has been turned off. The ping that has been referred to in the media was long before she was known to have disappeared. [Note: she wasn't "known" to have disappeared until 8 pm Sunday August 14.] Once a cell phone is turned off, disabled, or has no power, there's really no way to look for that phone," Dickey said. When asked if police know where that last ping was, Dickey responded, "We do, but we're not releasing any of that information." (http://www.wlwt.com/news/29119482/detail.html#ixzz1wK5ozolO)
-A visitor to the Facebook page, Katelyn Markham's Disappearance: Considering Everything, reported a large-scale search for KM in Okeana Ohio, near the Indiana border, in early September 2011. Two police officers told her they were searching for KM, because the last ping from her phone was from the Okeana tower.
-Update: Okeana is approximately 11 miles from the site where KM's remains were eventually found.
-Another searcher on a different September 2011 search organized by police and TES stated she was told the last ping was from a tower near Bobmeyer Road in Fairfield.
-In January 2012, at a vigil for KM, Chief Dickey told several attendees that he was baffled that the public didn't know the location of the last cell phone ping - and that it pinged off the Joyce Park tower in Fairfield, near KM's home.
-The chief claimed he had been upfront with the public about the ping location from the beginning. This is not accurate (see his quote above), and there were no articles or news stories announcing the release of that info between the chief's September 2011 statement and his February 2012 comments.

Miscellaneous

-There was no activity on KM's cell phone, bank account, or credit cards after she disappeared.
-August 16, 2011 would have been Katelyn's 22nd birthday and the one-year anniversary of her engagement. JC and friends had a party for her in absentia.
-Though JC was previously a fairly regular poster on Facebook, no activity showed between July 27 and August 15, the day after KM was reported missing.
-JC deactivated his Facebook in early September. It was briefly reactivated in Spring 2012, then deactivated again.
-According to police, there was no evidence of foul play or a struggle in KM's home, JC's home, KM's car, or JC's car.
-Police said from early on that they have no leads and that everyone who knew KM is a person of interest at this point.
-In interviews, JC sometimes spoke of KM in the past tense, and sometimes in the present tense. He spoke of her in the past tense in interviews within 2-3 days of her disappearance.
-JC said he has a "gut feeling" that KM is all right and that she is "close." He said, "I keep believing that if she is somewhere, in the worst case scenario, that she fights her way out. I keep wanting to believe that because... she's strong. I know she's strong. So, she's got to manage to make her way out."

John mcgowan said...

-There was no evidence of abuse or domestic violence between JC and KM, and he has no criminal history.
-Many family and friends assert that he was devoted to her and that they were a very happy couple.
-A psychologist on Nancy Grace's TV show said (after hearing him interviewed for a few minutes) that JC does not fit the psychological profile of someone who would harm her.
-KM's engagement ring, which she was presumably wearing when she vanished, is a zigzag of nine small marquis-cut diamonds set in yellow gold. It was JC's grandmother's ring and has sentimental family value.
-The broken blinds visible in some news footage at a window of KM's townhome were damaged previously by her dog and are unrelated.
-Except for mention of a possible gray shirt, it has not been reported what KM was wearing when last seen, and/or what clothes or shoes are missing from her home.
-Some friends have said KM had a stalker, someone who was "obsessed" with her, but JC said more than once that it's not true.
-When Nancy Grace asked why KM texted JC the photo of the photo, instead of showing the original to him when he was there less than an hour earlier, he replied that he didn't know, and that the photo was upstairs (which suggests that the couple was downstairs). He implied he had not seen the photos yet.
-JC's aunt and frequent defender on Facebook, KK, explained that JC had seen the photos and liked them, so he asked KM to send him a copy, which she did after he left.
-JC said on August 18, 2011 that he didn't have a lawyer because he didn't do anything wrong. If he has obtained a lawyer subsequently, that info has not been released to the public.
-JC said he would not visit his stepsister MM (an hour away) because he wants to be at home for when Katelyn comes back. (Fall 2011)
-JC was openly dating a young woman by early spring 2012 (beginning date of their relationship not known). He attended the October 2011, January 2012, and June 2012 public events for Katelyn, but not the April 2012 one.
-Fairfield police indicated that they were working with profilers regarding Katelyn Markham's disappearance. (April 2012)
-Fairfield police issued a statement clearing a Fairfield man, who worked near KM's home and was arrested for sexual battery, of any involvement in KM's disappearance. (July 2012)

http://kmdce.livejournal.com/1435.html

ima.grandma said...

dear cheryl

please allow me a minute or two

i remember you telling me about what your mother taught you

make a difference. every day.

youre so important to me

i can learn. i can change. i can help.

just a minute or two

Lis said...

Here's a couple more good JC statements to analyze:

Grace: "...But it is unusual according to reporters you have spoken of her in the past tense."

Carter: "I have spoken of her in the past tense because she is currently missing. And I only use the past tense because I just, I don't know what else to use and it's really confusing when I'm talking to so many people about it. You know, what direction I can go. And, and, it's, it's insanely hard to deal with a lot of this stuff, so I deal with a lot of stress. I just want to re-iterate the fact that, I just want Katelyn home and that's all that matters to me. I don't care if people are, you know, talking about me, whatever. As long as we're focused on Katelyn Markham and bringing Katelyn Markham home that is all I want.


He's fine talking about Katelyn but he does not want any focus on himself and his many inconsistencies.

After this show he would no longer speak live on Grace's show because "he feels her interviews stopped being focused on Katelyn and zeroed in on him."

Another quote-

"She had a big old bag full of stuff from the bank and so she had me go and burn them," Carter said. "Personally, it really was just an innocent little chore she wanted me to do for her and basically I went to a friend's house and I got rid of them."

Apparently there was a facebook group run by JC's family where they spent a lot of time deleting posts by those suspicious of him and they finally took the page down. His stepmother said this:

"I am Megs mother,Johns stepmom. I am the one who asked Megs to stop communicating under the advisement of Tim Miller, Equusearch who has lived through this type of situation before, and my husband (her step-dad and John's dad). I have been witnessed to Megs slow but sure "falling apart". Every negative comment made about John or family is eating away at her and she is losing faith. I cannot and will not allow that to happen. Therefore to recap, I DEBI CARTER ASKED MY DAUGHTER TO STOP BECAUSE I LOVE HER AND I WANT HER TO KEEP HER SANITY, HER LOVE OF PEOPLE AND HER FAITH IN TACT. Since on this site it is a no-win situation for any family member involved. You can post anything you like about this or about me. I WILL NOT RESPOND. Good night and Good Luck."

Way to circle the wagons, stepmom. Family is more important than truth or justice. She phrases Megs as "losing faith" where I would more likely call it coming to her senses.

ima.grandma said...

correction

i remember barbara telling me about it

Anonymous said...

Ima.grandma, you have posted a lot on this public forum and so I hope you will bear with me if I also respond to you. Maybe I'm way off but I'm troubled because you don't seem like yourself. I have a dear friend who is bipolar and your posts are reminding me of the way she communicates when she has a manic phase. If I am wrong, please forgive me. I just want to say something because my friend has felt betrayed in the past by people who can see she is not herself but don't help her. I want to say something, to encourage you to think about whether something like this might be going on. Do you have a counselor you could check in with? Have you changed some kind of medication recently? I value your posts here. I'm not going to say any more about it but I'm praying for you and thinking about you.

HISG said...

In the radio show where he says that the last time he saw Katelyn was 'last night...uh I mean last week' (paraphrased),
I think this is a slip, a Freudian slip if you will , and that he revisited her body a week after he put her there and that is when he dumped trash to further conceal the body.

I must say that this is the only person we have looked at in these cases who strikes me as being a probable serial killer.

There were 2 other bodies found dumped in the creek bed previous to Katelyn's. Does anyone realize maybe Katelyn found something that made her think he had killed before and that that is why he killed her?

The dump site was 25 miles away, so JC must have had her dead in his car while he was w his friends at the bonfire and he must have driven to the dumpsite at 4 am when he says he "watching TV and things like that".

What is sad is that I bet cops did not even interrogate him using sleep deprivation to get him to talk. He should have been asked about alibis when the other people found in the creekbed went missing.
I believe his boldness in having her dead in his car while he hung out with his friends indicates he had killed before. Also, obviously the other bodies found before Katelyn in the creekbed.
JC sends chills up my spine, and I usually have a thick skin when analyzing these cases.
JC reminds me of Dennis Rader (BTK) who I find particularly disturbing. They even have the same exact goatee.

HISG said...

John wrote

-A psychologist on Nancy Grace's TV show said (after hearing him interviewed for a few minutes) that JC does not fit the psychological profile of someone who would harm her.

This is such BS. Oftentimes even extreme batterers are "normal" on psych tests.
Even serial killers can be surprisingly sane or seemingly mild-mannered...even the ones who claim they are demon-possessed or like with Son of Sam who said a dog told him to kill...they later admit they were lying about being crazy to try to get a lighter sentence.

HISG said...

Also BTK would call police to report his own crimes, which seems to be the case with JC...it seems like he called 911 when he did as part of a cat and mouse game...he could have waited longer than he did to call but I think he was excited to get the ball rolling with the search/police investigation/etc.

Nic said...

John, thank you for all your research. That's a lot of detail you organized for us.

Anonymous said...

Could "I mean there's no reason for her to go anywhere" imply she is dead in the house.

lynda said...

OT

OMG...Davey just posted a new blog "sharing" people's stories about Amanda and how her story has changed their lives. The story he posts is ALL ABOUT HIM! It is unbelievable!

https://daveyblackburn.com/2016/05/17/nothing-is-wasted-story-1/

John mcgowan said...

My pleasure, Nic!

interview hr said...

Tks very much for your post.

Avoid surprises — interviews need preparation. Some questions come up time and time again — usually about you, your experience and the job itself. We've gathered together the most common questions so you can get your preparation off to a flying start.

You also find all interview questions at link at the end of this post.

Source: Download Ebook: Ultimate Guide To Job Interview Questions Answers:

Best rgs

Just Hit Me Up Now said...


adult live cam chat creative
adult live cam chat driver
adult live cam chat hd driver
adult creative live cam chat driver download
adult creative live cam chat driver vf0330
adult live cam chat hd
adult live cam chat hd vf0790
adult live cam chat hd mac
adult live cam chat hd review
adult live cam chat hd linux
adult live cam chat hd starter pack
adult live cam chat hd windows 8.1
adult creative live cam chat hd linux
adult live cam chat messenger
adult live cam chat hd 720p

























































































...