Saturday, September 17, 2016

Blackburn: Projection Pre Crime

Shortly before his wife was murdered in a home invasion in which no great theft took place, Davey Blackburn gave this performance.  




On November 10th, 2015, 3 men entered the home, beat, sexually assaulted and shot 3 times, pregnant Amanda Blackburn.  She languished for 2 days before death came.  The fatal shot was to the back of her head, execution style. 

This is not the general behavior of a home invasion robbery in which sudden and often violent interaction takes place for the purpose of theft; incapacitate the home owner enough to take that which was valued.  

Nor was this typical of sexual assault where the primary interest is rape.  

Nor did Amanda Blackburn pose enough resistance to warrant this elevation in violence ending in murder. 

Pre crime and post crime behavior and wording is critical to an overall understanding of the crime.  

Statement analysis of the statements made by Davey Blackburn following the murder showed:

a.  No fear of the then yet to be apprehended killers, nor concern for his son, his neighbors, and the public at large.  A vicious invasive murder produces profound fear, trauma, and concern that the killers, which appeared to the public as "senseless" (since no major theft took place) only increases the fear due to the seemingly random nature of the crime.  Nothing is as frightening as the unknown and with unknown motive, there is the incessant fear that the killers will return.  If it was known that much cash was in the house and this was a robbery, the trauma is lessened for survivors because the motive 'makes sense' in this limited criminal aspect.  Without sense, brutal rapist killers were on the loose.  

b.  An immediate and intense desire to profit from her death.  The language was commercial and shocked the public. Blackburn showed obsessive language about numbers in attendance, like his mentor, Perry Noble.  This unbridled ambition was evidenced within the specific number of attendees, online, to his 'service', while offering nothing about the victim.  The lack of empathy for Amanda was striking.  

c.  Extreme (given both the context and numerical analysis) distancing language from the victims (including the pre born child).  This lack of human empathy for the victims and immediate and consistent distancing from the victims also shocked the public. 
d.  Language of guilt, offering by himself, "for us, we have nothing to hide."  The use of the plural is something that parents of kindergartens recognize as a need to 'hide' or 'share guilt' among a crowd.  
e.  He claimed "Amanda died so the church would live", justifying her death, while claiming to have been alone, naked in the shower, with the Almighty, who spoke to him and gave him "history making" plans.  He qualified the history making plans by removing responsibility of failure from himself to the congregation.  If he does not make history, it would be their fault.  

This represented two elements within murders common of those who either commit the murder, or have guilty knowledge of the murder:  the need to justify the action, and the need to avoid responsibility.  These are not only found in such crimes, but are personality traits found within deviants.  In child homicides, for example, we often find such statements as
"she would not stop crying", shifting blame to the child.
"she was a teenager, you know..." with a subtle shifting of responsibility to hormonal behavior. 

On the day of the murder, Blackburn went to the gym, as he did regularly, at a specific time, returning home at a specific time, yet on this date, he spoke to his best friend (as was his pattern) but remained on the phone for 40 minutes longer than usual.  

This, alone, as a change from the norm, should be examined, but the additional element makes the deviation from the norm heightened:  on this occasion, he remained in the driveway on the phone call while Amanda bled out, with precious time lost. 

Projection and Pre Crime Behavior 

Before the crime, we look for any signals of projection, or even possible planning. 

What did Blackburn, himself, tell us?

1.  He told us that Amanda hindered his ambition.  He told us that he wanted to be out getting the numbers in, but she wanted him home with her.  

2.  He told us that when Amanda first became pregnant, it was the most stressful time in his life. 

3.  He told us that Amanda was incapable of satisfying his sexual needs.  He went as far as to publicly state (in a 'sermon') that Amanda wanted to go out to dinner, but he was incapable of having a conversation with her at dinner until they had sexual relations.  He reduced the victim (pre crime) to sexually reciprocal body parts.  

4.  His public videos show him correcting and embarrassing her.  This passive aggressive nature was in both word and body language.  The public displays of disrespect and humiliation were subtle and consistent. 

5.  Just before the murder, he gave a 'sermon' (with respect to readers of faith) where he waved about this gun as a choreographed prop.  

A man of unrestrained ambition  told the public what it was that stood in his way of success.  He told the public who it was who stood in his way of success.  

As one 30 year criminal investigator said, "no one gets this lucky."  

As soon as she was murdered, his words betrayed him.  His first announcement was a sales pitch for his business, and his second announcement  was his sales report; the number he obtained.  Then, in the media circuit, he continued to sell himself, referencing his upcoming book, while failing to speak about Amanda.  

He attended his father-in-law's church where he said he could not speak, but then could not stop himself from speaking and gave his speech about his naked shower meeting with Deity (something criminal psychologists and analysts recognize associated with sexual homicides and the need to cleans guilt) about his grandiose plans, fully unimpeded.

Had he been polygraphed, the course of the case might have dramatically shifted.  A defense attorney would have had all the videos removed immediately and would have silenced Blackburn.  

The narcissistic lack of human empathy shocked a nation, but it was specifically in his words that we see the removal of hinderance from his ambitious plans; not unlike powerful, ruthless politicians. 

Blackburn was immediately cleared by police and is judicially innocent of the murder of Amanda Blackburn, as his alibi of being at the gym at the time of her murder was sustained and the three males arrested.  It does not appear that Blackburn was asked to polygraph although the statistics are clear that when a pregnant woman is murdered, the husband/boyfriend is most often involved.  






1,945 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1601 – 1800 of 1945   Newer›   Newest»
dnd said...

Obsession is the single most wasteful human activity, because with an obsession you keep coming back and back and back to the same question and never get an answer."


Why do you care what we are doing here, Anon 7:37? Looks like you may be a little obsessed yourself with telling everyone they are wasting their time. What's it to ya?

Anonymous said...

If Taylor was on video outside when the shots were heard, he wouldn't be charged with shooting her. Duh!

This from the person bragging about being smart, lol.

But I really enjoyed your fantasy about Taylor being on video outside during the whole incident, Nic.

Freaking ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

Taylor is charged with shooting her because of the testimony of a confidential informant, is that correct?

Anonymous said...

And they say Davey will talk himself into a corner. Lol

Nic talks so much she has forgotten the subject of her theories.

Me2l said...

said...
Taylor is charged with shooting her because of the testimony of a confidential informant, is that correct?

October 12, 2016 at 9:41 PM



How is this possible? The accepted line here is that snitching is just not done (explaining away why they won't snitch on DB).

Contradictory much?

So many holes to this "Davey done it" story.

Anonymous said...

Clearly he's not on video outside during the shooting or the defense would be screaming bloody murder that the prosecution lied in the affidavit. Are you new at this?

There is other evidence we don't know about, too. There is info missing from the affidavit about a lot of stuff, including the SUV. Hide and watch.

Anonymous said...

Looking back now and knowing what would transpire,
or
Looking back now and knowing what transpired,

What's the difference?

Anonymous said...

Then how did they charge Taylor - what did they find connecting him to Amanda and being in the house, besides cell phone pings? That will be revealed at the trial.

Me2l said...

Bobcat said...
Looking back now and knowing what would transpire,
or
Looking back now and knowing what transpired,

What's the difference?
October 12, 2016 at 9:56 PM


Your first example is of "would" in a conditional tense......speculative.

The second is past tense. It occurred.

Simplified explanation.

Nic said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
If Taylor was on video outside when the shots were heard, he wouldn't be charged with shooting her. Duh!

This from the person bragging about being smart, lol.

But I really enjoyed your fantasy about Taylor being on video outside during the whole incident, Nic.

Freaking ridiculous.

October 12, 2016 at 9:36 PM


A "CI" said he was in the house. Big whoop. Like that will hold its weight in court. Just like Gordon and Watson's charges of murdering Amanda aren't credible because published ATM stills have them in a completely different location from the alleged time of shooting. And I'll be surprised if Amanda's DNA hit on that pink sweater. That and on the car.








Nic said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Clearly he's not on video outside during the shooting or the defense would be screaming bloody murder that the prosecution lied in the affidavit. Are you new at this?

There is other evidence we don't know about, too. There is info missing from the affidavit about a lot of stuff, including the SUV. Hide and watch.

October 12, 2016 at 9:47 PM


Clearly he is on video. They published stills from video. Not only is he on video, there are eye witnesses (neighbours) to him loitering at the end of their driveways and walking up Sunnyfield and on the adjacent street.

There is *a lot* of evidence on video. There is evidence of someone disabling the 2nd house's security camera, a black SUV coming and going, (depicting who got in/out) and even someone trying to access the immediate neighbour's house (to the Blackburn residence) via that front door, as DB is leaving for the gym!

What was he wearing?!?! Is he dressed the same as Taylor was that day?

Stay tuned!

Anonymous said...

There's a high probability the 911 call will come out during trial, but what Davey says will have no bearing beyond how he describes the scene/his wife's condition as it relates to the evidence against the accused.

But how would the way Davey described the scene/his wife's condition help implicate or exonerate the accused?

I am not being combative, just asking.


The scene was what it was - but there would be many different ways for Davey to approach telling a 911 dispatcher about the scene.

Starting with how he began the call, right after the dispatcher says "911, what is the nature of your emergency" - if he started it with a greeting, more so if he took the time to say that he just came home from the gym instead of cutting right to the chase and start asking for help - that could be seen as establishing an alibi

More importantly -
How he described the scene, did he leave out details that would indicate a home invasion. If he did leave out anything that would obscure the fact to the dispatcher that this was obviously a crime scene, that would be interesting. There is a solid reason why the 911 dispatcher only sent a fire truck to an active crime scene.


Davey not indicating it was a crime scene to 911 (and I am not saying he didn't - and we will know for sure when we hear the 911 call) ) would explain at least two things:

(1) why Engine 12 had to summon IMPD instead of the dispatcher sending them

(2) why Davey has felt the need to say in so many appearances that he honestly had no idea by the grace of God exactly what he was seeing, that things were a blur, that things were out of place but he didn't know anyone had been in his house, that when he walked in he thought something had gone horrifically wrong with the pregnancy


IMPD responded to the two other burglaries that morning after the residents called 911 and reported them as burglaries, aka home invasions.

Engine 12 / EMTs (only) made the initial response to the Blackburn house - then they called IMPD to respond (probably as soon as they walked in).

Logic says that the affidavit wording is correct that Davey said to 911 that Amanda was "injured and unconscious", if not in those exact words, that sentiment was expressed.

But did he, or did he not, express to 911 that someone had been in his house while he was away, that Amanda's underwear was off and her shirt pulled up, that there was duct tape and credit cards and earbuds scattered around (clearly not the result of a fall from a ladder or an accident or a miscarriage)?

Yes, stay tuned.

Anonymous said...

"In the next month, October 10th-November 10th, I honestly truly mean it when I say our friendship felt better than ever. We laughed and spent time together just like we did in that first 2 years of our friendship. Looking back now and knowing what would transpire, that difficult, but extremely healing lunch was one of the greatest gifts that Jesus has ever given me. I have never been more grateful for a month of time in my life ever before."

Ashley Barrett
http://daveyblackburn.com/posts/friendship-distance-and-forgiveness

----------------------
Another interesting quote from a church associate:

"What a beautiful image to see so many people that have been touched and eternally blessed by @daveyblackburn and Amanda's story. The story of forgiveness. The story of enduring then overcoming the worst of the worst. The story of the really goods and the really bads being transformed into something restored and renewed. Into something good.
Blessed to see the impact unfold. Not only at @resonateindy but all across the nation and even the world. Something none of us saw coming.
Nothing is wasted. I love my pastor, my church family and my God who has time and time again shown love and forgiveness in response to my foolishness."

Jeremy Hendricks (Resonate band drummer and handgun enthusiast)
https://www.instagram.com/p/BIqrs6iDi3h/
https://www.instagram.com/p/BE1Ek6tv5J5/?taken-by=jermhendricks
https://www.instagram.com/p/-2nxlGv5F2/?taken-by=jermhendricks

Anonymous said...

Davey knows what he said...

If he included "home invasion" details in the call, like, "someone has been here while I was gone", that would be expected because thugs allegedly entered his house and did this to Amanda.

if he didn't include any such details in the 911 call, had not been expecting that someone would enter his house, then that would be unexpected for a husband who was surprised to walk in and find his best friend in the condition she was in. He described it as blood smeared all around her, struggling to take every breath. Definitely a medical situation - but -

If there was no evidence of struggle, no evidence someone had been in the house (no swisher sweets for example), then maybe just EMTs were needed.

But from the way he described what he saw that morning in the APC, wouldn't he have wanted IMPD to come to a crime scene and find out who did this to Amanda?

Anonymous said...

Bobcat said...
Looking back now and knowing what would transpire,
or
Looking back now and knowing what transpired,

What's the difference?

Me2I said
Your first example is of "would" in a conditional tense......speculative.

The second is past tense. It occurred.

Simplified explanation."



After reading the context (Ashley's post), it sounds less like speculation and more like she was stating what (she knew?) would lie ahead. It goes along with the Lord using the Levi Lusko video to prepare Davey's heart leading up to Amanda's death, for all of them to really feel like they were about to walk through a season of pain.

It's unthinkable to know that these people *knew* this would transpire - but there are indications that they might have known it was going to happen.

Anonymous said...

So much need for so many people to convince that this was out of the blue, that they never expected it, that it was the worst nightmare come true, that they never saw it coming for one minute.

Anonymous said...

(4/24/2016) "came back, walked in my house, and, and found Amanda, and honestly, um, I, I think it was by the grace of god that I had no idea what had happened. Um, I honestly thought - she was three months pregnant so I thought that something had gone horrifically wrong with the pregnancy, and so, um, I think the lord prepares your heart for things when you’re about to walk into a really tough season because, prior to this, our entire leadership team, both Amanda and I just had this sense that we were about to walk into a season of pain, and uh I, I, thought it would be that we would lose the baby. I really did, and um, we hadn’t really experienced any kind of pain, um, certainly not to this magnitude, and so, when I found her, I, I, basically, she, she, she was still breathing and I went and I said, man this is really bad, but if we can get just get her to the hospital, she’s going to be OK. Had no idea that there was, that there were bullet wounds; had no idea that somebody had been in my house, um, things didn’t look right, it didn’t, something was, was up"

Anonymous said...

Reading this ^ ^ ^ again with fresh eyes, I am all but positive that the 911 call is going to omit any indication of a home invasion.

Anonymous said...

". . . and so, when I found her, I, I, basically, she, she, she was still breathing and I . . . "

thought I would hold a pillow over her nose but then I thought that might be hard to hide. . .

So much sensitivity about the word "she"

Jasmine said...

Peter Hyatt's SA analysis of this case is fabulous especially to those like me have never studied it.However, Dr. Andrew. G.Hodges author of Who Will Speak for Jon Benet and discoverer of "reading between the lines, thought prints. Dr. Hodges maintains that in the case of the Ramsey's and most likely the Amanda Blackburn case(my emphasis on the Ramsey's not Dr.Hodges)In Dr. Hodges words, "unknowingly they continued to confess between the lines as again they unconsciously elaborated on and clarified how the. MUrder occurred;if people talk they will eventually tell the truth". The left brain is the unconscious, the right brain being truth, the right brain can't be hidden. So it seems even though there isn't any written letter involving the Blackburn murders, the way CD constantly speaks his mind should implicate him unknowingly. SA does the same thing as thought prints in finding the truth. I must add that Peter has some reservations concerning thought print analysis but there are correlations using both methods Ive found.

Anonymous said...

"Nic said...

A "CI" said he was in the house. Big whoop. Like that will hold its weight in court. Just like Gordon and Watson's charges of murdering Amanda aren't credible because published ATM stills have them in a completely different location from the alleged time of shooting. And I'll be surprised if Amanda's DNA hit on that pink sweater. That and on the car."


Nic, once again, you're showing your complete ignorance of the American justice system. When you participates in a dangerous felony (such as burglary), and it results in the death of someone, even if you didn't pull the trigger, you are responsible. It's called the felony murder rule. Educate yourself, PLEASE. You carry on and on like you're some kind of investigative genius, but you don't even understand the most basic things. Felony. Murder. Look it up.

.........


"Nic said...

Clearly he is on video. They published stills from video. Not only is he on video, there are eye witnesses (neighbours) to him loitering at the end of their driveways and walking up Sunnyfield and on the adjacent street.

There is *a lot* of evidence on video. There is evidence of someone disabling the 2nd house's security camera, a black SUV coming and going, (depicting who got in/out) and even someone trying to access the immediate neighbour's house (to the Blackburn residence) via that front door, as DB is leaving for the gym!"


Yes I KNOW he's on video. What I'm saying is if he is shown OUTSIDE DURING THE TIME OF THE GUNSHOTS, the defense would be screaming bloody murder that the prosecution lied in the affidavit. Do you get it? Please tell me you get it so I can stop explaining it.

Yes there's a lot of video evidence -- much more than we know about, and it's going to make you look even more foolish when the trial happens.

Me2l said...


After reading the context (Ashley's post), it sounds less like speculation and more like she was stating what (she knew?) would lie ahead. It goes along with the Lord using the Levi Lusko video to prepare Davey's heart leading up to Amanda's death, for all of them to really feel like they were about to walk through a season of pain.


Semantics, but........when speaking of events of the future, it can't be anything but speculation, since it has yet to happen--sometimes, speculation based upon a plan, but still, until it occurs, it is surmized that it will occur.

Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...

But how would the way Davey described the scene/his wife's condition help implicate or exonerate the accused?

I am not being combative, just asking."


Since you're asking, please listen carefully to the answer, because this has been explained to you before, flightful.

Nothing in the 911 call is going to exonerate the thugs. The jury is not allowed to disregard evidence like DNA, phone locations, surveillance video, and witness testimony.

Even if Davey said in the call, "She looks absolutely fine, like she's just peacefully sleeping but won't wake up," IT WON'T MATTER. If he said it looks like she hurt herself doing gymnastics, IT WON'T MATTER. If he said it looks like she injured herself with a knife while buttering toast, IT WON'T MATTER.

She was shot. Three times. There is ample evidence the thugs are responsible. What Davey says in the call that he thinks happened won't matter because what DID happen has already been established.

The call we be used in the trial to help verify the timeline, etc.


........


"Anonymous said ...

Logic says that the affidavit wording is correct that Davey said to 911 that Amanda was "injured and unconscious", if not in those exact words, that sentiment was expressed."


Of course that is the sentiment he expressed....... because SHE WAS INJURED AND UNCONSCIOUS.

There have been multiple alternate explanations suggested for why the paramedics had to request police. You know that, you just choose to ignore that there are possibilities other than it being Davey's fault. You've made the same post containing the same info dozens of times as if there's never been a response. Why?


Anonymous said...

Nothing in the 911 call is going to exonerate the thugs.

This isn't about exonerating the thugs. They are not choirboys. Neither is your boy Davey, unfortunately. How many times does it have to be said that even if the thugs were involved, it doesn't mean that a strategically mapped out, carefully plotted ploy by our faithful Crossfitter didn't lead them to Amanda that morning.
-------------

Even if Davey said in the call, "She looks absolutely fine, like she's just peacefully sleeping but won't wake up," IT WON'T MATTER. If he said it looks like she hurt herself doing gymnastics, IT WON'T MATTER. If he said it looks like she injured herself with a knife while buttering toast, IT WON'T MATTER.

But details left out of the 911 call could / will make it look like Davey didn't give the whole scenario to the dispatcher. He may not have given a description of injuries and just said he needed EMTs. But IF he didn't indicate that someone had been in his house while he was away, why didn't he?

What he did not say WILL MATTER.

----------
She was shot. Three times. There is ample evidence the thugs are responsible. What Davey says in the call that he thinks happened won't matter because what DID happen has already been established.


It does not matter what he said he said during the call about how he thought Amanda's injuries were caused. Unless he said "she's injured and unconscious, maybe she fell and hit her head" - that would absolutely matter. That's the impression Perry Noble got from Davey's description of Amanda's injuries- that she fell from a kitchen counter. Why didn't Davey tell his close friend and mentor that his wife had been shot?

Oh wait, he had "no idea there were bullet wounds" until later at the hospital (right). So why didn't he at least share the gravity of the situation with him and others?

And it also,absolutely matters that he has said in so many appearances that he thought it was a miscarriage, "we probably just lost the baby" in conjunction with "things didn't look right but I had no idea someone had been in my house". It is far more important and telling what Davey has said after the 911 call, in the ensuing months, than how he described injuries that morning.

-------------
The call will be used in the trial to help,verify the timeline, etc.

If Davey's 911 call is only being used to verify the timeline, there would be no reason to withhold it as part of an active investigation. The timeline has already been made public in the affidavit for probable cause.
........


"Anonymous said ...

Logic says that the affidavit wording is correct that Davey said to 911 that Amanda was "injured and unconscious", if not in those exact words, that sentiment was expressed."

Of course that is the sentiment he expressed....... because SHE WAS INJURED AND UNCONSCIOUS.


This means nothing if one doesn't take into context the statement that followed, which was -

But did he, or did he not, express to 911 that someone had been in his house while he was away, that Amanda's underwear was off and her shirt pulled up, that there was duct tape and credit cards and earbuds scattered around (clearly not the result of a fall from a ladder or an accident or a miscarriage).

There have been multiple alternate explanations suggested for why the paramedics had to request police.

But one of the most compelling (and one reason the 911 call might be being withheld) is because the 911 dispatcher had no clue police were needed until paramedics told them they were needed.

Bingo3 said...

The "still breathing" comment was startling. If he thought she fell and hit her head because of a pregnancy gone bad, then why would he say "still breathing". Of course she was breathing if it was just a head bonk. The truth is, he was shocked that she was still breathing. 45 minutes in the car to let her die and she was "still breathing". DB must have been quite surprised by her being alive. That waiting game in the hospital must have been a little scary for Crazy Davy.

How many agree there is a 100% chance on the 911 call that he says that he just returned from the gym before he says anything else! I bet he introduces himself also. Maybe even includes that he is Lead Pastor. ha!

The guy is just hanging himself with his words and his contradictory stories. How in the world the police chose not to do a polygraph on him is unreal. I think it should be protocol. If a pregnant woman dies a polygraph should be done on every husband. Davey would have failed and wouldn't be out buying houses, taking trips, having promo shots taken, making an album, writing a fake book, touring and loving the spotlight. Some ask how we know he wasn't polygraphed. The answer was given by Peter. He would have lawyered up and been forced to shut up. We all know that didn't happen!



Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

This is just one example of Davey's stumbling lying about what he thought when he walked in to find Amanda - and there are numerous similar statements in different appearances spanning many months.

"Had no idea that there was, that there were bullet wounds; had no idea that somebody had been in my house, um, things didn’t look right, it didn’t, something was, was up"

Does this sound like a guy with a communications degree who confidently told the 911 dispatcher exactly what he saw, that from all indications it looked like someone had broken into (entered) his house while he was at the gym and assaulted his wife?

Or does it sound like a guy who DID NOT tell 911 everything he saw and has been frantically trying to explain why he didn't?

Me2l said...

The guy is hanging himself with his words.....but he hasn't quite done it yet, which is why he hasn't been arrested and charged? Is there such thing as incrimination by degree? Or is it either you're incriminated, or you're not?

Me2l said...

Or does it sound like a guy who DID NOT tell 911 everything he saw and has been frantically trying to explain why he didn't?
October 13, 2016 at 9:30 AM



Who is he trying to convince? Are you saying investigators are not aware of the contents of the 911 call, so DB is striking preemptively, just in case they happen to listen to it? How much incrimination will investigators require to do their LEGAL duty and arrest an incriminated suspect?

Bingo3 said...


Last sentence of his Amanda blog.

"And back here on Earth new life is springing forth because of the pain she endured."

I just can't wrap my head around the this kind of evil crazy.

Yes, she was brutally shot while begging for her life (which is obvious with how she was shot through her arm trying to protect herself) She was turned around and shot execution style in the back of her head, knowing she was leaving this earth and her son and family behind. Her clothes were pulled off her to humiliate her. She was attacked in her own home with her baby upstairs. But the pain she endured is springing new life here on Earth?? What happened to this man to bring him to this point of pure evil? What kind of life is springing forth from this awful event?

Anonymous said...

Anon at 9:04 am, that stuff could matter if DAVEY was on trial, but he is not. The THUGS are on trial. What Davey said in appearances after the murder will not be admissible. What Perry Noble thought won't be admissible. Try watching a few murder trials. You might learn something.

Once again, what Davey thought might have happened prior to the incident being investigated by police won't matter. You'll see.

Even if the first thing out of Davey's mouth is "I just returned from the gym and found my wife ..." (alibi building) IT WON'T MATTER. The defense will not be allowed to SA Davey.

I said the call will be used to help establish the timeline, *ETC.* You don't even understand that it's common for LE to withhold 911 calls until trial, how can you possibly know what the reasons are for it, lol?








http://criminalconduct.blogspot.com/2012/07/interview-catching-liars-with-statement.html#.V_-RNCMpC2c

From Mark McClish: "On the other hand, Statement Analysis is similar to a lie detector in that it is generally not used in court. You do not need an expert to testify that the word tried means the person has not done it, or that the phrase my victim is a confession because the pronoun my means the person has taken possession of the victim. Some areas of Statement Analysis would not be admissible in court because they are based on observations. This would include words or phrases that indicate deception such as "I swear on my mother's grave."

Anonymous said...

Me2l,

"Who is he trying to convince?"

His dwindling flock and questioning mentors/peers.

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

Bingo,

"What happened to this man to bring him to this point of pure evil?"

Davey's was a pastor's kid and Davey grew up HATING the church.
Newspring is the first church he liked.
http://case-discussions.blogspot.com/2016/06/sad-expressions-of-pain-and-church.html

Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Me2l said...

Bobcat said...
Me2l,

"Who is he trying to convince?"

His dwindling flock and questioning mentors/peers.




What are his numbers? Do you have names of mentors and peers who are questioning him?

Apparently, investigators don't need convincing, unless, of course, they have not heard the 911 call.

Anonymous said...

Me2l (Is he "good" enough to outsmart LE?),

His numbers are such that Resonate has drawn itself back to one service...and Zwoolie prays for the empty seats in their auditorium.

Perry Noble
Kenneth Murphy (full transcript coming soon)

Bingo3 said...

Bobcat, also the first church he liked came with a millionaire pastor with 30,000 members, several books, speaking engagements and an enviable lifestyle. Very bad scenario for the perfect storm of Davey Blackburn.

Bingo3 said...

Speaking of Zwoolie, it is so interesting to me that they have a youth minister and two worship leaders AND DB has an assistant. They also now have offices. How can this be afforded? I just keep comparing the scenario to my friend who has a start-up church that is bigger than Resonate. His wife had to go back to teaching for the insurance money. He worked construction until just a little while ago. His office is in his house and he just now after 5 years hired a part-time secretary. He meets in an old church building when that church is not in service. He has no lighting or fancy set-ups. Only a small sign outside the church. He has volunteer worship singers and volunteers to help with the children. They can't afford a staff like Davey but he has more members than Davey. How far can insurance money go? Donations and t-shirt sales also. Davey had the staff even before Amanda was killed. It is baffling to me where the money was coming from and I just wonder what DB had to do to get the money. He refused to fail in his start-up church while his best friends, uncle and mentors thrived. He HAD to have a staff whether he could afford it or not. He had to have the fancy lighting, signs and website even though he could not afford it. His financial records should have been investigated.

Anonymous said...

"That stuff could matter if DAVEY was on trial, but he is not. The THUGS are on trial. What Davey said in appearances after the murder will not be admissible. What Perry Noble thought won't be admissible. Try watching a few murder trials. You might learn something.

Once again, what Davey thought might have happened prior to the incident being investigated by police won't matter. You'll see.

Even if the first thing out of Davey's mouth is "I just returned from the gym and found my wife ..." (alibi building) IT WON'T MATTER. The defense will not be allowed to SA Davey.



I understand that Davey will not be on trial during the trial for the thugs. I agree with the posters who said Davey's explanations and stumbling might be (or are) to convince his minions as to why he said what he said and why he left things out in the call which is eventually going to come out.

But is it that difficult to believe that whoever is in court, or law enforcement personnel who hear it, won't EVER go after Davey for having something to do with this crime?

At the very least, the tape could point to shared blame, to foreknowledge. Or not.

It's too easy to say that if the 911 call had something implicating Davey in it, they would have arrested him already. Maybe they are waiting for their own reasons. And there will be mountains more evidence presented at the trials for the thugs that would be useful in prosecuting a case against Davey.

Anonymous said...

Anon@9:04, apparent you missed the part where anon@12:30 asked if the call could help "exonerate the thugs." Hello? Pay attention, please.

Anonymous said...

^^ apparently, that is

Me2l said...

It's too easy to say that if the 911 call had something implicating Davey in it, they would have arrested him already. Maybe they are waiting for their own reasons. And there will be mountains more evidence presented at the trials for the thugs that would be useful in prosecuting a case against Davey.



So if the 911 call produced evidence substantial enough to implicate (would that mean incriminate?) Davey, police would not arrest him? Police would not arrest someone implicated in a murder?

It is that "simple."

Anonymous said...

It's not what they know, it's what they can prove.

It takes time.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 11:19,

You're moving the goalposts. The original argument had nothing to do with Davey being on trial and everything to do with the THUGS' trial.

I didn't say LE "won't ever" go after Davey, nor did I say that if the 911 call implicated Davey "they would have arrested him already."

If you have to move the goalposts, you've lost the argument. You're wrong about what the defense can use to exonerate the thugs. Just admit it, ffs.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 12:30,
Are you a football player?

Me2l said...

said...
It's not what they know, it's what they can prove.

It takes time.
October 13, 2016 at 12:20 PM



Then you don't understand the legal definitions of either "implicate" or "incriminate."

Anonymous said...

Or perhaps, could you be a semantics expert as well?

Anonymous said...

No, Anon at 12:42. Ever heard of a logical fallacy?

"Moving the goalposts, similar to "shifting sands" and also known as raising the bar, is an informal fallacy in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. That is, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. The problem with changing the rules of the game is that the meaning of the end result is changed, too."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

Anonymous said...

You're moving the goalposts. The original argument had nothing to do with Davey being on trial and everything to do with the THUGS' trial.

This is discussion. Most of the posts stand alone. The posts about the 911 call and Davey's statements which were made at 12:30am, 12:41am, 1am, 9:04am, 9:30am and even 11:19am stand alone, meaning that the facts and opinions expressed in them, the questions raised in them, do not need an argument to be discussed here or anywhere else.

-------
I didn't say LE "won't ever" go after Davey, nor did I say that if the 911 call implicated Davey "they would have arrested him already."

My original statement to which you are responding -

"But is it that difficult to believe that whoever is in court, or law enforcement personnel who hear it, won't EVER go after Davey for having something to do with this crime?

At the very least, the tape could point to shared blame, to foreknowledge. Or not.

It's too easy to say that if the 911 call had something implicating Davey in it, they would have arrested him already.



How do you derive from the statement above that I am talking specifically about you, that you felt the need to clarify? I was not talking about you. It was in general. But you are sensitive about it.


---------
If you have to move the goalposts, you've lost the argument. You're wrong about what the defense can use to exonerate the thugs.

HOW many times does it have to be said that I don't expect the 911 call to be used by the defense to exonerate the thugs? I do not expect that the call will exonerate the thugs.

But I am having trouble seeing anything that could be said in the 911 call that would tie these particular thugs to this particular crime. The call may not/will not exonerate the thugs but there also might not be anything in it that would place them there, prove that they did anything to Amanda inside that house that morning.

IF Davey had mentioned seeing the Swisher Sweet package on the counter in the 911 call, that would show that someone (the thugs?) had been in his house. But he said he had no idea anyone had been in his house and it does not appear that he reported a crime scene or any indication of a home invasion, just injuries of whatever description he chose to use.

I expect the 911 call to shed some light on Davey's words, actions, demeanor of that morning that might be useful in a future trial for him. I also expect that Davey might be called as a witness and what he says will be on the record, then able to be compared to what he has said over the past months in his numerous appearances.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 1:22, why are so sensitive about the fact that three thugs will be convicted and rot in jail?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

But how would the way Davey described the scene/his wife's condition help implicate or exonerate the accused?

I am not being combative, just asking.

October 13, 2016 at 12:30 AM

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 1:34, the same reason you're so sensitive about the possibility that DB's involvement/guilty knowledge may be exposed.

Me2l said...

Anonymous said...
Or perhaps, could you be a semantics expert as well?




Words mean things. When you're saying that, although investigators may implicate DB, they are waiting for ................. what? If police implicate someone in a murder, that means they have incriminating evidence, and it would be irresponsible, to say the least, if they did not act upon it. Your fantasy of a sneak attack (so to speak) at some point, notwithstanding, is proof you need to educate yourself on how these things work. Instead, it's more convenient and entertaining to continue to add to this collaborative story the bunch of you insist upon writing, even though it is unrealistic and most certainly has no bearing on the case.

Me2l said...

I expect the 911 call to shed some light on Davey's words, actions, demeanor of that morning that might be useful in a future trial for him. I also expect that Davey might be called as a witness and what he says will be on the record, then able to be compared to what he has said over the past months in his numerous appearances.
October 13, 2016 at 1:22 PM




You don't think it already has?

Anonymous said...

Me2l

Words mean things.

Is he "good" enough to outsmart LE?

At this point, it would appear that he is. Appearances can be (intentionally) deceiving.

Me2l said...

.....which implies the commenters in this blog are more capable than police and investigators?

Based upon what?

Anonymous said...

Words (that mean things)

Anonymous said...

Anon at 1:22, why are so sensitive about the fact that three thugs will be convicted and rot in jail?

I think some posts are being misunderstood. I hope the three thugs are convicted and rot in jail forever (of course after Davey makes his appearance/nationally televised photoop "forgiving them") - IF they did everything that morning that they are accused of doing. Or I hope at least that they are sentenced appropriately for their parts in the happenings of that morning.

I also fervently hope that anyone else connected to the happenings of that morning (if indeed anyone else is connected) is found out, arrested, tried, and convicted and sentenced appropriately for their actions.
------

Anon @ 1:34, the same reason you're so sensitive about the possibility that DB's involvement/guilty knowledge may be exposed.

Yes, the more discussion about the 911 call, the more angst appears. Could it be because it might expose Davey's involvement/guilty knowledge - or both?

I expect the 911 call to shed some light on Davey's words, actions, demeanor of that morning that might be useful in a future trial for him.
You don't think it already has?


I do expect that it already has, or I at least suspect that it already has.

I also know that, although it's a different case and scenario altogether for many different reasons, Vernal Kunz and Jessica Mitchell have not yet been arrested even fifteen months later, after the disappearance of their son on that camping trip - and they failed polygraphs, their stories don't match, there are a hundred reasons why they should've already been arrested - but they have not been.

Detectives have said that they know the parents know what happened and are hiding something, yet they don't have enough evidence to move on them or they would have by now.

So it's the same with Davey. They might have their suspicions, they might have evidence, but until they know it's a slam dunk for a case to be tried and successfully prosecuted, they will not move on him. So he should enjoy his lifestyle and trips and appearances while they last, just in case.

Anonymous said...

If Davey didn't have anything to do with Amanda's murder, whether by his own hands or by orchestration - if he has no guilty knowledge and is clean as a whistle -

- then he has nothing to fear or hide (for ourselves, we have nothing to hide) - and he and everyone else can dismiss random speculation and accusations on a message board as being from insane hermits with no lives.

But I think he knows things.

Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mom2many said...

It is perplexing in so many cases, what seems to be obvious, law enforcement doesn't move on. Erica Parsons case is a prime example. LE knew the 'parents' were involved but couldn't charge them because they couldn't be assured of a guilty verdict. They found alternative charges in the meantime. Now the 'father' led them to her body. The Susan Powell case, her husband was clearly at fault, with giant carpet stains cleaned and drying with fans. They delayed justice until he took the lives of himself and his children. The multiple Petersen cases have been mentioned here before. The AJ Hadsell case they have GPS and phone data for her stepfather's and her phone being together until the sight where her remains were found. He has not been charged, though he is being held on other charges.

There are two things at play. Once an arrest gets the ball rolling the prosecution is under time constraints to move along, as everyone has a right to a speedy trial. If the case isn't airtight, there is the risk of the second complication, double jeopardy. Prosecution gets one shot.

Here we have a case that to my observation looks like the husband orchestrated events. The perps have not gone to trial and the verdict is unknown. What if they are exonerated? Well, poof, there goes any orchestration case against Davey. How can he be convicted of hiring thugs to kill her, who were acquitted of killing her? It may be possible, but exponentially more difficult. That's a rational reason to delay an arrest until after the trial. There may be other reasons. Juries are finicky these days. The expectations for proof are so high. They don't seem to understand how to apply "reasonable" to doubt to come to a rational conclusion. See Casey Anthony. See Willie Wilson, the same city the Blackburns live in, as a matter of fact.

I don't blame LE for being cautious. I hope they don't drag on so long that Weston ends up at risk, as the Powell case.

Me2l said...


said...
If Davey didn't have anything to do with Amanda's murder, whether by his own hands or by orchestration - if he has no guilty knowledge and is clean as a whistle -

- then he has nothing to fear or hide (for ourselves, we have nothing to hide) - and he and everyone else can dismiss random speculation and accusations on a message board as being from insane hermits with no lives.

But I think he knows things.

October 13, 2016 at 2:05 PM




.....which is common here--people questioning the more inane and insane accusations.

Differences of opinion, and yet, those of us who question and express the opposing views, are accused of being "one of them"--Davey, Meg, friends of DB, etc., and insane, to boot, so please, don't go all philosophical and self righteous on us.

Anonymous said...

Me21 @2:24, please take your own advice and I don't think we'll have any problems. ☺😊😀😁😂😄😄

Nic said...

Bobcat @ 12:55 posted from (DB, 4/24/2016),

came back, walked in my house, and, and found Amanda, and honestly,
dropped pronoun,
came back, distancing; “go back’ would be place of origin, “come back” would be to visit, there is separation between between DB and Amanda

walked in my house
dropped pronoun
walked in; walk in (on somebody), walk in(/to the house), DB walked in on Amanda
my house, ownership, not our house, something that is shared

and, and
nervous, sensitive, missing information

found Amanda
dropped pronoun, “DB" did not find Amanda, nobody “found” Amanda

I, I think it was by the grace of god that I had no idea what had happened.
“think” weakens assertion
“was”, is passive,
grace of god - oath, used to persuade, make genuine
“think it was by the grace of god”, very weak, like saying, "I really, really, really had no idea"
no idea - what is said in the negative is sensitive, having no idea (plus all the weak assertion) is having some idea,

In my opinion, DB had an idea what he would see when he came back and walked in on Amanda.

Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Nic, how could he NOT have an idea what he would see when he came back when, according to you, he shot her and the thugs never entered the house? Rotflmao

Nic said...

Anonymous said:
Nic, once again, you're showing your complete ignorance of the American justice system. When you participates in a dangerous felony (such as burglary), and it results in the death of someone, even if you didn't pull the trigger, you are responsible. It's called the felony murder rule. Educate yourself, PLEASE. You carry on and on like you're some kind of investigative genius, but you don't even understand the most basic things. Felony. Murder. Look it up.


Well then this is interesting. If Taylor, Gordon and Watson weren't on the street for the 2nd robbery and If Taylor wasn't on the street until after Gordon and Watson leave (after whomever it turns out to be who game them Amanda's ATM card,) then Taylor isn't any more guilty of killing Amanda or burglarizing the houses on Sunnyfield than the residents leaving for work that morning. So The One they're trying to frame will get off (for the crime spree and murder) on November 10th and the rest don't (for robbery) because they had stolen items from the second robbery in the trunk of the car they stole? Interesting because Taylor could feign he thought they borrowed the car and he didn't know what was in the trunk. Interesting.

Me2l said...

came back, distancing; “go back’ would be place of origin, “come back” would be to visit, there is separation between between DB and Amanda


It seems as if a point of presence would be the difference. If, in his mind, he is seeing himself in his home, I'd think "came back" is perfectly logical. Not sure about the SA application here. "Go back" sounds more distancing than "came back."

"I go back home."

"I came back home."

The first one doesn't even make sense. The second sounds as if coming back to a place of familiarity.

Do you have SA reference for that?



Nic said...

Yes I KNOW he's on video. What I'm saying is if he is shown OUTSIDE DURING THE TIME OF THE GUNSHOTS, the defense would be screaming bloody murder that the prosecution lied in the affidavit.

No they wouldn't. LE only reported what a witness heard and what a CI said. They, themselves, did not say Amanda was shot at a specific time or by whom. LE said the break came from the pink sweater, via a DNA hit. IMO, Gordon and Watson were being paid ($400) to show up. Taylor was the patsy. This is my opinion.



Yes there's a lot of video evidence -- much more than we know about, and it's going to make you look even more foolish when the trial happens.

I don't think so. My opinion is based on the information that's available. I am open to new information coming to light and clarifying that morning, as it is presented. Like when the house listing was linked and I learned that the master bedroom was on the main floor. I always imagined Amanda coming downstairs and taking the defensive shot up the left arm. Now, I'm not confident that's where she took (what I believed) was the first shot. Evidence listed in the APC does indicate she at least took one shot on the landing (through and through). And the comment from LE saying she died trying to save Weston makes sense to me, now. (Proximity of master bedroom to nursery on 2nd floor.)


Anonymous said...

Davey's guilt being exposed, if he indeed has guilt to expose, will have no impact on my life other than having another trial to discuss on the internet. The same cannot be said, however, for many here who have dedicated their lives for months and months and months to carrying on and on about how guilty he is. That he HAS to be guilty and there are no other options. If it turns out you're wrong, then what? Will you lose your collective minds? Will there be pulling of hair and gnashing of teeth?

The only thing I've committed to is that the thugs are guilty and did exactly what the police say. We'll find out in a few months if I'm correct. Those of you who have detemined Davey shot Amanda based on bad statement analysis are likely in for a big let-down.

Some of you might be looking around in nine years and thinking, "Wow, I spent every day for the last 10 years saying Davey is guilty of murder, why isn't he in jail yet?" Scary thought.

As the trial grows closer, I think some people are coming to the realization their fantasy that the trial will end like an episode of Columbo or Matlock, with the thugs going free and Davey being dragged away to jail, is just that: a fantasy. As a result, you freak out harder and harder each time you're faced with the reality that's not going to happen. You've convinced yourself that even the people who simply think the thugs are guilty MUST be worried about Davey's guilt being exposed. Because YOU'RE the ones who are worried.

But hey, if it helps you sleep better at night, sure ..... I'm super-duper extra worried Davey's guilt will be exposed. I toss and turn at night in torment. Does that make you feel better? I hope so, because it seems like you need it.

Nic said...

There is ample evidence the thugs are responsible.

And you know this how? The only "evidence" is hearsay and a DNA hit on a pink sweater taken from the 2nd robbery. Is Amanda's DNA on the sweater? Did Amanda's blood hit on the stolen car? Again, if video shows that the person trying to access the house next door when DB is leaving is the same person who enters the Blackburn residence and then exits it to give Gordon and Watson the ATM card, is Taylor, then so be it. But cell phone records (reliable) don't even have Taylor on Sunnyfield until after Gordon and Watson have departed for the bank. LE doesn't even have the gun! There's no murder weapon. I wonder if anyone "known", i.e., Watson, Taylor, Gordon, hit in either house.

Nic said...

Anonymous at 9:04am said:
If Davey's 911 call is only being used to verify the timeline, there would be no reason to withhold it as part of an active investigation. The timeline has already been made public in the affidavit for probable cause.


Woot!!!

Anonymous said...

Nic, how do you know LE doesn't have the murder weapon? Link please. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the woot Nic !

Me2l said...


Anonymous at 9:04am said:
If Davey's 911 call is only being used to verify the timeline, there would be no reason to withhold it as part of an active investigation. The timeline has already been made public in the affidavit for probable cause.




And it obviously hasn't cemented a case (a speculative term at this stage) against DB.

Nic said...

"Had no idea that there was, that there were bullet wounds; had no idea that somebody had been in my house, um, things didn’t look right, it didn’t, something was, was up”

dropped pronoun at “had”

no idea
what state in the negative is sensitive

that there was, that there were
self censoring, (segue now I know why he singles out three shots, one to the head, it was the one that mattered)

bullet wounds
much distancing, he doesn’t say where there were bullet wounds, nobody is attached to the bullet wounds, he doesn’t say I had no idea [they] shot Amanda!

had no idea that somebody had been in my house
dropped pronoun
no idea - sensitive, in the negative
“somebody had been in my house” is embedded
had been, is passive language, he does not say they broke in or that they shot Amanda
somebody - quantifies how many people, somebody (one) body had been in “my” house
“my” - ownership, he says “my” not “our”

um, things didn’t look right, it didn’t
um, pause slowing down pace
what is said in the negative is sensitive
“things”, the priority is “things”, he does not reference Amanda, Amanda is part of “things”
it - what is “it”? First he says things, things change to “it”, change in language, change in reality
didn’t (x2) very sensitive, much persuasion about looking right, likely “it” looked right to DB

What I post is my opinion based on my application of Statement Analysis principles applied to public statements made by Davey Blackburn.

Nic said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Nic, how could he NOT have an idea what he would see when he came back when, according to you, he shot her and the thugs never entered the house? Rotflmao


October 13, 2016 at 3:18 PM

Did I say DB shot her? I believe I have always said that Taylor did not shoot Amanda, and that she was shot and dying before DB left for the gym. I also said that the three were hired to make it look like a house invasion gone bad.

I didn't say the "thugs" (plural) didn't enter the house. I assert based on cell phone pings and his effort to hide his identity with a shirt rather than hide in one of the crime scenes, that *Taylor* did not enter the house (or the neighbour's house). I also assert based on cell phone movement reported in the APC, that Gordon and Watson were not at the second robbery. That was somebody else.

Anonymous said...

For those of you high-fiving each other over the 911 call as it relates to the timeline: No one said the timeline is the ONLY way the prosecution will use the call during the trial, did they?

Because we don't know what all was said in the 911 call, we don't know how the prosecution will use it (if they use it) beyond the timeline. Hence the "etc."

You are mistaken if you think the established timeline in the affidavit will not be part of the trial simply because it was presented in the probable cause hearing. The same evidence will be presented again, but in more detail.

Sorry to rain on your woot parade.

Nic said...

Me21,

LE stopped investigating when they arrested Watson, Gordon and Taylor. That is as far as they wanted to go.

Do you have SA reference for that?

No I don't.

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 1:22pm said:
I also expect that Davey might be called as a witness


It’s already been posted he will be called as a witness and he is ticked. I don’t know how the poster knew this/his reaction, maybe he broadcasted it like he does everything else.

Nic said...

mom2many @ 2:19pm said:
How can he be convicted of hiring thugs to kill her, who were acquitted of killing her?


That's the assumption (murder for hire). What about, hiring thugs to make it look like they killed her (by appearance only) but they were not the killers?

Me2l said...

Nic said...
Anonymous @ 1:22pm said:
I also expect that Davey might be called as a witness

It’s already been posted he will be called as a witness and he is ticked. I don’t know how the poster knew this/his reaction, maybe he broadcasted it like he does everything else.
October 13, 2016 at 6:55 PM




But you're accepting it as truth?

Nic said...

Davey Blackburn is the one who called 911 to report the crime. He walked in to the scene of the crime. His listed as one of the State's Witnesses in the APC. He was part of the initial investigation. He gave witness testimony in the early days to LE.

As to his reaction, no, I do not know what his reaction is. But it is fun thinking about him sitting on the stand, squirming, being questioned by both prosecutor and defence.

Nic said...

*He is

mom2many said...

Nic,
If LE was investigating Davey as Amanda's direct murderer, there wouldn't be a need to await the results of the thugs' trials.

I go back and forth on whether I think they are still investigating Davey. It is such an overworked department, but early LE statements don't really add up.

It wouldn't surprise me if they gave the investigation up based on not being able to trace money from Davey's cash business. If the trials return a guilty verdict, they may be able to leverage reduced sentencing for cooperation at that time, but we'll have to see.

Anonymous said...

Whoever is doing this doesn't even sleep. It seems if they are sleeping it is only during a 4-5 hour period somewhere during the "night". Do you understand that is not good? Do you understand there is something very wrong there going on with you emotionally and also physically? Do you understand you are probably not getting REM sleep? Do you understand that lack of REM sleep is probably fueling the other problems?

Trudy said...

Anon @ 9:31, your concern is touching. Thank you for your kindness and compassion. Now piss off.

Anonymous said...

Make sure you don't sleep either...no point in that...no responsibilities to take care of...why waste hours sleeping when you can just talk to yourself pretty much 24/7? You disgust me.

Trudy said...

I'm still reeling from the news that Larry Taylor's foster father is a pastor. What are the odds? I'm surprised that nobody else seems surprised.

Anonymous said...

No, why don't you piss off?! Screw you and your bullshit talking to yourself 24 hours a day. THat shit's fucking crazy and absolutely demented you are so immature you have absolutely no responsibilities of any kind ever and you talk to yourself 24 hours a day.

Trudy said...

I'm reminded of CD saying he wants to share the Gospel with Larry Taylor, and how he wondered (at Gauntlet) "what if Larry Taylor had something likethis when he was growing up?" . Now it seems that Larry has already had the Gospel shared with him, and actually did have "some thing like this while he was growing up" courtesy of Pastor Foster Father.

It will be interesting (to me at least, lol) to see how Crazy Davey weaves this into the narrative.

Anonymous said...

Anon, yes we really do enjoy discussing CD on this blog. Although I will admit at times I go over to daveyblackburn.com, and I feel like you feel about this site after reading some of the comments. But you know what I do, I stop reading what I believe are lies and go to another site where I enjoy reading the comments. This site. So, always remember, no one is forcing you to stay. Ok? Peace!

MsDp

Trudy said...

anon @11:24, Thank you for your advice about getting a life. May I ask where you got yours from? It looks perfect - well balanced and harmonious. Ima get me one just like yours!

Anonymous said...

Oh gee, that's right I forgot...you're the New Age Master right? You're life is as unbalanced as anyone's life could possibly get yet you know all about balanced chakras and shit like that, how to live a harmonious, calm, centered life. Keep telling yourself that. I wouldn't worry about finding a calm centered life...Id worry about just getting a life of any kind if I sat around talking to myself all day and night. Literally anything...like become a pet owner.

Anonymous said...

Nic,

Natasha the earwitness...
reported being in bed (not sleeping, just "in bed")
hearing two shots
"sounded like" a woman scream

Body position shows sensitivity
She reported the wrong amount of shots
at a time that doesn't agree with the CI narrative
and a noise that didn't warrant a call to 911.


Natasha Jones-Tank was "in bed" next door to Allison Becker's home.
Natasha is currently divorcing her husband whose address is 4.5 miles away from Sunnyfield Court. Was Natasha renting a room at 2824 Sunnyfield? Who owns 2824 Sunnyfield?

I recall her testimony was determined here to be unreliable months ago.

Thank you for your continued analysis!

Updated Again - There are SO MANY HOLES in the timeline:
http://case-discussions.blogspot.com/2016/09/timeline-of-events-surrounding.html

Uncle Ken's transcription:
http://case-discussions.blogspot.com/2016/08/8282016-cypress-church-with-stepuncle.html

Davey leaks about being "bound in chains of lies" and also about "preparing your character" aka the grieving husband on national TV.

Me2l said...

Just in time for Halloween....The Hydra appears.

Bingo3 said...

Have you guys seen the new clip on Resonate page? It is a clip of the sermon last Sunday. Davey preaches in a tight leather black jacket while someone does Crossfit in the background. Seeing that and the big cover page with Rock Star Davey in the background in like watching a church circus.

Bingo3 said...

Nic, I haven't studied as thoroughly as you but I agree that the morning circumstances just don't add up. DO you know if there has been any of Amanda's blood found inside the car or on any of the thugs clothes. If he shot her three times, once to the back of the head, he would have to have some blood on him. He was close enough to lean over shoot her and look at her face and watch her bleed. If this indeed happened, no way he gets out of there without blood all over him. (especially if he were intoxicated, he would be clumsy) If they have that evidence, it seems like a plea deal would have already happened. The thugs would not have a prayer. Also the fact the phone is still by her bed is interesting. Usually when one gets up, one grabs their phone and takes it with them. Her phone was still by her bed. If she had it with her when he attacked, she could have maybe called 911. He punched her in the mouth and went back outside. Did he knock her out? I don't think a punch in the mouth would knock someone out but he was able to leave her by herself and she still could have called 911 but she didn't. It was a hostage situation for a while as he and Amanda were there for a while before the shooting happened. What did they do? He hasn't been charged with rape? He was in the house with AB, a dog and a baby for about 35 minutes before the shooting. No one around her anything or saw anything. It just doesn't make sense.

Bobcat said...

http://case-discussions.blogspot.com/2016/08/8282016-cypress-church-with-stepuncle.html

17:15 KM: "Talk about how you landed on God’s sovereignty in your own mind, as far as this false guilt of blaming yourself."

17:20 DB: "Right. So shock is one of those things and then, and obviously you go into like this thing of guilt, a lot. And you, I mean, I literally wrote down, um a page full of things I felt guilty about. Right, just this, just things, even, even down to the point of like, I would have, like had I known that this was gonna be the last time I saw her, this is what I would have done, or. You know what I mean, just all those things like, I wouldn’t have taken this for granted. I wouldn’t have - and you just go through all those things in your mind, but, especially the, the unlocked door. Right. It was just kind of, it was kind of habit for us, like I would leave in the morning. She was about to get up, anyways, and so, I wouldn't lock the door. Um, and so I would wrestle with that and wrestle with that and wrestle with that and the reality is is you can kill yourself wrestling with the what-ifs, or the should’ves or the could'ves. You can absolutely destroy and be held captive to that thought and I had to finally, finally just put that thought at the feet of Jesus and say ok I am trusting your sovereignty. I am trusting that when I was out of control, you were in control. And that when, when my whole world was shaken, you were the bedrock. You were the bedrock that was holding it up, and so that, that’s, that’s the only place that I’ve been able to find peace is just going; “OK God, I don’t understand it all, and uh, and I probably won’t on this side of eternity, but I do know, that you are in control, and I do know that, that this was not my fault, you know, and that's what God’s promises tells me in the midst of my emotions, um, that are going on."

Hey Jude said...

In response to Bobcat@10.29 Oct 11

That 'Bring me the ephod' sermon is the one in which he earlier explains how, "when you and I launch a full frontal assault on the enemy, we're going to experience resistance", and "We've always been a church that will make a full frontal assault on the enemy". He tries to make it sound as if Resonate is an established church (it was only about eighteen months old in its current incarnation when he said that). He's also very keen to take people along with him in his 'full frontal assaults on the enemy'. Interestingly, when he begins to share that train of thought, it is not the 'enemy' who is the instigator of an attack - it is 'the enemy' who offers 'resistance' to the launch of an attack.

Davey is confused. In Davey's world, 'resistance' is anything which frustrates him. 'Resistance' is the enemy, or of the enemy, yet resistance is first introduced as a response to an attack upon itself.

I'd say negotiation, understanding, compromise maybe don't feature much for Davey.

It would be interesting to know if the people who joined him in the earlier attempts at forming a church walked away from Davey out of concern for his 'vision', or if it was he who jettisoned them because he could see they didn't appreciate his need to revel in OT stories of bloodshed, violence and divine retribution.

What is Davey's idea of a full frontal assault on the enemy? Who even, is the enemy, upon whom such an assault should be launched? He tries so hard, but it comes down to seeing 'resistance' and 'the enemy' in the mundanity of his car not starting, and in uncooperative ('demon-possessed', he jokes) children who don't want to get ready for church on a Sunday morning. 'Resistance' is things not going his way - 'resistance' itself is 'the enemy'.

I think he is unintentionally indicating what happened, and that he took others along with him (at least prepared them for' the season'), and that "you're pregnant - you're gone" was his own thought about Amanda, rather than one voiced by anyone else, the 'coincidence' of which he's been trying to explain and justify ever since.

---
I can't believe he has the nerve to tell his audience they should be taking notes of what he says, as if he believes he is a greatly edifying preacher. I listened to that one several times, thought if I was a kid in his audience I would not invest in a notebook even though I was the type of kid who took notes.

Bobcat said...

HJ,

"'Resistance' is things not going his way - 'resistance' itself is 'the enemy'."

-----------------------
Through the lens of my past experience...

I closely observed a similar pattern in a rogue Cub Scout Leader some years ago. There are parallels with Resonate...

Resonate was stand alone - the Cub Scout pack (following national standards) is its own unit.

The "Cubmaster" had been raised in scouting (a mormon - scouting is their official youth program). He considered himself - because of his lifetime of experience - to KNOW HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE, PERIOD. Any parent/volunteer who questioned his programming and overreaching schedule was questioned about their goals for their son, and if they still didn't fall in line, they were labelled a "bad parent."

DB may exercise similar authority over Resonate. Failure to show up to his numerous volunteer meetings/trainings/retreats may label you a bad christian who doesn't want to help save souls. Those who question him are "not christians." He said that to the Byars family - a statement that cause Robin to cover her mouth!

The Cub Scout Leader's singular focus on parading around in his leader uniform, and growing his Pack, and skirting official standards/rules caused a number of discerning parents to leave the pack, and some left scouting altogether.

By the time oversight finally took action to place him on an "ineligible leader" list, he had destroyed the Pack. Literally, the Pack number is now a historical number, and the Pack no longer exists.

I don't see a good ending to the Resonate story.

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 9:31

Has it occurred to you that commentators are from many time zones? Even overseas? For example, I’m in EDT and the UK is four hours ahead of me. If it’s 11pm here, it’s 3am, there. Moreover, not everyone works 9 to 5 (like you?), some work shift work.

Nic said...

Bobcat,

Being in bed and sleeping were not lost on me. :0)

Note, house of the 2nd robbery was broken into from the back. Security cameras wouldn’t capture the backyard of any house, especially that time of the morning.

DO you know if there has been any of Amanda's blood found inside the car or on any of the thugs clothes.

No. I only go by what LE reported at the press conference when they reported that the big break in the case was the DNA hit on the pink sweater. The APC reports that there was swabbing at both houses on Sunnyfield, and in the beginning they were waiting for the DNA results before they confirmed “sexual assault”. But when the results came back, that charge was taken off of the table. So I ASSume, that if there had been any other hit, be it in either crime scene or the get away car, it would have been duly noted. Supporting "evidence" reported in the APC directed towards the the three, the morning of November 10th, is circumstantial except for the pink sweater and ATM stills depicting them in the car wherein the ATM receipt found was found afterwards. Cell phones put them on the street, but the APC doesn't report DNA evidence except on the pink sweater. Interesting that they would mention the sweater and ATM receipt in the car but no DNA hit. Which is why I feel very strongly that Amanda’s blood wasn’t hit there. And that’s why I commented about DB’s car that morning and contamination. If LE had had their thinking caps on that morning, based on statistical probability in pregnant wife crimes, they would not have let him drive to the hospital in his car. i.e., After essentially walking through the crime scene/blood and touching (?) Amanda, who can argue that finding Amanda's blood in his car is unexpected?

Nic said...

And thinking about it some more, maybe that's why the fire truck showed up first. It created a diversion. If DB had reported the crime scene accurately, police would have responded before firemen and they would have sealed the scene and investigation, including of DB would have commenced immediately. But they weren't given the chance. He left with Amanda as they were arriving. That's why the cop showed up at the hospital very shortly after they carted Amanda away and questioning happened at the hospital.

See how LE has been blocked? DB runs a cash business, firemen show up to a home invasion/murder scene, DB drives to the hospital after walking through the scene, handling Amanda, etc. so any blood, anywhere is expected. There is no point in investigating DB because everything they would find would be expected.

Nic said...

The only thing right now working in DB's favour is security cameras showing him leaving the house and an "ear" witness to gunshots after he leaves. However, if Taylor is on the street when those shots supposedly went off, and he does not react to the sound himself, what that evidence would show, is what the rest of the street experience. i.e., Likely, there were no gunshots.

That would leave everyone wondering when, then, was Amanda Blackburn shot?

IMO, it would still be worthwhile to audit DB's cash flow since Amanda's death.

jmo

Anonymous said...

Nic you wrote Anonymous @ 9:31

"Has it occurred to you that commentators are from many time zones? Even overseas? For example, I’m in EDT and the UK is four hours ahead of me. If it’s 11pm here, it’s 3am, there. Moreover, not everyone works 9 to 5 (like you?), some work shift work."

Yes "Nic", I considered that until I realized it is only one person talking to themself all day and night. I came off sounding like a dick, and far be it for me to psychoanalyze. My intention was to let this person know that what they are doing is not healthy or normal. It's just not. I can see doing it once or twice to be funny, but this individual is doing is all day and all night. I am guessing this person must be isolated, (what can cause isolation? Addiction?) but at what point does that person need to wake up and realize what they are doing is harmful to themself and has to be very depressing for themself also. The answer is never. The individual can continue on with doing it forever and probably will. My intention was just to be honest and say wake up what you are doing must suck for you. But people can and will do what they want.

Anonymous said...

Nic @ 10:16,

"DB drives to the hospital after walking through the scene, handling Amanda, etc. so any blood, anywhere is expected."

Excellent, excellent observation! It brings to mind the recent change in DB's story from "pooled" blood to "smeared" blood.

Blood pools with no intervention, but it gets "smeared" by an action.

Larry Taylor would have to have had bloody knees or hands at a minimum for the blood to be "smeared". But Larry was apparently quite careful - as he only "leaned" and "watched" the blood.

Thank you again Nic for unraveling this quilted conundrum.

Anonymous said...

"Nic said...

The only thing right now working in DB's favour is security cameras showing him leaving the house and an "ear" witness to gunshots after he leaves. However, if Taylor is on the street when those shots supposedly went off, and he does not react to the sound himself, what that evidence would show, is what the rest of the street experience. i.e., Likely, there were no gunshots.

That would leave everyone wondering when, then, was Amanda Blackburn shot?

IMO, it would still be worthwhile to audit DB's cash flow since Amanda's death.

jmo

October 14, 2016 at 10:16 AM"


You're really clinging to that fantasy, aren't you? It's strange because there is no evidence to support your scenario -- it's just something you dreamed up -- but you keep repeating it over and over. This really is just mental masturbation for you, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

I meant to bold, not italicize, the fantasy above.

Nic said...

Bobcat said:
Thank you again Nic for unraveling this quilted conundrum.


It's my interpretation and my opinion based on available information. I think there are a lot of good "what ifs" that have been expressed. I wouldn't say [it's] unraveled until the prosecutors reveal all the evidence next March. :0)

Nic said...

there is no evidence to support your scenario -- it's just something you dreamed up -

Why do you say there is no evidence? Multiple resident street surveillance video was handed over to LE. My speculation is based on documented (released stills,) and first-hand witnessed behaviour (neighbours from their living room window/morning commuters), Taylor's behaviour when he had choices, and my speculation what the surveillance cameras might have captured.

Maybe it's hope that you're clinging to.

Bobcat said...

Nic,

I still thank you for pulling at the what-ifs and verbal loose ends.

Each time DB tries to iron out a wrinkle; upon closer inspection, another loose thread appears.

Bingo3 said...

From Bobcat:"Excellent, excellent observation! It brings to mind the recent change in DB's story from "pooled" blood to "smeared" blood.
Blood pools with no intervention, but it gets "smeared" by an action."

Bobcat, I thought "smeared" was such an odd thing for DB to say. Her blood was smeared which gets that way by action. They should have been able to get blood from the car and from LT's clothing if blood was smeared all around Amanda. He also would have blood spattered all over his face most likely if he was over her killing her execution style. As he talked loudly on his phone, did anyone witness all the blood? If they get the blood evidence, the thugs are finished. (but wouldn't there already be a plea deal if that were the case??)If they don't have blood evidence, it just makes that gym bag that much more interesting.

Anonymous said...

It is SO interesting that nobody else on the street (according to the affidavit) mentioned that they heard gunfire, shots, what sounded like a woman scream, Mel or Weston - at any time. We don't know that nobody heard anything but the affidavit doesn't include anyone else that did. This raises questions to me about the one earwitness standing alone, so sure of the time and so sure it was TWO gunshots along with the scream.

Apart from Natasha Tank Jones' testimony, apparently the only evidence of whatever struggle that was going on inside the Blackburn house that morning was inside the house. Could it really be that the only thing heard outside the house was by one earwitness who only heard two shots?

Could it be that whatever happened to Amanda happened in the middle of the night when people (including Weston) and dogs were sleeping and would be way more unlikely to hear anything?

I would be very interested to know if anyone on the street seen on surveillance camera (Taylor or anyone else) reacted to the supposedly-heard two shots at 6:40-6:45am or to the what-sounded-like-a-woman scream. If Natasha Tank Jones heard it while she was cruising on her bed a couple of houses away, what about the neighbors closer - runners on the street - people getting into cars for work - people coming home from night shifts?

And many have said that Mel would have been going crazy - especially if he was locked in a room upstairs and heard a commotion down below. Could it be that he trusted whoever was in the house?

Nic said...

Bingo3,

Exactly. Can you imagine how much blood there was?

Here the thing about Taylor. His presence on Sunnyfield is demonstrative of a *need* for coverup.

Someone had blood on their person and it wasn't Taylor.

There was a get away car that morning, and its occupants were not Gordon, Watson and Taylor.

jmo

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 5:44pm,

I am on the same page.

Bingo3 said...

Nic and Anon, so there was a getaway car? So this wasn't just three guys out to steal some things and saw a crime of opportunity. It was a strategically mapped out, carefully plotted ploy by evil. Why did they not try to get tvs and things of value at the Blackburns. Are they still trying to find out who was in the car? I do find it weird that the thugs were in contact with Bull the whole time and he was not arrested. I do find it weird that the thugs were all outside the house (according to CI) standing around talking about the debit card while AB was inside alive and she wasn't able to call for help. I do find it odd that LT was inside with AB, the dog and Weston for what 40 minutes without there being a lot of commotion inside. He finally shoots her and walks around the neighborhood screaming in his phone. IF CI were fact, what the heck did he do with her inside for that long? And seriously why would a neighbor hear 2 gunshots and a scream and NOT call 911. That is just careless and irresponsible of her! I really find it weird how important it was for Davey to tell everyone he was up at 4:30 for his long day and he grabbed his gym bag. (maybe in case a neighbor tell investigators the lights were on at the Blackburns early) I am starting to think again like Nic. Possibly, Something was done to Amanda between 4:30 and 6:10. If they still only have DNA on a sweater and wine bottles at another house, they don't have a case against LT. That is just something we don't know. The IMPD tried to wrap this up way to quickly. I think if LT has a good defense attorney this could get really interesting. Also, did the witness who saw LT walking around the neighborhood see any blood on him. It seems with the extent of the crime, blood would have been obvious. It looks like he was wearing jeans. Blood would have been all over.

Bingo3 said...


7:53 AM Chase bank voice mail left on Amanda's phone regarding suspicious activity on her debit card.

Unless, Amanda and Davey had two different bank accounts, DB most likely got this call also. Did they check his phone records. He would have known something was up at 7:53.

Me2l said...

Bingo3 said...

7:53 AM Chase bank voice mail left on Amanda's phone regarding suspicious activity on her debit card.

Unless, Amanda and Davey had two different bank accounts, DB most likely got this call also. Did they check his phone records. He would have known something was up at 7:53.
October 15, 2016 at 8:52 AM




It depends.

Davey and Amanda would not have had identical cell phone numbers, and possibly hers was the only number for their banking information. Somewhere, over the course of the past several months, I remember hearing or reading in all Davey's compulsive talking that Amanda was the money manager in their home.

Bingo3 said...

My husband and I both get the call if something comes up but I am sure many families just have one number connected. That makes sense, Me2l

Anonymous said...

It could go either way for sure.

But if it was a joint account
and we know that Chase was unable to reach Amanda while they knew these withdrawal attempts were in progress

then it seems they would have called Davey right after calling her if his phone number was also tied to the account - so they could freeze the card posthaste if this was unauthorized activity.

That is a great deal of IFs, but I wonder some things this morning.

At 7:53am or around that timeframe, Davey was already back from the gym and was cruising on the driveway talking to Kenneth Wagner on the phone.

We do not know whether or not Chase called Davey. But IF he did get a call from the Chase fraud agents while he was outside on the driveway then he would know one of two things.

Either

someone other than Amanda had possession of her debit card - he knew she wouldn't be up and out using it at that time of the morning, especially in the manner that would draw a call from the Chase fraud department

OR

that the (expected) ATM withdrawal was proceeding on schedule


In the first scenario, since Davey was already home and on the driveway - if Chase called him saying someone was trying to withdraw hundreds over the limit from an ATM with Amanda's card and they couldn't reach her, would he have walked inside and asked Amanda if she had lost her debit card? Checked if she was home, that she hadn't decided on the spur of the moment to run out before Weston was supposed to be awake (and pass up many ATMs closer to the house) to withdraw a ton of cash to go shopping with Amber later that day?


In the second scenario he wouldn't even have to answer the phone to see a call from Chase coming through and know what was going on, that the strategically mapped out, carefully plotted ploy was working.


Summary
IF Chase called Davey around the same timeframe as they left the voicemail on Amanda's phone because they couldn't reach her

And we know he was on the driveway already by then

And he didn't just walk right inside and ask Amanda about it, or check to see if she was home - and we know from the Affidavit that he says he didn't go inside until 8:20am

Why didn't he go inside and make sure Amanda's card was there, ask her if she had talked to Chase, let her know someone was trying to withdraw hundreds of dollars with her debit card from an ATM far from the house?


All of the above is ASSuming that Chase called Davey. And Chase might not have told the location of the ATM, but Davey would know that Amanda was asleep (or barely waking up) when he left for the gym and that she wouldn't have Weston out of the house with her at that time of the morning withdrawing cash from an ATM.

I wonder if they checked his phone records.

And I wonder even more why these random burglars took a single debit card and left multiple credit cards behind, scattered on the floor. Credit cards are small, portable, easy to hide, easy to use - online, even in person. And it's not like the homeowner would be able to report them missing/stolen right away, in this case.

If this was random, why not take the credit cards along too?

Me2l said...


then it seems they would have called Davey right after calling her if his phone number was also tied to the account - so they could freeze the card posthaste if this was unauthorized activity.



All the bank needs is one phone number, whether or not it's a joint account. Amanda's phone number could well have been the only one associated with the account.

It's really not that difficult to figure out.

Anonymous said...

Here we go round the mulberry bush with Me2I, that's always fun.

From the post at 4:18pm

Then it seems they would have called Davey right after calling her IF his phone number was also tied to the account - so they could freeze the card posthaste if this was unauthorized activity.

Me2I's response

All the bank needs is one phone number, whether or not it's a joint account. Amanda's phone number could well have been the only one associated with the account.

It's really not that difficult to figure out.



Me2I, did you see the IF in the first sentence in the statement, above - the one that starts with "then it seems they would have called Davey".

I suppose not. I bolded and capitalized it after your post so it is more easily seen. It is obvious that I know and made notice that Davey's phone number may not have been tied to the account.

That whole post at 4:18pm and what you take away from it is this? - writing again that Amanda's phone number could well have been the only one associated with the account? and this is why Chase (maybe) didn't call Davey ?

And Davey's number may well have also been associated with the account, and Chase may or may not have called him. Obviously the bank only needs one phone number. The post was laying out scenarios IF Davey's number was also tied to the account and IF they had called him. Nothing more.


But it appears to have hit on a nerve once again because this is the second time Me2I has posted about this after Bingo3 raised the question that Chase could've called Davey as well and then he would have known something was up at 7:53am already (or close).


The first time Me2I posted at 11:57am, text below, was in response to Bingo3's post and pointing out that yeah, maybe only Amanda's number was on the account, that she was the money manager - merely showing another possibility in the situation.

It depends.

Davey and Amanda would not have had identical cell phone numbers, and possibly hers was the only number for their banking information. Somewhere, over the course of the past several months, I remember hearing or reading in all Davey's compulsive talking that Amanda was the money manager in their home.



The second time, with the not so thinly-veiled condescending inclusion of "it's really not that difficult to figure out" at the end, takes it up a notch in sensitivity.

As in, these are not the droids you're looking for, he can go about his business, move along.

Here we go round the mulberry bush with Me2I, that's always fun.

From the post at 4:18pm

Then it seems they would have called Davey right after calling her IF his phone number was also tied to the account - so they could freeze the card posthaste if this was unauthorized activity.

Me2I's response

All the bank needs is one phone number, whether or not it's a joint account. Amanda's phone number could well have been the only one associated with the account.

It's really not that difficult to figure out.



Me2I, did you see the IF in the first sentence in the statement, above - the one that starts with "then it seems they would have called Davey".

I suppose not. I bolded and capitalized it after your post so it is more easily seen. It is obvious that I know and made notice that Davey's phone number may not have been tied to the account.

That whole post at 4:18pm and what you take away from it is this? - writing again that Amanda's phone number could well have been the only one associated with the account? and this is why Chase (maybe) didn't call Davey ?

And Davey's number may well have also been associated with the account, and Chase may or may not have called him. Obviously the bank only needs one phone number. The post was laying out scenarios IF Davey's number was also tied to the account and IF they had called him. Nothing more.

Anonymous said...

But it appears to have hit on a nerve once again because this is the second time Me2I has posted about this after Bingo3 raised the question that Chase could've called Davey as well and then he would have known something was up at 7:53am already (or close).


The first time Me2I posted at 11:57am, text below, was in response to Bingo3's post and pointing out that yeah, maybe only Amanda's number was on the account, that she was the money manager - merely showing another possibility in the situation.

It depends.

Davey and Amanda would not have had identical cell phone numbers, and possibly hers was the only number for their banking information. Somewhere, over the course of the past several months, I remember hearing or reading in all Davey's compulsive talking that Amanda was the money manager in their home.



The second time, with the not so thinly-veiled condescending inclusion of "it's really not that difficult to figure out" at the end, takes it up a notch in sensitivity.

As in, these are not the droids you're looking for, he can go about his business, move along.

Me2I's first post already noted the possibility that Amanda's number might've been the only one on the account. Then here it is again, stronger -

All the bank needs is one phone number, whether or not it's a joint account. Amanda's phone number could well have been the only one associated with the account.

It's really not that difficult to figure out.

Anonymous said...

I am very sorry for the duplication in posts above. It only needed to be said once and was duplicated because I screwed up on cut and paste and moving sentences around.

Me2l said...

Yes, anon, I REPEATED myself, because another brilliant anon went on and on about Davey getting the call from the bank AFTER I had pointed out they may only have one number, so the theory is ridiculous, and pathetically and obtusely assumes investigators would not have thought of that. You people crack me up. Believe it or not, you have not come up with anything ground breaking or original. Have you noticed nothing with the case has changed, even with all the fantasy, fictional writing that's engaged in around this place?

It's pure stupidity to ignore that the bank may have had only one number linked to the account, as if the possibility did not exist. It's also stupid to have to repeat it as if people are so brain dead and determined to make their non-case, they will ignore reality.

Of course, that's been happening for months around here.

Me2l said...



That whole post at 4:18pm and what you take away from it is this? - writing again that Amanda's phone number could well have been the only one associated with the account? and this is why Chase (maybe) didn't call Davey ?




Well, what is a person supposed to take away from a bunch of fictional writing, as porous as a colander? Your entire wall of text was a waste and meaningless, because obviously, if DB had received the call, it would have the possible effect of cracking the case open.

Oh.....but that's taking into consideration that obviously investigators are nowhere near as capable as you amateur sleuths commenting in a blog . What do investigators, who do that as a JOB know anyway?

Anonymous said...

Why are you wasting your time on this blog, Me21? Perhaps, you should find a forum more suited to your superior intellect and exceptional sleuthing ability. And, as is indicated in most of your comments here, you seem to be 'above' dealing with all of these "amateurs", at least, in your mind.

dnd said...

Me21, they cleared CD so fast many are assuming they didn't check anything but the LA fitness tapes. They couldn't have in that time frame. It makes sense that people will speculate about the things they should have done, like polygraph, check his phone, computer etc. We don't know if they even bothered to ask witnesses about CD'S behavior or problems in his marriage. Since we have heard nothing, and he hasn't been arrested, of course we are going to speculate. Did the police and investigators do their job in looking at the husband? It doesn't look like it and if not, I would like to know why.

Me2l said...

That's right. They cleared him quickly; however, it doesn't necessarily mean they haven't continued to investigate the case in general.

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

LE was not motivated to investigate anyone after they arrested Taylor, Gordon and Watson.

DB drove to the hospital in the car he was driving earlier that morning after he walked through the crime scene and I presumed, touched Amanda, before responding police had the chance to stop him. There would be nothing unexpected in that car now, except, i.e., gunshot residue. Unless they discovered gunshot residue on his steering wheel, and there is nothing, anywhere, to suggest that they did, no one can say Davey shot Amanda. His finger prints and DNA was expected to be throughout the house. And think about his for a second, what would he do with the murder weapon? Give it to someone else to dispose of for him? Could he ever trust that individual to not hang onto it and use it against him at a later date?

There had to be a fourth person.

dnd said...

According to the timeline, CD had 5 minutes between the neighbor's call to police and CD's to report Amanda. Maybe he took that shower first. That's a long time under the circumstances. And he drove off to the hospital and just left his son in the house with people Weston didn't know, according to what I read early in the case.

Anonymous said...

And think about his for a second, what would he do with the murder weapon? Give it to someone else to dispose of for him? Could he ever trust that individual to not hang onto it and use it against him at a later date?

The murder weapon could have been in the gym bag. Feel free to flame away.

Grabbed my gym clothes, grabbed my gym bag. There has been an obvious and extreme need for Davey to include in every appearance and statement that he was going to the gym, that he came home from the gym, that he headed out for a workout - establishing his location - making sure to mention also every time that he took his gym clothes or gym bag with him (TO THE GYM - ya think?!) Unnecessary extra wording after already saying where he was going.

- Sometimes Davey says he grabbed his gym clothes - giving rise to the question of why wasn't he just wearing his gym clothes for a ten-fifteen minute ride to the gym just after 6am, after having been up since 4:30am. Tuesday was his long day - why not save the time changing clothes at the gym and just wear his gym clothes in the car on the way there?

- In other statements he says he grabbed his gym bag - so maybe he was wearing his gym clothes but just carried the bag out of the house with whatever possible non-gym-related items in it that he wanted to carry out unseen. Neighbors wouldn't blink seeing someone headed out with a gym bag especially if the person was already wearing gym clothes. And maybe he was seen on camera at LA Fitness already wearing his gym clothes so he had to start saying "gym bag" instead.

As inept as IMPD appeared to be in handling this investigation, clearing him so quickly - did they even look in dumpsters around the gym or even inside it? LA Fitness personnel wouldn't necessarily scrutinize trash they were throwing out when emptying cans, realize it weighed more, call attention to it. It would be easy to throw a bag of something that looked like trash in an outside dumpster without raising suspicion and then once the dumpster was emptied and the trash was at the landfill or whatever - home free.

It would be an extreme chance to take, but everyone knows Davey was at the gym when his wife was supposedly shot - did they ever think something might be hiding in almost plain sight?

I imagine Davey's carefully crafted plot would include his wearing gloves to avoid GSR if he was the gunman.

dnd said...

I really wish Amanda's sister were able to talk openly about what Amanda was going thru at the time of her death. DB talks of the whole worship team knowing they were going to go thru a season of pain. I feel like maybe Resonate was getting ready to close, and they were sad and trying to accept it, except maybe DB. HE knew something extreme would have to happen to get those numbers up. DB said AB would reach more people in death then she ever would in her lifetime. Well how in the he'll would he know that? Is he God? And why did she have to be the one to give up her life for the church, wasn't it him that was responsible for giving his life for her as her husband? He says she died so the people called by God could have the historical revival, well she was called by God too! DB just believed he was the one God chose. All that talking God did to Him really makes me feel he thinks he is God. Maybe Amanda surrendered to his agenda, instead of her own because we all know DB' agenda could not be surrendered. It almost feels like he threatened her and crying she surrendered to protect herself and her child. That makes more sense to me than the stories he tells. I think as AB's sister works thru her grief and has the time to think, she may know some things she doesn't realize right now. Even Perry Noble said, a short time after AB's murder, that DB was doing better than he was, which was totally unexpected even by him. I just have all these things going thru my head about Davey's story. He sure had a lot of premenitions and coincidences happen in a very short time that he is using God as the explaination for. He just sounds like a con man. Yes, I am creating fantasies because there is no proof, but in my mind Davey acting like he is the chosen one and has so many talks and signs from God, sounds like the bigger fantasy and he has no proof either. Sorry so long, but I really could say so much more. I feel so sorry for Amanda, her children and her family, as I know many of you do. The truth will come to light someday.

Anonymous said...

A paint can (used in Amanda's business) would be a great hiding place for a small gun.
Hidden in plain sight.

Me2l said...

..........Peter has said more than once, but reiterated in his analysis conclusion, that SA shows Davey to have guilty knowledge, but that he does not believe Davey, himself, shot Amanda.

Anonymous said...

You're misquoting Peter.

Regardless of who pulled the trigger, paint cans could easily hide a small gun, duct tape, gloves, dog muzzle...

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

http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2015/11/kenneth-wagnor-statement-analysis.html

Part of Kenneth's statement jumps out at me.

Kenneth Wagner: "Tuesday I was sitting at lunch and I received a call that rocked my world forever."

compared to Uncle Ken and Perry Noble...

Ken Murphy: ""I’ll never forget that, getting that phone call. Start praying. Amanda was an accident; there was something happened. There was head trauma; and then when I got to the hospital, um, obviously your parents were down south. I think grandma and grandpa were, out of town as well. Grandpa got there pretty early, but then as family started to roll in, that, to hear what had happened. It was just unreal. It was surreal."

Perry Noble: "And I went into a meeting and I stepped out an hour later and somebody said something about a gunshot and I said no no no no no this isn’t a gunshot, this is um, she probably fell in the kitchen, and they had to kind of take me to the side and sit me down and say no no, no no no no no, it’s a, it’s a home invasion, and Amanda has been killed."

Back to Kenneth Wagner's statement:
"sitting" body position indicates sensitivity
"rocked my world forever" doesn't sound expected. I would expect the husband to say this, but not Kenneth, unless Amanda was his sister. This may be hyperbole.

Kenneth may have been expecting the call.

Me2l said...

Peter Hyatt said...
I haven't posted or considered DB the shooter.

Peter
September 30, 2016 at 10:26 AM

Bingo3 said...

dnd, you are not creating fantasies! You are spot on. "He sure had a lot of premenitions and coincidences happen in a very short time that he is using God as the explaination for. He just sounds like a con man."

He is absolutely a con man and a chronic liar. He knew this was going to happen. He is justifying it happening. He is marketing the murder and he is cashing in on her murder. The problem is that at the end of the day, DB is still a very bad preacher who turned people away. I tried last week to go back and watch snippets of the last months "leading up to Amanda's murder". His sermons are so hard to watch. He talks about himself the entire time. If he does speak of Amanda it is in a negative light. One sermon toward the end of the summer of 2015, he spends way too much time telling his congregation that he was an amazing baseball player. He talked about he planned to make sure Weston was the best and was competitive. He said that Weston could beat all of the other kids in the church. He then spent about ten minutes talking about being in the state championship and every amazing play he made. He was the reason they won the state championship and everyone expected him to win the MVP. When the name was called, he stepped out but it was someone else that won. He said he totally expected to win and it was a shock to everyone that he lost. He said even the winner thought DB should win. It was just sad to watch him go on and on and on about this. Poor Amanda to live with such a tool and poor audience that has to sit through such as this. People come to church to be filled up and learn about God, not to hear about their preacher's sport successes and cross fit workouts. He will never keep a congregation and he just doesn't get it and never will. He can do quick performances at rallies or events for those that don't really know him or have to hear him week after week. He will do better as a traveling salesman, um, I mean traveling preacher.

This competitive nature and the need to be the best and to win is contradictory to ministry. As a minister, it seems unless you are ready to humble yourself and serve, then you aren't going to be good in ministry. DB expected to win and be the best in everything he did in life. He chose an occupation that he is really not suited for and doesn't fit his personality. Jesus says "the first should be last and the last should be first." Davey has no comprehension of such as this! I should have won MVP! WE should have 900 members filling these seats and more! Numbers! Numbers! Numbers!! Weston will beat all of your kids! Indy needs Resonate to save it! Amanda died for revival of the world! I need to find my next sweat box! AB could never have done this if she were alive! I am going to be the best no matter what! Don't get in my way! I have not been able to produce a congregation for 4 years now but I'll do whatever it takes! The whatever it takes is a scary slogan for a church, don't you think? Shouldn't it be, God's Will be Done or We are here to Serve. This all will not end well but maybe it will change the direction the megachurch mentality is taking America and the need to produce giant numbers and big wealth. Davey truly is the new version of The American Tragedy:Megachurch Addition. (so obsessed with producing wealth and numbers, his wife had to be sacrificed)

Me2l said...

Me2l said...
..........Peter has said more than once, but reiterated in his analysis conclusion, that SA shows Davey to have guilty knowledge, but that he does not believe Davey, himself, shot Amanda.
October 16, 2016 at 1:06 AM

**********************

Bobcat said...
You're misquoting Peter.

Regardless of who pulled the trigger, paint cans could easily hide a small gun, duct tape, gloves, dog muzzle...
October 16, 2016 at 1:38 AM


**********************
Me2l said...
Peter Hyatt said...
I haven't posted or considered DB the shooter.

Peter
September 30, 2016 at 10:26 AM


********************

From November 17, 2015 blog and analysis by Peter:

http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2015/11/statement-analysis-transcript-davey.html?m=1

"Davey Blackburn did not shoot Amanda Blackburn, but does he know who did? Is he connected, in any way, to the shooter, due to a bad marriage, the pregnancy, and a life insurance policy?"




dnd said...

Bingo 3, thank you for your thoughtful post. I agree with you whole heartedly. Maybe God will use this as a way to stop these type of churches. I don't really believe DB shot Amanda, I was just thinking about how he talks about it in a way before her murder, then afterwards as if she agreed to be murdered so he could make those numbers. I definitely believe Peter's SA and analysis. I just wish there was more information, I guess that won't come out until trial, and I'm impatient.

Bobcat said...

Me2l,

"From November 17, 2015 blog and analysis by Peter:

http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2015/11/statement-analysis-transcript-davey.html?m=1

"Davey Blackburn did not shoot Amanda Blackburn, but does he know who did? Is he connected, in any way, to the shooter, due to a bad marriage, the pregnancy, and a life insurance policy?""

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

DB has many many further statements for analysis since last November 17th.

Just because Peter wrote; "I haven't posted or considered DB the shooter." doesn't mean he won't in the future.

Once "guilty knowledge" is concluded, statements can be reanalyzed with that determination in mind.

Me2l said...

has many many further statements for analysis since last November 17th.

Just because Peter wrote; "I haven't posted or considered DB the shooter." doesn't mean he won't in the future.

Once "guilty knowledge" is concluded, statements can be reanalyzed with that determination in mind.
October 16, 2016 at 2:16 PM



Well, obviously; however, you said I misquoted Peter when I stated he had said more than once he did not believe DB to be the shooter. I gave two examples in his own words to avoid misquoting.

Me2l said...

As far as "in the future," that isn't relevant to what either you or I said.

"Well.....well...,ya never know. He might say it sometime."

What the ??

Bobcat said...

Me2l

"Well, obviously; however, you said I misquoted Peter when I stated he had said more than once he did not believe DB to be the shooter. I gave two examples in his own words to avoid misquoting."

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

One statement repeats the supposition of LE who "cleared" him, well before he started jabbering again in April, and before Peter determined "guilty knoweldge".

The other statement says he "hasn't posted or considered".

Neither example supports your assertion of knowing Peter's beliefs.

I will not respond to your upcoming insult.

Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Me2l said...

Me2l

"Well, obviously; however, you said I misquoted Peter when I stated he had said more than once he did not believe DB to be the shooter. I gave two examples in his own words to avoid misquoting."


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

One statement repeats the supposition of LE who "cleared" him, well before he started jabbering again in April, and before Peter determined "guilty knoweldge".


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

And, of course, here is your statement about guilty knowledge:


"statements can be reanalyzed with that determination in mind.
October 16, 2016 at 2:16 PM"


The certainly can, but after Peter established "guilty knowledge," he made the comment that he had neither posted nor considered Davey the shooter.


"Peter Hyatt said...

I haven't posted or considered DB the shooter."


Peter used "considered" as a transitive verb. A transitive verb requires an object...in Peter's sentence "DB" is the object of the transitive verb, considered, meaning he had never thought DB to be the shooter.

Study it.



Here is Peter's statement again. It was said at the end of his blog and analysis. He is not "repeating" anything. That is you applying a palatable (to you) interpretation to what he said.

(Doesn't SA teach us to let the words speak for themselves, and if they didn't say it, we can't say it for them?)

"Davey Blackburn did not shoot Amanda Blackburn, but does he know who did? Is he connected, in any way, to the shooter, due to a bad marriage, the pregnancy, and a life insurance policy?

Or, did a man passionate and driven about his job, who had a bad marriage, who would have lost his job in a divorce, be granted his 'divorce' by a robber who decided to shoot his victim in the head?"



The other statement says he "hasn't posted or considered".


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

Neither example supports your assertion of knowing Peter's beliefs.

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


Interesting that you feel you must clarify Peter's own words. When he said very plainly months ago Davey is not the shooter and again recently that he has never posted or considered Davey the shooter. Those sentences speak for themselves.....or they should until Peter states otherwise.

You're doing what you routinely do....applying faulty interpretation, just as your SA is often quite faulty in its presuppositions.


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


I will not respond to your upcoming insult.
October 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM


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

No insults. Just correction.





Bobcat said...

Me2l: "Those sentences speak for themselves.....or they should until Peter states otherwise."

That's what I said. You're the one that put words in his mouth.

"Peter has said more than once, but reiterated in his analysis conclusion, that SA shows Davey to have guilty knowledge, but that he does not believe Davey, himself, shot Amanda."

If he doesn't say it, you can't say it for him.

You sucked me in again with your circular diversion. @@

Me2l said...

You don't understand the use of "considered", apparently. If Peter meant it as he used it, then yes, he said he has not posted or considered DB as the shooter.

You, dear BC, are elaborating and adding your own interpretation.

Me2l said...

"You sucked me in again with your circular diversion"



No one is twisting your arm. You just can't stand to be wrong.

Jasmine said...

Dnd mentioned above,"I wish Amanda's sister would say how she felt upon Amanda's death, something to that effect I feel the same way. Amber had accepted me on FB and we messaged back and forth a couple times. She listened when I told her that Amanda was not very happy with the move to Indiana. I'm a certified handwriting analyst and I gleaned this from looking over Amanda's handwriting. Of course Amanda wanted to please God by doing His will and maybe she was trying to please CD by leaving for Indiana, but it was a dichotomy. I message Amber in the easier way to tel her what I'd found. I never heard back from Amber and I'm blocked from posting on her plate although I can read her submissions. I believe Amber is in denial and perhaps she just doesn't want to be bothered with it. I don't know but Amber must use some misgivings about CD's character. Sisters always confide in one another but maybe Amanda was like a beaten wife who denies her husband's bad behavior due to embarrassment or family "I told you so" backlash so Nicky all?

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 11:41 said...
And think about his for a second, what would he do with the murder weapon? Give it to someone else to dispose of for him? Could he ever trust that individual to not hang onto it and use it against him at a later date?

The murder weapon could have been in the gym bag. Feel free to flame away.


You'll get no flaming from me. It's a great thought. Clothes struck me as sensitive when I first started reading the Amanda Blackburn case/DB's statements posted here. Then he switched it up to "bag". As you point out, he has to remind everyone over and over again he had a bag with him that morning to carry his clothes in. But he had to go home "to" shower, so that means he left the house in regular street clothes and changed into his gym clothes at the gym. Earlier I wondered if he had showered at the gym. Surveillance captured him arriving to the gym and probably leaving, but was there any video of him actually working out? For how long?

Further to your suggestion of "plain sight", I recall a picture DB posted captioned (paraphrasing) 'best gift ever' and it was a gun/ammunition(?)/case. I don't know anything about guns and whether it would be the type of gun listed in the APC they say was likely used to kill Amanda. That would definitely be "in plain sight". I think it would be the first question LE would ask him, i.e., any firearms the house? What kind? And if by chance it was the right kind of gun, to not bother testing it to see if it was the gun used to shoot and kill Amanda would be incredible investigative oversight to say the least. As I said, I don't know anything about guns so if the picture isn't anything close to a "blah-blah-blah", okay.

jmo

Nic said...

dnd @ 8:52pm said:
And he drove off to the hospital and just left his son in the house with people Weston didn't know, according to what I read early in the case.



Are you serious? I wonder if he had a car seat in his car or if they had just one seat they would switch from one vehicle to the other (and if the seat was stationed in Amanda's car that morning).

Nic said...

Jasmine,

After listening to Pastor Byars' thoughts about evil and wickedness I learned none of them will speak out "in evil" against anyone. Doing that would mean Satan would be destroying them (things of God) and their strength and faith would not let that happen.

"Now until that day, I’ve got to walk in freedom from bitterness and from anger and from wrath and hatred towards these men and here’s what I want you to understand from me, I’m trying to walk in, um, in hatred (nodding) I’m gonna use that, in hatred in anger towards sin in this world. Towards the brokenness in this world, instead of against the broken people of this world. Because we’re all broken and we all need a saviour to rebirth us into a new life in Jesus Christ. ..."
--Pastor Byars

Bingo3 said...

From Nic:
After listening to Pastor Byars' thoughts about evil and wickedness I learned none of them will speak out "in evil" against anyone. Doing that would mean Satan would be destroying them (things of God) and their strength and faith would not let that happen.

"Now until that day, I’ve got to walk in freedom from bitterness and from anger and from wrath and hatred towards these men and here’s what I want you to understand from me, I’m trying to walk in, um, in hatred (nodding) I’m gonna use that, in hatred in anger towards sin in this world. Towards the brokenness in this world, instead of against the broken people of this world. Because we’re all broken and we all need a saviour to rebirth us into a new life in Jesus Christ. ..."
--Pastor Byars

I agree. I don't think their faith will even take them to a place where such evil could be done by a man of God (DB) However, everyone has that inside little voice that tells them differently. I am sure deep inside they know something "just isn't right with that boy." Pastor Byars says "we’re all broken and we all need a saviour to rebirth us into a new life in Jesus Christ. .. He is correct. He must know that AB couldn't replace Jesus to bring about the epic revivals across the world. He must know something is wrong with DB. He knows scripture and truly seems to know the Gospel. I guess his grief wants this tragedy to be for the better good but he must know the way DB speaks is crazy talk.

Bingo3 said...

This is Davey's Story and he is sticking to it:

I’ve been criticized for this, but I believe whole-heartedly Amanda died a martyrs death. Webster’s defines a martyr as someone who is killed or suffers greatly for a religion or a cause.

http://daveyblackburn.com/posts/how-do-you-deal-with-the-way-amanda-died-part-3

Bobcat said...

Everyone has that inside little voice that tells them differently.

"The Gift of Fear" is an excellent book regarding this protective intuition.

Unfortunately, the SUPPRESSION of those instincts, by adults who have the means to leave those dangerous situations, does not bode well for them.

They will be victims. Evil wins.

Anonymous said...

"She was going to follow God’s call to be a missionary to Indianapolis, taking the Gospel to people who haven’t heard it or yet been changed by it."

If Larry Taylor is the shooter, and Larry Taylor's foster father is a pastor...
then Larry has heard the Gospel. Has he been changed?

DB has talked about unchanged church people before:

DB 5/15/2016
http://resonateindianapolis.com/mediacast/home-run-life-week-7-when-to-run-the-bases-backwards/
21:20 "But, but, but, like, like, like, like Heaven! Do we really believe, that eternity is real? (long pause) Do we really care about it? (long pause) That’s why you sense, from me, this, change of tone, ‘cause there’s an urgency that moves me forward. See, um, the other thing that I’ve discovered about, just growing up in church, and, and church people is, um… There’s a lot of church people who aren’t changed people. There’s a lot of church people who aren’t changed people, and maybe you know some of them. Once you were like, they’re, they’re all up in church, man they do alllll the right things, they say all the right things, they wear all the right things, but at the end of the day, man, they’re not, they’re not, they’re not even really changed. They’re like… Some of ‘em are just mean. Some of ‘em are condescending. Some of ‘em are judge, judgmental. And I’m going to tell you right now if you stick around here long enough, you’re gonna recognize that we’re just as messed up. But the good thing is we serve a God, Jesus, who was none of those things. All of us Christians are pretty much hypocritical. We’re messed up. But then there are some who like, know that they’re that way and they refuse to change. They know they live life for themselves but they refuse to change. They know that they should live life in the light of eternity for other people but they refuse, to change."

Anonymous said...

Davey's blog post "How Do You Deal With the Way Amanda Died Part 3" - wow. And not in a good way. I am so angry after reading it.


"Almost as if I were having an out of body experience, my mind began imagining what everything looked like the morning I found her, me crouched by her side, a lamp turned over near her feet and shattered over the ground, the ladder she had propped against the wall for decoration now laying beside her body. I remembered how that morning Weston’s door was still shut. I remembered sitting downstairs on the floor of our living room pleading with Amanda to stay with me as she struggled for every breath. I remembered I could hear Weston's soft coos from his room upstairs. I remembered looking up at the balcony just above me."


Davey's mind began "Imagining" what everything looked like - as opposed to "remembering" what everything looked like? He had no idea anyone had been in his house, yet he remembers (imagines) a lamp turned over and shattered, the decorative ladder laying beside her body.

I seriously doubt there was much pleading for Amanda to stay with him - his thinking was probably more like "how the hell are you still breathing and now what do I do from here, this was NOT how this was supposed to happen".

And now we have an explanation that Weston wasn't crying or upset that morning - because Davey remembers he could hear Weston COOING from his room upstairs? Not crying, but cooing - and not just cooing, but SOFT cooing.

How wonderful to know this morning that Weston was softly cooing - not crying in fear, confusion and distress after certainly hearing what was going on downstairs.

I eagerly await an upcoming post where Davey will explain why Mel the dog wasn't barking and where the dog was, that Davey remembers hearing Mel scratching softly on the door of the room where Amanda had put him upstairs that morning. Or something like that.

Anonymous said...

"And whether You call me to die, or call me to live and carry this beautiful burden". . .

This could be the first indication that Davey might end his life rather than go down for any connection to Amanda's murder. If he dies, it's because God called him. It would look like an accident. I really think he would rather die than have to face the shame and utter humiliation an arrest or even a serious publicized investigation (reopening of it?) would cause.

Anonymous said...

The newest blog post may be the most disturbing thing I've ever read.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 12:05,

It's not the first indication.

Anonymous said...

I remembered how that morning Weston’s door was still shut.

Parents of fifteen-month old children, it is common for their doors to be shut overnight ? - especially if the master bedroom/where parents are sleeping is downstairs?

"Still shut" - did Davey go upstairs and close Weston's door before he left for the gym ?

Anonymous said...

DB: "...a lamp turned over near her feet and shattered over the ground, the ladder she had propped against the wall for decoration now laying beside her body."

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

Peter SA lesson (do a search) regarding Patsy Ramsey note:
Please note the inanimate object (ransom note) was "lying"; often when an inanimate object is given body posture, it is because the subject put it there.

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

DB's new blog makes me feel SICK. So sad for what Amanda went through while he watched from above.

That was a checkpoint, where, had anything gone wrong, he still would have had clean hands and came out on top.

There were ten minutes between the time the SUV came and went from Sunnyfield. Davey timed out exactly 3.5 minutes standing on the balcony. Now we know why DB is so sure that is the last time Amanda saw Weston. DB made sure the door to his room stayed closed.

At any time, if need be, the "random" robbery/home invasion could have been aborted. Davey would then have been the hero for protecting Weston and saving Amanda. But, he also needed to confirm for himself that the shot was done before leaving for the gym.

The CI's story is a bunch of lies.

The above is my opinion.

Anonymous said...

And didn't the investigators find Mel the dog in a room upstairs too? (behind a closed door?) I wonder if that was where the dog would normally be at that time of the morning.

Weston was up in his crib /upstairs. Put the dog upstairs too. Doors closed to lessen the chance of hearing what was going on downstairs (or in Mel's case, actually doing something to protect Amanda).

Maybe this was on the agenda, the list of things swirling around in Davey's mind, to do between when he woke up at 4:30am and finally made it out the door to the gym around 6:10am.

Anonymous said...

"But for some reason he doesn’t go into much description of the brutality of Stephen’s death. In fact the way Luke writes, it seems to be a peaceful scene covered in Jesus’ protection, hardly any mention of brutality, even though we know it must have been gruesome"

Similar to the way Davey writes about Amanda's death. Emphasizing the peacefulness and the happy ending, virgin pina coladas while she's laying out in the sun in heaven. Although it was graphic enough and unkind enough to Amanda’s family and friends to describe Amanda’s condition that morning to the extent he already has in these “How Do You Deal With the Way Amanda Died?” serial posts.



"I believe whole-heartedly Amanda died a martyrs death. Webster’s defines a martyr as someone who is killed or suffers greatly for a religion or a cause."

Yes, continuing the martyr story - Amanda gave her life so that revival would happen across Indy, the nation, the world.

But martyrs WILLINGLY make the choice to give their lives. Amanda didn't choose. Or did she, in Davey's logic? Because Davey persists over and over in calling Amanda a martyr, this really does go along with a previous poster's thought that maybe Davey and Amanda had talked about losing Weston and the church growing - in a similar situation as Levi Lusko's daughter - and Amanda had said she would rather it be her that was taken instead of Weston. And Davey took it and ran with it, escaping from website monitoring and whatever else make his life unhappy in the process. Win win situation for him.

"4 years to the day, before those men took her life, she and I packed up a moving van, left jobs and a life of comfort to venture into the unknown and start a church in a city that needs to hear a message of Hope, Healing and Salvation. 4 years early she decided she wasn’t going to settle in to the comfortable life. She was going to follow God’s call to be a missionary to Indianapolis, taking the Gospel to people who haven’t heard it or yet been changed by it. And as a result of following God’s call on her life, her life was taken from her. That’s martyrdom."

4 years TO THE DAY - what are the chances? Yet another coincidence that makes for a really neat addition to the story. And when Davey says Amanda's life was taken from her because she followed (as a result of following) God's call on her life, he is making it her responsible for what happened. He says she chose this. Over comfort and whatever else.

Amanda didn't choose this - it was done to her. All of the talk about what Amanda would have done and would have wanted is just Davey trying to convince himself, and us, that this was meant to be, orchestrated by God. Or wait, was it the result of a plot by evil powers as he said in the 2nd installment? It can't be both !

Statement Analysis Blog said...

I am curious (this is probably better in poll form) so here goes:

How many of you believe that eventually D Blackburn will confess or enough evidence will be produced to indict him? (or any other way....will the truth come out?)

If you could answer with just a few sentences, I appreciate it.

My own belief if "yes", the truth will come out, some day, in some form.

thanks...

Anonymous said...

Yes, I believe as you do Peter - that the truth will come out, some day, in some form.

I believe someday enough evidence will be produced to indict him. I do not believe he will up and confess unless forced to. And I think chances are good that he will disappear or choose to die (as another martyr) if he sees a chance of his freedom and lifestyle being taken away.

Anonymous said...

The entire scenario is so evil and disturbed to me - with my limited experience, it's hard to predict.

To go places in my mind, to imagine his whole setup, that at any point, any beat, the story would still work with him having clean hands, is horrifying. I think Amanda suffered through a long ruse that morning, with Davey playing alongside her as a "victim", running up to "protect" Weston.

Has the truth come out with Scott Peterson? Ted Bundy? Andrew Cunanan? Warren Jeffs?

I'm sorry - too many sentences. I'm sickened.

mom2many said...

I believe the truth will come out. I believe so, because Davey cannot shut up.

He may confess to someone close to him, who may have the courage to report it.

Or his continual leakage will motivate investigators to file charges. The case will likely be heavily circumstantial, because of the missing laptop, cash business, and failure to secure the scene, including his car, clothing, gym bag etc. I think investigators need a confession/admission to have a successful prosecution.

Or, Davey's constant blabbering will make the guys who coordinated the hit nervous and willing to turn on him while they can make a deal, before he implicates them.

Anonymous said...

How many of you believe that eventually D Blackburn will confess or enough evidence will be produced to indict him? (or any other way....will the truth come out?)

No, I don't believe D Blackburn will ever be indicted. I think he destroyed all evidence that will prove his guilt and someone help him setup the gang bangers perfectly.

MsDp

Statement Analysis Blog said...

Someone sent me the link to Blackburn's latest blog entry. My first reaction was "he is milking it for all he can..." but my second reaction came when I read it.

He is moving closer to an admission of guilt.

He is claiming that she was martyred and he links himself, via the pronoun "me", to the one who ultimately 'martyred' her.

I recognize that this is a bit advanced for material posted on a blog, even where readers may have a good understanding, but suffice for now, look at the words he uses.

He is the one who moved her to where she was supposed to be in order to be martyred. He has already identified the "cause" that she was martyred for as she "died" for the church.

I should not have included "indicted" in my question here and if I poll it, I will word it carefully.

How many believe the truth is going to come out?

If he keeps blogging, he will go too far.

I may, in spite of a busy schedule, put something together for an article.

Peter

Anonymous said...

How many believe the truth is going to come out?

If he keeps blogging, he will go too far.

I may, in spite of a busy schedule, put something together for an article.



The truth is going to come out. It is actually coming out in bits and pieces every time he writes or speaks. Those who listen to him exhibit body language of disbelief.

I think he has already gone too far.

I would very much like to read an article with your thoughts.

Bingo3 said...

The most recent blog is one of the most twisted things I have ever read. Twisted and evil. I agree with Peter, he is getting closer to confessing. It almost seems like he has justified this so much that he really doesn't see the murder as a bad thing or either feels he has convinced everyone that it was really a good thing in the end. She went into the arms of Jesus and look how many people's lives are being changed! The revival of the masses could never have happened if I, um, um I mean God hadn't allowed AB to die.

Bingo3 said...

So not only did God allow it but he wants DB to know it was a precious thing.

"I remember writing in my journal, God help me to see Amanda’s death as you see it, a precious thing."

Davey only has 2 published comments. How many comments did he have to go through to find two that he could publish.

Bingo3 said...

Peter, we would love to see an article. Wow. It just doesn't get stranger than this!

Anonymous said...

He cant confess the truth, because he doesnt even know what the truth is anymore. Thats clear from his language. Liars lie to themselves too. Davey is no longer in touch mentally with what actually happened.

Anonymous said...

For those, like Bobcat, saying "evil wins", what does it win? Looking at people who have done evil deeds, they have harmed, injured, tormented others, but I dont see where they have "won" anything. In fact every evil deed they have done, they lose. They lose peace of mind, they lose pieces of their inner life (which is usually already very impoverished), they lose love, they lose trust...all they gain is more enptiness and bitterness and fear...they do also lose a stable or meaningful relationship with reality...I think we are seeing this now with Davey, as I do think he is delusional about what occurred in the literal sense ie. who killed Amanda etc.

Anonymous said...

I think the truth is already out, but I don't think the IMPD or defense attorneys nor any Indianapolis investigators are paying attention.

Trudy said...

I hope the truth comes out but I don't think it will. If the scales would fall from the eyes of Amanda's family there would, IMO, be a better chance. I had hopes of Phil Byars being another Freddy Kassab, but no longer.

I think Crazy Davey (being crazy and Davey) will do or say something to bring about his own irretrievable downfall within the church in the next few years, if not months...but he will get away with the murder of his pregnant wife.

Anonymous said...

Resonate Church Facebook page

November 11th
Extremely heavy hearts today. Our Pastor's wife Amanda Blackburn passed away this morning. Please pray for the Blackburn and Byars family during this difficult time. Although we are hurting tremendously, we are still hoping and believing that great things are still yet to come from this! "Although we don't know what to do, our eyes are on you".

November 11th
Yesterday, our pastor Davey Blackburn came home from the gym to discover someone had broken into his home and his wife Amanda had suffered a gunshot wound. She was immediately rushed to the hospital where she later died from these injuries.
Please join us in prayer for our pastor, his son Weston and their entire family during these hard days ahead. We have extremely heavy hearts and although we are hurting tremendously, we are still hoping and believing that great things are still yet to come.


November 13th (partial)
Dear Resonate Family,
I cannot thank you enough for the unbelievable outpouring of love that you have shared with my family over the past few days. As many of you know, my wife Amanda Grace and our unborn baby have been tragically killed... .

. . . . Amanda’s story has attracted national news. I know that Jesus is going to make good come from this, so in the event someone from the media tries to speak with you, simply respond by asking everyone to join us in prayer for my family. You can let them know that we have extremely heavy hearts and although we are hurting tremendously, we are still hoping and believing that great things are still yet to come.

Davey


The first two posts were on the Resonate Church Facebook page the morning Amanda was taken off of life support. The third one was two days later. The same sentence is used in all three posts in almost the exact words.

There would be no need to convince, much less state THREE TIMES, that "we are hurting tremendously" in the wake of something like this. Two of the statements also include "we have extremely heavy hearts". Both of these statements would go without saying. The need to say it over and over and over shows need for persuasion that "we" are hurting soooo much from this, that our hearts are heavy.

The first two posts were speaking of "our pastor's wife" and "our pastor". Then it switches to "we are hurting tremendously". Whoever wrote the post did not say "we as a church" or "I" am hurting. If Davey wrote these to be released, why doesn't he say "I" am (or "my family and I are") hurting tremendously. In the context of Davey's instructions to the media, "we" as a church or as him and his family makes sense, but not when he is talking alone. The switching from a press release informational type of post to making it more personal ("we" are hurting) is odd.


The use of the word "still" is also odd. It is used twice in the same sentence in all three statements. "Still" hoping and believing" for something indicates time passing - that the hoping and believing had gone on for some time and "they"/ "we" were STILL hoping and believing that great things are STILL yet to come.

Then Davey in his statement - the one that begins with it being "impossible to explain the emotions my heart has been forced to process".
As deeply as I am hurting I am hopeful and confident that good things will come of this.

Who would have expected him to be able to explain anything on the day Amanda died?

I think these statements were prepared ahead of time. But WHO wrote them?

Trudy said...

IMO the 911 call will reveal what this latest blog reveals : that CD did NOT check on Weston that morning. The reference to the "still" closed
door is to imply that the thugs did not even enter Weston's room, and the soft cooing (ffs) is to imply that CD had audible evidence that Weston was safe and did not need to physically check him.

The "still" closed door and the soft cooing are storytelling elements to explain why CD did not check on Weston. IMO.

How creepy is this?
" I felt the Lord whisper to my heart, “I was standing here the whole time, Davey. And she knew it . . . She saw me.”

She knew it. She saw me.

Anonymous said...

IF this was unexpected home invasion on the morning of November 10th, it is quite a jump

from being surprised and dumfounded by it
- to -
being able to,on the very same day, start hoping and believing that great things will come of it.

It is even more of a jump to be STILL hoping and believing. Almost as soon as it happened, whoever wrote these posts was still hoping.

Could this mean they had been hoping for great things to happen from such a situation for awhile already? The leadership team had a feeling that they were about to walk through a season of pain or whatever. Was this part of a plan?

Anonymous said...

November 2014, Meg opened her Nothing Is Wasted Etsy shop. https://www.etsy.com/shop/NothingIsWasted/about?ref=shopinfo_about_
"I've entered into a season in life where I can honestly tell you I have no idea what's next. I've been in full time ministry for the past 5 years and now ... I'm not. During the first few weeks of transitioning out of my job and into new jobs I've heard three resounding words from God ... "Nothing is Wasted". There's a song from Elevation Church that I love with this same title and over and over God's reminded me that He works all things for my good. Romans 8:28 tells us that "We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him .." ... So that's life right now, I'm putting all my eggs in the following Jesus basket and believing that the Best is Yet to Come!"

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

Either Davey stole all of Meg's lines, or...?

Anonymous said...

Unreliable denial?

"She was about to get up, anyways, and so, I wouldn't lock the door. Um, and so I would wrestle with that and wrestle with that and wrestle with that and the reality is is you can kill yourself wrestling with the what-ifs, or the should’ves or the could'ves. You can absolutely destroy and be held captive to that thought and I had to finally, finally just put that thought at the feet of Jesus and say ok I am trusting your sovereignty. I am trusting that when I was out of control, you were in control. And that when, when my whole world was shaken, you were the bedrock. You were the bedrock that was holding it up, and so that, that’s, that’s the only place that I’ve been able to find peace is just going; “OK God, I don’t understand it all, and uh, and I probably won’t on this side of eternity, but I do know, that you are in control, and I do know that, that this was not my fault, you know, and that's what God’s promises tells me in the midst of my emotions, um, that are going on."

http://case-discussions.blogspot.com/2016/08/8282016-cypress-church-with-stepuncle.html

Anonymous said...

Meg says

"Nothing is Wasted". There's a song from Elevation Church that I love with this same title and over and over God's reminded me that He works all things for my good. Romans 8:28 tells us that "We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him .." ...


How weird - what if Davey didn'tsteal the lines? I still wonder about Meg's masked burglar costume last Halloween.


The name of Meg's Etsy shop "Nothing is Wasted" is the same statement that's on Amanda and Evie's gravestone

which is the same song from Elevate Church that Davey says came on Pandora radio "randomly as the very first song" when the family was gathered around Amanda's bed

(can anyone tell I am having extreme trouble wrapping my mind around this actually happened, especially watching the video when Davey tells the story and the way he emphasizes "Nothing. Is. Wasted." and looks around at his audience. . .

and the Bible verse Romans 8:28 is also on Amanda and Evie's gravestone


It's a carefully crafted story. There are so many threads to the quilt woven together to create a certain picture that Davey wants us to see. Meg lived with Amanda and Davey and then moved out so suddenly right before the execution. Now she's preparing green rooms and bringing water to the stage and sitting beside Davey at meetings and recording sessions.

No accusations. These are facts.

Trudy said...

It's frustrating to discuss this case when there is such a dearth of information and no apparent way of obtaining it. The same questions continually arise, but they can't be answered here, and they form a perpetual stumbling block.

What is Meg's involvement? (if any). She moved to Indianapolis for 4-5 months, straight inwiththeBlackburns. She ensconced herself inthe family home, looking after Weston and Mel. (Professing her love for both,on Instagram). She moved out just weeks before Amanda's murder. She has an intimate history with Davey, has anEtsy shop coincidentally likeAmanda's" weathered willow" business, and the "nothing is wasted/Best is yet to come stuff is just eerie. Not to mention the Halloween costume (!!!???) Is she SWF? Or just another thread in DBs masterpiece of a quilt.

What does Amber know? (if anything). I wonder if Amber has evidence that she, herself, is unaware of. Why did she cut short the family. Vacation and fly 12 hours to see Amanda? Did Amanda ask her sister to come? Davey describes the Monday morning of the 9th without ever mentioning Amber despite all the people to see, things to do swirling around inhis head. Amber wrote that Amanda LEFT HER FAMILY to come and pick her up that day. So Amanda did NOT have Weston with her when she went to the airport. The way Amber wrote that Amanda left her family makes me think that Weston was left with Davey that morning. My point is that it is unexpected that Davey omits Amber all together in his recount of Monday morning. I don't know what it means. Just that it is so unexpected.

What about Ashley? In a sermon before Amanda was murdered, CD singles out Ashley and praises her bravery and strength, making special mention of the fact that she does crossfit. In the weeks subsequent to Amanda's murder, CD moves in with his dead wife's best friend, (twice) takes up crossfit with her, takes her on holidays, and has her cooking, cleaning and taking care of Weston (while Derek looks more and more like a pathetic cuckold.) Although I don't think Amber was complicit in any way, I think CD had calculatedly factored Ashley in as part of his master plan. ( He notes that some people have criticized his domestic arrangements, but says he doesn't care)

Where was Mel?

Was Davey a contact for Chase Bank? A great question, but again, no answer and none likely forthcoming.

Where did the gun found near the Blackburn home come from? Has there ever been a gun found on that street before or since? That was pretty unexpected too.

So many questions. But we don't have access to phone records, bank records, the 911 call, surveillance videos. What does Alonzo Bull know? Who drove the black SUV? How did the Kilt gang know to go straight to an unoccupied house?

The answer to any or all of these questions and many more would help me to understand this case and determine the likelihood of CD ever being charged and convicted of his wife's murder.

If I may take a poll: who thinks that Larry Taylor, Jalen Watson and/or Diano Gordon will be convicted of Amanda's murder?
What will their defense be?



Anonymous said...

"The resulting vaulted ceilings in the living room drastically opened-up the floorpan, and from the balcony I had an areal view of the whole scene. Almost as if I were having an out of body experience, my mind began imagining what everything looked like the morning I found her, me crouched by her side, a lamp turned over near her feet and shattered over the ground, the ladder she had propped against the wall for decoration now laying beside her body."

Why "ground" instead of "floor"?

The lamp was near her feet
shattered over the ground
The ladder was laying beside her
Davey sat on the floor

Anonymous said...

He says "..beside her BODY" not "beside her". Amanda was already dead to him.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

Peter- I hope you find time to do some kind of article, I'd like to hear what you have to say. I'm curious about why you believe that he's close to confessing.

Poll Answer: I think the truth will come out, although I'm undecided on the "how". The more Davey talks/blogs, the more he leaks. It's a catch 22: he has to talk to promote his (a.k.a. "Amanda's") story in order to market his business, but in talking he risks giving away information.

Just My own Opinion- I think he talks because he's narcissistic and can't help himself...holding everyone else in contempt, the duper's delight kind of thing. He doesn't seem to be very self-aware, adding details 6-11 months after the fact (details that aren't logical or sequential, contradictory details, emotions in the "right" place, storytelling sentence construction, etc.). It feels like he's straining to convince now and that may be because while he's being invited to speak, Resonate is not growing as predicted and there is no Amanda's Death As A Sacrifice revival in Indy or elsewhere. Resonate is not now, nor has it been, a force to be reckoned with spiritually speaking.

Anonymous said...

He says " beside her body". Not "beside her". She was already dead to him.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

*Correction to my above post at 11:13 PM- not "close to confessing"

Should read- "close to an admission of guilt"

Concerned said...

Peter,
I believe you're right and Davey will crack.
The fact that he risked so much to create the break-out
success of his brand and to find it's not working is making
him crazier and crazier. His latest posts are beyond
nuts!

I keep reminding myself that Indy LE has the 911 tape
and if it says what we expect, they know he's complicit
in the crime. They may be tightening the screws on him
as we speak. (Insert snarky comeback from Me2l here.)

I hope Amanda's family is paying attention and will be
prepared to rescue Weston as I can see Davey doing a
murder-suicide.

Trudy said...

Peter Hyatt said:

"He is moving closer to an admission of guilt.
He is claiming that she was martyred and he links himself, via the pronoun "me", to the one who ultimately 'martyred' her."

This reminds me of Crazy Davey's statement that he "presented her to the Lord, holy and blameless".

How did you do that, again, Davey?

Anonymous said...

I just read Davey's latest blog entry and it seems he's becoming more mentally unbalanced. He is equating himself in his "out of body experience" viewing the scene (of her death) to the Lord who is there to protect her. He also sees her "somewhat involuntarily kneeling" from this omniscient viewpoint. Again, there is this "posture of surrender"...and he is at top of stairs....Amanda was shot from that location of someone following her down the stairs.

I just think that he is the one who shot her and he is very mentally unbalanced where he may be literally be somewhat insane in that he thinks even though he is the one who killed her (or had her killed) that he was also the one (the Lord) who was there protecting her because he quite clearly equates himself with the the Lord in this blog entry.

I think he genuinely is delusional about what his role was in what happened to Amanda.

Anonymous said...

Maybe with all of these most recent blog posts, Davey is gearing up for an insanity defense.

I don't think that would work though, considering all of his statements early on - everything he says he remembers vividly - his national tv interviews where he talks so calmly - many or most of which have been transcribed and documented over the past eleven months.

«Oldest ‹Older   1601 – 1800 of 1945   Newer› Newest»