Morris Davis

[Blackout]

will this one ever be solved?


pizza man gets killed....weapon found several years later in another state

[Guardian]

This case is crazy. How the hell do they explain it? Is it possible that the friend who stole and then pained the gun had stolen it once before, committed the murder and then returned it to prevent it from being discovered that he had stolen the gun in the first place? That is the only scenario that makes any sense at all to me.

[zack007attack]

will this one ever be solved?


pizza man gets killed....weapon found several years later in another state

I learned on a forensic science documentary that not all ballistic tests are 100% accurate. It is possible that the slugs recovered from Morris's body were extremely similar to the test fired slugs from the weapon recovered from the person caught with the pawn shop reciepts, but not exact.

I consider two possibilities:
1) If the gun recovered was not registered with the authorities under the owner's name (if handgun registration wasn't required in Montana at the time of the murder), then maybe he had an original gun which was stolen, then the murder weapon was put in place by someone he knew in order to possibly frame him.
2) the murder weapon was taken, used, and put back in its location before the owner noticed.

I strongly believe that the murderer is someone the gun owner knew. He has done all he can to help the police but can't point out a murderer because he can't see any of his friends or family members as potential murderers.

[Guardian]

It would almost have to be the friend that stole the gun in the first place. What are the odds that one person would steal the gun, drive to Montana, Kill Morris, drive back to Oregon and put the gun back so it can then be stolen by another person who just happens to drive to the same town in Montana and pawn the gun?

No. As many could rightfully point out on this board, I will usually give the benefit of the doubt and give some measure to coincidence. But this is just too far out there to be anything else.

Even if the ballistics tests were wrong and it was another weapon with similar patterns as the murder weapon, what are the odds of it ending up in the same town in Montana? It's possible, but it is unlikely.

As I said before, I suggest that the friend stole the weapon. Killed Morris. Replaced the weapon so that A) his friend would likely not make the connection to him stealing the gun and therefore have no way of possibly connecting his friend to a crime. And B) to get the weapon off of his own hands in the case that he were suspected in the crime.

This friend likely had at least some connection to the town in Montana to be there later when he pawned the weapon.

So why steal the gun again you ask? Well, for the same reason that anyone pawns anything. To get some quick cash. Perhaps he stole it again to be used in another unknown crime and figured it was too risky to once again return the weapon to the owners home. He then pawns the weapon to get some quick cash perhaps thinking that after so long, the connection would not be made. Let's face it, if he didn't have that slip on him when arrested, the police would likely have never found that gun.

The quick cash also fits nicely into the scenario of Morris' murder. The killer had no way of knowing which driver would be sent when he ordered the pizza, so that pretty much rules out the possibility of the crime being personal. And all that was taken after the murder was Morris' delivery wallet.

The friend is the only thing that makes sense. They need to grill that guy until he breaks down and confesses.

[zack007attack]

It would almost have to be the friend that stole the gun in the first place. What are the odds that one person would steal the gun, drive to Montana, Kill Morris, drive back to Oregon and put the gun back so it can then be stolen by another person who just happens to drive to the same town in Montana and pawn the gun?

No. As many could rightfully point out on this board, I will usually give the benefit of the doubt and give some measure to coincidence. But this is just too far out there to be anything else.

Even if the ballistics tests were wrong and it was another weapon with similar patterns as the murder weapon, what are the odds of it ending up in the same town in Montana? It's possible, but it is unlikely.

As I said before, I suggest that the friend stole the weapon. Killed Morris. Replaced the weapon so that A) his friend would likely not make the connection to him stealing the gun and therefore have no way of possibly connecting his friend to a crime. And B) to get the weapon off of his own hands in the case that he were suspected in the crime.

This friend likely had at least some connection to the town in Montana to be there later when he pawned the weapon.

So why steal the gun again you ask? Well, for the same reason that anyone pawns anything. To get some quick cash. Perhaps he stole it again to be used in another unknown crime and figured it was too risky to once again return the weapon to the owners home. He then pawns the weapon to get some quick cash perhaps thinking that after so long, the connection would not be made. Let's face it, if he didn't have that slip on him when arrested, the police would likely have never found that gun.

The quick cash also fits nicely into the scenario of Morris' murder. The killer had no way of knowing which driver would be sent when he ordered the pizza, so that pretty much rules out the possibility of the crime being personal. And all that was taken after the murder was Morris' delivery wallet.

The friend is the only thing that makes sense. They need to grill that guy until he breaks down and confesses.

Good thinking.

I wonder why the police never investigated further into who could have stolen the gun and put it back. It had to be somone the owner knew, not someone random since the gun was put back in it's exact place. The police should have put together a list of everyone who was in the owner's house in between the time the owner last noticed his gun was in his house and the time of the murder. He obviously never noticed it was missing, so it had to have been stolen within a short amount of time before the murder. That makes narrowing down the suspects much easier.