Sitcoms Online - Main Page / Message Boards - Main Page / News Blog / Photo Galleries / DVD Reviews / Buy TV Shows on DVD and Blu-ray

View Today's Active Threads / View New Posts / Mark All Boards Read / Chit Chat Board

Unsolved Mysteries Online Main Page / Message Board / Show History / Episode Guide (1987-2002) / Expanded Episode Guide #2 / Expanded Episode Guide #3 / Case Updates / Wiki / Official Site / Lifetime Site / Lifetime Schedule / Related Links / True Crime Shows Message Board / All Other Cases Message Board / Buy The Best of Unsolved Mysteries DVD / Buy Unsolved Mysteries - The Ultimate Collection DVD

Unsolved Mysteries: Original Robert Stack Episodes - The Complete First Season

Watch or Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Original Robert Stack Episodes - The Complete First Season on Amazon Instant Video
/
Season 2
/ Season 3 / Season 4 /
Season 5
/ Season 6 / Season 7 /
Season 8
/ Season 9 / Season 10 /
Season 11
/ Season 12 / Watch on YouTube

Unsolved Mysteries with Dennis Farina Episodes

Watch or Buy Unsolved Mysteries with Dennis Farina - The Complete First Season Episodes on Amazon Instant Video
/ Season 2 / Season 3 / Season 4 / Season 5 / Season 6 / Season 7 / Season 8 / Watch on YouTube


Unsolved Mysteries: UFOs

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: UFOs DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Ghosts

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Ghosts DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Miracles

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Miracles DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Bizarre Murders

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Bizarre Murders DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Psychics

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Psychics DVD Set
Unsolved Mysteries: Strange Legends

Buy Unsolved Mysteries: Strange Legends DVD Set

Sitcoms Online Message Boards - Forums  

Go Back   Sitcoms Online Message Boards - Forums > Unsolved Mysteries

Notices

SitcomsOnline.com News Blog Headlines Twitter Facebook Instagram RSS

truTV Gets 2nd Season of Tacoma FD; I'm Sorry Gets Season 3 on truTV
NBC Fall 2019 Premiere Dates; The CW Fall 2019 Premiere Dates
Netflix Gets Funny with Pranks with Stranger Things Star; Gabrielle Union and Jessica Alba Series Gets 2nd Season
Sitcom Stars on Talk Shows; This Week in Sitcoms (Week of June 17, 2019)
SitcomsOnline Digest: Fall Premiere Dates for CBS; CBS and Viacom in Merger Talks Yet Again
Fri-Yay: Reaction to The Good Place Ending; Antenna TV Brings Back Webster, What's Happening!! and What's Happening Now!!
New Chip 'n' Dale Coming to Disney+ in 2020; Inside the Actors Studio Moves to Ovation and Starts with Sitcom-Themed Show


New on DVD/Blu-ray (April/May/June)

Evening Shade - The Complete Collection Perfect Strangers - The Complete Seventh and Eighth Seasons My Three Sons - The Third Season - Volume One The Brady Bunch - 50th Anniversary The Brady-est TV & Movie Collection Will & Grace (The Revival) - Season Two

04/02 - Archer: Danger Island - The Complete Season Nine
04/09 - You're the Worst - The Complete Fifth Season
04/12 - Evening Shade - The Complete Collection
04/16 - The Big C - The Complete Series (Blu-ray)
05/07 - Baskets - The Complete Season Three
05/13 - I'm Dying Up Here - Season 2
05/13 - My Three Sons - The Third Season - Volume One
05/13 - My Three Sons - The Third Season - Volume Two
05/14 - The Donna Reed Show - Seasons 1-5
05/14 - Petticoat Junction - Seasons 1-3
05/28 - Perfect Strangers - The Complete Seventh and Eighth Seasons (WBShop.com)
05/28 - South Park - The Complete Twenty-Second Season (Blu-ray)
06/04 - The Brady Bunch - 50th Anniversary The Brady-est Brady Bunch TV & Movie Collection
06/18 - Will & Grace (The Revival) - Season Two (Blu-ray)
More TV DVD Releases / DVD Reviews Archive / SitcomsOnline Digest


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-09-2010, 09:50 PM   #136
crystaldawn
Member
Senior Member
 
crystaldawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 17, 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,116
Default

Its great there so much discussion on this case...probably one of my top 5 most favorite cases! It is so baffling but the more I think about it the more I still believe it was a robbery. I can speculate that maybe it was some teenagers or young adults, perhaps even someone that Ayleen knew because she may have had kids that age. That could have been why they felt they needed to silence her. I also wonder if maybe they hit Ayleen to silence her and without really planning to killed her and panicked and staged the accident. As far as no sign of a struggle, I think Ayleen would have cooperated with them in hopes of them not hurting her. Not sure what all was taken but I do believe Justin found an article that mentioned jewelry was missing from the home. Maybe they were looking for something specific and found it.
crystaldawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2010, 11:54 PM   #137
Mastermind
Member
Senior Member
 
Mastermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 16, 2008
Posts: 1,842
Default

Quote:
but I'm going to have to go with mozart on this one.
Thanks. But I didn;t create the bugular theory. The police in conjunction with Mr. Conway created the theory.

Mozart's "accidental death" theory was created on his own.
I have no idea what his qualifications are as he has no idea of yours or my own.

I usually avoid coming up with a theory to frame around a case, I usually just point to what's the best method as to where an investigation should go? What is the best path from a law enforcement perspective.

This is not a "who's the killer" case or a "is he inoocent or guilty" case. This is a murder/accident suicide scenario. Is it accident, suicide, or murder?
In cases like these you have to be careful in siding with suicide or accident. If you choose murder and your wrong...all that's happening is that your chasing after a murderer that deosn;t exist. No real harm or foul. But if you choose accident or suicide...if your wrong...people's lives could be in danger.

IMHO, if there is any significant doubt as to whether this was an accident...A homicide investigation must be initiated to cover all bases.

Would you not agree that there is significant doubt as to whether this is an accident?

[QUOTE]
Quote:
I also think that if the arson investigator were certain that it was arson, he wouldn't have minced words and said what he did--he would have come out and said he felt it was arson.[/QUOTE
Do me 3 favors.

1. Call the Boulder Colorado police department and ask them whether Patsey Ramsey is a suspect in the murder of Jon Benet Ramsey and compare there answer to you to the one the arson investigator gave you.

2. Watch 10 UM segments and compare the answers that the police officers gave in their interviews to the one the arson investigator gave.

3. Ask yourself if you had to go on national television and give an answer on your opinion on whether Ayleen Conway's death was a murder or not...how composed and precise your answer would be in front of all those cameras.

Quote:
I also never suggested anyone was wearing a mask. I discussed the possibility that she knew this assailant. What I suggested is that a burgular would be more likely to have a gun or a knife and use it in a straightforward manner than go to some elaborate trouble to set up an accident that may or may not work out as planned. Car accidents are definitely not the simplest way to commit homicide, although I do agree, people do stage them and get away with it. This just doesn't seem like one of those cases to me.
Why does it not seem like one of those cases to you? Explain.

Quote:
How come there were no signs of a struggle in the house? How did the burgular get in? Through the open backdoor? If you saw an open back door wouldn't you assume that someone was at home? Why would a burgular take that risk? If you were Aeileen and you saw someone breaking and entering another home, wouldn't you run inside and lock that door immediately before calling the cops? So why was the back door still open, and no evidence of a struggle inside?
1. The burgular got in through whatever door Ayleen let him in when she became a hostage of the bugulars.

2. Your assuming that Ayleen would register them as being burgulars. She may have just walked over to them to explain that her neighbor was not in and that they should come back tomorrow. She may have thought they were meter readers or coming to do electrical work. As a matter of fact they may have been dresssed as meter readers. It's a common tactic that several burgulars have used.

3. The backdoor was still open because the robbers where not too interested in securing Ayleen's house after they left with Ayleen. What..were they worried that some one might break in?? Considering the condition of the pool, iron, phone and bath..why do you consider the back door being open to be odd??

4. Again, most likely Ayleens house was not being robbed at the time she ran into them. Most likeley they were either on her property when she ran into them or their were in the process of robbing a neighbors house.

Quote:
Maybe the emergency response did contaminate the scene and destory evidence, but the officer who was the first responder said he could see right away that she was beyond help, so I'm thinking the emergency response would have focused on putting out the fire, and investigating the scene before bringing in whoever would need to remove the vehicle and body.
Why would anyone investigate the scene? It's a fire. All that stuff is going to happen after the firetrucks and ambulances have driven over the road are gone. In fact no investigators would be called until way after the fact. That's why the burning of the car is such a great method of diposing of a body...everyone assumes it's just an accident and a fire at the first response.



Quote:
That must be one boy scout of a burgular! He comes PREPARED!
You do realize what a burgular has to do to rob a house, don;t you? You do realize there is some equipment needed here.

If he was dressed as a meter man or an electrician...he has even more tools to utilize.

Not to mention whats in the car or might be in Ayleens car. Or what might be in Ayleen's house.

Quote:
I agree, if we knew the cause of death then we would be a lot closer to understanding this. I'm not saying these things never happen, I'm just not convinced in this case. There is too much uncertainty. The police didn't even call it murder or arson, they just called it "unexplained." So if they had some evidence which they felt was strong enought to bump it up to a criminal offense, I feel they would have done so.
Unexplained death is investigated by a homicide detective. just as regular homicide is.

The only reason they classify it as unexplained death is that it allows the case to be classified as a suicide or accidental death.

Any case that involves suicide/accident/ or murder as a possibility is always classified as unexplained death regardless of the probablilities and likelihoods of either scenario.

A straight homicide classification is a case where a woman is found axe murdered in her living room. In a case like that accident and suicide are never possibilities.

If a person is killed in a vehicular homicide like a drunk driver case it almost always is classified as unexplained death.

Quote:
Car accidents are definitely not the simplest way to commit homicide, although I do agree, people do stage them and get away with it. This just doesn't seem like one of those cases to me.
I agree. Bludgeoning someone unconcious and setting fire to them alive is a much better method.

Quote:
I guess these sound just as outlandish to you as your theories about a roving band of burgulars who have kits that would allow them to set up elaborate car accidents sounds to me.
This is the primitive version of a "burgulars kit" and one geared toward Sutton's work(not necessarily emblematic of one that would be used in this case. This actually is probably the template from which all thiefs and burgulars developed the concept of the "burgular kit". The burgular's kit is a sort of concept that has been spread through rote. The thing about burglary is that it is a skill that has to be taught if your going to be successful. Mst people learn from another burgular or through rote of other ex-cons when they are jailed.

Most modern kits contain
1. Several types of lockpicks or jimmeys.
2. Air hose
3. Pipe or bludgeone device
4. Rope
5. Duct tape
6. Hammer
7. Screwdriver set
8. Flashlight
9. File

Most of this placed in a black bag or even on a tool belt.

More complex kits could can be geared toward breaking safes
1. Blow torch
2. Dynamite ( I actually came across a burgular kit that had three sticks of dynamite in his house to blow the safe of of a residential house!!

Quote:
You also said something about Aeileen driving normally through her driveway for hours? I'm not sure what you're referring to there, if you're saying she drove normally up until she all of a sudden had the accident, well, that's how accidents happen sometimes. Maybe an animal jumped out in the road ahead of her and she braked and swerved? Or maybe she was disoriented and confused by whatever caused her to leave the house and get in the car in the first place
Whatever caused her to leave the house with her iron on, the pool been filled, the door open and the phone off the hook could only be a life threatening situation (like serious illness or the threat of being killed by someone or being held hostage).

Sure accidents happen when your driving normally to get your groceries at teh store, but she wouldn;t be driving normally...she would be racing like a madman trying to get to the hospital before she expired. She would be racing and weaving out of traffic trying to get to someone that could help her

Apparently while in this mad dash she managed to avoid getting killed or attracting attention while she was still close to her house. Yet this illness allowed her to drive well enough to wind up on that highway where all of a sudden everything falls apart an ends in a massive fireball that just happens to be exascerbated by the fact that the gas cap flew off.

Boy that must have been the worst day ever had by a person.
1. She manages to get a suprise live threatening ailment that she's never had or been prepared for.
2. This ailment just happens to prevent her from calling the police properly or her own actions left the phone inoperable
3. She know has to drive to help, yet this disease and her own fear prevent her from simply driving to the hospital, next door or the nearest gas station or shopping area.
4. On top of that she winds up on a road that is completely away from any help whatsover
5. She succumbs to whatever and finally crashes after having been able to drive all this distance with this ailment and not crashing once.6.
6. And on top of that the gas cap comes off igniting a hellish inferno that kills her
7. To make matters worse this fire is so powerful it prevents any way for the autopsy to be done to determine death leaving the case looking suspiciously like it was arson.

Everything that went wrong that day apparently did. This is Murphy's Law taken to the extreme.

Quote:
We don't know her medical history, you are right, but sometimes people do have "episodes" that could be chemical or could be mental, with no previous problems on record.

I guess these sound just as outlandish to you as your theories about a roving band of burgulars who have kits that would allow them to set up elaborate car accidents sounds to me.
Suicide makes more sense than accidental death. There have been several examples of people driving their cars into structures to kill themselves. The benefit being that it makes the suicide look like an accident. So that your loved ones will not have the grief of knowing you committed suicide. (also helps with insurance.

It makes more sense that Ayleen would suffer some depression attack during her chores. Decides to drive away immediately to escape her "psychological demon". While being far away from her home, Ayleen decides to feel all is hopeless and decides to end it all and hit the accelerator into the rail. In fact, she may have removed the cap to make sure the fire kills her.
Mastermind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 10:09 AM   #138
soilentgreen
Member
Forum Regular
 
Join Date: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hambone2421
She could have interrupted the burglary right at the beginning before anything was stolen. She could have recognized one or both of the burglars (assuming there was more than one). If this occurred, odds are, burglarizing the house takes a back seat as they try to hush the only witness to the crime.
I lean towards this and it's quite possible that Aeileen was killed or injured before the accident and fire occurred.

It is common for victims of a heart attack/stroke/aneurysm to attempt to drive themselves to the hospital (at the hospital where my brother works, they have found people in the parking lot who managed to get there and then have died in their vehicle). A person suffering from a sudden medical condition could become disoriented and meander down roads, eventually wrecking or disabling their vehicle, but this doesn't explain the intense fire or the missing gas cap.
soilentgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 10:54 AM   #139
egswanso
Member
Forum Regular
 
egswanso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 06, 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 462
Default

Reviewed this segment just today; the crash scene itself suggests strongly to me that it was no accident: a missing gas cap, evidence of accelerants, and a high rate of speed. You don't accidently douse your car and yourself with gasoline.

Beyond that, there's just not much evidence presented to support a theory.

Suicide? Possible, but there's nothing in the segment suggesting her motives for suicide.

Burglary? Maybe, although the scene at the house doesn't look like a burglary, given no evidence of ransacking or theft. If there were burglars, it would appear they were looking for something specific or interrupted before they could start burglaring.

Another possibility that the segment didn't really discuss would be a targeted homicide; that is, that someone went to the house for the sole purpose of killing Ayleen. It seemed that the family had money, and perhaps enemies of her husband (if it said what he did for a living, I didn't catch it) may have had reason to target them.
egswanso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 11:06 AM   #140
CeeAlicia
Member
Occasional Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 09, 2010
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
In cases like these you have to be careful in siding with suicide or accident. If you choose murder and your wrong...all that's happening is that your chasing after a murderer that deosn;t exist. No real harm or foul.
I'm not saying they shouldn't investigate. They definitely should, nad if they find evidence that it was a homicide, then go for it. I've got no problem with being proven wrong since I'm not a professional. But, what if you find someone you think was the murderer, they get convicted on scant evidence, and it turns out they are not guilty? Texas has the death penalty, wrongful convictions do happen and people have been wrongfully executed. So there could be harm and foul.

[QOUTE=Mastermind]IMHO, if there is any significant doubt as to whether this was an accident...A homicide investigation must be initiated to cover all bases.

Would you not agree that there is significant doubt as to whether this is an accident?[/QUOTE]

Yes, there are doubts. I listed my doubts the first time I posted--she could have gone to the neighbors for help if it were a medical problem, it could have been a pre-planned scenario for some unknown reason, why didn't the police secure and investigate the home as soon as the husband reported the strange state of the house? Why was her purse still there? These are my doubts. I don't disagree that there are weird circumstances that could lead to all sorts of speculation. I was just left with a different impression of what seemed most likely, given the fact that we are not presented with any physical evidence of other persons being at either scene.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
Why does it not seem like one of those cases to you? Explain.
I've already done this. That's what I did in my previous posts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
1. The burgular got in through whatever door Ayleen let him in when she became a hostage of the bugulars.
Why would she let them in her house if she saw them doing something suspicious at a neighbor's house? If they spotted each other through the back yard, and they forced her to let them in the back door, then okay. If you're saying she spotted them through the back door, and then they asked her to let them in through some other door, then she could easily just lock herself in the house and call 911 and not let anyone in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
2. Your assuming that Ayleen would register them as being burgulars. She may have just walked over to them to explain that her neighbor was not in and that they should come back tomorrow. She may have thought they were meter readers or coming to do electrical work. As a matter of fact they may have been dresssed as meter readers. It's a common tactic that several burgulars have used.
Sooo, if she thought they were meter readers or construction workers, and they thought she thought they were meter readers, why kill her? Why not just say, thanks, and then walk away. I mean, I suppose she could have mentioned it to the neighbor and then realized what it actually was later, but by then the assailant would be long gone. If she knew the person, she probably wouldn't have had any clue what the heck was going on, unless it was a person who was already a known suspicious type--did she even know about the other burgularies in the area? And why would a burgular risk robbing a house that close to someone he knew, and probably knew would be home during the day? I just don't see why someone would take the risk of setting up a weird accident that could go horribly wrong just to avoid some possible burgulary charges? I mean, what if someone had driven by on that road she crashed on and saw what was going on? That's a pretty big risk, even if it is a back country road. It bordered people's land, it was the middle of the day, anyone could have seen them setting this up. Did the police bother to stake out that road during their investigation to see what type of activity occurred there during the day, to see if it was routinely used by anyone as a meeting point or something because of its isolation? We don't know. Did they keep it under wraps that they were doing further investigation at first, or did they make it publicly known?

Quote:
3. The backdoor was still open because the robbers where not too interested in securing Ayleen's house after they left with Ayleen. What..were they worried that some one might break in?? Considering the condition of the pool, iron, phone and bath..why do you consider the back door being open to be odd??
I mentioned it because I thought you were implying that she had spotted these burgulars breaking into someone else's house while she was in the backyard. If not, and she for whatever reason let them in another door, which I don't understand the circumstances of how you think that would have occurred, then you're right and the open back door is not germane. Were any of the other doors of the house left unlocked that day? We are not told.

Also, they're not concerned with the state of Aeileen's house being left in a suspicious way that might raise questions about her death being a murder, but they ARE so concerned that she might finger them in a burgulary that they kill her and stage an elaborate car accident?

Quote:
4. Again, most likely Ayleens house was not being robbed at the time she ran into them. Most likeley they were either on her property when she ran into them or their were in the process of robbing a neighbors house.
I'm still fuzzy on how you think she ran into them? If she spotted them from her backyard, saw it was someone she knew (who I'm assuming she knew was not a meter reader or construction worker, or whatever) doing something suspicious, why not run back in through the open back door and then close and lock it behind you? I don't know, maybe they saw her and already had their guns out and had time to threaten her into letting them in through the backdoor. Or maybe they just threatened her into coming with them and getting in her car right at that moment and never went in the house. That would explain not finding any physical evidence in Aeileen's house--but what about the house that was in the process of being broken into? Was there a report that day from any of her neighbors about anything missing from their homes or anything weird at all? Not that we were shown. Did she see them out a window and go out the front door to talk to them? Then anyone on the street could have seen them.

Quote:
Why would anyone investigate the scene? It's a fire. All that stuff is going to happen after the firetrucks and ambulances have driven over the road are gone. In fact no investigators would be called until way after the fact. That's why the burning of the car is such a great method of diposing of a body...everyone assumes it's just an accident and a fire at the first response.
I think accident scenes involving fatalities usually have an investigation--not necessarily an unexplained death or homicide investigation, but at least an accident investigation. That's why there are photographs of the car at the scene before it was removed. I also said that yes, a fire truck probably would have been there to put out the fire and could have destroyed evidence. I agreed with you on that point. But I feel like any other emergency response would or should have been told to wait before moving in and removing anything (body included) from the scene. As the responding officer stated, he could see that she was already dead when he arrived. There was no one else injured so any emergency medical response would have been unnecessary. Maybe the police were just really that incompetent and did a very cursory investigation--I don't know.


Quote:
You do realize what a burgular has to do to rob a house, don;t you? You do realize there is some equipment needed here.

If he was dressed as a meter man or an electrician...he has even more tools to utilize.

Not to mention whats in the car or might be in Ayleens car. Or what might be in Ayleen's house.
Was anything other than some jewelry reported as missing from the home?



Quote:
Unexplained death is investigated by a homicide detective. just as regular homicide is.

The only reason they classify it as unexplained death is that it allows the case to be classified as a suicide or accidental death.
Okay, but in the course of their investigation, they never bumped it up to homicide, or even arson.


Quote:
I agree. Bludgeoning someone unconcious and setting fire to them alive is a much better method.
Is this what you feel happened here? Then why were there skid marks? Maybe she came to at the last minute, slammed the brakes, got knocked out again but not killed when she crashed, and then they felt they had to set the car on fire? And what if the car had gone over the bridge as they supposedly intended? She could possibly have survived that, too. She could possibly have survived any crash scenario they set up, without the arson element. They were gonna go down underneath the bridge and set the car on fire then, too, maybe? It's hard to tell from the segment what exactly is underneath the bridge, how big of a drop it is, etc. This seems like another very risky proposition.

Quote:
Most modern kits contain
1. Several types of lockpicks or jimmeys.
2. Air hose
3. Pipe or bludgeone device
4. Rope
5. Duct tape
6. Hammer
7. Screwdriver set
8. Flashlight
9. File
Once again, we are not given any information on what types of break-ins these were. Were they the work of a sophisticated pair who went to lengths to cover up how they got in, or were they broken windows, jimmied locks, belongings strewn about, etc. We have no way of knowing. Did the break-ins happen during the day? If they were sophisticated enough burgulars to have lots of equipment and costumes, why didn't they bother to stake out the street to see if there were any housewives at home during the day that might see something?

Quote:
Sure accidents happen when your driving normally to get your groceries at teh store, but she wouldn;t be driving normally...she would be racing like a madman trying to get to the hospital before she expired. She would be racing and weaving out of traffic trying to get to someone that could help her
Not necessarily. If it was psychological in nature, then there's no telling how well or terribly she was driving. Or where she thought she was going. She could have done any sort of weird thing, like leaving her house in a strange state and driving off to the middle of nowhere, losing control of the car, and crashing.


Quote:
Boy that must have been the worst day ever had by a person.
1. She manages to get a suprise live threatening ailment that she's never had or been prepared for.
2. This ailment just happens to prevent her from calling the police properly or her own actions left the phone inoperable
3. She know has to drive to help, yet this disease and her own fear prevent her from simply driving to the hospital, next door or the nearest gas station or shopping area.
4. On top of that she winds up on a road that is completely away from any help whatsover
5. She succumbs to whatever and finally crashes after having been able to drive all this distance with this ailment and not crashing once.
6. And on top of that the gas cap comes off igniting a hellish inferno that kills her
7. To make matters worse this fire is so powerful it prevents any way for the autopsy to be done to determine death leaving the case looking suspiciously like it was arson.

Everything that went wrong that day apparently did. This is Murphy's Law taken to the extreme.
Hey, s**t happens! Seriously, though, the above scenario is just as whacked as the break-in scenario. That would have been a seriously bad day for Aeileen, too! Either way, a lot of stuff DID go wrong for her that day and she ended up dead.


Quote:
Suicide makes more sense than accidental death. There have been several examples of people driving their cars into structures to kill themselves. The benefit being that it makes the suicide look like an accident. So that your loved ones will not have the grief of knowing you committed suicide. (also helps with insurance.
I wouldn't completely rule out suicide, but then why leave the house in such a way? And why skid marks? And what if she survived and was left in pain, incapacitated, etc?

Quote:
It makes more sense that Ayleen would suffer some depression attack during her chores. Decides to drive away immediately to escape her "psychological demon". While being far away from her home, Ayleen decides to feel all is hopeless and decides to end it all and hit the accelerator into the rail. In fact, she may have removed the cap to make sure the fire kills her.
I doubt anyone "decides" to feel that all is hopeless. Suicide can't necessarily be ruled out, but once again, why skid marks? And I don't know if I think she removed the gas cap. It could have been misplaced earlier and she didn't mention it to Pat, or she didn't notice yet. I just need to see some shred of physical evidence that someone else was at either scene before I'll believe it was a burgulary gone awry. For now, I only see something going terribly wrong with Aeileen herself.
CeeAlicia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 11:28 AM   #141
egswanso
Member
Forum Regular
 
egswanso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 06, 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 462
Default

I was just thinking about this one some more, and frankly, it seems like the initial question, at least, all comes down to the crime scene.

If there were accelerants used, I think everyone would have to agree accident (in whatever flavor) is off the table. What's frustrating is that this shouldn't be an open question - analysis of the burn marks and chemical analysis of the vehicle should make it easy to tell what, if any, accelerants were used. It's not clear from the segment if this was done, and, if not, is a potentially major blunder by LE.
egswanso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 12:23 PM   #142
Mastermind
Member
Senior Member
 
Mastermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 16, 2008
Posts: 1,842
Default

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
In cases like these you have to be careful in siding with suicide or accident. If you choose murder and your wrong...all that's happening is that your chasing after a murderer that deosn;t exist. No real harm or foul.

I'm not saying they shouldn't investigate. They definitely should, nad if they find evidence that it was a homicide, then go for it. I've got no problem with being proven wrong since I'm not a professional. But, what if you find someone you think was the murderer, they get convicted on scant evidence, and it turns out they are not guilty? Texas has the death penalty, wrongful convictions do happen and people have been wrongfully executed. So there could be harm and foul.

[QOUTE=Mastermind]IMHO, if there is any significant doubt as to whether this was an accident...A homicide investigation must be initiated to cover all bases.

Would you not agree that there is significant doubt as to whether this is an accident?
Yes, there are doubts. I listed my doubts the first time I posted--she could have gone to the neighbors for help if it were a medical problem, it could have been a pre-planned scenario for some unknown reason, why didn't the police secure and investigate the home as soon as the husband reported the strange state of the house? Why was her purse still there? These are my doubts. I don't disagree that there are weird circumstances that could lead to all sorts of speculation. I was just left with a different impression of what seemed most likely, given the fact that we are not presented with any physical evidence of other persons being at either scene.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
Why does it not seem like one of those cases to you? Explain.

I've already done this. That's what I did in my previous posts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
1. The burgular got in through whatever door Ayleen let him in when she became a hostage of the bugulars.

Why would she let them in her house if she saw them doing something suspicious at a neighbor's house? If they spotted each other through the back yard, and they forced her to let them in the back door, then okay. If you're saying she spotted them through the back door, and then they asked her to let them in through some other door, then she could easily just lock herself in the house and call 911 and not let anyone in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
2. Your assuming that Ayleen would register them as being burgulars. She may have just walked over to them to explain that her neighbor was not in and that they should come back tomorrow. She may have thought they were meter readers or coming to do electrical work. As a matter of fact they may have been dresssed as meter readers. It's a common tactic that several burgulars have used.

Sooo, if she thought they were meter readers or construction workers, and they thought she thought they were meter readers, why kill her? Why not just say, thanks, and then walk away. I mean, I suppose she could have mentioned it to the neighbor and then realized what it actually was later, but by then the assailant would be long gone. If she knew the person, she probably wouldn't have had any clue what the heck was going on, unless it was a person who was already a known suspicious type--did she even know about the other burgularies in the area? And why would a burgular risk robbing a house that close to someone he knew, and probably knew would be home during the day? I just don't see why someone would take the risk of setting up a weird accident that could go horribly wrong just to avoid some possible burgulary charges? I mean, what if someone had driven by on that road she crashed on and saw what was going on? That's a pretty big risk, even if it is a back country road. It bordered people's land, it was the middle of the day, anyone could have seen them setting this up. Did the police bother to stake out that road during their investigation to see what type of activity occurred there during the day, to see if it was routinely used by anyone as a meeting point or something because of its isolation? We don't know. Did they keep it under wraps that they were doing further investigation at first, or did they make it publicly known?

Quote:
3. The backdoor was still open because the robbers where not too interested in securing Ayleen's house after they left with Ayleen. What..were they worried that some one might break in?? Considering the condition of the pool, iron, phone and bath..why do you consider the back door being open to be odd??

I mentioned it because I thought you were implying that she had spotted these burgulars breaking into someone else's house while she was in the backyard. If not, and she for whatever reason let them in another door, which I don't understand the circumstances of how you think that would have occurred, then you're right and the open back door is not germane. Were any of the other doors of the house left unlocked that day? We are not told.

Also, they're not concerned with the state of Aeileen's house being left in a suspicious way that might raise questions about her death being a murder, but they ARE so concerned that she might finger them in a burgulary that they kill her and stage an elaborate car accident?

Quote:
4. Again, most likely Ayleens house was not being robbed at the time she ran into them. Most likeley they were either on her property when she ran into them or their were in the process of robbing a neighbors house.

I'm still fuzzy on how you think she ran into them? If she spotted them from her backyard, saw it was someone she knew (who I'm assuming she knew was not a meter reader or construction worker, or whatever) doing something suspicious, why not run back in through the open back door and then close and lock it behind you? I don't know, maybe they saw her and already had their guns out and had time to threaten her into letting them in through the backdoor. Or maybe they just threatened her into coming with them and getting in her car right at that moment and never went in the house. That would explain not finding any physical evidence in Aeileen's house--but what about the house that was in the process of being broken into? Was there a report that day from any of her neighbors about anything missing from their homes or anything weird at all? Not that we were shown. Did she see them out a window and go out the front door to talk to them? Then anyone on the street could have seen them.

Quote:
Why would anyone investigate the scene? It's a fire. All that stuff is going to happen after the firetrucks and ambulances have driven over the road are gone. In fact no investigators would be called until way after the fact. That's why the burning of the car is such a great method of diposing of a body...everyone assumes it's just an accident and a fire at the first response.

I think accident scenes involving fatalities usually have an investigation--not necessarily an unexplained death or homicide investigation, but at least an accident investigation. That's why there are photographs of the car at the scene before it was removed. I also said that yes, a fire truck probably would have been there to put out the fire and could have destroyed evidence. I agreed with you on that point. But I feel like any other emergency response would or should have been told to wait before moving in and removing anything (body included) from the scene. As the responding officer stated, he could see that she was already dead when he arrived. There was no one else injured so any emergency medical response would have been unnecessary. Maybe the police were just really that incompetent and did a very cursory investigation--I don't know.


Quote:
You do realize what a burgular has to do to rob a house, don;t you? You do realize there is some equipment needed here.

If he was dressed as a meter man or an electrician...he has even more tools to utilize.

Not to mention whats in the car or might be in Ayleens car. Or what might be in Ayleen's house.

Was anything other than some jewelry reported as missing from the home?



Quote:
Unexplained death is investigated by a homicide detective. just as regular homicide is.

The only reason they classify it as unexplained death is that it allows the case to be classified as a suicide or accidental death.

Okay, but in the course of their investigation, they never bumped it up to homicide, or even arson.


Quote:
I agree. Bludgeoning someone unconcious and setting fire to them alive is a much better method.


Is this what you feel happened here? Then why were there skid marks? Maybe she came to at the last minute, slammed the brakes, got knocked out again but not killed when she crashed, and then they felt they had to set the car on fire? And what if the car had gone over the bridge as they supposedly intended? She could possibly have survived that, too. She could possibly have survived any crash scenario they set up, without the arson element. They were gonna go down underneath the bridge and set the car on fire then, too, maybe? It's hard to tell from the segment what exactly is underneath the bridge, how big of a drop it is, etc. This seems like another very risky proposition.

Quote:
Most modern kits contain
1. Several types of lockpicks or jimmeys.
2. Air hose
3. Pipe or bludgeone device
4. Rope
5. Duct tape
6. Hammer
7. Screwdriver set
8. Flashlight
9. File

Once again, we are not given any information on what types of break-ins these were. Were they the work of a sophisticated pair who went to lengths to cover up how they got in, or were they broken windows, jimmied locks, belongings strewn about, etc. We have no way of knowing. Did the break-ins happen during the day? If they were sophisticated enough burgulars to have lots of equipment and costumes, why didn't they bother to stake out the street to see if there were any housewives at home during the day that might see something?

Quote:
Sure accidents happen when your driving normally to get your groceries at teh store, but she wouldn;t be driving normally...she would be racing like a madman trying to get to the hospital before she expired. She would be racing and weaving out of traffic trying to get to someone that could help her

Not necessarily. If it was psychological in nature, then there's no telling how well or terribly she was driving. Or where she thought she was going. She could have done any sort of weird thing, like leaving her house in a strange state and driving off to the middle of nowhere, losing control of the car, and crashing.


Quote:
Boy that must have been the worst day ever had by a person.
1. She manages to get a suprise live threatening ailment that she's never had or been prepared for.
2. This ailment just happens to prevent her from calling the police properly or her own actions left the phone inoperable
3. She know has to drive to help, yet this disease and her own fear prevent her from simply driving to the hospital, next door or the nearest gas station or shopping area.
4. On top of that she winds up on a road that is completely away from any help whatsover
5. She succumbs to whatever and finally crashes after having been able to drive all this distance with this ailment and not crashing once.
6. And on top of that the gas cap comes off igniting a hellish inferno that kills her
7. To make matters worse this fire is so powerful it prevents any way for the autopsy to be done to determine death leaving the case looking suspiciously like it was arson.

Everything that went wrong that day apparently did. This is Murphy's Law taken to the extreme.

Hey, s**t happens! Seriously, though, the above scenario is just as whacked as the break-in scenario. That would have been a seriously bad day for Aeileen, too! Either way, a lot of stuff DID go wrong for her that day and she ended up dead.


Quote:
Suicide makes more sense than accidental death. There have been several examples of people driving their cars into structures to kill themselves. The benefit being that it makes the suicide look like an accident. So that your loved ones will not have the grief of knowing you committed suicide. (also helps with insurance.

I wouldn't completely rule out suicide, but then why leave the house in such a way? And why skid marks? And what if she survived and was left in pain, incapacitated, etc?

Quote:
It makes more sense that Ayleen would suffer some depression attack during her chores. Decides to drive away immediately to escape her "psychological demon". While being far away from her home, Ayleen decides to feel all is hopeless and decides to end it all and hit the accelerator into the rail. In fact, she may have removed the cap to make sure the fire kills her.

I doubt anyone "decides" to feel that all is hopeless. Suicide can't necessarily be ruled out, but once again, why skid marks? And I don't know if I think she removed the gas cap. It could have been misplaced earlier and she didn't mention it to Pat, or she didn't notice yet. I just need to see some shred of physical evidence that someone else was at either scene before I'll believe it was a burgulary gone awry. For now, I only see something going terribly wrong with Aeileen herself.
[/QUOTE]

All due respect, your arguments were less convincing than your previous post. I also feel your completely avoiding and missed points that were made previously. I could answer your questions but I would be repeating what is said in previous posts and what others have said. We would be arguing just to argue. I also have a feeling your locked into a theory just to be locked into one. A situation where i am not, if there is evidence to promote accident I will follow that theory and even bolster it. You have presented nothing to present accident here.

In short you've actually made me more convinced that this is not an accident. But in fairness, you did help bring up the one possibility of homicide.

In regards to the lack of physical evidence of break through there are several examples of home invasion, breakthroughs and murders in which the perps never left physical evidence. Lets consider the types of physical evidence not left

1. Footprints...You could spend your life in homicide and never come across a footprint. Whether someone leaves a footprint depends on
a. Size and girth...short and light people tend not to leave heavy impressions
b. Surface---Very few people have floors or concrete surfaces. Carpet is the common surface. Shag carpeting is a notoriously bad surface for footprints.
c. Environment- Footprints are usually caused by a substance in contact with the shoe..if theres no dust, rain, mud, snow, etc...you stand an excellent chance of not leaving footprints.
d. Shoes---Sneakers rarely leave footrprints. Boots almost always do. Dress shoes fall in between. If you have smooth surface shoes they tend not to leave impressions unlike cleated shoe or heeled shoes.
e. Movement-- If your not running in the house or moving that much. If you walking a little bit or standing or sitting in a house, these going to be less opportunity to leave prints
f. Time- How long are you in the house? If you simply walk into one or two rooms and walk out, theres even less a chance you leave prints.

2. Evidence of break in---Not an issue here, the door was open.

3. Fingerprints- as long as you wear gloves (a common tactic in burgularies) , you wont leave a print

4. DNA- AH!!! Maybe there were scads of DNA left by these people..Unfortunately we were several years too early for that technology. Time and Movement also decrease the chances of DNA being in the house. Clothing also affects this. If your not sweating, rubbing onto something, etc you might not leave discernable DNA.

5. Evidence of struggle - If there are two 200 lbs guys fighting in the house, there would be tons of evidence of chairs turned over, lamps broken, bookshelves turned over.. But Ayleen is a woman being apprehemded by possibley two men...how much of a struggle could she make? It probably took them fives seconds to grab her. Could easily be done without any damage to the house or furniture.

The lack of struggle actually hurts the accident theory more...If she was in dire straits to leave the house why was she not fumbling for the medicine cabinet turning over chairs trying to run to the car. Why was her purse not turned over. Why did she not know over anything driving the car out of the driveway?

6. Blood - Most likely Ayleen was not killed in the house. Hence no blood. Any struggle would have taken a short amount of time with very little chance of skin being cut.

7. Hair- If your bald you won;t leave hair. If your short haired you'l leave even less chance of hair. You usually need long hair to have a chance of leaving a hair sample at the scene. Considering this is the late 70s early 80s, there might be a chance that an African American would have an Afro hairstyle which could leave hair. But quite a few of them tend to have shorter hairs and nappy hair tends to be less likely to be left. Chances of arm hair being left depends on whether criminal is wearing short sleaves or not. Pubic hair only gets left in rapes or if the perp goes to use the toilet. Women tend to have the greatest chance of leaving hair do to the length and the greater chance hair is on their clothing. People that have dogs tend to have dog hair on the clothes which is also a consideration. As with the other factors above, time and movement affect the chances this evidence is left. Plus hair also gets blown away by wind and movement making it difficult to find if it ever was there.

8. Clothing Fibers- This is something that sounds good in theory..but in practice never works. Fibers depend a lot on what type of clothing you wear. Some clothes leave significantly less than others. Also leaving fibers usually requires your clothes to be in contact with something directly. In this case the only thing that clothing would be in contact with would be Ayleen Conway herself and the car. Unfortunately the fire destroyed any possibility of that evidence to be found. Fibers can also be blown aways.

If you review the above factors, you'll see why it is not unusual to find evidence of an intruder at a crime scene.

That;'s why a detective cannot use the absence of physical evidence as thee sole reason to rule out an intruder. There are other mitigating factors (less of all is contamination of the crime scene) that are likely to prevent that evidence from existing.

It is also important to keep in mind that the crime scene is also extended to Ayleen;s car. Which in this case was completely burned. A majority of the evidence that you feel may be missing may have actually been in that car.

They're probably were hair, fibers and blood evidence in that car. Maybe even fingerprints.

Last edited by Mastermind; 02-10-2010 at 01:23 PM.
Mastermind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 01:16 PM   #143
Mastermind
Member
Senior Member
 
Mastermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 16, 2008
Posts: 1,842
Default

I don;t know why the accelarator is such a big deal in this case. It neither proves nor disproves accident/suicide/murder.

1. If Ayleen was being kidnapped by burgulars, a struggle could have ensued that resulted in the accelarator being hit and the car hitting the rail.

2. If Ayleen was being chased she could have hit the accelerator to escape
or in confusion.

3. If Ayleen was suicidal she could have hit the accelator to kill herself.

4. if ayleen was suffering from "Abnormally Sudden Mysteries Illness Syndrome" ASMIS (I want medical credit for this!!) she could have hit the accelerator will finally succumbing to the throes of this rare disease.

5. Her abductors could have knocked her unconcious, rigged the accelerator to hit the rail and then set the car on fire.

All theories are valid based on the accelarator evidence.
All the accelerator tells us is that it was the reason why the car hit the rail. That's about it.
Mastermind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 01:27 PM   #144
mozartpc27
Vigilante Logician
Forum Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 09, 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 820
Default

The evidence for arson, Mastermind, ultimately boils down to this:

1) The gas cap was missing
2) The car and all of its interior burned very intensely, more so than the accident investigator would expect if the fire had started "naturally," given that the interior upholstrey used flame-retardant materials.

There is no direct evidence, apparently, that the inside of the car was actually doused with gasoline. Had there been, this would remove all doubt.

Let's compare this case to the Kathy Bonderman case for a moment (she too was found dead inside a burning car), because I think that would be instructive. In the Bonderman case, the local sheriff thought that this had been an accident, but the state highway patrolman sent to investigate thought it was murder. In that case, the evidence for arson was strong, especially when compared to the case against it. One of the big issues was whether, as the local sheriff surmised, Kathy's car had veered off the road, then gone over railroad tracks at a place not designed for automobile crossing. He felt that this was what had happened, and in the process of going over raised tracks, a combination of sparks and perhaps leaking fuel had ignited the fire that eventually killed her. However, when the state police examined Kathy's car, they found no evidence of structural damage, other than the fire. This, of course, is strong evidence for arson. Furthermore, upon investigating the interior of the car, state police could identify multiple starting points for the fire, originating in the interior of the car. Again, strong evidence for arson, especially when taken together with the complete lack of structural damage to the automobile. Moreover, Kathy was found on the passenger side of the vehicle, not the driver's side, as one would expect. Finally, about 300 yards from the site where her car was found, an empty gas container was found; hardly proof, but awfully suggestive. As it turned out, of course, this WAS arson, and her husband was the one who had killed her.

Now let's turn back to Aieleen's case. No one disputes that there was heavy front-end structural damage to the car, owing to the again undisputed real crash that occurred. This factor alone could have caused a rupture in the fuel line inside the engine; if that rupture happens, causing gasoline to spew forth, as metal strikes metal at a high rate of speed, causing sparks, a fire - and a very bad one - is hardly a surprising result. Further, the pattern of the burning (the melding of the bumper to the guard rail you mentioned) to me suggests the intensity of the fire was highest at the point of impact - i.e., where the bumper and the front of the car collided with the guard rail. Again, this is what you would expect if a metal-on-metal collision ruptures a fuel line, introducing gasoline into the equation. I've had my own car have a ruptured fuel line once, inside the engine compartment, and it's amazing how fast, just by coming into contact with engine parts that are hot from the normal heat of a running engine, that gasoline will ignite, let me assure you.

The gas cap was missing, which might be suggestive, but we really don't know if it went missing during this accident, or whether it had been missing some time before. Further, it would not be so extraordinary for the gas cap to be blown off in an intense fire that originates at the front end of the car and features a ruptured (and therefore open) fuel line. The heat from that fire would travel down the fuel line and begin to heat the tank itself, causing a rise in pressure inside the gas tank, which could blow a plastic cap off.

The point is, the missing gas cap is only suggestive, at best.

So, in summary, it can't be shown for sure that the interior of the car was in fact doused with gasoline or another accelrant, and neither can it be firmly established that the fire had an origin point inside the vehicle, which it certainly would in an arson case (no one trying to dispose of a body and evidence inside the cabin of a vehicle is going to douse the engine of that vehicle with gaoline, light it on fire, and then leave, hoping that the fire spreads quickly enough and ferociously enough into the cabin to destroy all the evidence).

It's entirely possible that fire was started by the accident itself (I've certainly seen more than a few total burn-outs caused by traffic accidents in my travels), and, to have staged this accident, the burglar or burglars - who, again, left no traces of their own existence - would have either had to take their lives in their own hands by being inside a car travelling 50-60mph as it struck a guard rail, or else managed to get very lucky in staging exactly this scene.

It's still the deep, deep unlikelihood of being able to stage an accident scene like this - skid marks and all - that makes a murder in this case unbelievable to me.
__________________
"You can't say the words that the rock makes you feel like." - Patty Johnson
mozartpc27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 06:21 PM   #145
Mastermind
Member
Senior Member
 
Mastermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 16, 2008
Posts: 1,842
Default

Quote:
It's still the deep, deep unlikelihood of being able to stage an accident scene like this - skid marks and all - that makes a murder in this case unbelievable to me.
No it's a deep deep, unlikelihood that this was accidental death.

Evidence is missing destroyed, your basing your theory on the absence of evidence.

1. Ayleen's body was destroyed
2. The evidence in the car was destroyed.


Quote:
mozartpc27 The evidence for arson, Mastermind, ultimately boils down to this:

1) The gas cap was missing
2) The car and all of its interior burned very intensely, more so than the accident investigator would expect if the fire had started "naturally," given that the interior upholstrey used flame-retardant materials.

There is no direct evidence, apparently, that the inside of the car was actually doused with gasoline. Had there been, this would remove all doubt
1. That's two pieces of evidence more than the accidental death theory. You have zero evidence to prove that she suffered a stroke.
2. Your assuming there is no more evidence to find. There is much more that can be investigated and more evidence that can be discovered.

There are several differences between this case and the Kathy Bonderson case. I think your letting that case jade your opinions on this one.

Mozart, what is the medical practicality that your stroke theory would work? That a human being could perform these acts under a stroke?
Mastermind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 06:23 PM   #146
Mastermind
Member
Senior Member
 
Mastermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 16, 2008
Posts: 1,842
Default

You also mentioned in a post that you felt Unsolved Mysteries trumped up several cases to make them more mysterious. This would indicate that you have a bias to see that this case become one of those trumped up cases.

Technically this makes you biased in your assessment.
Mastermind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2010, 08:53 PM   #147
CeeAlicia
Member
Occasional Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 09, 2010
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 8
Default

Mastermind, in my last post, which you stated convinced you more than ever that this WAS a homicide, I really wasn't trying to necessarily convince you of the accident/illness theory. I feel that you, too, are locked in to your idea of what happened. We all perceive things in our own way, and sometimes we are proven right, and sometimes we are proven wrong. At this point, I seriously doubt any one of us is going to get a solid answer about what happened--it's been like, 25 years with no new information.

I was asking a lot of questions that I felt were relevant that we didn't get answers to in the segment--such as the details of the burgularies in the area, how the scenes were investigated, whether there were other reports of suspicious activities or missing valuables in the neighborhood that day, the possible timeline of events that morning, etc.--trying to really convince myself one way or the other. Also, I was trying to respond to your questions with what my line of thinking had been, and why I felt mozart's idea seemed more in line with the evidence.

There are lots of ways that I could see this shaking out as a burgulary gone wrong--IF we had more complete answers. It's not so clear-cut to me, as it seems to be for you.

Here's a theory--Aeileen sees through a window in her home, an electrician in a uniform in her next door neighbor's yard, trying to get in the house. She goes out her back door, leaving it open, and gets the person's attention over her fence to let them know that the neighbor is not at home, when the guy turns around and pulls out his gun. (Apparently he doesn't care that she thinks he's an electrician, he's determined to kill ANYONE who sees him, even though he is in costume, and she has clearly bought into it. OR it was someone she happened to know, and as soon as he turned around, he knew that she would know he was not an electrician and that he was indeed about to rob the house, therefore he must kill her. Somewhat irrational, but let's just go with it for the sake of the theory, since we are already on this slippery slope.) He orders her to come with him--they go out the gate in her fence, through the neighbor's yard to the front of the houses where the cars are parked and alerts his partner who is waiting for him in their getaway car.

The guy with the gun tells Aeileen to get into her car and drive, while the partner follows in the second car. (This was before Oprah had enlightened the world about never letting them bring you to a second location. )

They drive out to this road which the burgular happens to know is very isolated and has a bridge. He tells Aeileen to stop the car about 200-250 feet away from the bridge. When she pulls over, he knocks her out with the butt of his gun, and gets out of the car, somehow managing to remove the church bulletin at the same time without realizing it, or just not caring. THEN, these two discuss how to get rid of her without it looking like a murder, and decide to set up an accident.

Somehow with whatever he and his partner happen to have in their all-purpose burgulary kit and getaway car, they (for example) rig a brick or some other heavy object over the accelerator to press down (maybe they use a rope, I don't know, I'm not really sure how you rig accidents, but it seems kind of complicated, to say the least) on the accelerator once the car is started AND put in Drive. They expect the car to go over the bridge (possibly), or maybe they actually did expect it to just hit the guard rail really fast and hard. Maybe besides being burgulars, they were also mathematicians and geometricians and physicists who could figure out really quickly how fast the car would go, where it would hit, how much time it would need and all that stuff. Or, maybe they were just gambling men who decided to set it up and see what happened! (But that does imply that they would come to the burgulary way less prepared, and that they might have been willing to risk just walking away once Aeileen had told them the neighbors were out. I don't know, I wasn't a psych major, I freely admit it.)

If they expected the car to go over the bridge, then, shoot, bad luck! Not only did the car NOT go over the bridge and kill Aeileen, but she also woke up during the course of the accident and hit the brakes, causing the skid marks! But one lucky thing did happen--she got knocked out again, or so badly injured once the car hit that she can't move to get out of the car and fight for her life. Because at this point she would know that they were trying to kill her, and I would hope that if she had any fight in her, she would have fought. At any rate, she's incapacitated AGAIN--but still not dead, otherwise why wouldn't they just remove the rigging device and leave her there looking like she crashed and died--and the car is totalled. OR maybe she is dead, but the car is so badly damaged that they can't get in the front seat to remove the rigging device, so oops, now what?!

Now, one of the burgulars gets the bright idea that if they set the car on fire, it will look like something that happened in the course of the accident, and hopefully destroy lots of evidence. But they don't have an accelerant in their kit! Darn! However, they do for some reason (maybe they've also been stealing people's gas from their cars) have a siphon and a canister. They remove the gas cap and siphon the gas out of Aeileen's car into their canister and get in the backseat and pour the gasoline all over the place, toss a match, run, and watch the car burn up.

They think they have done their very best, and, satisfied, drive off into the sunset.

But whoops--these brilliant, or brilliantly lucky, men have totally forgotten that they maybe should have gone back to Aeileen's home to make sure she hadn't had the iron (or even worse, the stove) on or left any other clues that may have made her leaving the house seem so abrupt and suspicious. Big mistake, because once Pat gets home the alarm bells are ringing.

BUT, then they got lucky again because the cops so bungle the scene that absolutely NO evidence of their shoes or their getaway car is discovered. AND luckily whatever they were doing at the neighbor's house never got far enough to arouse anyone else's suspicion that there was an attempted break-in. AND luckily the fire was so intense that it burned up the rigging device that they couldn't get, OR in the event that they had been able to remove the rigging device but the initial accident hadn't killed Aeileen, luckily for them Aeileen was so intensely burned that the coroner or ME had no way of determining whether the accident or the fire killed her, or whether she had been pistol-whipped at any point. AND luckily AGAIN, the arson investigator couldn't even determine whether there was definitely an accelerant used to start the fire or not. All he could say conclusively was that the gas cap was missing (oops, one other thing they forgot!).

That's a theory that pretty much fits in with the evidence we were shown. (Although I am sure I missed something somewhere ) Given, I would think they maybe held back some details from the public so that if there was a tip or if someone did get caught that they could determine for certain it's authenticity.

It seems like to me, either Aeileen had the unluckiest day of her life, and/or the assailants had the luckiest day of theirs. I feel like a lot more unlikely things happened in my above scenario than what mozart suggested, but hey, maybe I'm (or you, since it involves your idea about the neighbor being the target of the burgulary, and the wearing of the disguises, and suggestion of the burgulary kit) at least partially right. Now if only someone could prove it!

I also don't see why you think that just because a person had a medical emergency, became disoriented, and wanted to leave the house quickly that they would be turning over chairs or causing other havoc, like driving completely recklessly through town. When my grandmother had her first stroke, she took a valium and then called my father to try to tell him that she had had a stroke. People do weird things when they are under some pressure or anxiety. Or, maybe Aeileen had been going through some depression or other type of adjustment or anxiety disorder that caused her to want to leave everything behind, but Pat couldn't or wouldn't accept it (or admit it publicly), and so he set up the hose, the bath, and the iron himself. We never hear from any of the older kids or other family members--that's kind of unusual on UM, although not unheard of. Basically, there's just as much evidence presented to us for smart, reasonable people to draw very different conclusions.

I hope you don't think I'm just trying to argue with you for the sake of argument. This is a very intriguing discussion to me, and I do like to read everyone's posts and see what ideas come up. Hopefully I'm contributing some of those, too.

Anyway, sorry for the novel-length post. Hope it was somewhat entertaining.
CeeAlicia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2010, 04:12 PM   #148
Mastermind
Member
Senior Member
 
Mastermind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 16, 2008
Posts: 1,842
Default

Quote:
herefore he must kill her. Somewhat irrational


I don;t think they originally intended to kill at all. I think the situation deteriorated to a point where they had no choice but to kill her.

It's only a possibility that they were wearing a uniform...they might have been wearing regular clothes. There is no standard burgular uniform, so I don;t know that you would register one or two men on someone's property as burgulars. This isn;t the South Bronx...I would imagine that people are a lot friendlier and not that distrustful.

1. I think there first idea was to try to pass their actions off as being normal. If a stranger they probably said " Oh, hi we're just here to ummm. ummm check on the light fixture. or if a known person they probably tried to bypass the reason why there on the person's property "Oh Hi, Ayleen ..Mrs. Conway...we're umm. just here to help out with the lawn.

2. At this point Ayleen may have believed them, been suspicous or made a rush. Several things could have happened here.
1. Ayleen may said right out that she was going to call the police. Not an unusal scenario I've seen old ladies do just that and they've lived in a lot worse neighborhoods. CW Rodddy got into a fist fight with a drug-dealer..why would it be so out of the ordinary for Ayleen to do this? This is especially true if she knew the person. The burgular may have even been arguing with her all the way into the house till she got to the phone.
2. Ayleen may have said nothing...panic may have set in to one of the criminals and they either drew a gun or rushed to track her down before she got to the phone. Hence a burgualry know became a hostage situation.
3. At this point this became a botched robbery attempt...There plan ruined. Now they had a women in the possesion who has seen them and could testify them. They couldn't just kill her and leave...
a. They would have a murder on their hands that could get tied to them(especially if a gun is used...bullet could be tied to the gun.
b. They lose out on their haul considering they would have stolen nothing.
4. This started what was an improvised plan that probably changed right up to the end. They couldn't stay in the house, they couldn't do a complete burgulary of the house (except for maybe a few things), since they had Ayleen to deal with. Remember the phone was off the hook, someone might come any minute to investigate why Ayleen was not home. The best plan at this point was to leave the premise with Ayleen. They took her in her car (maybe they had their own, maybe they thought they could sell it., maybe burning the car came to them at this point)
5. Hence they all left in Ayleen's car (or two cars maybe). They probably told Ayleen that they had no desire to kill her and just wanted to escape out of state. They probably just told her that they would let her go once they reached the limits.(this would explain why Ayleen was found so far away, if I am correct this would be the route to leave the state) What happened from this point is open to several possibilities. What we do know is that at the end of this interrupted burgulary, the pers set Ayleen's car on fire to burn any evidence and make it look like an accident.

Quote:
There are lots of ways that I could see this shaking out as a burgulary gone wrong--IF we had more complete answers. It's not so clear-cut to me, as it seems to be for you.
I believe there is more evidence to be found via further investigation. I do not believe we have all the pieces of the puzzle here. We're missing a big piece in the lack of autopsy and the destruction of one potential crimes scene(the car).

Quote:
The guy with the gun tells Aeileen to get into her car and drive, while the partner follows in the second car. (This was before Oprah had enlightened the world about never letting them bring you to a second location.
You were'nt serious with that statement? You honestly told me that nobody gets into the car with an armed person, anymore because Oprah, said it. You lost credibility with that statement. That there no hostage situations anymore because "america got wiser"? There was a hostage situation last month that played out like that in California.

Quote:
Somehow with whatever he and his partner happen to have in their all-purpose burgulary kit and getaway car, they (for example) rig a brick or some other heavy object over the accelerator to press down (maybe they use a rope, I don't know, I'm not really sure how you rig accidents, but it seems kind of complicated, to say the least) on the accelerator once the car is started AND put in Drive. They expect the car to go over the bridge (possibly), or maybe they actually did expect it to just hit the guard rail really fast and hard. Maybe besides being burgulars, they were also mathematicians and geometricians and physicists who could figure out really quickly how fast the car would go, where it would hit, how much time it would need and all that stuff. Or, maybe they were just gambling men who decided to set it up and see what happened! (But that does imply that they would come to the burgulary way less prepared, and that they might have been willing to risk just walking away once Aeileen had told them the neighbors were out. I don't know, I wasn't a psych major, I freely admit it.)
You seem to be under the impression that burning a car and rigging an accelerator are beyond the layperson. One does not have to be a criminal genius or even heavily equipped.

1. To rig any accelarator all you need is a heavy object. A perfect example of this is in a scene in the movie "Sideways" with Paul Giammati. Auto insuaance investigators come across several examples of people who have rigged acceleerators to fake crashes. None of these people are rocket scientiests or have equipment bags.

2. If you walk through the streets of Detroit or anacostia, DC, you'll be treated to the beautiful sights of charred out automobiles. Who does them/ Street youths, Gangs, ticked off drug dealers. All you need to burn a car is a piece of cloth and match or lighter. None of these people are expert arsonists.

3. You seem to also believe that this burgualry scenario is unique to this case. It is not. There have been several murders that involved a person being taking and then set up to make it look like they died in a fire. I could be wrong but didn;t one of the Mary Morris murders occur this way? I might be wrong, skip that.
Quote:
Basically, there's just as much evidence presented to us for smart, reasonable people to draw very different conclusions.
Not really. There zero evidence to really conclude an accident.

When an accident happens
1. You know the reason why the person was on the road to begin with. To go to work, to pickup their kids, to drive to the bar. There is no evidence to indicate a reason why she left. Not only that, she left her house in disarray with the door open. She left under suspicious circumstances.
2. You also usually have a good idea why the car crashed. In this case, the guard rail caused the crash, but the fire was really caused by the fact the gas cap was missing. The cause of the accident was the was not just the crash but the fire that was caused by the gas cap disappearance.
3. Usually you have a good majority of the inside of the car available to see if there is any evidence. In this case, all the evidence in the inside was destroyed by the fire. An in this case you had the advantage of the car not been compacted, which is the usuall problem.
4. And more importantly their is the absence of the autopsy which usually conclusive in telling us they died of a broken neck, etc. We don't have that in this case.

The chances of all the above happening in an accident are improbabe. This would be one of the more bizarre accidents ever recorded.

I cannot buy that all the above happened under normal circumstances.

Quote:
It seems like to me, either Aeileen had the unluckiest day of her life, and/or the assailants had the luckiest day of theirs
How can you call them lucky?
1. They got interrupted before they could burgular a house and make their pay day.
2. They suffered the worse thing that can happen in that they have an eyeball witness to their activities.
3. They made off with practically nothing in their haul.
4. They had to waste time in trying to deal with this witness.
5. They had to stoop to murder to get rid of this witness. Including the arduous task of taking her out, killing her and burning the car and body.
6. They probably spent the entire ride back smelling of gasoline and commiserating about what they had to do.
7. Their attempt to hide Ayleen's murder as an accident failed. The arson investigator pointed to the possibility of arson (is that correect enough language for you guys...SHEESHH ) This case is on the books and is being investigated by violent crimes. Hence they did not cover the crime.
8. They probably had to curtail or even stop their burgularies because of the murder investigation and the fact that burgulars were considered a suspect. They most likely can't operate in the town or even have to lam it completely. They may be living far worse of than they where before the murder.
9. They know have to live with the fact that there is a murder case that has superceded the burgualry cases meaning they have to be on watch every day of their lives.

This was a botched robbery. A failure of "bay of pigs" enormity. There is nothing lucky at all regarding anyone in this case. Except maybe Unsolved Mysteries which got an interesting case to do.
Mastermind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2010, 12:18 AM   #149
CeeAlicia
Member
Occasional Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 09, 2010
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 8
Default

The Oprah comment was a joke. That was why I put a "LOL" smiley after it. I obviously don't think that that ended all hostage situations in America or anywhere. May have been in poor taste, sorry.

I'm honestly trying to figure out what you think the scenario was here, not just trying to wind you up. I guess it is enough just to leave it at--you think there was foul play, and you have lots of different speculations about how and why--which opens the door to all sorts of possible universes. I think there could have been foul play, but I also think mozart's idea makes more sense given what we've seen. I'm not trying to make it a personal attack, or tell you you have no credibility as a thinking person or whatever.

1. I did account for the possibility that Aeileen approached the person in a friendly or inquisitive manner.

2. I did account for the possibility that it was someone she knew.

3. Okay, let's assume they all left in one car. I'd love to be able to find this road on Google Maps and see if your idea about leaving the state via this route is at all viable. I guess it depends which state they were supposedly hoping to get to afterward. And I think it would have had to have been 2 cars because otherwise, after the accident, they're walking around out in the open carrying their burgular kits, and probably smelling like gasoline and fire or whatever. And wouldn't they have most likely approached the original burgulary in a vehicle, if they are carrying around all this different equipment? And once again, wouldn't they have staked out the street for a day or two to make sure there wasn't a housewife neighbor at home who could see them?

4. Those people you mentioned who the insurance investigators run across as rigging accidents--I'm assuming the only reason they know the accidents were rigged is because it was done poorly and the people got caught. Rigging an accident to occur in itself might not be difficult, but doing it successfully without getting discovered probably requires a little bit of study beforehand.

5. You still haven't accounted for the skid marks. That is evidence of an accident, or at the very least, someone attempting to stop a crash from happening.

6. I agree that the house was left under suspicious circumstances--but to say that when an accident happens you always know the reason a person was in their car and the reason they were in the location is not true. I could decide to take my car out somewhere I've never been tomorrow without alerting anyone and end up having an accident and dying, and no one would know why I was there. Obviously, that isn't what happened here, but your statement is way presumptive. And, once again, I don't see why they went to all this trouble to make everything at the crash scene appear accidental, but they let her leave her house in such a state as to instantly arouse suspicion?

7. I don't know what caused the fire. No one knows. Not even the arson investigator could say for certain what caused the fire. Cars do crash and catch on fire without arsonists being involved. I know they're not supposed to, and I don't know if they're always this intense, but it does happen.

8. When I said they were lucky, I meant they were lucky in relation to the circumstances they found themselves in re: Aeileen. They succesfully rigged a murder and an arson to look like an accident, didn't leave any evidence except for a church bulletin at either scene, and had cops that didn't believe her husband when he first raised the red flag. Obviously they weren't lucky in relation to an attempted burgulary.
CeeAlicia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2010, 01:55 PM   #150
mozartpc27
Vigilante Logician
Forum Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 09, 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 820
Default

Mastermind: Not to keep debating this endlessly, but you've asked me a couple of times recently what kind of an ailment would allow Aieleen to drive for awhile BEFORE getting into an accident. I ask you to consider the case of George Owens. Owens clearly had some sort of minor medical "event" - probably a stroke - that caused him to become disoriented, and drive far away from his home for no apparent reason. Moreover, my grandfather suffered from very minor strokes for much of his adult life (as a consequence of injuries sustained during WWII).

In other words, a stroke need not total incapacitate its victim. It is, in fact, more than possible to have a minor stroke and become disoriented. Indeed, it is also more than possible to then suffer a more major stroke a not-too-long-time later.

It's not as wildly implausible as you want to make it seem.
mozartpc27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:14 AM.


Frequently Asked Questions

1) How do I contact Unsolved Mysteries with information on segments?

If you any information on cases, you can contact them via:

Website: www.unsolved.com

Contact form on official Unsolved Mysteries site

Please note that their old mailing address and 1-800 phone number no longer work.


2) Where can I watch Unsolved Mysteries?

Lifetime

Lifetime Schedule / Lifetime Site

Escape Schedule / Escape Site


Although the administrators and moderators of the Sitcoms Online Message Boards will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of the Sitcoms Online Message Boards, nor vBulletin Solutions Inc. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message. The owners of the Sitcoms Online Message Boards reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

VigLink badge

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.