Cindy James (Video Link Included) [Archive] - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

purple rose

03-13-2008, 12:09 PM

Purple rose, perhaps you can enlighten us with your thoughts---
There are a few things that make me doubt that anyone did this besides your sister, such as why would she not discuss this with anyone? If she was honestly fearful and getting attacked like she was, why not confide in anyone? Also, the whole scenario (assuming UM was correct on it's facts) of Cindy walking her dog at 3 in the morning...why in the world would she do that knowing that she was being stalked and fearing for her life?
I hope this doesn't come off as insensitive, if so, I'm sorry. I mean no disrespect. I'm very sorry for your loss, and I'm very sorry that regardless of who did it, that Cindy had to go through the torture and then have it end in such an awful way.

God bless and thank you.

Kamy

Kamy, this requires a long answer (sorry, but you asked and no, that wasn’t disrespectful or insensitive but very valid!)…
Cindy went to the police for help and a few doubted her (and some were rude) so I suspect she learned to shut her mouth.
Then she hired a security services provider and he wasn’t able to stop what was happening or catch anyone (why?).
And sometimes Cindy would say to me with disdain, “Well I suppose Mom has already told you about…” even though my mom had not talked to me regarding an incident.
I realized there was a huge problem in my family about sharing information, as if it would be seen as gossip. I certainly did not want to be a gossip. Talking behind Cindy’s back about her would have been considered a breach of her sacred right to privacy. We had all lived our own lives and interacted when it suited us. We had shared what we wanted when we wanted. That’s just the way it had been. And it was probably one of the reasons why Cindy’s harassment escalated to the point it did.
It seemed nobody had known enough about the entire situation in time to help her effectively, in time to fully understand what was going on—neither the police nor her security services provider nor the medical community nor her family. Very sad, isn’t it?
Sharing information about her harassment was extremely difficult for Cindy; she was very selective about what she shared. And I was reluctant to ask her for details because she would say, “Do you really want me to tell you? The details are too horrible. I’d have to relive it all again.” I would feel ashamed and guilty for asking, so over the years I had learned to wait for her to come to me with details and feelings. Whenever anything happened, I just wanted to know she was OK, to support her in the only way I knew how, with hugs and verbal reassurances. Whenever she did divulge her private life, I always had the belief she was telling me the truth.
And, periodically she had implored me to watch out for myself and be safe, but she NEVER said why. It was years later I found out why—my life, and the lives of other family members, had allegedly been threatened during an attack on Cindy on January 27th 1983.
As far as walking her dog in the middle of the night (if it’s true – the security provider who investigated one alleged dog-walking incident after a fire, denied it even happened), I don’t know. If she was really walking her dog at night I have to wonder if she felt defiant, or figured it was up to the police (who were constantly watching her place) or the security services provider (who was watching Cindy and her premises) to do their job properly and allow her to live a life that wasn’t ALWAYS filled with terror. Still it is a puzzle…I don’t think I could have done that but other people say they could have under the circumstances. People are different.
Hope that answers your questions?

kamy

03-13-2008, 12:45 PM

Wow, thank you so much for your response, purple rose. Your explanations make much sense, and I think unfortunetely, as viewers, we only have what UM shows us to go on and make our conclusions. Sadly, UM has mis-led (perhaps unintentionally) viewers in the past, and I believe they may have done it again with this case.

I look forward to reading your book. Thanks again for your reply and God bless.

Kamy

purple rose

03-13-2008, 01:40 PM

Your explanations make much sense, and I think unfortunetely, as viewers, we only have what UM shows us to go on and make our conclusions. Sadly, UM has mis-led (perhaps unintentionally) viewers in the past, and I believe they may have done it again with this case.

I don't think UM has mis-led, it's just that people sometimes have an agenda based on what they perceive the truth to be. I believe UM tried to capture the essence of what makes Cindy's case so intriguing...the uncertainty over a lot of things because of the lack of evidence and the different perspectives of people. It's so easy to jump to conclusions and speculate if there are unknowns. I hope my book will help people come to their own conclusion based on the huge amount of new details that I provide and the different way of looking at the case through the book. It will be really interesting to have your feedback after you read it.

crystaldawn

03-13-2008, 04:28 PM

purple rose

03-13-2008, 06:08 PM

I have so many questions for you purple rose but I'm sure you're very limited in what you can say since you have a book coming out. Lets just say I'm anxious to read it and see if and what role you think her ex had in her stalkings and murder.

Well, a few things I can point out are:
…Cindy originally denied she thought he was involved.
Even though both Cindy’s security services provider and the police originally thought Cindy’s ex-husband might have been responsible for Cindy’s harassment and attacks, I disagreed. For one thing, her first attack on January 27, 1983, came after she had already decided to move back into the marital home for safety reasons after she and her husband had separated, so it does not make sense to think he was setting up an attack to pressure her into moving back.
And, to me, Cindy NEVER said he was behind anything. (That doesn’t necessarily mean anything.)
And although several of Cindy’s friends talked of injuries Cindy allegedly acquired at the hands of her ex-husband, it all traces back to hearsay—to what Cindy told people—except for the time he admitted to slapping her (one of my brothers heard but didn’t see it). Otherwise, nobody ever saw him doing anything physically hurtful to her.
So is it possible she became so scared as the harassment escalated (and was maybe being blackmailed by someone?) that she changed her story (to some people) to protect her family members?

Todd Mueller

03-13-2008, 10:00 PM

Thanks for all of the great info, purple rose.

I think what makes it so hard for many of us who saw the UM story to understand about Cindy is some of those big contradictions. Walking her dog at night, no "stalkings" when security was watching, withholding information, etc. As someone else said, that's what makes it such an interesting story.

Speaking of your book, I know that Neil Hall (the reporter featured in the UM story who was critical of Cindy) wrote a book about Cindy's story. Did you ever read it, and if so, what did you think of it?

I know reading a book by an author who thinks your sister did it herself is probably a bit morbid, but I wondered if you wanted to read what he said so you would know.

Again, thanks for all of the info and all of your honesty. It is great and we all appreciate it. :)

purple rose

03-13-2008, 11:46 PM

Speaking of your book, I know that Neil Hall (the reporter featured in the UM story who was critical of Cindy) wrote a book about Cindy's story. Did you ever read it, and if so, what did you think of it?

I know reading a book by an author who thinks your sister did it herself is probably a bit morbid, but I wondered if you wanted to read what he said so you would know. :)

Well Todd, a distorted view of events was presented in both Neal Hall’s and Ian Mulgrew’s books published in 1991. They were sensational versions of other people’s speculated ideas of the truth. Neither Neal’s book nor Mulgrew’s book incorporated any of the insights so critical to understanding exactly what went on as Cindy’s world crumbled around her.
Mulgrew’s book portrayed Cindy as a paranoid, insecure woman who fabricated the incidents—a woman obviously in need of help, who died before anyone realized how ill she was.
And Hall’s book mainly regurgitated the incomplete information presented at the inquest and said Cindy’s death could have been the result of murder by misadventure—due to one of her alter personalities.

Todd Mueller

03-13-2008, 11:54 PM

Huh. Thanks, purple rose.

Do you think Cindy was mentally ill at all? I do NOT mean that to be disrespectful in the least. I guess I'm asking if that aggrevated what happened to her or was caused by what happened to her. In any event, your poor sister was a troubled woman.

I didn't read either the Hall book or the other one, but some here have. I definitely want to read yours as it sounds like with your insight we can finally get a better understanding of Cindy the person.

Take care!

purple rose

03-14-2008, 01:33 AM

angelina26

03-14-2008, 11:34 PM

Todd, it's really interesting that you ask about Cindy's mental state because someone just emailed me today about that very question and I'm going to be talking about it on my Blog in the next few days.
When Cindy was alive I had no idea of the degree of hell she was suffering through with her harassment--and I had believed she was definitely not crazy, nor suffering from a multiple personality. A dissociative disorder would have been a thought outside the realm of possibility at the time, if anyone had dared to suggest it to me.
She was an amazing person.
She was distraught and stubborn and witheld information and was emotional and did unusual things, but she was always loving and kind and considerate and compassionate and thoughtful.
She tried to starve herself to death after the house fire in 1986 and ended up in the hospital. She was very ill then because of what was happening -- the investigation was going nowhere and fingers were getting pointed at her even though there was no evidence to prove anything. She wanted to die then. She had given up. But she got better and by 1989 there was no hint of suicide. Even her doctor said so.
As crystaldawn pointed out, I'm rather limited in what I can say right now. Wish I could say more as there is so much more to the story than what has come out before.
I am so glad you are on here purple rose to give input because anytime we have seen this story we always hear or see a new thing that makes us doubt our original thought process.

Something turned me off from that neal hall guy...First off UM was not very clear about any prior training on tying knots thats she may have had..

This whole thing with the knot and the type of knot that was used..okay a knot specialist came in and recreated the knot in 3 minutes. Was Cindy a girl scout or knot training that she knew how to do special knots no one else can do? Couldn't they have gotten a normal person to try the same knot and see if they could recreate it in so many minutes? And she had drugs into her system, right? Did they drug up the knot specialist and tell him to recreate the knot?

The whole knot specialist scenario is like seeing if a person who has no basketball skills can dunk like Michael Jordan and then have Michael Jordan come in as the specialist and dunk?

I have read your posts on here and have offered even more insight to what I think and I cant wait for your book. I am sorry for you and your families loss..

CanadianUMFan

03-15-2008, 04:00 AM

Welcome streetbond! :) Yes I agree that Cindy James was murdered. I agree that it would extremely difficult for her to have hogtied herself. Not to mention the drugs in her system were apparently injected, yet there was no syringe near the body. The massive amount she had in her system would have rendered her unconscious very quickly which is another fact that points to her not having committed suicide. Not sure if you know this streetbond but Cindy's sister is currently finishing up a book she wrote about her sister's death. She does post to this board so hopefully she'll let us know when its available to buy. I'm very curious to read what her sister thinks about who is responsible for Cindy's death.

According to the UM segment, they had someone replicate what Cindy may have done to herself just prior to her death and it was very possible even with all of those drugs in her system. I believe that Neal Hall said that it would have taken 15 minutes for the drugs to kick in and the expert replicating the knots that were used was able to do this in a matter of a few minutes. There is little doubt in my mind that Cindy James did this to herself.

CanadianUMFan

03-15-2008, 04:10 AM

I don't want this to come out the wrong way as I sympathize with Purple Rose and her family's loss but Purple Rose's postings in this thread haven't shed much light on anything IMO. There isn't really any specific information that would lead one to believe that someone was actually harrassing Cindy and ultimately murdered her. I am hearing a lot of generalities about Cindy's situation but I am not seeing any specifics. I certainly don't see any evidence that indicates that someone was doing all of the things to Cindy that Cindy claims was being done to her. The fact that Cindy tried to starve herself at one point would be an indication that she had some serious mental problems.

I-think

03-15-2008, 12:59 PM

Todd Mueller

03-15-2008, 07:46 PM

The whole knot specialist scenario is like seeing if a person who has no basketball skills can dunk like Michael Jordan and then have Michael Jordan come in as the specialist and dunk?

Angelina... that's awesome! :lol:

I never thought of it like that, but you make a great point. Having a "knot expert" do it isn't like having an average person, who may or may not have known how to hog tie themself.

I'm still really torn but what you say is funny, but also very insightful.

angelina26

03-15-2008, 08:01 PM

Angelina... that's awesome! :lol:

I never thought of it like that, but you make a great point. Having a "knot expert" do it isn't like having an average person, who may or may not have known how to hog tie themself.

I'm still really torn but what you say is funny, but also very insightful.

hehehe you like that huh...I always have new comments and thoughts when I see it over again because I always miss something but that was actually said by my roommates and I thought it was a very good point to make....

purple rose

03-15-2008, 08:26 PM

According to the UM segment, they had someone replicate what Cindy may have done to herself just prior to her death and it was very possible even with all of those drugs in her system. I believe that Neal Hall said that it would have taken 15 minutes for the drugs to kick in and the expert replicating the knots that were used was able to do this in a matter of a few minutes. There is little doubt in my mind that Cindy James did this to herself.

I was there in the courtroom when this demonstration by the so-called knot expert happened. And he said he was not knowledgeable about tying yourself up when under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Without having drugs in his system it took him approximately three minutes to tie the knots and loops for all four limbs, slip his feet into two loops, tie a ligature around his neck and then slip his hands into the remaining two loops, step through his hands so they would be bound behind his back, and fall over onto his side, as Cindy’s body was found.
Note: He admitted he felt lightheaded several seconds after tying the ligature around his neck but his breathing was not impaired. So add massive drugs in the system –wouldn’t a person be fumbling?
And he said a few more things (which didn't get into the media. And one of them happened to be a very important point about how the knots in his demonstration were different from the ones in Cindy's death ligature!)...but I'll be mentioning those other points in my Blog in a few days.

And Hall wasn't the drug expert and nobody said it would have taken 15 minutes for the drugs to take effect -- the effect of the drugs would have been dependent upon when she took them and nobody can know for certain the timeline for that. Remember, there were no containers with drug residue at the site so if she took all those pills (as opposed to someone injecting the morphine - murder for sure in that case) she downed them somewhere else. (Otherwise there would have been drug residue in her pockets or a container or on her hands or somewhere near her because she would have had to carry them there.)

angelina26

03-15-2008, 08:35 PM

I was there in the courtroom when this demonstration by the so-called knot expert happened. And he said he was not knowledgeable about tying yourself up when under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Without having drugs in his system it took him approximately three minutes to tie the knots and loops for all four limbs, slip his feet into two loops, tie a ligature around his neck and then slip his hands into the remaining two loops, step through his hands so they would be bound behind his back, and fall over onto his side, as Cindy’s body was found.
Note: He admitted he felt lightheaded several seconds after tying the ligature around his neck but his breathing was not impaired. So add massive drugs in the system –wouldn’t a person be fumbling?
And he said a few more things (which didn't get into the media. And one of them happened to be a very important point about how the knots in his demonstration were different from th ones in Cindy's death ligature!)...but I'll be mentioning those other points in my Blog in a few days.

And Hall wasn't the drug expert and nobody said it would have taken 15 minutes for the drugs to take effect -- the effect of the drugs would have been dependent upon when she took them and nobody can know for certain the timeline for that. Remember, there were no containers with drug residue at the site so if she took all those pills (as opposed to someone injecting the morphine - murder for sure in that case) she downed them somewhere else. (Otherwise there would have been drug residue in her pockets or a container or on her hands or somewhere near her because she would have had to carry them there.)

We said the same thing before we read this because we were like "well she was a nurse I know that have to know lethal doses with body weight blah blah blah" but again where was the residue of anyone who administered it...

I dont trust Neal Hall he always looked crooked to me and very out to "promote" himself as a "serious" reporter..his logic never made sense to me or anyone else for that matter...

purple rose

03-15-2008, 08:49 PM

We said the same thing before we read this because we were like "well she was a nurse I know that have to know lethal doses with body weight blah blah blah" but again where was the residue of anyone who administered it...

Are you saying you agree that since there was no residue at the scene Cindy could not have had enough time to take the drugs somewhere else, get there, arrange everything, and tie herself up?! (I don't think she would have had enough time, but I'm not a medical expert.)
And if somebody else injected her with morphine (she had an injection mark on her inner elbow) that means she was killed and dumped there and the killer for sure would not have left any residue (syringe) or clues.

angelina26

03-15-2008, 08:58 PM

Are you saying you agree that since there was no residue at the scene Cindy could not have had enough time to take the drugs somewhere else, get there, arrange everything, and tie herself up?! (I don't think she would have had enough time, but I'm not a medical expert.)
And if somebody else injected her with morphine (she had an injection mark on her inner elbow) that means she was killed and dumped there and the killer for sure would not have left any residue (syringe) or clues.

The absence of residue is the main thing for me but no I dont think she had enough time to do all that...I agree we are not medical experts but we have better common sense then Neal Hall...

The whole needle mark was not mentioned in the UM segment, although I have not paid attention sometimes and could have missed that part. My thought process is there are always sloppy killers who leave something behind and they get caught or want to get caught and then there are some killers who are very very good and have not gotten captured yet...

angelina26

03-15-2008, 10:59 PM

No, I think Cindy was a mentally confused person and did all of that to herself. Like softenthesilence has stated there are CRAZY people out there with serious problems. I do not doubt that CJ was one of these.

And while on the subject of the case her parents were totally errie in the segment, her mother seemed to be scared of something and her father came off as a total control freak. F-R-E-A-K-Y!

I know people are entitled to their opinion but I feel sorry for Cindy and her family. Cindy is someone's daughter and sister. Cindy's sister (purplerose) does read and comment on this board.

Todd Mueller

03-15-2008, 11:02 PM

I know people are entitled to their opinion on what they think what happened with a specific case but you should use a little more decorum on what you say....obviously you have not read the entire thread but purplerose is CJ's sister...and those parents you talked about are purplerose's parents as well...maybe you should read threads before saying anything to that effect because there are more users on this board that have tie ins with the people involved with the case...

Well said.

Also, remember that a 15 minute segment on UM does not necessarily tell the whole story. No one seems to know what happened for sure, and I highly doubt the UM segment gives us enough to make a truly definitive decision.

That said, we're all entitled to our own opinion, but as angelina said, try to remember the victim was someone's daughter and someone's sister.

Peace, all. . . ;)

CanadianUMFan

03-16-2008, 02:36 AM

I just listened to the phone call that was on the W5 report and on Cindy's sister's website. The caller sounded like a female trying to disguise her voice. Does anyone agree or disagree with that?

Tighthead

03-16-2008, 11:45 AM

Tighthead

03-16-2008, 11:47 AM

I dont trust Neal Hall he always looked crooked to me and very out to "promote" himself as a "serious" reporter..his logic never made sense to me or anyone else for that matter...

You may not agree with his logic, but Neal Hall is pretty much a straight shooter and not much of a self promoter.

Todd Mueller

03-16-2008, 12:00 PM

You may not agree with his logic, but Neal Hall is pretty much a straight shooter and not much of a self promoter.

Usually reporters don't have an agenda or bias, so they can see things for what they aren't. Not that they can't be biased, but I got the impression that while investigating this Neal Hall definitely saw things that made him question if this was for real or not.

The problem in my mind is that there is really nothing that happened that couldn't have been done by Cindy herself. No offense intended, purple rose, but I think that is where the questions come from. That doesn't mean she DID do it herself, but nothing can prove she didn't.

So if it is real, I'm sure that's what probably drove Cindy crazy. At the same time, that's why Neal Hall would never by into it, and that is the Catch-22 of this case.

CanadianUMFan

03-16-2008, 03:27 PM

Usually reporters don't have an agenda or bias, so they can see things for what they aren't. Not that they can't be biased, but I got the impression that while investigating this Neal Hall definitely saw things that made him question if this was for real or not.

The problem in my mind is that there is really nothing that happened that couldn't have been done by Cindy herself. No offense intended, purple rose, but I think that is where the questions come from. That doesn't mean she DID do it herself, but nothing can prove she didn't.

So if it is real, I'm sure that's what probably drove Cindy crazy. At the same time, that's why Neal Hall would never by into it, and that is the Catch-22 of this case.

Ian Mulgrew is another very well-respected Canadian reporter who wrote a book about this case and my understanding is that his view is similar to Hall's.

purple rose

03-17-2008, 12:00 AM

The problem in my mind is that there is really nothing that happened that couldn't have been done by Cindy herself. No offense intended, purple rose, but I think that is where the questions come from. That doesn't mean she DID do it herself, but nothing can prove she didn't.

Are you forgetting about the fact that one of the police officers answered a threatening call at Cindy's house when she was at work...and the fact that another officer was present with Cindy when a call came in...and that Agnes was with Cindy on at least one occasion when Cindy's lines were cut and that Agnes and Agnes's husband were in the house with Cindy when some of the threatening notes were left. (Maybe those facts weren't in the UM segment?)
So there were incidents that happened that Cindy could not have done! So obviously somebody else did THOSE things...we just don't know who! So she WAS being harassed (at least on those occasions by someone else) but that doesn't tell us about her death (whether it was murder or suicide).

Todd Mueller

03-17-2008, 12:30 AM

Are you forgetting about the fact that one of the police officers answered a threatening call at Cindy's house when she was at work...and the fact that another officer was present with Cindy when a call came in...and that Agnes was with Cindy on at least one occasion when Cindy's lines were cut and that Agnes and Agnes's husband were in the house with Cindy when some of the threatening notes were left. (Maybe those facts weren't in the UM segment?)
So there were incidents that happened that Cindy could not have done! So obviously somebody else did THOSE things...we just don't know who! So she WAS being harassed (at least on those occasions by someone else) but that doesn't tell us about her death (whether it was murder or suicide).

Purple rose:

None of those things were mentioned in the UM story. For the record, I should have said "based on the UM story" there was nothing they could confirm. I'm not sure if that was the information they had or if they presented it that way to make the story better. But based on what they did show, there was nothing they could confirm. In fact, that was the central part of Neal Hall's argument during the segment. He kept saying there was nothing they could confirm and that all things could have been done by Cindy (both the harrassment and the murder/suicide).

Again, I mean no disrespect to you or your sister's memory. We are just discussing the case as it was shown on UM.

Here's another question: Did you and/or your parents view the UM segment before it aired? The reason I'm asking is if there were incidents that could be confirmed (like you mentioned) then maybe that should have been included?

I hope what I said didn't make you mad. I said it because that's how it was portrayed on UM and that is why so many of us are on the fence as to what really happened.

Best regards,

TM

angelina26

03-17-2008, 10:39 AM

You may not agree with his logic, but Neal Hall is pretty much a straight shooter and not much of a self promoter.

I myself am a straight shooter and tell it like it is so Neal and I have that in common but his logic didn't make sense and his tone was very belittling..so in my opinion he is no more of an expert than anyone else.

purple rose

03-17-2008, 04:24 PM

Purple rose:

None of those things were mentioned in the UM story. For the record, I should have said "based on the UM story" there was nothing they could confirm. I'm not sure if that was the information they had or if they presented it that way to make the story better. But based on what they did show, there was nothing they could confirm. In fact, that was the central part of Neal Hall's argument during the segment. He kept saying there was nothing they could confirm and that all things could have been done by Cindy (both the harrassment and the murder/suicide).

Again, I mean no disrespect to you or your sister's memory. We are just discussing the case as it was shown on UM.

Here's another question: Did you and/or your parents view the UM segment before it aired? The reason I'm asking is if there were incidents that could be confirmed (like you mentioned) then maybe that should have been included?

I hope what I said didn't make you mad. I said it because that's how it was portrayed on UM and that is why so many of us are on the fence as to what really happened.

Best regards,

TM

Oh, don’t get me wrong…I’m not upset.
But I am frustrated because it sounds like there are so many facts people are missing (and that’s why I said before that some of the printed material and shows already “out there” are other people’s speculated ideas of the truth – they are missing facts!)
As far as seeing the UM segment, no I didn’t see it before it was aired, in fact I didn’t even know it was being made at the time (my father was the person in the family who was contacted about all the programs that were being made about Cindy and he didn’t tell other family members until it was too late—I would have liked to have given my two-cents worth before any of the segments were complete, but probably not on camera).
In August 1991 I did see the Current Affair presentation of the “Cindy James mystery” and thought the producers had really sensationalized the information and presented it quite dramatically.
And I don’t know if my father previewed any of the shows that were made about Cindy’s case.
And about what Hall said in the W-5 segment, he was referring to the death scene having no real conclusive evidence to determine whether it was murder or suicide. I don't recall what he said in the UM segment -- guess I'll have to watch it again... (But if he said there was nothing they could confirmm and that ALL things could have been done by Cindy, well then he's simply incorrect.)

Tighthead

03-17-2008, 06:13 PM

I myself am a straight shooter and tell it like it is so Neal and I have that in common but his logic didn't make sense and his tone was very belittling..so in my opinion he is no more of an expert than anyone else.

And that makes him crooked?

spark19

03-17-2008, 09:01 PM

I just listened to the phone call that was on the W5 report and on Cindy's sister's website. The caller sounded like a female trying to disguise her voice. Does anyone agree or disagree with that?

You know, I haven't listened to that recording in months, but you stating that, I can hear it in my head now and its freaking me out.

That coupled with the steamer trunk corpse image popping up in my head (thanks to another thread) ensures very little sleep for me tonight!

angelina26

03-17-2008, 09:57 PM

And that makes him crooked?

I said he was no more of an expert than You and I first of all and secondly his belittling attitude doesn't mean someone is crooked and yes he did seem like he was arrogant...If I did say crooked in a previous post then I apologize people have their own common sense as well as opinion but he was trying to sell his like it was the truth when we still dont have the truth...

mgm711

03-19-2008, 03:28 PM

is this storey on any of the dvd's i dont remember seeing it???I remember it from years ago...

CanadianUMFan

03-19-2008, 10:38 PM

is this storey on any of the dvd's i dont remember seeing it???I remember it from years ago...

The Cindy James story is on the Bizarre Murders DVD set.

crystaldawn

03-24-2008, 09:50 AM

angelina26

03-24-2008, 12:06 PM

purple rose

03-24-2008, 02:21 PM

I just watched the UM segment of Cindy's case on Purple Rose's website and a few days ago I watched the NBC version of the Cindy James case. This has got to be the most heavily edited segment I have seen so far on Lifetime! I don't even understand why since there was no "update" at the end to make room for. The NBC version showed pictures of Cindy and her family Lifetime edited out. They also had more comments by Cindy's parents (here mother describing how if Cindy were going to kill herself she would have dressed herself up nice and had her dog taken care of, not go out in that abandoned area). There was also more discussion of "multiple personality disorder" with her father and her psychotherapist saying there was no evidence of that. Even more comments from Neal Hall than I remember saying he feels for the family because they don't want to believe Cindy could have done this to herself. Does anyone who has seen the Lifetime version remember any of the scenes I just described?

I have a question for you Purple Rose. I noticed Cindy's car was found abandoned and her body wasn't discovered for 2 weeks. Do they think she was at that abandoned area the entire two weeks or is there a period of time where her whereabouts weren't accounted for?

Since the police thought Cindy committed suicide, they must have believed she did it at that abandoned location and was lying there for two weeks until her body was discovered by the works crew who were repairing the pothole in the road nearby.
A lot of people have written to me and disagreed with that police theory -- people saying that the place where Cindy was found was:
- a busy location and
- teenagers partied at the abandoned house and
- you could see into the bush area from the nearby sidewalk
- and therefore her body must have been dumped there by someone (otherwise she would surely have been found sooner).
Entomology reports couldn't determine exactly how long she was lying outside (so maybe she could have been dumped there -- certainly not a suicide)

By the way, which NBC segment did you see that you are referring to? Something not on my site?

crystaldawn

03-24-2008, 02:57 PM

By the way, which NBC segment did you see that you are referring to? Something not on my site?

Well as you may or may not know UM was originally aired on NBC. It seems that when Lifetime started airing UM they edited many of the segments to either make room for updates or possibly more commercials. I have the segment that was recorded back when NBC aired it (before Lifetime edited it) and thats got a little more in it than the segment on your site seems to. Let me know if you'd a like a copy of the NBC airing I have.

purple rose

03-24-2008, 09:17 PM

Well as you may or may not know UM was originally aired on NBC. It seems that when Lifetime started airing UM they edited many of the segments to either make room for updates or possibly more commercials. I have the segment that was recorded back when NBC aired it (before Lifetime edited it) and thats got a little more in it than the segment on your site seems to. Let me know if you'd a like a copy of the NBC airing I have.

Oh, I got ya…I didn’t know you were referring to the UM segment (didn’t know it was aired on NBC)!

Yes, the UM segment on my site was edited (from what is presented on disc 2 on the “Best Unsolved Mysteries Segments about Bizarre Murders” DVD set – is that the version you have?) because the UM segment is the property of Cosgrove/Meurer Productions and it would be an infringement of their copyright for me to have the entire segment available to the public – that’s why I have a link on my website media page for people to purchase the boxed set to view the entire segment (if they don’t already have it).

If there is another version/segment with more stuff than what's on the DVD set that I have, then I'd love to see it.

crystaldawn

03-24-2008, 09:48 PM

If there is another version/segment with more stuff than what's on the DVD set that I have, then I'd love to see it.

Okay pm me your mailing address and I'll be happy to mail you out a copy of what I have and you can see if there's some additional footage. :)

open_mind

03-28-2008, 02:10 AM

I agree and with technology today, they could take the recording from the machine and match it with the voice of Cindy from the taped statement she gave(do a voice analysis), if the pitches in voice don't match then the police she re-open the case.

Another something to ponder:

Munchausen syndrome is a psychiatric disorder in which those affected fake disease, illness, or psychological trauma in order to draw attention or sympathy to themselves. It is in a class of disorders known as factitious disorders which involve "illnesses" whose symptoms are either self-induced or falsified by the patient. It is also sometimes known as hospital addiction syndrome. In some extremes, people suffering from Munchausen's Syndrome are highly knowledgeable about the practice of medicine, and are able to produce symptoms that result in multiple unnecessary operations. For example, they may inject a vein with infected material, causing widespread infection of unknown origin, and as a result cause lengthy and costly medical analyses and prolonged hospital stay. The role of "patient" is a familiar and comforting one, and it fills a psychological need in people with Munchausen's.

I believe that everything happens for a reason and no matter what happened, Cindy is in a better place and is now happy. I feel that no matter how this happened she was being protected from something worse that could have happened or years of agony. Maybe she's looking down at everyone for concentrating on her and wishing everyone could be happy because she is - now. She would probably want everyone to remember the good in her and not focus on this tragedy but on the great things that she was in life. I also believe that in the case someone did do this that he/she/they/it will 'get' theirs whether we see it or not.

purple rose

04-11-2008, 02:28 PM

Okay pm me your mailing address and I'll be happy to mail you out a copy of what I have and you can see if there's some additional footage. :)

Thanks for sending me a copy, crystaldawn, of the NBC segment you had…I actually found it difficult to watch and hear—In the audiotaped police interview with Cindy she was in such an awful state and I wanted to be with her to help her feel better!
(I uploaded three audio clips to my Blog http://www.melaniehack.com/blog/ for anyone interested.)
And I was really frustrated because I noticed factual errors in both what was said and in how some of the incidents were portrayed (in the recreation of some scenes). In my next Blog I’ll talk about the tidbit of information in the police report about the 1984 attack (when Cindy was stabbed in the hand) that I don’t believe was made public…how and where a can of mace (pepper spray) was found. Does anyone know about that?
Oh boy, it’s obvious there is so much that was never divulged! Sure wish I could list a bunch of stuff here…
By the way, has anyone had to face a similar situation as me (not knowing if their family member or friend committed suicide or was murdered)? If you have, please let me know!
We have another case up in Canada that was recently in the media…RMC cadet Joe Grozelle who vanished in Oct 2003 and was found 3 weeks later (police think it was a suicide but the family thinks he was murdered). You can google the name and get some info. I would think that case would be a good puzzle for UM.

crystaldawn

04-11-2008, 03:22 PM

Thanks for sending me a copy, crystaldawn, of the NBC segment you had…I actually found it difficult to watch and hear—In the audiotaped police interview with Cindy she was in such an awful state and I wanted to be with her to help her feel better!
(I uploaded three audio clips to my Blog http://www.melaniehack.com/blog/ for anyone interested.)
And I was really frustrated because I noticed factual errors in both what was said and in how some of the incidents were portrayed (in the recreation of some scenes). In my next Blog I’ll talk about the tidbit of information in the police report about the 1984 attack (when Cindy was stabbed in the hand) that I don’t believe was made public…how and where a can of mace (pepper spray) was found. Does anyone know about that?
Oh boy, it’s obvious there is so much that was never divulged! Sure wish I could list a bunch of stuff here…
By the way, has anyone had to face a similar situation as me (not knowing if their family member or friend committed suicide or was murdered)? If you have, please let me know!
We have another case up in Canada that was recently in the media…RMC cadet Joe Grozelle who vanished in Oct 2003 and was found 3 weeks later (police think it was a suicide but the family thinks he was murdered). You can google the name and get some info. I would think that case would be a good puzzle for UM.

Glad to have been able to help purple rose. It was very sad hearing Cindy's voice, I can't imagine how hard it must have been as a close relative to hear it. :( They really do a disservice when they heavily edit these original cases. Lifetime is bad enough but there's no reason a segment on the boxed set has to have so much cut out of it, it really changes the entire case sometimes.

Kyte

06-18-2008, 03:53 AM

Man, just watched it, right now I'm scared stiff.

I believe Cindy was murdered. Easily.

Why didn't they ever investigate the man that ran down the street after Agnes' husband asked for him to cal 911?

That "suicide" seemed far, far, far too outrageous to be one.

Must've been beyond hell for Cindy, living alone, in constant fear.

And I agree with her mom. The police shouldn't of made it so obvious that they were monitoring her home. Why the flip would they do that?

She was murdered. Simply put.

alfiechat

06-18-2008, 02:30 PM

Crystal dawn, is the person in your icon Doreen Marfeo who was thought to be killed by her husband?

crystaldawn

06-18-2008, 02:31 PM

Crystal dawn, is the person in your icon Doreen Marfeo who was thought to be killed by her husband?

Yes it is.

mike890

06-18-2008, 03:16 PM

"I just listened to the phone call that was on the W5 report and on Cindy's sister's website. The caller sounded like a female trying to disguise her voice. Does anyone agree or disagree with that?"

That 2nd phone call was a pathetic attempt to make the "stalker" seem like a crazed drug addict. "More smack, more downers". LOL. That was probably Cindy on the tape because it was obviously a woman.

Kyte

06-18-2008, 05:12 PM

Man, I'm still so scared about this case.

What's so scary is that Cindy probably knew who was doing all this stuff (I think it was between multiple people) yet not tell others, and how there was something more broader she was hiding.

I can't believe people would call that a suicide. No syringe, bag over head, etc. etc.

Also, I want to ask you Melanie, when the police did monitory her house 24/7, did they do it stealthily or obviously to someone that was stalking? If it was obvious, then it'd be useless. What's your theory on what happened, and who was stalking her? My heart goes out to you and your family and I wish the best of luck in the future for you guys. What Cindy had to go through is beyond hell, and for seven years, living alone like that. I can't imagine going through a month of it. I sincerely hope justice can be served.

Kyte

07-16-2008, 06:31 PM

bump this thread :)

purple rose

07-17-2008, 12:23 PM

Just wanted to let everyone know that my father had a stroke recently and he told my sister Marlene that on his deathbed he would reveal information about our sister Cindy’s ordeal that has not been revealed to date. The book has been delayed because of his frailty (he’s had such a hard time with Cindy’s death…felt responsible that he didn’t do enough to help her when she was being harassed…you know, that common but mistaken belief that ‘if only’ I could have saved her…that it’s somehow his fault because he let her down as a father who should have caught the perpetrator and saved her life…)

crystaldawn

07-17-2008, 01:32 PM

purple rose

07-17-2008, 02:24 PM

Thanks for posting purple rose. Sorry to hear about your father's stroke and his frailty. :( Just curious did the fact that your father knows more information about Cindy's ordeal than he had previously shared surprise you?
Well, he had mentioned it before when I was writing my book, but I didn't know what to think of it...I'm curious what he has to say...

crystaldawn

07-17-2008, 07:24 PM

I wanted to point out a few things about Cindy's case on here that weren't mentioned on the UM segment. These were on Melanie's blog (I hope thats okay if I list them Purple Rose) you can find them at www.melaniehack.com.

There was a brown hair stuck in some blood in Cindy's palm after one of the attacks. Police seized it but never analyzed it.

Some of the calls at Cindy's home were intercepted by the Detective as well as Security Services Provider.

Some friends were visiting Cindy one night when they heard someone banging. Her brother was also there on one occasion and saw a shadow near her garage.

Cindy never told police she was out walking her dog the night of the attack mentioned on UM. It was police speculating that.

Anyway I thought these were very interesting points to bring up. Can't wait to read your book Purple Rose and I wish your father a speedy recovery.

hottstuff25

07-22-2008, 02:01 AM

I haven't seen it in a while, but I do think that UM toyed a little with this segment, and exaggerated Cindy's erratic behavior for entertainment and sympathy purposes.

With that said, I do think Cindy was murdered and I do think that the cops may be covering up something that we don't know. If Cindy was hiding or concealing information, it was definitely something that she feared her life for (like in Ms Tammy Leppert's case). Whatever it was, it may have been some sort of inside activity with the cops or the private investigator. They were too quick to rule a suicide and claim that she was nuts after her death. I just think if it were a plain stalker, he would at least try to show his face. A more criminally involved scenario (especially within authorities) regarding illicit activity would be more likely to stay as hidden as possible.

Not only that, we have all come to the conclusion that her suicide was either elaborately set up by her, or elaborately set up by someone else. There was no in between. The fact that the police knew so much about her psychological mishaps and the ongoing case itself would sort of explain why the elaborate suicide story would be made up so quickly. And only cops would come up with such an interesting, sadistic way to make it seem like she did it. I don't think Cindy had sunk into that much of a trance to commit suicide in such a horrific way. I seriously don't think any human in their rightful mind could. If a suicide seems out of question and no suspects are turning up anywhere, the first place I'm gonna point at is the authorities themselves.

Most of the evidence conjured up on the UM segment seemed more like police speculation than actual evidence in the first place. I hate to take things even further, but if the cops or the PI do have something to do with this, then there might many things that are just not true. Do we know for sure that she was in that spot for 2 weeks? This was police evidence at the crime scene, correct? No other witnesses had seen her body in that specific spot. Not only that, how do we know she died in and around this area, or if she even walked to the site of her death? She could have been been killed somewhere else in this manner, and then placed in this spot to make it seem as if it were suicide. Fingerprints and DNA would be covered up by the people already investigating the crime scene. Is any of the evidence that the cops came forth with before her death even legit? If staged, all this police "evidence" might be a giant manipulative way to coax the public into thinking something totally different about Cindy's death.

Whether it be the cops withholding information or not, some important people involved in this case know a LOT more than is being said and are abruptly telling lies and concoctions to the public and the media.

Zlatko

08-04-2008, 02:46 PM

Sorry for bumping this up; I'm new to the case. One little thing I wanted to bring up about regards Cindy's ex-husband. Am I the only one who finds it very odd that all of this harassment began to occur right after Cindy got a divorce? I found it strange that she didn't experience any harassment while she was married to him. He clearly has a lot more to do with this case then what is showed.

Secondly, what about the guy who was outside the Woodcock's house during the fire? Tom Woodcock asked for help, and the guy just ran away. That's very odd...

crystaldawn

08-04-2008, 03:41 PM

Zlatko

08-04-2008, 09:30 PM

I completely agree with both points. Its interesting how the police seem to overlook facts that interfere with their assessment that she killed herself.

Welcome to the board btw..:)
Thanks for the welcome. :wave:

I want to mention another strange aspect of this case. Why didn't Cindy move to an apartment with a room-mate, or go back to her parents? She could have even bought an attack dog. By being alone in a house, she left herself vulnerable to a criminal. That's what makes the case even more bizarre.

Mastermind

08-05-2008, 10:53 AM

If someone was going after Cindy and threatening her.

Is it the consensus of this forum that it is multiple persons or just one individual?:confused:

Zlatko

08-05-2008, 12:12 PM

If someone was going after Cindy and threatening her.

Is it the consensus of this forum that it is multiple persons or just one individual?:confused:
That's my point. If Cindy was being stalked, she put herself in a dangerous position. It leads me to believe that Cindy may have killed herself. On the other hand, it's weird that Cindy would suddenly develop multiple-personalities when she had no previous history of it. All roads lead to nowhere in this case.

Mastermind

08-05-2008, 01:15 PM

Sorry when i meant "multiple persons" i meant more than one person going after her.

I just can't see this all as being the work of one individual harasser.

Zlatko

08-05-2008, 02:19 PM

Sorry when i meant "multiple persons" i meant more than one person going after her.

I just can't see this all as being the work of one individual harasser.
It's possibly, but Cindy James doesn't strike me as the type who has a lot of enemies. The only person who I think would have something against Cindy would be her ex-husband. Perhaps he hired people to harass her.

Does anyone have any interesting information regarding Cindy's husband? I could have sworn I read somewhere that he abused her during their marriage...

ididn'tdoit

08-05-2008, 04:16 PM

I think Zlatko brings up a key point, the harassments started after her divorce. Now I don't know for sure her ex-husband was involved or not but I've almost finished Neal Hall's book about the case and he certainly comes off as pretty weird and sometimes he would even get violent with her. I also agree with CD, for those of you who rule out murder, read the book, it goes much more into detail than UM.

Zlatko

09-07-2008, 01:24 AM

purple rose

09-07-2008, 12:00 PM

Had to bump this thread. I have a question for you, purple rose. Just curious since you know more about all the details surrounding your sister's death. Who do feel most likely killed your sister, and why? Can you provide any interesting facts that we might not have known regarding the case?

OH boy, great questions!
You know, for liability purposes I can’t exactly say who I think killed Cindy (unless I also give the proof). But what I would like to say to everyone (as a clue) is open your minds and expand your idea of who your list of perpetrators could be. Beyond the obviously suspicious, there are individuals that deserve closer scrutiny. I know, that’s pretty vague. But if you look back at the older threads here on the UM board, I once saw someone post an idea that was completely overlooked by everyone…and yet it was something everyone should have seriously taken a closer look at!
Interesting facts you might not have known:
Cindy didn’t purchase her groceries at the location where her car was found. When I was going through everything years later, I found the receipt the police didn’t locate at the time of investigation and it shows she got her groceries at a different time and location (and no purchase for nylons was on it—as the police speculated).
On the day she disappeared she had a “hang-up call” (and one on the 23rd –she disappeared on the 25th)…they were registered on her kitchen calendar.
After Cindy’s death I found the makeup she purchased at the Bay on the day of her death (she’d had a makeover) —the police completely missed seeing it at the location I found it!
Years after Cindy’s death the security services provider gave an interview to A Day In The Life and he had facts incorrect.
Police knew who was staying in the blue van (Ufimstev) at the abandoned house location (near where Cindy’s body was found) but by the inquest they lost his statement and the wanderer had disappeared.
There are a lot more interesting and surprising facts…
Two people who testified at the inquest asked for, and were granted, legal “protection” so their testimony could not be used against them in future court proceedings…
And so on…

Zlatko

09-07-2008, 12:32 PM

Thanks for the answers, purple rose. I have more questions, what are the details about the guy who was outside Cindy's friends' house after a fire? I remember Cindy's friend asked the man to call firefighters, and the man just ran away.

Also, do you think there's a chance that multiple people were possibly harassing Cindy instead of one individual?

purple rose

09-22-2008, 01:40 PM

Here is an email I recently received:

"Please check out the following information.
Abuse Of Trust by Christopher Hyde. The career of Dr.James Stewart Tyhurst.
Note: Roy Makepeace worked at UBC with Tyhurst before he went to work at BC Hydro.
Killer Doctors by Colin Evans Re: The brotherhood of silence.
Gorman v Tyhurst The Supreme Court Decision
Anyone You Want Me Be by John Douglas Re: The Gorean Concept
Journey Into Madness by Gordon Thomas
Brother Twelve by John Oliphant

A Current Affair did a report on the sex slave Jill Gorman and her ordeal on Gabriola Island. Re: Maureen Boyle with local reporter Marc Edge in the 1990's.
Note: The island your sister went to on the sailboat trip in the 1980's was more than likely Gabriola Island.
Hopefully, this information helps you with your quest to find out what happened to your sister and her tragic death. I believe this information speaks for itself."

I'd be interested to hear anyone's thoughts.

dynoguy88

09-24-2008, 11:16 PM

This is a response to everyone who keeps bringing up Cindy's harrassment as starting shortly after her divorce.

I read both books by Ian Mulgrew and Neal Hall and Melanie can obviously correct me if I'm wrong on anything but Cindy and her ex-husband Roy didn't divorce right before the harrassment started. They seperated. The Unsolved Mysteries segment even said, "In July of 1982, Cindy and her husband seperated. 3 months later, the phone calls began."

Cindy and Roy didn't actually divorce until years later. When they seperated, they were on much better terms. In fact, there were times (it was reported) that they continued to date off and on. And for a while, they dated other people but still went on double dates with each other!

Believe me, when I first saw the UM segment and heard that her hell started so shortly after seperating from her husband, I thought that was suspicious. But after reading the books, biased as they are, I feel much different. The relationship didn't sound ugly enough to make me suspicious. But that's just my opinion going on what I read.

dynoguy88

09-24-2008, 11:30 PM

purple rose

09-24-2008, 11:58 PM

Here is an email I recently received:

"Please check out the following information.
Abuse Of Trust by Christopher Hyde. The career of Dr.James Stewart Tyhurst.
...
Here is a follow-up email regarding that email I posted for everyone:
"Hello Melanie,
I discovered on Sunday that you are writing a book about your sister's mysterious death. I hope that you discover the truth about what actually happened to her,as it has been 19 years since her body was found at 3111 Blundell Road.
I believe that during the summer of 1981 or 1982 that Cindy went on a sailboat trip to the Gulf Islands to visit colleagues or friends of her husband Roy Makepeace. On one of these yachting trips she discovered a diabolical secret about a member of the psychiatric community in British Columbia.
I believe that Roy Makepeace went to visit his friend who was a fellow psychiatrist, who had a home on Gabriola Island.

Did Cindy find out something she was not supposed to know about?

It is important to recognize that Cindy and Roy were members of the psychiatric community in British Columbia. As Roy Makepeace was the head of Social Psychiatry at UBC, before he went to work at BC Hydro. It is self-evident that he had friends who were psychiatrists.

I believe the reason Cindy experienced her ordeal and reign of terror for seven years is because she knew that a sadist who was a member of the psychiatric community in British Columbia, was practising radical psychiatric therapies and sexually abusing some of his female patients.

The various incidents on the timeline in Ian Mulgrew's book strongly suggest that a doctor is the main suspect. The numerous medications from the autopsy indicate this possibility, especially due to the unusal amounts of morphine found in her system.The marks on her arm suggest a syringe was used and the knife in her hand in the floor of her home suggest someone with medical knowledge of the human anatomy. Suspend your disbelief for a moment. In your imagination consider a doctor with a medical bag or kit. In that medical bag are vials of morphine,, black stockings, cigarettes, a knife and glass cutters.I recommend the book called Killer Doctors by Colin Evans.

The incident on 16th Ave. in December of 1985 suggests a possible area of operation for her tormenter. Did he work at the University of British Columbia Psychiatic Department?

I believe Ozzie Kaban was right, when he said that Cindy was murdered. He is a very stellar investigator. Unfortunately, the stalker he was after turned out to be very crafty and elusive.

If Cindy had said her tormentor was a psychiatrist she would not have been believed. She would have been considered delusional or insane. It would have been a huge scandal in the newspapers.The brotherhood of silence would have protected a member of the psychiatric community. Re: Killer Doctors by Colin Evans.

Over the years there has been the sordid story of the sex slave Jill Gorman in the newspapers, who has been trying to bring her tormentor to justice. It took her fifteen years to get compensation for th e abuse tthat she suffered from the psychiatrist who treated her.He took her to Gabriola Island. A Current Affair did a investigation in the early 1990's. The book Abuse of Trust by Christopher Hyde also describes what he did to the sex slave Annie White at his estate on Gabriola Island.

Jill Gorman won a $557,000.00 in a civil against him and his name was Dr.James Stewart Tyhurst. He retired from the University of British Columbia in 1987. He was arrested by the RCMP on November 8th, 1989 fo the sexual assault of four of his patients (The Vancouver Sun). Tyhurst is 86 years old. He was born in 1922.

Did Cindy know the name of her stalker?

Why did she change her last name to James? Is this name a clue?

It is possible she changed her name to the name of her stalker. For example Cindy James=James Tyhurst. I believe this notion is worthy of consideration.

It is also possible that I am mistaken, but he is a good suspect.

I know that Cindy wanted you to have this information. It was like she guided me to you and your web site. I have always believed that the cold truth would be revealed one day and that your dream was a message from Cindy to help set her soul free from planet earth. She knew that you could help her. Cindy was subjected to sadistic evil by an "empiric" or quack doctor and I hope that you have evidence that will expose the truth in your book.

...

I hope this information does not cause you any distress. The problem with cold cases is that you may have a good suspect, but can the evidence support a charge of murder. This is circumstancial evidence that I have shared with you, and after 27 years since the sailboat trip to the Gulf Islands, this circumstancial evidence would be difficult to prove.

My advice to you Melanie is to let the facts speak for themselves.The worst thing a person can do is try to make an opinion or an idea into a fact. The paper trail is enormous,if you follow it. Journey Into Madness by Gordon Thomas is a good place to begin. Dr.Paul Termansen is mentioned in this book.He was Cindy's psychiatrist, when she was his patient at Lion's Gate Hospital. I like Dr.Termansen, I met him during The Jack Cram Controversy,which happened in 1994.

I discovered recently a book called Crime and Deviance. by Lemert
Tyhurst is mentioned in the book in Chapter 9. He is considered one of the leading psychiatric experts in paranoid behavior patterns.
If Tyhurst is the main suspect in Cindy's ordeal ,then it is diabolical and sinister what he did to her.

As Schopenhauer said, "All truth passes through three stages".

1. It is ridiculed.

2. It is violently opposed.

3.It is accepted as a truth so self-evident that it has always been known.

Most of the information I have shared with you can be found on Google.

Abuse of Trust by Christopher Hyde could be found at a used book store.

Brother Twelve is also a revealing book about a sex slave camps in the Gulf Islands.

I look forward to reading your book when it published."

More thoughts for everyone to chew on.

Zlatko

09-26-2008, 01:23 PM

Holy crap, that information opens up a new perspective into the case. I always found it strange that Cindy was injected with morphine, something that would be difficult to obtain. Is there anymore information on this James Tynhurst?

TracyLynnS

01-12-2009, 05:31 PM

Cindy's body was found after two weeks supposedly laying outside in the weeds in late May and early June. That's two weeks of warm late spring weather. I would have assumed there would be much more decomp than than we see in the pictures they are showing. Are they certain on their time of death?

And even though she has a needle mark on her inner elbow, they are assuming some/all of the drugs were ingested orally. Did the autopsy find any morphine or other drugs in her stomach or upper intestine?

When I first started watching this case as presented by UM, I thought "crackpot lady wants attention and finally kills herself". But then I read through this thread and suicide is definitely not the case. Too much has been overlooked. And while it's not impossible to hogtie one's self in the manner that Cindy was found in, it's highly unlikely and when you add it in with all the other facts of no syringes, not traces of drugs, etc, you've got a murder.

The officials still have a lot of explaining to do, imo.

Zlatko

02-13-2009, 06:00 PM

I had to bump up this thread since I'm almost done with Ian Mulgrew's book "Who Killed Cindy James."

Thus far, the book provides way more than what I got from the UM segment. In the book, it says that Cindy had nothing, but contempt for husband. She thought he was a monster. It also mentions that Cindy negative feelings towards her parents. She apparently felt that her father was nothing, but a militant.

As for the evidence, I didn't feel that the book provided any real solid evidence that Cindy committed all those acts. There were no eye-witness report about Cindy committing any acts of self inflicted violence. All they said was that she was suicidal. On the other hand, there was an incident in which Cindy was found in her garage, with her hands tied. A knot expert tried to tie himself the way Cindy was tied, and failed. IMO, that's pretty solid evidence that someone was harassing her.

If anyone has the Neal Hall's book, I'd like to see if they could post any interesting information from the book. From what I've heard, it's better than Ian Mulgrew's book.

CanadianUMFan

02-13-2009, 11:36 PM

Zlatko

02-14-2009, 12:54 AM

If she was actually murdered by someone, that person has to be one of the most ineffective killers of all time considering that it took seven years to actually complete the murder. Yet, at the same time, they were brilliant enough to avoid detection by the authorities during those seven years and ever since too. Does that really make sense?
One of the investigators in the case, Ozzie Kaban argued that Cindy was being harassed for intimidation's sake. He said that Cindy knew something, so a group of people were harassing her to keep her quiet. Kind of like a cat which plays with its victim.

Both the suicide, and murder arguments seem to have flaws. I don't see how someone could harass her non-stop, and get away with it. On the other hand, no one caught Cindy trying to stage something.

atomicfizz

02-14-2009, 01:38 AM

Zlatko

02-14-2009, 01:49 AM

I always thought that the recording of the threatening calls sounded like a woman trying to sound like a man. I have always thought she committed suicide, but who knows. It just doesn't make sense to me that someone can do all this stuff for so long and no one ever sees anything. I can buy that she did it to herself without being caught more than someone else never getting caught. Of course this is just my feelings on this case. I also am a little suspicious of her "stubbornness" to not move in to an apartment with someone else. Yes, you want to garden and live in a house and whatever and giving that up would crimp your style, but is it going to crimp your style more than the harassment that is going on? I don't know. That's just weird to me.I concur with you about the apartment. If she was being harassed, an apartment would be effective at stopping the harassment. What's interesting is that the book says that Cindy moved from suburb to suburb. Very odd...

One more thing I found strange is that she never bought an attack dog. A big rottweiler, or pitbull would scare off anyone.

bbaver

03-09-2009, 07:44 PM

Stumbled across this forum in January, but finally getting around to posting. I have read both books on the Cindy James case and exchanged a few emails with Melanie (Cindy's sister), who is very nice and much more open minded than what I would expect a family member to be (in this situation). I look forward to reading her book when it comes out. I know Melaine has held up the publishing because of new evidence that will be interesting to hear about (hopefully) one day. This case has intrigued me so much that I also shot Ozzie Kaban an email. He says that the case is still open and looks "promising". Melanie and Ozzie can't share much more right now, which is understandable. Ozzie is still of the belief that Cindy was murdered.
Some of my thoughts based on the information in the on-line videos, this forum, and the books.....(and absolutely no disrespect meant to Melanie or the Hack family...just trying to be objective)....

--They say that truth is stranger than fiction. Hard to believe that with 100+ reported incidents, that neither the police, nor Ozzie Kaban could either find the perpetrator or prove that Cindy brought upon her own misfortunes. This went on for more than 6 years, and no one can establish any real proof one way or another? Simply unbelievable. Hopefully the work that Melanie is currently doing will bring ultimate closure to this story and the Hack family.

--Ian Mulgrew went out of his way (in his book, "Who Killed Cindy James?") to point out (what he described as) odd behavior of Cindy's ex-husband Roy Makepeace. Honestly, Makepeace's actions weren't that strange to me. He acted like I would expect someone who was still in love with Cindy to act, especially if he had nothing to do with this ordeal. If he were the one tormenting Cindy, then he certainly fooled me. His alibis seem strong and (again) I think his behavior supported the fact that he had nothing to do with this.

--My current opinion, which of course may change after I read Melanie's book, is that there was some real harassment and some staged incidents. First the "harassment was real argument": People have made comments like, "All this harassment and no one else sees a thing? Come on......". This is not true. There are probably at least eight or more incidents cited in the two books where (1) someone other than Cindy took the calls, or (2) neighbors reported strangers on Cindy's property, or (3) other tenants reported strange noises while Cindy was away. Some of the harassment, in my opinion had to be real. How much of it? I don't know. Now, the "harassment was staged by Cindy argument": There seems to be fairly strong evidence that the fire in April, 1986 was started by Cindy. And with some of the reported break-ins, the evidence collected by police directly contradicts what Cindy reported and supports the theory of “an inside job”.

--Regardless of what was real or not real, what Cindy James went through was pure hell. I'm certainly not qualified to know exactly what Cindy's mental problems were or what they stemmed from, but I can relate with some of her issues, because certain types of mental illnesses run in my family. If she staged many of the events and her own death, she was clearly a sick person that needed help....help that no one was able to give to her. With physical illnesses, you can often go to your family doctor and get the treatment that you need right away. Unfortunately, with mental illnesses, it's often very hard to recognize the exact problem and I think we (as a society) are decades away from really knowing much about mental illness. The psychiatrists/doctors in the 80's couldn't really help Cindy much. Were this to happen today, in 2009, I still have little confidence that your average psychiatrist/doctor could correctly diagnose Cindy's problems.

--I am still torn as to how Cindy died. I think I have read enough of the public information available on this case to make a decent argument for both sides. After finishing both books, I first had the opinion that Cindy likely took her own life. After re-reading some of the sections, including the 1990 coroner's inquest, I'm not so sure. It still boggles my mind that a real tormentor and murderer could get away with all of this without leaving many clues. On the other hand, Cindy hired Ozzie Kaban, a well respected private investigator. Ozzie states that he did his own research to make sure he wasn't being duped by Cindy, including going through her trash and etc. He never found any evidence that Cindy was doing any of the harassment to herself. I find it hard to believe that a respected PI, working that closely on this couldn't find the evidence, if Cindy were staging most or all of the incidents.

--One thing that Melanie posted in this thread....the fact that she later found the receipt for the groceries Cindy had bought, and that there were no nylon stockings on the receipt.....this flies in the face of the police's investigation. Had this information been available for the inquest, I wonder if the 5-person jury would have reached the same conclusion of "unknown event" caused Cindy's death. I think this is a very strong piece of evidence.

--The story of Ruth Finley is brought up in both books. Amazing similarities in her case, with Cindy James, and would support the "incidents were staged" argument. Here is a link to an article on Finley's case: http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20099840,00.html

--Obviously, I'm going only from what information is available publicly, and the two books are both biased toward the "suicide" theory. Reading Melanie's book will provide a needed, different perspective from someone close to the case.

TracyLynnS

03-09-2009, 09:20 PM

bbaver, you have brought up some excellent points. I haven't read any of the books that have been published on this case and only know what's been discussed here and shown on UM.

I can believe that some of the harassment was real and that Cindy could have thought it would be a good idea to increase the harassment herself, so the authorities would take her more seriously. All this happened back before we had stalker laws and I imagine she was very frustrated by police who were probably telling her that there was nothing they could do until the perp "did something".

One thing that has always bothered me. If the photos they are showing of the death scene are real and not reenactments, there is something really wrong there.

Cindy was supposed to have been missing and dead for 2 weeks there in those tall weeds, yet her body only looks to have one or two days of decomp. This was in the springtime (may?). The foliage was all bloomed, so it was warm enough for there to be more extensive decomp than we see in the photos.

So, was she held somewhere for several days, then killed and dumped at the weeded location? What can explain the generally good condition her body was found in? It seems very odd to me.

I can be convinced that Cindy may have staged some of the harassment, but I don't think I can ever be convinced that she tied herself up in the manner she was found, to commit suicide.

It took a knot expert to tie himself up like that. A regular person can't do that. A regular person would have to study up on books about knots and various configurations of knots to be able to do that to themselves. That's a very strange thing for a suicidal person to do. Much more strange than just staging some harassment episodes mixed in with the real ones.

I'm very interested, too, to see what Cindy's sister's book will have to say. That's probably the only book I'll read on the case.

Cindy was a beautiful woman. The perp in her case could have been anyone from the ex husband to a crazy stalker who was infatuated with her.

bbaver

03-10-2009, 12:06 PM

Thanks, Tracy. I can see from this forum that Crystaldawn has analyzed this case pretty well also, and has brought up other good points.

From Neal Hall's book "The Deaths of Cindy James": Pathologist Sheila Carlyle pronounced death upon arrival at the death site, noting that the body was in an “advanced state of decomposition”. Same book: Entomologist Gail Anderson could determine only that the body had been at the death scene since June 2 or earlier. Cindy's body was found June 8. Ozzie Kaban, the PI who worked for Cindy, said he couldn't understand how a body could lay in the same location for 2 weeks and not be attacked by rodents and small animals known to frequent the Richmond area.

So, no one really knows how long the body was there. It makes logical sense to me that the authorities, wanting to convince the public that it was a suicide, would give the opinion that the body was there for 1 to 2 weeks. And it makes logical sense to me that Ozzie Kaban, who worked for Cindy, would make the opposite argument - that evidence showed that the body wasn't there long. I tend to believe the entomologist, that the body was there 6 or more days. I'll again put the disclaimer out there, that my opinion is based solely on the info available to the public. Melanie Hack might bring up some other evidence in her upcoming book that might sway my opinion.

As for the knots, you bring up a good point. And I'll add that Cindy's last attack, before her disappearance, was in October, 1988. Her arms and legs were "hog-tied" when she was found unconscious in her car. The same knot specialist that testified at the inquest, reviewed those knots, and said it was highly unlikely that Cindy tied herself up. However, the knot specialist found a discrepancy from the simulation ligatures and the actual ligatures. I could not follow exactly what he was saying (in Neal Hall's book). Even after re-reading the knot specialist's comments over and over, I couldn't follow what he was getting at. So, I don't know what the final conclusion was, in regards to the ligatures from this attack.

As for the death scene, the same knot specialist again analyzed the ligatures and opined that Cindy had likely tied herself up in this instance. But I agree that it would be hard for someone who wasn't a knot specialist to do this, especially if they had drugs in their system that were taking effect quickly.

HHorseman

03-12-2009, 11:46 AM

The journalist that was interviewed seemed to be on the ball,he certainly made a good case for it being Cindy doing this to herself,but on the other hand the private detective beleived she was telling the truth so I dont know. If it was a stalker they did a bang up job of keeping completly invisible from the police.

Thinman

03-12-2009, 02:12 PM

bbaver

03-12-2009, 02:32 PM

I just do not see how no evidence could have ever been left behind if a stalker was in fact tormenting Cindy. This was the 80's, but not so long ago that technology could not detect a foreign presence. Sadly, I believe poor Cindy unwittingly did these horrible things to herself through multiple personalities or a similar condition.

The "not finding evidence" thing is a double edged sword. If police can't find legitimate evidence that there was a stalker, you would think that they could have found legitame evidence that Cindy was staging the incidents.
They did't find enough evidence on either side of the coin.

I honestly don't know Thinman. I've gone back and forth....suicide or homicide. Just playing devil's advocate.

Thinman

03-12-2009, 02:55 PM

bbaver

03-12-2009, 03:43 PM

Excellent point. However, the victim has a lot less to worry about evidence-wise. If Cindy was tormenting herself, she would not have to worry about leaving behind her DNA, hair, blood, skin, fingerprints, etc. A foreign perpetrator would.

The fire was proven to be an inside job. As far as the people who vouched for Cindy's being harrassed, they were all people who loved Cindy and were extremely biased in her favor. Ozzie Kaban and the Woodcocks probably would have said or done anything to clear her name.

Good points.

I guess another possibility, that hasn't been brought up, is that Ozzie Kaban actually did find evidence to support Cindy was staging the incidents. If he was past the point of no return on this case, it might have been easier for Ozzie to continue supporting the "legitimate harassment" theory. If he found out that he had been duped, it would severily damage his and his company's reputation.

I just find it even harder to believe that Ozzie couldn't find legit evidence vs. the police being unable to find the evidence.

slower7

04-06-2009, 02:23 PM

ok,lets take a look at the two weeks before she was find at the abandoned house. Her car was dicovered in a parking lot, blood on the door handle, groceries in the car and her contents of her wallet on the ground, did the police then take the blood sample and see if it was hers, did they then seeing all this start to do a search? Did they then suspect fowl play? Why did it take two weeks to discover her body? The abandoned house was by a busy road. She was find with a black nylon stocking tied around her neck, she had her hands tied to her feet beyond her back, she had mass amounts of morphine in her system, ok then where is the needle/sytringe, not around her body nor around her car or in her car. If she did inject herself then did she walk to the abandoned house, how far away was the house from her car, plus if she did walk how long did it take for the drugs to take affect, could she then have put the nylon stocking around her neck and then tie herself up. If she walked to the abandoned house the drugs would have already been taking affect and it would be nearly impossiable to tie herself up unless she was a knot expert. Did the police check the site where she was find for another clues such as hair, clothing fiber, blood, etc.

shanejm

04-11-2009, 04:21 AM

My question about this case has always been...how long had she been dead? Was she dead for 2 weeks lying there in that yard/ditch? Was she dead 2 weeks but possibly put there by someone? Had she died just that day or somewhere around that day and did she die there or in a different location. I honestly don't know if any of these answers were figured out because they assumed it was suicide. Just my thoughts about her murder.

slower7

04-13-2009, 02:03 AM

I once again will post on this subject and I hate to say subject only because Cindy was a human being with a family and a life, it's hard to image all those years of not knowing who was responable for the death of a loved one, Cindy's sister is very brave to post on this site expecially after all her and her family have gone through. I have read alot of posts on here, alot of great insight, alot of excellent points and information from Cindy's sister. I do hope to gain insight into this but I too get lost in all that has been presented about this strange,dark case. First of there is probably a great deal of information in the police reports that no one has access to not even Cindy's family, nor the reporter/reporters, nor the investigator. The only reason why I say this is because in this case the police believed Cindy to be her own tormentor, their attitudes seemed to have one of that, that they didn't have time nor cared to greatly to help her. It was easy to chalk it up to her mental state, which by the way she had no previous history to indicate other wise, speaking as someone that has mental illness in my family, you just don't development extreme personality disorder over night. However I do believe that overtime the stress on Cindy, the constant torture, the finger pointing at Cindy creating her own torment caused mental stress. From the get go the police took this case lightly, why? who wanted to torture cindy? what was their motive? Did Cindy see something or know something? It is very possiable. The fact that the police
from the time they find Cindy's body to this day believe it was done by her? Why? the evidence shows no signs of suicide, no one could have tied their own hands behind their back to their feet (which is called hog tying) while induced in a drug state,( plus having had a nylon stocking tied around her own neck) the chance that someone exactly did that is rare. So they had a knot tying expert do a demostration ok he's an expert. Cindy wasn't.The strange thing is that her car was parked a good distance from the abandoned house. The police found it two weeks earlier, they didn't even take a blood sample off the door handle, didn't take any samples or check to see if their was other evidence. That's the way it was told in both videos I saw( on um and current affair). If she did inject herself where did she do it? Evidence points to no needles, residue at the site nor at her car. Why walk to an abandoned house? How could she if she was so loaded on morphine, I don't know about anybody else, morphine works fast expecially if injected(my mom's a nurse too). If anybody else was found in this fashion the police would have pointed out murder. I feel the police are covering up something or they have hidden or are hiding something. They did a poor job in protecting her and handling this case. Suicide is one thing, killing herself in such a fashion is hard to swallow. Their are very unlikely cases of suicide in this fashion. The case on her tormentor/stalker is one of great difficuilty because the older this case becomes the futher away it gets and the more facts get twisted. Some of the evidence leads to a likely suspect the fact that the fire was set in her basement and her neighbor's husband saw a man on the street and asked him to call the police and he ran, the fact that the neighbor find cindy tied up outside, the fact the cindy was find one time on a side of the road miles from her home confused with scratches and bruises on her body. I think over time all the drugs that the tormentor had pumped into her caused confusion on time,places, and other information. also overtime it worsen and caused her to doubt her sanity. I believe the police know much more than they are telling and are pumping up the public to look at Cindy's sanity rather then look at the evidence. Cindy was a beautiful women, seemed smart, and worked as a nurse. There is probably an important piece that has got lost in all the madness and suffle of this case that would bring light to her family. The fact that it's so baffling, so rare, so bizarre, so extreme, causes people even myself to get lost in the madness of a strange tormentor, and/or suicide/ death. The evidence in her death speaks volumes though. If one was to truly investigate this case they would have to be someone on the outside with a clear mind, a great knowlege in suicide and murder cases, someone that was not jaded by Cindy's previous history. I believe the truth is their buried under a mountain, (though somethings my have been lost or suffled in the process).

. Whatever your opinion, whatever your connection to the case, please understand this women was a human being, fragile, hopeful, a neighbor, friend, lover, someone standing next to you in line at the grocery store. May her friends and family find comfort and peace.

"Look not mournfully into the past, it comes not back again. Wisely improve the present, it is thine. Go forth to meet the future without fear and with a manly heart". Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Mastermind

04-13-2009, 05:40 PM

If Cindy was being tormented by someone....i find it difficult to believe
that a good POI could not be found in this case(other than the one that was previously mentioned)

1. To have this much hatred and vitrol for someone, the killer would have to have spent a significant amount of time with Cindy at some point. This has to be a jilted lover, ex husband of some sort that has been with Cindy for a time.

2. Why and how could this guy keep such a low profile and not be seen by even one person? Think of the Annette Burnside case or James Donal King, Those guys were not shy about showing themselves and publicly abusing their women. Yet this guy tends to be the ultimate 'stealth abuser". At least the Wackers had a composite of an individual.

3. Not only did Cindy know her killer, but her family friends did to. This guys name and phone number is sitting in someones address book.

4. To follow and monitor Cindy in such a way would take a tremendous stakeout by the individual. This would have to be someone in a parked car or van watching her hours each day. How could police or investigators not spot this guy or run into him. Especially since the police had their own massive surveliance of her.

The only Cindy was killed by someone is if this was a random psychopath that she did not know her and chose her because he could.

I just do not see how no evidence could have ever been left behind if a stalker was in fact tormenting Cindy. This was the 80's, but not so long ago that technology could not detect a foreign presence. Sadly, I believe poor Cindy unwittingly did these horrible things to herself through multiple personalities or a similar condition.

1. From what i have heard from homicide detectives, usuable fingerprints are rarely found. In this case I have a hunch that our killer would have used gloves which eliminates that possibility all together. People touch objects all the time and don't leave fingerprints. Someone

2. As long as you don;t step in dirt, mud, durt, mud, dust or blood, you can easily avoid leaving footprints. I mean think about your own home. You traipse and walk through the house all the time, do you leave copious amounts easily discernable footprints? Not to mention, that other people, such as family memebers, police officers and paramedics are walking over the same footprints.

3. There was probably was some DNA evidence, but giving the time, I doubt anyone thought about keeping any eveidence in relation to that.

4. Depending on how strong or skilled the killer was, he wouldn;t necessarily have spilt blood or had skin under his fingernails from defensive attacks. He could easily have left unscathed.

5. Keep in mind that the she was not killed in those previous attacks. It;s not like he had to slit her throat or gun her down or strangle her to death. There is less of a chance for him to leave evidence in those case. In regards to her death, we don;t know where the actual crime scene was, so searching for physical evidence would be difficult.

In short, what I am saying is that it is reasonable that there wouldn't be any physical evidence left by this assailant.

Zlatko

08-18-2009, 07:36 PM

dynoguy88

08-19-2009, 02:09 PM

Just a question for anyone who knows a lot about the case; were the any reports of anyone other than Cindy witnessing something shady? The only thing I remember is Agnes Woodcock's husband witnessing some strange man run away after their house caught fire.

In both books, there were some shady instances mentioned.

1. Cindy's family members and friends sometimes answered the phone at her house when she got one of those many threatening phone calls.

2. One time, Cindy and the Woodcocks were playing cards at 2:00 in the morning when they heard a noise out in the yard. When Tom went to check on it, he noticed a dead cat which had been strangled to death left on the porch. A note attached to the cat said, "You're next." The Woodcocks said Cindy never once left the room so there's no way she could have staged that.

3. Cindy's neighbor took the garbage out one night and was surprised to see a man in his back yard staring at Cindy's house. When the neighbor asked what he was doing there, the man ran off breaking the gate latch on the fence as he ran by.

4. Cindy's downstairs basement tennants called the police one day when they heard strange noises upstairs after Cindy had left for work. The police checked the house out but didn't find anything amiss.

Zlatko

08-19-2009, 05:26 PM

In both books, there were some shady instances mentioned.

1. Cindy's family members and friends sometimes answered the phone at her house when she got one of those many threatening phone calls.

2. One time, Cindy and the Woodcocks were playing cards at 2:00 in the morning when they heard a noise out in the yard. When Tom went to check on it, he noticed a dead cat which had been strangled to death left on the porch. A note attached to the cat said, "You're next." The Woodcocks said Cindy never once left the room so there's no way she could have staged that.

3. Cindy's neighbor took the garbage out one night and was surprised to see a man in his back yard staring at Cindy's house. When the neighbor asked what he was doing there, the man ran off breaking the gate latch on the fence as he ran by.

4. Cindy's downstairs basement tennants called the police one day when they heard strange noises upstairs after Cindy had left for work. The police checked the house out but didn't find anything amiss.Thanks for the information, dynoguy88. It'd be interesting to hear the eyewitness' physical description of the man. Perhaps it was Roy Makepeace.

On another note, I think this is Roy Makepeace's facebook page. http://www.facebook.com/roy.makepeace

dynoguy88

08-19-2009, 08:48 PM

Yeah, that's him. I'm surprised someone in their late 80's has a facebook account.

Mastermind

08-20-2009, 09:24 AM

Cindy's family members and friends sometimes answered the phone at her house when she got one of those many threatening phone calls.

1. Has anyone verified that actual calls were made to that phone?

2. One time, Cindy and the Woodcocks were playing cards at 2:00 in the morning when they heard a noise out in the yard. When Tom went to check on it, he noticed a dead cat which had been strangled to death left on the porch. A note attached to the cat said, "You're next." The Woodcocks said Cindy never once left the room so there's no way she could have staged that.

1. Was there an autopsy done on the cat? Any phsyical evidence or photos to show what happened to it or there was an actual cat. Are there photos of the note?

2 It's not out of the question it could be the work of pranksters or a "copycat"(sorry for the pun... no actually I'm not sorry. That was pretty funny!!! :D )

3. As crazy as it sounds, that cat may be the first (and possibly only) murder victim in this case!! Was there any evidence to be found from the body or the scene?

As interesting as those instances were, the only real valid one is the phone calls. If someone could prove that there were actual phone calls made to the Woodcocks phone, I could believe in this case a little more.

It bothers me that the Woodcocks are the only witnesses to these incidents. :confused:

dynoguy88

08-20-2009, 09:40 PM

autopsies on the cat? Uhhh...I assume it was done. The books didn't go into great detail over that. But alot of dead cats were thrown on her property over the years. In one instance, it appeared a cat had been run over by a car yet it still had a wire wrapped around it's neck.

dynoguy88

08-20-2009, 10:02 PM

I checked the book and found SOME of the cat reports...

October 15, 1983 - Cindy's little dog Heidi heard a noise in the middle of the night and started barking. A dead cat with a rope around it's neck was found in the garden. A note nearby said, "You're next."

November 9, 1983 - Cindy out running errands from 6:00 to 8:00 P.M. Returned to find a dead cat between two back doors. Also a letter. Cat had been strangled.

November 22, 1983 - Cindy's dog Heidi found another dead cat next to the garage. Also a letter. Cat had been hit by a car, not strangled.

One of the books has the complete log of incidents over the years. It's unreal. I'll have to write it one one day.

bugnpinky

08-20-2009, 11:38 PM

I cannot wait until Purple Rose's book comes out. If what she states about the doctor is true....it explains a lot. Someone that evil and diabolical and intelligent would not have a hard time making everything appear twisted. PurpleRoses's comments show that there is way more to this case then just the small segments we have seen and the previous books.

Mastermind

10-06-2009, 06:02 PM

Some other things that have bothered me about this case......

1.This guy tortures here all this time and NOW he decides it's time to kill her??? Why now? He had done nearly a 100 acts without getting caught, so why stop now. What was happened at that time to force this guy to kill her??

2. Cindy changed her name and address at least once, yet this guy still found her. How could he find her that quickly?

3. Cindy obviously knew who her attacker. While she claims that the attacker said that if she told anyone, he would killer her family. such a "conversation" had to have occured after a few previous attacks. Why did Cindy not reveal this persons name before?

4. Much like with the Wackers...I find it interesting that Cindy James can easily provide a reason why the attackers are just torturing her rather than killer her.

5. Considering how high profile this case was, I wonder if some of the incidents can be atrtributed to pranksters. You know if a criminal wanted to find a crime he could get away with, Cindy James would seem like a good target. For example, if you tried to molest her and escaped, the crime would be attributed to her stalker and not you. The cat thing seems like a prankster job.

6. It wouldn't be that difficult for Cindy to hire Ozzie Kaban to help her "stage" a few incidents. Seems like a win win deal for both of them.

7. I am most positive that quite often the police & PIs that were watching Cindy's house were "undercover" and not plainclothes. Which makes it even more puzzling how none of them found this guy.

wonderfalls

12-19-2009, 07:00 AM

Thanks for the link Mr. Clairvoyant. I heard a clip of Cindy James' caller on the website her sister has for her upcoming book and it was chilling. :eek:

Those recordings were VERY creepy.

I couldn't help but think it sounded like a woman though. Like it was Cindy.

wonderfalls

12-19-2009, 08:05 AM

If a person wanted to terrify her for years, it seems strange to me that he would kill her in a relatively painless way (by overdose). It also seems strange that he would tie her in such a complicated fashion. To me, it's like she learned to tie herself up that way just to convince everyone that she had been right all along. It is not conclusive evidence that someone had been harassing her, unlike a bullet to the back of the head would be.

I am not convinced that she did it all herself though. This case freaks me out A LOT.

Mastermind

12-19-2009, 12:54 PM

I am not convinced that she did it all herself though. This case freaks me out A LOT.

Perhaps the PI, Ozzie Kaban, had something to do with it.

If a person wanted to terrify her for years, it seems strange to me that he would kill her in a relatively painless way (by overdose). It also seems strange that he would tie her in such a complicated fashion. To me, it's like she learned to tie herself up that way just to convince everyone that she had been right all along. It is not conclusive evidence that someone had been harassing her, unlike a bullet to the back of the head would be.

You'd think after all this terror, he would find a much more gruesome way for her to die.

leafygreens

12-31-2009, 12:33 PM

Yeah, that's him. I'm surprised someone in their late 80's has a facebook account.

:lol:

Mastermind

01-03-2010, 10:57 PM

If Cindy changed her name, this guy would have had to follow her to get an idea of who she was, her phone number and her residence.

Come to think of it..to do any of his harassment he would have to be surveiling her and following her constantly?

How could nobody even get a whiff of this guy?

She had PIs and police watching her for some time. They shoudl have seen someone or heard word of someone asking about Cindy.

Doesn't make sense.:confused:

Hambone2421

01-07-2010, 04:28 PM

Those recordings were VERY creepy.

I couldn't help but think it sounded like a woman though. Like it was Cindy.

Can someone provide a link to these recordings?

crystaldawn

01-07-2010, 06:20 PM

Can someone provide a link to these recordings?

There was a link earlier in the thread. You can find them at her sisters website at www.melaniehack.com.

Shahla

01-17-2010, 08:50 AM

I saw the UM segment years ago and it both scared and intrigued me. But never I have thought she did this to herself. The other 'similar' case mentioned, (Ruth) where the victim did it herself, Ruth admitted she did it at one point. I never saw in programs or read anywere Cindy admit it could possibly be herself.
Ruth seems a plain 'simpler' woman to me then Cindy seems to me. If Ruth was able to find out she was her own tormenter than Cindy could for certain find that out íf she was indeed her own tormenter.
So..what reason could she have to do this to herself? To me, none.
As far as we know she never had trauma's from the past, like Ruth seemed to have, so there was no reason for Cindy 'to create a subcharacter'.
Because her mental state detariated much later in her life. As a result of the torment she endured and not as a cause of other events earlier in her life.
I also did not read from purplerose that mental illness runs in her family. And if no one in the family showed mental illnesses then it is not (very much) likely she developed one without trauma's. Which she seems not to have had until the torment start.

People mentioned there was no evidence any other person or more than one person did this to her. Even after purplerose mentioned there was evidence.
Sometimes the evidence lies in what is NOT there. Like a missing syringe. If she did this to herself that syringe could not be far from where she was found. Morphine is strong stuff. You will rapid feel the influence of that. And she had high doses of that stuff in her blood so it would have kicked in quite hard. If she did this she would have know that and could not have injected it far from the place she was found because she would also need a certain amount of time to tie herself up the way she was found. To me it is therefor, among other things, not likely she commit suicide.

I also read here that the person responsible had to have a lot of time at his hands. To follow and stalk and torment her around the clock. That can easily have been handled to hire people to do the dirty work for him or most of it. Give shady people a bundle of money and you are amazed what they are willing to do for it.
As for the mentioned phonecalls that can be listened to at purplerose's site when some think it is a woman. Maybe a woman was hired to make those calls. Just because it could have been a woman does not automatically say that it had to be Cindy herself.

As for the pranks (dead cats) mentioned. That does not sound as a prank to me! They would have killed cats for it, at least a couple of the amount used. Because I guess dead cats can't be found at the streets so easily. And when there is killing involved it is no longer a prank.

I also read Purplerose mentioning another tread about Cindy where a poster mentioned something or someone (possible suspect) that was overlooked or not reacting to by the other posters. I would like to know where to find that thread because it sounded important to notice. Otherwise Purplerose would not have pointed it out.

Shahla

01-17-2010, 02:37 PM

Meanwhile I have seen the W5 segment. First the police think it is her (ex) husband. After a while they think it's Cindy herself. Then when they find her car with blood on the door, they think it's fowl play. When they find her they think it's her again, this time succeeded and killed herself. Strange way of thinking the police handled here.
I think in any other case when they find a woman in a position like this they immediately would think it was a homicide. Did the police have tunnel vision here? They couldn't find anything so it must have been her?
I agree with Ozzie Kaban in the segment.

I read this whole thread and I just remembered that purplerose asked about similar cases when the family thinks it's murder and the police thinks it's a suicide. I saw two weeks ago or something like that a 48 hours mystery segment about Col. Shue. You can watch this segment on cbs.com under videos and then click the link on the left: 48 hours mystery. Scroll a bit down and you find it.

Mastermind

01-18-2010, 05:27 PM

I also read here that the person responsible had to have a lot of time at his hands. To follow and stalk and torment her around the clock. That can easily have been handled to hire people to do the dirty work for him or most of it.

1. You don't think it would be a little expensive to hire two or more people for that long a time?

2. What "for-hire" person would take multiple jobs on the same target? If you were a "for hire killer" wouldn;t you consider this a "high risk" contract?:confused:

3. Wouldn;t someone who has resources hire thugs at that price be fairly easy to find? We're talking about someone who is either in organized crime or is a millionaire. Did her ex-husband fit into any of those categories?

As for the mentioned phonecalls that can be listened to at purplerose's site when some think it is a woman. Maybe a woman was hired to make those calls

1. Your insunuiating potentially 3 people were hired. And your also assuming this "woman" has no desire to come forward considering that she was not privy to murder. At that point she was just part of a harassment campaign. Once Cindy dies, she knows that her client is a murderer.

2. Why does it have to be a woman? You can splice recordings like in the L'enfant case?

People mentioned there was no evidence any other person or more than one person did this to her. Even after purplerose mentioned there was evidence.

I could be wrong but I thought the only evidence was eyewitness accounts and the dead cats?

Ruth seems a plain 'simpler' woman to me then Cindy seems to me. If Ruth was able to find out she was her own tormenter than Cindy could for certain find that out íf she was indeed her own tormenter.

Not necessarily. Perhaps Cindy isn;t as strong a person as Ruth. Perhaps her madness went to far. It seemed at the end that she was not doing so well mentally.

I read this whole thread and I just remembered that purplerose asked about similar cases when the family thinks it's murder and the police thinks it's a suicide. I saw two weeks ago or something like that a 48 hours mystery segment about Col. Shue. You can watch this segment on cbs.com under videos and then click the link on the left: 48 hours mystery. Scroll a bit down and you find it.

Murder mistaken for suicide happens all the time. Epecially in prisons.

But this case is not just a simple suicide...it's a massive prolonged harassment by an "unseen attacker".

I think in any other case when they find a woman in a position like this they immediately would think it was a homicide. Did the police have tunnel vision here?

What evidence was their of foul play? I personally would come to the same conclusion of suicide based on the crime scene and the backstory of Cindy.

I agree with Ozzie Kaban in the segment.
Keep in mind that Ozzie Kaban is/was an employee of Cindy James.

I also did not read from purplerose that mental illness runs in her family. And if no one in the family showed mental illnesses then it is not (very much) likely she developed one without trauma's. Which she seems not to have had until the torment start.

I'm by no means a psychologist, but I'm pretty sure you don;t need to have psychosis in your family in order to develop it. Much the same as you can have no history of diabetes in your family and develop the disease.

Sometimes the evidence lies in what is NOT there. Like a missing syringe. If she did this to herself that syringe could not be far from where she was found. Morphine is strong stuff. You will rapid feel the influence of that. And she had high doses of that stuff in her blood so it would have kicked in quite hard. If she did this she would have know that and could not have injected it far from the place she was found because she would also need a certain amount of time to tie herself up the way she was found. To me it is therefor, among other things, not likely she commit suicide.

1. Are you sure this is the only way it could be done. Your sure you've exhausted all other possible ways those drugs could wind up in her body?

2. Perhaps the syringe was stolen by a drug addict who happened upon the body.

3. Were were the needle marks on Cindy's body?

Shahla

01-18-2010, 07:46 PM

I appreciate that you took the time to react on my thinking of the case.

1. It would be expensive but if the person who hired had more than enough mony, it would be for that person no problem at all. Maybe not even an amount he would 'miss' anyway. The stalking and tormenting was so severe that it must have been almost as important for that person als food and beverages.

2. Maybe someone with an addiction. The high risk would be taken because the addiction is stronger. One option.

3. Maybe but who says he let them live after 'the job was done'? Just a possibility.
You name the ex husband but who says he was the one behind this. Maybe we need to look in a whole other direction. Someone with a lot to loose if Cindy knew something very severe or important about him and wanted to be a whistleblower. Was it even a him? Can't it be a woman behind all this that wanted to do this to Cindy?

===
1. I assume people are hired. I don't have an exact number in mind. It could be one. It could be two. I don't know. Íf it was indeed a woman who called, Cindy's death is already ruled as a suicide and maybe that assumed woman caller is scared for her own life and because they did not call it a murder left it like it is. No punishment from the hirer and no punishment of the law. And not everyone has enough of a conscience to overcome that.

2. It does not need to be a woman. My reaction was just about someone mentioning it sounded like a woman and therefor it had to be Cindy. I thought that did not necessarily need to be true. It can be a man. Sure. Maybe one of the hired men. One of the persons that is seen by witnesses. Technics can alter voices. Agree.
====

According to purplerose there was more evidence than already mentioned her or elsewhere so maybe there was more than just eyewitnesses and dead cats?

The case of Col. Shue seemed also not simple. Lot of questions and situations unanswered. That isn't solved either, I think.

The police thought it was foul play when they found her car abandoned with blood on the door. That's the foul play mentioned. I don't know for sure if there is foul play. I assume but it is just a theory. I believe that theory more than that Cindy might done this all herself. I would come with a different conclusion than you on the same events.

yes, Ozzie was an employee of Cindy but he was only hired because there was a lot wrong in Cindy's life. And at first he wanted to make sure she did not do it herself. If he was for example only in for the money wouldn't he 'believe' her from the start no matter what?

In most cases disorders do not develop just like that. Or it runs in the family, or she endured severe trauma's or it was a severe chemical unbalance or a combination. It just does not develop like other fysical diseases can just like that. And even fysical diseases can have some sort of cause. In those cases certain 'requirements' have to be met.

=====
1. What other ways are there. You either snort it, smoke it, inject it of someone put it in your food or drinks. I am not quite sure what you mean here or which direction you're at.

2. If it was a drugarea it is possible a junkie could have stolen a syringe if it was there. Why not. This case is already full of weird, unexplainable or otherwise to name events.

3. The needlemark on Cindy's body was at the elbow area but then on the inner side of the arm. I believe it was the left arm.
====
Another thing. If she was laying there for two weeks wouldn't anybody have smelled a body wás there? It seems to be a very distinctive smell.

Shahla

01-18-2010, 07:51 PM

I appreciate that you took the time to react on my thinking of the case.

1. It would be expensive but if the person who hired had more than enough mony, it would be for that person no problem at all. Maybe not even an amount he would 'miss' anyway. The stalking and tormenting was so severe that it must have been almost as important for that person as food and beverages.

2. Maybe someone with an addiction. The high risk would be taken because the addiction is stronger. One option.

3. Maybe but who says he let them live after 'the job was done'? Just a possibility.
You name the ex husband but who says he was the one behind this. Maybe we need to look in a whole other direction. Someone with a lot to loose if Cindy knew something very severe or important about him and wanted to be a whistleblower. Was it even a him? Can't it be a woman behind all this that wanted to do this to Cindy?

===
1. I assume people are hired. I don't have an exact number in mind. It could be one. It could be two. I don't know. Íf it was indeed a woman who called, Cindy's death is already ruled as a suicide and maybe that assumed woman caller is scared for her own life and because they did not call it a murder left it like it is. No punishment from the hirer and no punishment of the law. And not everyone has enough of a conscience to overcome that.

2. It does not need to be a woman. My reaction was just about someone mentioning it sounded like a woman and therefor it had to be Cindy. I thought that did not necessarily need to be true. It can be a man. Sure. Maybe one of the hired men. One of the persons that is seen by witnesses. Technics can alter voices. Agree.
====

According to purplerose there was more evidence than already mentioned here or elsewhere so maybe there was more than just eyewitnesses and dead cats?

The case of Col. Shue seemed also not simple. Lot of questions and situations unanswered. That isn't solved either, I think.

The police thought it was foul play when they found her car abandoned with blood on the door. That's the foul play mentioned. I don't know for sure if there is foul play. I assume but it is just a theory. I believe that theory more than that Cindy might done this all herself. I would come with a different conclusion than you on the same events.

yes, Ozzie was an employee of Cindy but he was only hired because there was a lot wrong in Cindy's life. And at first he wanted to make sure she did not do it herself. If he was for example only in for the money wouldn't he 'believe' her from the start no matter what?

In most cases disorders do not develop just like that. Or it runs in the family, or she endured severe trauma's or it was a severe chemical unbalance or a combination. It just does not develop like other fysical diseases can just like that. And even fysical diseases can have some sort of cause. In those cases certain 'requirements' have to be met.

=====
1. What other ways are there. You either snort it, smoke it, inject it of someone put it in your food or drinks. I am not quite sure what you mean here or which direction you're at.

2. If it was a drugarea it is possible a junkie could have stolen a syringe if it was there. Why not. This case is already full of weird, unexplainable or otherwise to name events.

3. The needlemark on Cindy's body was at the elbow area but then on the inner side of the arm. I believe it was the left arm.
====
Another thing. If she was laying there for two weeks wouldn't anybody have smelled a body wás there? It seems to be a very distinctive smell.

Shahla

01-18-2010, 07:53 PM

Oops, I just wanted to edit some words but instead of edit I chose quote...:rolleyes:

Mastermind

01-19-2010, 03:38 PM

1. I assume people are hired. I don't have an exact number in mind. It could be one. It could be two. I don't know. Íf it was indeed a woman who called, Cindy's death is already ruled as a suicide and maybe that assumed woman caller is scared for her own life and because they did not call it a murder left it like it is. No punishment from the hirer and no punishment of the law. And not everyone has enough of a conscience to overcome that.

2. It does not need to be a woman. My reaction was just about someone mentioning it sounded like a woman and therefor it had to be Cindy. I thought that did not necessarily need to be true. It can be a man. Sure. Maybe one of the hired men. One of the persons that is seen by witnesses. Technics can alter voices. Agree.

Someone with a lot to loose if Cindy knew something very severe or important about him and wanted to be a whistleblower. Was it even a him? Can't it be a woman behind all this that wanted to do this to Cindy?

1. It should be pointed out that according to Cindy's family she always referred to her attacker as he. Not they. Not she.

2. If cindy was a whitsleblower there has to be someone that she is whistleblowing to. Where is that person? It's not the police. No reporter has come through. Why was Cindy not testafiying or part of some deposition?

3. Why would a criminal conspiracy do such acts over such a long period of time to silence one person. They drew attention to Cindy by the whole compaign to begin with. Why do all these acts over all these years and then finally kill her? If there trying to silence her, why did they continune the acts even though she hasn;t revealed her attacker. That would seem to mean she is complying with the threats. They would not do a harassment campaign. When the police came involved, why continue with the acts once it became obvious that the police had no suspect? Continuing the attacks just invites more of a chance of getting caught for the very act your trying to

4. There has been ZERO evidence of Cindy being involved in anything remotely complex that would involve someone needing to silence her.

5. Cindy was never shy about calling the police. To our knowledge she never refused their assistance. She apparently was not afraid about getting the police involved. She was also not shy about giving the guys motive. Which she gave as "he wants to scare me to death. That's what he said to me". She was only reluctant to reveal the identity of the attacker. She 's scared to reveal the attacker, but not scared enough to involved the police who could find the identity of the attacker on their own. :confused:

2. Maybe someone with an addiction. The high risk would be taken because the addiction is stronger. One option.

This attacker is too skilled and too knowlegeable about surveillance and tracking to be that desperate. This would have to be a professional to not be caught doing these many acts.

Maybe but who says he let them live after 'the job was done'? Just a possibility.

1.That would involve other assasins, hence increasing the cost of this harrasment campaign.

2.Why does he have to kill the attackers? The police haven't found any suspects? The murder is a suicide.

3. Murdering hitmen is not a healthy way to live life. The only people who murder hitman are organized crime, police, terrorists or intelligence organizations.

The case of Col. Shue seemed also not simple. Lot of questions and situations unanswered. That isn't solved either, I think.

Colonel Shue was in the military, which much like being a cop, being involved in drugs, being a politician lend themselves to being a victim of foul play and conspiracy. You should always be suspicious of of the death of any military person.

Cindy James was a nurse and worked with kids.

Apples and oranges.

Another thing. If she was laying there for two weeks wouldn't anybody have smelled a body wás there? It seems to be a very distinctive smell.

I could be wrong, but wasn;t her body found outside in the brush? I don;t think I could tell the difference between a decomposing body from car engine fumes, garbage, raccoons, mold or fungus?

Shahla

01-23-2010, 12:32 PM

Mastermind

01-23-2010, 10:29 PM

Quote:2. If cindy was a whitsleblower there has to be someone that she is whistleblowing to. Where is that person? It's not the police. No reporter has come through. Why was Cindy not testafiying or part of some deposition?

She could have been deciding to be one but had not acted on it, so the delicate information was still hidden.

???:confused:

How would here killers no that she had sensitive info to begin with? For them to take this risk with someone who "potentially" could rat on them, Cindy would have to be deeply involved in their affairs. It would have to be an organized element cleaning up and taking care of all lose ends in the activities. Why would Cindy be considered a lose end in their activity? What was she doing illegally?

Quote:3. Why would a criminal conspiracy do such acts over such a long period of time to silence one person.

Maybe it was fun to torment her?

I thought you said this was business, not pleasure.

Their trying to silence someone, tormenting that person for fun just runs more risks. Would professionals really risk their contract for jokes and giggles?

Quote:They drew attention to Cindy by the whole compaign to begin with.

They drew it before and realised she could become a big problem.

They drew attention to their relationship with Cindy before the first attack? How? As far as I know, there has been nothing occuring previously to Cindy's attacks? There wasn;t any stories like in the Dave Bochs case? Where are the stories prior to the first attack?

Quote:If there trying to silence her, why did they continune the acts even though she hasn;t revealed her attacker.

To scare her to death, she said that herself one time and you wrote it yourself at point 5.

Scaring her to death?? What;s wrong with a bullet to the head? Have you ever heard of an organization silencing witnesses by "scarring them to death"? If you want to kill someone, you kill them. It saves money, time and risk. You don;t waste time in a prolonged campaign unless your trying to get caught.

Quote:4. There has been ZERO evidence of Cindy being involved in anything remotely complex that would involve someone needing to silence her.

No evidence does not necessarily mean there wasn't anything 'behind the scenes', like evidence or a 'remotely complex situation'.

Using that logic, anything is possible in this case.

Cindy James might have been a terrorist for the Palestinian Liberation Organization who killed herself to protect her comarades. There's no evidence of that either, but there could be, couldn;t there?

Quote:5. She 's scared to reveal the attacker, but not scared enough to involved the police who could find the identity of the attacker on their own.

Maybe she was not affraid to reveal the person behind the attacks. It is well possible there was a lot more to it and she was not willing to reveal that.
I guess she only involved the police because she did not want to die. There was only one period she thought about suicide. And it is one thing to take your own life in your own manner and one a day and time of your choice. It is a whole other thing that another person decides it for you. And in the period she wanted it she did not act on it. Why then would she do it two years later when she not even wanted it?

I'm sorry I'm not following your logic here.

1.If she;s afraid to die, wouldn;t the easiest thing be to tell the police who is attacking her, so that they can put her in witness protection or whatever. So she could put these people in jail so the attacks can stop to begin with?

2. The minute someone thinks about committing suicide they can be at risk to committ suicide any time after that. There is no golden rule on when and how someone commits suicide.

3. if she was whistleblowing, isn't the whole point of that activity...to NAME people to begin with? If she was ready to name people, she had to have realized the risks that would come with it. Are you telling me that the attack campaign came as a surprise to her if she was whistleblowing?

4. Cindy changed her name and address, why would she not reveal the information then, before the next attack?

Quote:This attacker is too skilled and too knowlegeable about surveillance and tracking to be that desperate. This would have to be a professional to not be caught doing these many acts.

A professional can also at one point in life become addicted. An addiction does not mean you don't or can't have skills.

Keep in mind the hitman is rarely contacted directly in something like this. So who the hitman is as a person may be a moot point. I seriously doubt these people contacted hitmen directly. The most likely used a broker.

I guess if the job was this high risk enough the broker might find a desperate man to do the job. But keep in mind that the broker has himself to worry about..he doesn;t want caught. He also has to worry about his reputation.

I can;t see a broker agreeing to keeping this type of contract and relationship for that long. The broker would ask for more money in this situation. Making this whole thing even more expensive.

Quote:2.Why does he have to kill the attackers? The police haven't found any suspects? The murder is a suicide.

To make sure they could never betray him, making a deal with police,

What are they going to tell the police? They know nothing

1. Your assuming the client knows who the attackers are in the first place...The client may never have meet the attackers in the first place. Those people may have been hired by the broker.

2. What could attackers possibly tell the police? That some unknown guy in a bar paid them to attack Cindy James? They know nothing of the client or the motives of the client. Just that some dude in a bar paid them money and gave them instructions.Considering the business that the broker is in and the type of people that hire the broker...it probably isn;t a good idea to rat on the broker. :(

3. God knows how many buffers and brokers are involved in a job like this. You could have several people who don;t know the person above them. That's the whole point of using the buffer.

4. Someone that specializes in killing and harming people is by nature not an easy person to kill. You really don;t want to try to go after a hitman unless you ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO. Think about what his occupation is?:eek:

[QUOTE]Quote:Colonel Shue was in the military, which much like being a cop, being involved in drugs, being a politician lend themselves to being a victim of foul play and conspiracy. You should always be suspicious of of the death of any military person. Cindy James was a nurse and worked with kids.

That was not my point. The point was if there were other cases where it was not sure if it was murder of suicide. Colonel Shue was also found bound. Not an ordinarily suicide if it was one.

Determining between murder/suicide/accident is one of the perils of homicide investigation.

There are
1. Homicides that are really accidents
2. Accidents that are really homicides.
3. Homicides that are really accidents
4. Suicides that are really homicides
5. Homicides that are really suicides
6. Accidents that are really suicides

Are you trying to say that there are some apparent suicides that are really homicides? Sure. But there are also apparent homicides that are really suicides and apparent suicides that are really....well... suicides!

Quote:I could be wrong, but wasn;t her body found outside in the brush? I don;t think I could tell the difference between a decomposing body from car engine fumes, garbage, raccoons, mold or fungus?

Her body was indeed found outside, near a busy road or area. Someone should have smelled her if she was there for two weeks. Decomp. smell is very distinctive. I can't compare it with anything. It is def. not the same as rotten food, or mold etc.

1. You do realize that roadkill and dead animals die on sides roads all the time? Somehow the smell of deer which are much larger than humans doesn;t seem to attract much attention.

2. There have been several instances of actual dead bodies INSIDE buildings that have been discovered several weeks after death anyone knowing.

3. I really think your overestimating the smell of decomp and the degree to which the average Joe be bothered by that smell. Remember most people have no idea what a dead body smells like. What seems like a bad smell might be passed off by the average person as rotten garbage. Nobody's going to say, "Hey smell that! There's a dead body"

4. Who says nobody noticed the body? Some people may have noticed it and chose not to report it. Happens all the time. There's no blood or anything, maybe they thought she was doing kinky sex, was drunk or sleeping it off. M

5. Your also forgetting that smells mask other smells. Suppose, I ran exhaust fumes, placed mold, and threw garbage and rotten leaves in a room with a dead body. Could you really smell the decomp over all that?

6. Hell, I stumbled upon a corpse in an alley in Anacostia that was three weeks old and the smell wasn;t that noticeable. (Actually the garbage and the smell of the river was worse. :mad:)

This iso ne of the advantage of dumping bodies outside. Nobody notices them unless they see the body or stumble across it.

Shahla

01-24-2010, 11:59 AM

I'll trie to respond later. It is a lot to absorb.

Shahla

01-27-2010, 03:19 PM

Her tormenters, killers or whatever to call them must have had the knowledge that she knew vital things.
Why would they otherwise bother to do all this. The 'fun' part I mentioned because it was done for so long, even when Cindy did not reveal anything. When a person does not speak out why bother to go through with it if you know she is already scared enough and will apparently not tell on them or the person behind it. It does not mean she herself did something illegal. It is possible she stumbled on illegal activities or overheard and the tormenter and helper(s) realized later somehow. That is also a loose end.
I think it was a combination of business and taking a sadistic pleasure out of doing this to her. Hitmen would not want to take the risk but the person behind this does not necessarily have to have the same opinion about it. And maybe there never were hitmen.
He could have ordered all this in the manner it just happened. Ór he only hired people to spy on her and do little things to her like cutting her phoneline, lay a dead cat on her doorstep and did the heavy stuff himself. Rationally he would know it is a risk but if he had a sadistic and/or sociopathic personality that would have gotten the upper hand. Because that kind of personalities think they are smarter than anyone else. He would like the risk and think the same time that everyone is too stupid to catch him.

'The story' prior to the first attact are not revealed to the public. The tormenters would for sure did not want that and Cindy did not tell for some reason.

A witness protection program isn't 'waterproof'/'airtight'. Maybe Cindy did not think it would save her.

If you at some point in your life want to commit suicide it does not mean you will do it. And if you tried it does not mean you will want it the rest of your life or will for sure try it again sometime in the future. That you have done it once can also cause a turning point. A realisation that you dó want to live and from then one you will fight to get a better life.

The whistleblowing issue. She could have become one but obviously chose not to for some reason. Only Cindy knows why she did not reveal the name(s) of her attacker(s). Maybe at the time she thought that was the best decision to stay alive because she could not proof anything she knew.
And maybe she thought she would for sure die if she told and could stay alive if she kept her mouth shut.

I come back later to react on the rest of what you wrote.

At last, for now, I read in another thread you are paralized? How did that happen? If you want to tell. If not, forget I mentioned it.

Mastermind

01-27-2010, 08:29 PM

At last, for now, I read in another thread you are paralized? How did that happen? If you want to tell. If not, forget I mentioned it.

Line of duty. I'll leave it a that, since explaining the circumstances would rob me of anonymity on this board. I believe I even googled the incident once. Thanks for asking, though.

A witness protection program isn't 'waterproof'/'airtight'. Maybe Cindy did not think it would save her.

Yet, she was willing to change her name and address. A form of "personal witness protection" If she was willing to change her name, she would have gone all high hog and gone into the program.

Though admitedly I will agree that the canadian form of the witness protection program may not be to the same standard as the FBIs! (apologies to all canadians on this board)

Not all witness protection is voluntary. Cindy could always be jailed or

If you at some point in your life want to commit suicide it does not mean you will do it. And if you tried it does not mean you will want it the rest of your life or will for sure try it again sometime in the future. That you have done it once can also cause a turning point. A realisation that you dó want to live and from then one you will fight to get a better life.

Having suicide tendencies is much like being an alcoholic or drug addict. You are always potentially at risk to committ suicide. You could be really positive one day and then 12 months later you see a depressing news story and then go back to the same dark depression you were in previously.

The whistleblowing issue. She could have become one but obviously chose not to for some reason. Only Cindy knows why she did not reveal the name(s) of her attacker(s). Maybe at the time she thought that was the best decision to stay alive because she could not proof anything she knew.
And maybe she thought she would for sure die if she told and could stay alive if she kept her mouth shut.

If she has no proof, then she's not a whistlblower.

She can't be an eyeball witness to anything since she would have all the proof she needs in her testimony.

If she has some vague information on the attackers, that would mean she is working for them in some capacity. Who could Nurse Cindy James possible be involved with?
1. Drugs?
2. Espionage?
3. Organized Crime

Why would they otherwise bother to do all this. The 'fun' part I mentioned because it was done for so long, even when Cindy did not reveal anything. When a person does not speak out why bother to go through with it if you know she is already scared enough and will apparently not tell on them or the person behind it

Time is money. They can;t afford to have fun at Cindy James expense. They also have the police to worry about. Remember that the police had staked out Cindy;s home several times. And she has a private detective working for her.

I think it was a combination of business and taking a sadistic pleasure out of doing this to her. Hitmen would not want to take the risk but the person behind this does not necessarily have to have the same opinion about it. And maybe there never were hitmen.
He could have ordered all this in the manner it just happened. Ór he only hired people to spy on her and do little things to her like cutting her phoneline, lay a dead cat on her doorstep and did the heavy stuff himself. Rationally he would know it is a risk but if he had a sadistic and/or sociopathic personality that would have gotten the upper hand. Because that kind of personalities think they are smarter than anyone else. He would like the risk and think the same time that everyone is too stupid to catch him.

Again, the scenario you depict is unbelievably expensive and risky for all parties. I can't see any criminal organization element being that stupid to do this activity and still being in business. They don;t need Cindy James to whitleblow on them...this whole terror campaign alone would do the entire organization in! :lol:

I mean they got all this talk, hiring people, surveillance, multiple attacks and doing all this while the police are involved in Cindy James case! Boy, I would love to investigate their organization!

I mean the minute you spoke to someone on the street about Cindy James the name must scream out. I bet I could easily go undercover and and wind up being part of this "hit terror squad"

For your scenario to be remotely possible, it would have to be soldiers within an established organization that already had ties to the

In "godfather" terms...capo regimes if you will... divisions of soldiers within an organized family.

And they would only do a campaign like this unless their boss was unbelievably angry at someone. They would not do a campaign like this n

How the heck Cindy James could be involved with a high level organized crime syndicate is bizarre.

The only even plausible scenario I could think of is that she was sexually involved with someone involved with organized crime. She cheated on him, he;s pissed and now he wants to make her life a living hell Which I guess is possible...though unbelievably improbable!!!:confused:

if they were having fun, why wasn;t rape a part of this?

Why didn;t the attackers rape Cindy James? She was quite attractive by the photographs we've seen.? What greater pleasure could there be in sexually tormenting this young women?

Mastermind

01-27-2010, 08:32 PM

Tighthead

01-27-2010, 10:18 PM

Again not to offend Canadians...but how much high level organized crime is there in Vancouver back then??? I'm sure there is some, but not to the level like a city such as Philadelphia, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, etc..

I'm not sure that many of us would take offense to your suggestion that we lack your high level of organized crime.

Back then, Vancouver (like most NA cities) would not yet have had the newer wave of organized crime - it certainly has it now. There was some mob presence back then, but pretty mild in the scheme of things.

dynoguy88

01-28-2010, 12:56 AM

Again not to offend Canadians...but how much high level organized crime is there in Vancouver back then??? I'm sure there is some, but not to the level like a city such as Philadelphia, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, etc..

I'm not a Canadian but I own both books written about the Cindy James case. Here is an excerpt from "The deaths of Cindy James" by Neal Hall to answer your question. The book was written in 1990, one year after Cindy died.

Richmond (where Cindy's body was found) gets only a handful of homicides each year, mainly the domestic-dispute variety. A husband and wife get an a argument, tempers flare and someone ends up dead - usually the wife. Kitchen knives and hunting rifles are the popular weapons. The suburb's most serious crime problems are burglary and car theft, not murder. It's crime rate is nothing compared to neighboring Vancouver.

Vancouver, separated from Richmond by the muddy Fraser River, has the highest per capita crime rate in the country. The city, with it's surrounding suburbs, including Richmond, has about 1.4 million residents and is the economic and cultural hub of the province of British Columbia. The port of Vancouver is one of the busiest in the country, and B.C., with it's thousands of kilometers of uninhabited coastline and close proximity to the U.S. and Asia, is a drug smuggler's haven. And along with the drug trade come all disturbing spinoffs - gang style slayings, street prostitution and one of the largest concentrations of heroin and cocain addicts in Canada.

Richmond gets some spill-over from Vancouver's burgeoning crime scene: it has earned a reputation as a great place to dump a body. Canada's most notorious serial killer, Clifford Olson, buried three of his child victims amid the shadows of Richmond's stretches of unpopulated bush and tranquil blueberry fields. When the call came from the municipal works yard about Cindy's body being discovered at No. 3 and Blundell, police initially assumed that they had another Vancouver murder victim on their hands.

Shahla

01-28-2010, 04:39 AM

I don't think it was organized crime in that sense of word in this case.
The suicide part I disagree. I know some part of 'that proces'.
English is not my native language so it is hard for me to argument that well.
Then it is fairly easy to blow all my thinking away.
It almost seems to me you're laughing at my writing, mastermind, which takes the interest in the case and responding to this thread away for me.
I think I leave this case at that.

The question about you being paralized was asked out of compassion. Ofcourse it was not my purpose that you reveal anything that can expose your identity. I understand and respect you want your privacy and keep your identity a secret. I just felt for your situation.

Mastermind

01-28-2010, 11:49 AM

Then it is fairly easy to blow all my thinking away.
It almost seems to me you're laughing at my writing, mastermind, which takes the interest in the case and responding to this thread away for me.
I think I leave this case at that.

I'm sorry if you feel that way. and I apologize if there was offense taken.
I'm glad you mentioned there was a language barrier, I will keep that in mind in the future.

Actually I was very interested in your theory and was in a way thinking along with your theory and seeing it from both perspectives.

I actually applaud you for coming up with a theory I had never thought of.Your theory has led to this theory which I now bring up to this board.

What if Cindy James had a secret lover that she was fooling around with. This person was someone who was extremely wealthy or was involved with organized crime. For whatever reason the relationship turned sour. This mystery man took this break up to heart and decided he was going to make Cindy James life a living hell from now on. Because he already has bodyguards or soldiers working for him, he doesn;t have to outsource any hit people. Heck he could have his own bodyguards perform all the acts. They would agree to it, considering there already being paid by their client to protect him and do other illegal activities. Since Cindy James doesn;t know any of his illegal activities, he technically doesn;t have to worry about her ratting out his activities. If he's a wealthy socialite, he has no illegal activities he has to worry about exposing (except his attacks on Cindy). This guy may have never planned to kill Cindy at all, just torture her until she committs suicide or dies of shock or something. Something may have occured which prompted Cindy dying now and in an undetectable way (most likely that they feared the police where getting too close).

Well what does everyone think? Credit goes to Shalaa. :)

Mastermind

01-28-2010, 11:51 AM

The question about you being paralized was asked out of compassion. Ofcourse it was not my purpose that you reveal anything that can expose your identity. I understand and respect you want your privacy and keep your identity a secret. I just felt for your situation.

I know it was out of compassion and I thank you.

It's just that I wanted to avoid answering the inevitable future questions that may be asked about the incident.

No offense taken.:)

Shahla

01-28-2010, 03:12 PM

I'm sorry if you feel that way. and I apologize if there was offense taken.
I'm glad you mentioned there was a language barrier, I will keep that in mind in the future.

It's oké. I understand your line of approach and reactions now.
I'll try to post in English in the best way I possibly can. But when I am writing my arguments I often notice I can't as well explain in English as I'd come up with in my own language: Dutch. It almost always sounded better in my own language when I read it back in English. My vocabulary is too small and I miss the knowledge to translate the nuances.

Actually I was very interested in your theory and was in a way thinking along with your theory and seeing it from both perspectives.

I understand now better. I actually (first) thought your opinion was that she did this all by herself. To me that is the least likely option.

What if Cindy James had a secret lover that she was fooling around with.

My line of thinking goes also more in this direction.
It would or could explain why she was not killed much earlier in this tragic story. Maybe he (person behind this) was hoping, in a sick way, that she'd 'come around' and give him another chance. Maybe he promised he would stop with this horrible treatment if she went back to him.
Ór he was an admirer, tried to win her affection, she rejected him and voilá the stalking and the rest started. With maybe the same idea he would treat her well if she gave him a chance.

More later. It's dinertime here. :D

Mastermind

01-28-2010, 05:47 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind
Actually I was very interested in your theory and was in a way thinking along with your theory and seeing it from both perspectives.

I understand now better. I actually (first) thought your opinion was that she did this all by herself. To me that is the least likely option.

I actually still believe that the most likely scenario is that she killed herself and the assailant was imaginary.

But I'm always open to another theory if it makes sense.

Shahla

01-30-2010, 05:32 AM

I guess it's no use then to go through with theories. You think she's done it herself. I think otherwise. I think we will never find out which one it is anyway.

Kkaban

03-31-2010, 01:21 AM

I'm the new guy and have been following the Cindy case for many years. I'm torn...If I was being harrassed like that and they couldn't figure it out I would have moved to a different city, province, state or country...so I don't get that. BUT the big thing that jumps out at me, is this was an inside job by the PI. Everything I've seen about him makes me think he was involved. And it's funny how his buiness really took off after this case. He was always in the news...and his cop friend ended up in jail after attacking a woman saying she reminded him of Cindy James. The cops and Cindy were both played by this Private investigator. It's the only thing that makes sense. Then he killed her when he didn't need her anymore because his business was starting to thrive.

Ozzie Kaban is a upstanding man, that wouldn't stoop to such levels to let it his business "thrive", in the way you speak of.

If you held more information on him, or perhaps even educated yourself a little better than you have, you would know his business was thriving well before Cindy's death, (Case in point his popularity with many celebrities, and his ability to protect them while visiting Vancouver).

I may be biased, as he is my grandfather :) ...
But I also know more about the case than you probably do, making my insight on this, probably a little better than yours.

peachysquirt21

03-31-2010, 01:50 AM

I-thinks theory is a bit of a stretch IMO.

mattc

03-31-2010, 09:49 AM

Been really interested in this case after reading one of the books. I'm looking forward to reading Cindy's sister's book next. As I said in the other thread, I really feel that Cindy was doing this to herself (I know a lot of feel this way).
Since we don't know Cindy very well, it's hard to know exactly what was going on, but I think everyone involved in this case has done their best at trying to figure out what the deal was with her and the harassment. Also, and I mean no disrespect in any way, from PurpleRose's posts, I got the sense that Cindy's family didn't know her incredibly well (at least as an adult) either. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but Cindy's sister said she had only seen Cindy once in the final year of her life, that Cindy was not very forthcoming to any family members about the problems (and that they didn't usually ask)

In other words, a lot more could have been going on in Cindy's life (or mind) that her family wasn't aware of.

1) The fact that this started 4 months after the separation has been cited as a sign that possible her ex was the perpetrator. It seems just as (if not more) likely that the separation and proceeding loneliness was a catalyst that started the self-harassment. Cindy's sister said on the thread that Cindy wanted out of the relationship, but she also said that Cindy went on several more dates with her ex AFTER the harassment. She even moved back in with him for "protection." Was this a desperate attempt to get back with him? Or to get sympathy from him? Keep in mind that her ex was a psychiatrist, from what I read.

2) On the UM segment, her father said that the investigators "never investigated this as a homicide." But the Vancouver PD spent over a million dollars, had 14 officers assigned to this case, and had her house on periodic surveillance. They did not ignore her claims. Cindy would give vague details of the attacks, say it was one person, sometimes more than one person, and gave them very little to go on.

3) I understand traumatic amnesia, but in every case in which Cindy was supposedly attacked, she had selective memory. She'd say stuff like "I remember sneakers," or "I saw the back of his head only." Usually when someone is traumatized, they only remember waking up in the hospital, not the beginning of the attack, and the end (with the middle part that would involve seeing the actual perpetrator(s) forgotten).

4) The major incidents:
a) When Agnes found Cindy by the side of her house with a nylon stocking around her neck, she just remembered "sneakers." There was no other evidence.
b) When the PI heard "disturbing noises" on the 2-way radio, he came over and her house was secure, with no signs of an intruder. She only remembered seeing someone at the back gate, and then remembered seeing someone put a needle in her. Some have stated that this happened without her knowing anyone was coming over, but surely she knew that the PI would come over if he heard strange noises... did she make those noises herself?
c) The basement fire is almost obviously an inside arson. This happened, by chance, when her friends were spending the night and after they went to bed, and Cindy is the one who goes in and wakes them up. Also, if it is true that her friend saw a man in front of the house and that he ran, it might not be as suspicious as one would initially think. What if the man ran to go call the fire dept, as the friend had asked him. And even if the man was there and didn't go call the dept., it doesn't mean he had anything to do with the fire.
d) Of course her death: I do think that if Cindy was going to kill herself, she would have absolutely done everything possible to make it NOT look like a suicide... if she just shot herself, slit her writs, etc, she would have revealed to everyone that she had been fabricating the harassment, and thus died not as a victim, but as a messed up woman (in her own mind I mean). There was a needle mark, but that doesn't necessarily mean she injected the morphine. She could have made the mark herself so it looked like a needle mark (this was a nurse, and she certainly didn't seem stupid). If that was the case, she could have ingested a ton of morphine, which only takes psychotropic effect after about 20-30 mins. Finally, the area where her body was found was wooded on the periphery, and had a lot of underbrush. She could have thrown the needle into the woods. I think the "no needle" around her proves nothing really.

Finally, of the 6-7 year campaign of harassment, including 100-plus reports of incidence, there are a handful of sketchy reports of others "witnessing" the experiences. These are suspect to me (but not in any way intended to deceive or be intentional by those that witnessed them). For example, I'm sure everyone in her building/neighborhood knew of the situation, so things like "noises in Cindy's apartment" would arouse suspicion. Those same noises heard from someone else's apt. would probably not cause a person to bat an eye.

Her friends, who appeared on the UM segment (an apparently were the only people who supposed witnesses to anything that happened in 7 years) said they were in the room when she got threatening calls.. and that Cindy had not left the room when a dead cat was on her doorstep. You know, Cindy appeared quite crafty at doing this to herself, and this had been going on for years when they said they saw this stuff, and I feel that a combination of a) wanting to believe Cindy and clear her name, b) the blurring of reality that comes with hindsight and recollection, and c) Cindy's own ability to deceive, and to do it very well, might explain the "witness" accounts.

Finally, I have a hard time buying that some of the events were real and some were staged. Someone wrote on this thread that perhaps she did some of these things to get the police more involved since they were not listening to her or believing her. Well, im not sure if fabricating an incident would make the cops believe her more; more importantly, why would she choose to do something as drastic and damaging as setting her own house on fire to "make a point." It just doesn't make any sense.

This case is actually not that insane, from a psychiatric standpoint. There are mental illnesses that center around harming oneself or others in order to elicit sympathy, attention, or to add excitement to an otherwise mundane, lonely existence. This happens more than we think; this is just unique because it was able to go on for so long, and of course it ended in such a tragic and grandiose manner.

Sorry for rambling, and I hope my post doesn't come off as though I think I'm right and my opinion is perfect. Obviously I'm only going by the things I've read and seen, and I have really enjoyed reading all the opinions and conversation on this board!!

ididn'tdoit

03-31-2010, 01:18 PM

mattc

03-31-2010, 02:54 PM

The first time I watched the edited version of this segment I was pretty (though not completely) convinced she did herself in. But after watching the uncut version, I wasn't so sure, and I was even more confused after reading Neal Hall's book, but basically I thought there was a strong chance there was foul play involved. Her husband who is mentioned in the book came across as being pretty weird and I just had a gut feeling he could've been involved.

Another puzzling fact is that her shrink never saw any signs of multiple personalities, wouldn't that strengthen Cindy's version (or are shrinks just easily fooled)? :confused:

I think either way's possible although I tend to lean more toward the foul play theory.

I just listened to that message on her answering machine again and if she did do all these things to herself, do you think it could be Cindy herself on that tape? It sounds like a female voice :eek:

Hey. Yeah, I listened to that too, and it was creepy wasn't it!!! I do think that it sounds like a female voice, and I have a gut feeling it was Cindy...I know the PD thinks it was Cindy.

I don't think Cindy had multiple personalities either. I think she knew exactly what she was doing as she was doing it, and I think she wanted to do it based on the sympathy/attention, etc that the incidence were causing. Really sad..

Mastermind

03-31-2010, 05:43 PM

Cindy by her own words, knew who her alleged tormentor was and the motive behind the his actions.

That always seemed suspicious to me.:confused:

If here ex-husband did this, I have to imagine that his identity would get revealed to other people at some point. Especially early on. That's why I can't buy that he was responsible.

If there was a killer...this person would seem to be
1. a psychopath with a jealous crush on Cindy.
2. A rich secret lover that already had the resources to torture Cindy long term.

Neither scenarios sounds plausible.

bbaver

04-04-2010, 07:10 PM

Cindy's sister hasn't provided any update on the forthcoming book in some time. Wonder if it's still in the works?

lulusmith

10-15-2010, 08:22 PM

Thanks for the welcome. :wave:

I want to mention another strange aspect of this case. Why didn't Cindy move to an apartment with a room-mate, or go back to her parents? She could have even bought an attack dog. By being alone in a house, she left herself vulnerable to a criminal. That's what makes the case even more bizarre.
I have only gotten to page 6 so far, but I wanted to say that as someone who's been stalked in the past, I eventually lived alone because it was safer for people around me. I didn't want any other innocent people dragged into it or harmed just for knowing me. This is after years of losing jobs because of the stalking and having to move cities, states and eventually across the country. When it first started, I was living with someone else, and that person also lost several jobs, even after I moved out, just because that person had been associated with me and my stalkers knew it. They figured, if they got to this person, eventually the person would cave to their pressure and tell them where I was.

Also, I did have a very protective dog at one point, but my stalkers killed him in a very horrible way. After that, I couldn't live with myself if something happened to another animal because of me. That was how I was thinking at the time, it's very isolating when you're stalked, and it's very easy to fall into the self-blame thinking. When people don't want to believe you, it can make you question your sanity. I was lucky that other witnesses to the stalking knew it was real, and that they told me so. That helped me stay just grounded enough to eventually get away and lose them.

It sounds like even though Cindy had this support from some people, it wasn't enough over time. I feel awful for her, and I have no problem believing this happened to her, and probably by more than one person.

lulusmith

10-15-2010, 11:19 PM

K, I read the rest. :)

I think to go into Witness Protection (not sure in Canada), you have to be "asked" to join. Like you witness a crime and then to save your life, you go into hiding. You have to change everything about your life, not just your last name and address. If the police didn't believe her, she wouldn't have had that option. But besides that, she lived in houses as a kind of defiance, no? Why, then, go into Witness Protection? You couldn't exactly give the impression that the stalker is not going to scare you if you go into Witness Protection.

I agree with Shahla. I think someone was doing this because he found it fun. (Not necessarily a he, but if Cindy said it was a man...) There are many, many sick people out there, sociopaths and Narcissists, for example, and they would find something like this fun and amusing. They also believe they are smarter than everyone else. People don't like to cross them, because they don't want to be targeted themselves. Cindy could have unintentionally done something the stalker considered a slight, and the stalker could have felt justified in exacting revenge or "punishment." I know it doesn't make sense to people with morals, but these folks don't really have common morals, they live by their own code. From Cindy's sister, we know Cindy had at least one sociopath in her life: Dr. T (the psychiatrist convicted of raping one of his patients and of keeping another one as a sex slave; can't remember how to spell his last name).

Suppose the stalker were the doctor, or that coworker of her ex. That alone would cause me to withhold certain information from the police, because he would be a more credible person than I would be (just for the fact of who he is). I understand that in a way, because really, how crazy is it that a woman is the target of some bizarre campaign, but there is no solid evidence to support her claims? Particularly after she was hospitalized those two times. Being hospitalized automatically causes people to wonder how sane you really are. Look at that man in the L'Enfant case, and he had many, many witnesses AND corroborating evidence of being kidnapped and tortured, yet people think he's doing it to himself.

As for evidence to the phone calls, even the police intercepted at least a few (can't remember which page that was on, but her sister pointed it out), and at least a few of the calls were traced to a district of Vancouver and could not have been made by Cindy in any way. If SHE (a nurse) could afford to pay someone to make those calls, why couldn't a psychiatrist, or anyone else, for that matter? Out of the possibilities, if Cindy were behind it, her co-conspirators have the least to fear for coming forward now, it was not a crime back then to do what they did, and since she's dead (sorry to be so blunt), they don't even have to fear retribution. On the other hand, if her stalker were real, and he were a sociopath, anyone who helped him would have a LOT to fear with coming forward, at least until he died, if not long after. It would depend upon the strength of "hold" he had/has.

I'm curious as to how the police could miss evidence that Cindy's sister later found. It makes me wonder how thoroughly they investigated her disappearance.

Now, one thing that has me wondering. She dated that police officer, what if he were her stalker or he worked for her stalker? I was talking to my husband last night, and we concluded that he could've easily gotten a key to her residence from the landlord. He's a public official, all he has to do is ask. And while a warrant may be required, not all landlords are that scrupulous as to request one. Not to mention locksmiths. The police had to have known of her address changes, of her name change. If he had a key, he could easily gain access (of course), and light a fire in her basement. He could intrude in her home when she's at work, he could get in without any sign of a break-in.

As for multiple-personalities, I don't believe she had it for one second. The 80's/90's was like the "hay day" for diagnosing that condition. Many, many people had "memories" implanted by over-zealous psychologists and therapists during unsupervised/unmonitored hypnosis sessions. The actual rate of this condition is about equal to the rate of schizophrenia, 1% of the population. If Cindy were going to ever be diagnosed with multiple personalities, it would have been then. She had no childhood abuse, no missing time, no chronic untreatable headaches, no strangers coming up to her calling her by a different name, and nothing newly purchased randomly showed up in her apartment (that we know of). If I remember correctly, Vancouver and Seattle were pretty considerable centers for this. There's just no evidence of it.

mdl1981

10-16-2010, 01:29 AM

Another one I was torn on, although I tend to believe she was staging the whole thing. Didnt the police state that the fire at her friend's house was started from the inside? And that Cindy claimed she was outside "walking her dog" when the fire started or something along those lines?

Would someone who believes she is being stalked and fears for her life...go outside at night and alone to walk their dog? I think not.

alistaircrane

10-16-2010, 04:04 PM

I stumbled across a blog a few weeks ago that hypothesized Cindy was stalked/killed because she had uncovered a pedophilia ring. Has anyone else ever heard of this theory and if there's anything to it?

lulusmith

10-16-2010, 05:27 PM

Oh that's an intriguing thought. I know that was a problem there in the mid-to-late 70's and 80's. I wonder if the psychiatrist was in on that, he did have at least that one patient as a sex slave. Could you pm me the blog?

I really am thinking that this had to do with her job, or else a coworker/friend of her ex.

TracyLynnS

10-16-2010, 09:45 PM

OFF TOPIC but I wanted to interject some info about a recent "stalking" type situation that's been going on here in Michigan.

I'm sure many of you have seen it in the news. A little girl named Kathleen Edward is 7 years old. She has Huntington's Disease. It's terminal and she's not expected to live very much longer. Her mother just died from it last year, at age 24.

In this thread and others, such as the Wackers, Circleville Letters, Lenfant, etc, many of us wondered why a stalker would put so much time and effort into torment one insignificant person. Well, here's the answer:

Jennifer Petkov is about 40 years old. Three years ago, Kathleen's grandmother Mrs. Rose, who is Jennifer's neighbor, had a party at her house. She had rented a bouncy house type inflatable for the kids to play in. Jennifer Petkov text messaged the Rose family to ask if her children could come to the party and play in the bouncy house.

Mrs. Rose was very busy hosting the party. Present were her young daughter suffering from HD, her granddaughter, Kathleen (about 4 years old at the time) also suffering with HD, and according to news reports, another disabled child, plus all her party guests.

The Rose family did not reply to Jennifer's text message quickly enough to suit her. She later shouted to the family that she didn't want her kids playing with "those f***ing *******" anyway, and began a 3 year campaign of torment.

The intimidation and cyberstalking finally became public this week. Jennifer Petkov's husband was also involved. The stalking involved posting photoshopped pictures on facebook showing the 7 year old with skulls and crossbones (since she's terminally ill), and the child's mother in the arms of the grim reaper (since the young woman just died last year).

These people then painted their pick up truck and put a homemade coffin in the back, making it look like a hearse. They drive it in front of the little girl's house (she stays at Grandma Rose's house a lot, now that her mother has passed), park it in front of the house so the little girl sees it every time she looks out the window, and they pull up to her house and rev the engine to get her attention, so she sees the death truck and coffin.

Last year, Jennifer Petkov threatened to use her car to run over a friend of the dying girl's family. Yesterday, in front of witnesses she nearly did. She was arrested for assault. She and her husband already had protection orders against them intended to keep the Petkovs away from the dying girl and her family.

I don't have all the details, but I wanted to share this case as an example of the unbelievable lengths people will go to when stalking and tormenting a victim. It doesn't prove that Cindy James or any of the other victims we discuss were targeted by outsiders or if they did those things to themselves, but it does explain what kind of bizarre things stalkers will do, that most of us could never even imagine.

lulusmith

10-16-2010, 11:11 PM

Exactly! I was reading about that woman, she sounds like a narcissist to me (if not a sociopath). I mean for crying out loud, there was a party going on with ill people there. How quickly does she expect an answer? But even more importantly, why can't she just let it go? It was THREE YEARS ago, and one lousy text. Give it up already, there's no reason to terrorize a dying 7 year old for something she didn't even do! (Nor a healthy one, but the things she's done--those pictures are horrible!). What a psycho.

(Sorry to go off topic, it's just that she is a perfect example. What she's doing makes no sense to those of us with any kind of internal moral system. Yet there she is posting death wishes to a 7 year old on Facebook! Not to mention the pictures, and the truck she drives, the things she yells, etc).

TracyLynnS

10-17-2010, 08:42 AM

Still OFF TOPIC... I agree with your "diagnosis" of that stalker being a narcissistic psychopath and I think she's very dangerous.

Among the things that this particular case shows is that completely innocent people (the 7 year old, her mom, the friend) were targeted for stalking and terror because the perp wanted to make her primary target's (the grandma) life miserable.

She admitted that the reason she does it is for "personal satisfaction" and to "burn Rebecca Rose's a**".

That's it. The point of all this cyberstalking, bullying, assault on other people, is for the effect it will have on the grandma.

(BTW, I had stated that the perp was 40 years old. I just read a news report stating that she's 33. Still, she's a married mom and is definitely old enough to know what she's doing is horribly wrong.)

Orange_Sody_84

10-17-2010, 09:52 AM

*shakes head* what a sick woman (and her husband too) :eek: to torment people like that. man that really takes the Cake. she sounds like a total deluded (insert curse word here.) I hope there is a special place in Hell for people like her. :mad:

I hadn't heard of that case. thanks for posting it. those types of stories always interest me. even though they depress me.

alistaircrane

10-17-2010, 10:49 AM

Here is a link to the blog that speculates on what kind of organization could have been stalking Cindy:

http://swallowingthecamel.blogspot.com/2007/11/gangstalking-opinions-wanted-please.html

cocytus

11-02-2010, 01:49 AM

Personally, I think that this was a case of a deeply disturbed woman that was harming, and finally killed, herself. I think that the producers of this UM segment knew (or at least suspected) this and that's why the following questions weren't asked for the segment:

1) Who was supposed to be "stalking" her and what was their motivation?
2) She moved and changed her number, yet the "stalkers" were always able to find her. How?
3) If the intention of the stalking was to harm her, why wasn't she seriously injured until she was found dead near her car?
4) Why didn't any events occur when the police were around? Even if the antagonists KNEW that the police were there, wouldn't they risk exposing themselves by skulking around waiting for them to leave?
5) What types of medication was Cindy taking? Where any them same kind as were found in her body after her death?
6) If she had a boyfriend/girlfriend, what did they say about this?
7) Had she tried self-harm in the past?
8) How did her doctor miss of the signs that this person was a deeply troubled and potentially suicidal person?

There are a number of more question that I have, but I feel that these question could have been asked by the producers. But I feel if theyHAD they asked them , this story wouldn't have been such a "mystery."

alistaircrane

11-02-2010, 06:24 PM

I think the "she did it to herself" explanation is too simple and is exactly what someone(s) would want us to think in order to avoid suspicion. I'm in the "she didn't do it to herself" camp.

TracyLynnS

11-03-2010, 02:18 PM

This is probably going to come across as rude, and even though I'm a Cindy "sympathizer" I have to say that this whole thing is becoming even more vague and unnecessarily mysterious than it needs to be.

Canada (where Cindy's death occurred) has always been pretty quiet on the details of their crime. I remember when the Ken and Barbie killers (Karla Holmoka and her crazy pervert husband, I forgot his name) were committing murders, very little was revealed publicly, even for years afterward. IIRC, the details were kept hidden until well after the criminal trials. The country's policies provide the first layer of "mystery" in Cindy's death.

In this semi-secretive environment, we have Cindy's case, where she's in grave danger, yet won't reveal all the details of her torment to anyone, including her family or the police.

A few years ago, her sister began posting here and is writing a book. We've hoped to learn some helpful info, but many of her posts are often vague and add more "mystery".

Then, two or three years ago, her father has a stroke. At that time, he announces that on his death bed, he will reveal more information that he's known all this time but has remained silent about for more than 20 years.

For me, that is just about the last straw. This man had a stroke which could have killed him. He's elderly and is now in poor health. He could die unexpectedly any minute. How does he know he'll linger long enough to even have a death bed to use as his excuse for finally revealing the secrets he knows?

WHY WHY WHY are there all these secrets, intrigues, and tantalizing tidbits? A woman has died under unknown circumstances. She could have been murdered. Her loved ones could still be in danger. Why not tell what you know and let justice be served?

IMO, everyone involved continues to interject way too much drama into the whole thing. It's been over 20 years now, multiple books have been written about the case, and multiple television shows have featured this story. Yet, the people who hold the answers keep milking her death by stretching out the information and evidence they provide for maximum impact. It's a disservice to Cindy and to others who may suffer from either the mental illness she had or the type of crime that killed her.

lulusmith

11-04-2010, 12:53 AM

I agree.

Enough already, a woman has DIED here. More could follow. Spit it out already and don't let her death be in vain, whether she did it to herself or not. Either way, I feel for Cindy. Whoever she was betrayed by is now being helped by her own family. That is something I just can't wrap my head around.

dolphindance

01-11-2011, 09:07 PM

I think the "she did it to herself" explanation is too simple and is exactly what someone(s) would want us to think in order to avoid suspicion. I'm in the "she didn't do it to herself" camp.

What's more likely? A recently divorced woman develops mental illness and pretends she's being stalked for attention and it spirals out of control, eventually consuming her life, or a mysterious organization is devoting likely thousands of dollars and manhours to stalking an unimportant woman? I noticed you also posted a link detailing "gang stalking", this is essentially a conspiracy theory that appeals to paranoid schizophrenics. There's been a lot written online about it, and it has no basis in reality. Again, unimportant people believing they're the victims of a nationwide stalking attempt, pretty ridiculous. It's not some grandiose super secretive conspiracy but in fact the symptoms of a serious mental illness. A couple links:

http://www.schizophrenia.com:8080/jiveforums/thread.jspa?messageID=106199

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=129037

Anyway, the reason I bring it up further is because it has a lot of parallels with the whole Cindy James situation. I think mattc on the last page detailed the most plausible theory surrounding this case.

alistaircrane

01-11-2011, 11:47 PM

cocytus

01-12-2011, 07:31 AM

You can preach til the cows come home, but there's no way I'm accepting Cindy did this to herself. It was someone (or a group of someones) who tormented her for years and eventually killed her. That's what I believe, and that's what I'll continue to believe until definitive proof gives us a final answer one way or the other.

Doesn't that belief place you in a rather difficult intellectual position, poster? There is no real evidence that another party was responsible for any aspect of this, but you are choosing to believe it because....why?

What possible "definitive proof" could there be in a case like this? Since Ms. James apparently never documented the reasons for these "attacks" and her family doesn't appear to want to give any additional information, how would it ever be possible to find out the "truth" behind this matter?

dynoguy88

01-16-2011, 10:31 PM

I played around with google street view and I found some locations that are of particular interest to this case. All the addresses are listed in the books so they were easy to find. The UM segment made it seem like Cindy moved only once but she actually moved 4 times in the last years of her life.

This is where it all started in October 1982. 334 East 40th Ave. in Vancouver.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Cindyloc5.jpg

Cindy rented this house for 4 months shortly after she and her husband separated. A young couple lived downstairs in the basement suite at the time. Threatening notes and the first threatening phone calls happened here. This was also the location of the first attack on January 27, 1983. Agnes Woodcock found Cindy behind the house in the basement stairwell. She had several cuts over her body and a nylon stocking was tied around her neck.

After temporarily moving back to her old house where she lived with her husband after the attack, Cindy moved in to this house at 3293 West 14th Avenue in Vancouver.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Cindyloc2.jpg

Cindy lived here for about 2 1/2 years, from April 1983 to December 1985. This is the house where 3 dead cats were thrown in both the front and back yards. Her garden was torn up. The second attack happened here on January 30, 1984. Ozzie Kaban walked out back, looked inside the window and found Cindy unconscious in the kitchen. A threatening note was pinned with a parry knife through her hand.

This was Cindy's next house located at 5400 Blundell Road in Vancouver.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Cindyloc4.jpg

Cindy rented this duplex for about a year. This was where the basement was set on fire while the Woodcocks were spending the night with Cindy. The basement window had also been broken on another occasion. Continued threating phone calls and her porch lights were uncrewed. After the fire, Cindy had an emotional breakdown and had to be hospitalized for 10 weeks. Cindy's landlord kicked her out of this house not long after.

Cindy lived at this house for the last year of her life, on 8220 Claysmith Road in Richmond.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Cindyloc3.jpg

The UM segment never reenacted the last attack but it happened here. A police officer found Cindy unconscious in her car and in the garage on October 26, 1988. She was nude from the waiste down and she had been strangled with a nylon stocking again.

This is the shopping center where Cindy disappeared for the final time on No. 2 and Blundell Road in Richmond.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Cindyloc.jpg

On May 25, 1989, Cindy bought some groceries at this shopping center and a birthday present for a family friend. She was last seen depositing her paycheck at this location. Where it says "Eve Station," is where the bank used to be. This parking lot was where Cindy's car was found with blood on the driver's side door and her credit cards were under the car.

This final picture is the approximate location where Cindy's body was found, near the corner of No. 3 and Blundell Road, about a mile from the shopping center.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Cindyloc6.jpg

The creepy looking abandonned house was torn down a couple years after Cindy's death. At the time, many new homes and businesses were being built so this is harder to recognize, but the first thing we see at the beginning of the segment when Cindy's body is being transported away.

Xytras

01-16-2011, 11:19 PM

Great digging dynoguy!

I lean toward believing Cindy made everything up but I am not 100% about it. The only thing that dissuades me is why she would move so many times during the false stories - it would take so much time and energy to continue the fascade, however this could be explained by mental instability and/or paranoia that caused everything in the first place.

WishfulDreamer

01-16-2011, 11:23 PM

dynoguy88

01-17-2011, 12:11 AM

Great digging dynoguy!

I lean toward believing Cindy made everything up but I am not 100% about it. The only thing that dissuades me is why she would move so many times during the false stories

Technically, she only moved two times by choice. The first house was always a temporary residence (just a little less than 4 months) while she and her ex-husband Roy waited to sell the house they owned together so they could each by their own homes. In fact, she was originally scheduled to move out the day after the first attack.

She was evicted by her landlord from the duplex 3 years later because the landlord didn't want Cindy's tormentor, whoever it was, to be a danger to her other tenants.

cocytus

01-17-2011, 07:45 AM

I think that there's a huge flaw in the argument given by the journalist. "The knot expert did the knot in three minutes..." I find that to be incredibly moronic. We're talking about an EXPERT here. Of course he can do the knot, and in a short amount of time. I'm surprised he even took three minutes. Also, I disagree about the morphine side affects taking so long to come into affect. We don't know where the morphine was injected. But that's really suspicious that nothing was found at the scene or anywhere in the vicinity that would have helped ingest the morphine or place it into her.

Hmmm....

The journalist studied every aspect of this case in detail for an extended period of time. In this situation, IMO, that makes him an expert on this matter I would tend to defer to his experience w/ this case.

1) A knot expert showed how easily the knot could be tied and that it could be tied by a single person unaided. Perhaps the reporter didn't express that in the best manner possible, but that's what I took away from it.

2) And the fact that nothing was found on the scene means little other than either the hypodermic was tossed away before Ms. James arrived at the scene or may have been overlooked during the search of the area. Both are reasonable assumptions.

There's one obvious question: If Ms. James' killer(s) were going to give her an overdose of morphine as a method of execution, why bother to also bind her? If they knew enough to inject a fatal dose of morphine why didn't they know that the dosage would make binding her unnecessary?

Padfoot

01-19-2011, 07:00 PM

I have a question is about the website Melanie Hack created for her sister, Cindy: http://www.melaniehack.com/
There is a small picture on the tab representing the website (similar to the small TV picture representing this website). What is this picture???
I check out this website periodically to see if a release date has been announced for Melanie's book, and this picture has always disturbed me. Also, does anyone have any information as to when her book will be available?
Sorry to have such an obscure first post, but this picture adds to the mystery.

killgas20

01-19-2011, 09:11 PM

TheCars1986

01-20-2011, 11:05 AM

If you listen to the threat on Cindy's sisters website, listen to the word "Meat"...it's absolutely a woman's voice. More evidence to suggest Cindy was the one tormenting herself. And I agree with what someone brougth up earlier, Cindy said she knew who was responsible yet never revealed who, what, or why, her father allegedly has more information than he's letting on and he's in poor health yet he has still never came forward with anything...the question I have is why? If her family truely believes she was murdered and they have more evidence to suggest that, why not go public with this information in hopes of getting her killers caught? Cindy obviously had no problem contacting the authorities when an "attack" occurred, so why not call them when she knew who was responsible? IMO, everything in this case points to Cindy being the one responsible for her attacks.

MegtheEgg86

01-20-2011, 11:29 AM

alistaircrane

01-20-2011, 11:40 AM

I hope they catch the people or person who tormented Cindy for so many years.

ernmerica

03-11-2011, 07:01 PM

Padfoot

04-08-2011, 07:50 PM

Thanks for the reply, ernmerica! It is so small it looks like a little demon. A picture of Gandhi is much more comforting.

Tao

07-04-2013, 01:31 PM

Just watched this again and wanted to bring up some points. This seemed to be the latest thread (haven't read through all of it in awhile, so I apologize if this has been mentioned). I agree that it seems very likely she could have staged the murder scene herself. The thing with opiates is that some deaths/overdoses happen immediately and some after the drug has taken effect (which often can take a half hour). One question is do we know Cindy's tolerance for morphine? She was a nurse and would have had easy access to the drugs. If she had a certain tolerance level, that could explain some things. An addict (or someone taking it for legit reasons) can sometimes handle very large doses. I wonder if this could have played a factor in either:

how long she was able to stay awake before succumbing

or if this was a staged 'scene' (similar to others where she said she remembered being injected) and she wasn't meant to die.

Was the possibility she had some tolerance for the drug or may have even been abusing it ever looked into?

I don't find it particularly odd a syringe wasn't found. She could have had time to dispose of it before the drug took effect.

Also, the method of death just seems very odd. How many killers inject their victim with morphine? Why not just strangle her? If they were trying to stage a suicide scene, that's not the usual method. Also, I doubt they'd have hogtied her if this was a staged suicide.

And as someone mentioned, the fact she was never sexually assaulted (did it ever even look as if it had been attempted?) is strange. Not that an impotent or otherwise sexually dysfunctional or disinterested attacker is outside the realm of possibility. But the absence of even an attempted sexual assault makes it seem less likely this was the work of someone else. These types of crimes are usually sexually oriented. Someone mentioned the possibility of a female perpetrator. That may help explain the absence of sexual assault, but it doesn't seem very likely. It would just be one more statistical rarity in a series of statistical rarities in this case.

I recall someone stating that the doorbell was rung and a dead cat with a note was found and she was sitting with witnesses and couldn't possibly have done it. That does seem to point to an outside party. I suppose the only way she could have staged that herself was if she had someone else involved with her. Unless there was some way to leave the cat there and then trip the bell somehow. As elaborate as some of the other scenes were, I wonder if she couldn't have found some way. But I agree this bit points to someone else. But also, how credible are the witnesses? How much time had elapsed between the incident and the retelling? Could she have left the room for a moment?

It did seem like scenes were staged for when she knew someone would be coming over or listening as was the case with the two way radio.

I'm also interested in the possibility she did this to herself but was unaware of it due to MPD or some other illness. Though that doesn't seem to fit with what I just said above.

Anyway, I agree that this is one of those that a good case could be made either way.

Spark Of Spirit

07-04-2013, 03:11 PM

I'm of the opinion that she was either being stalked or she had some sort of a partner to help her do it. Her doing this alone leaves too much unexplained for my tastes.

MegtheEgg86

07-06-2013, 12:34 AM

dynoguy88

07-06-2013, 01:50 PM

As far as the morphine is concerned, I thought it was speculated that Cindy could've taken the drug in tablet form, which is released slowly into the body and takes effect much more slowly than directly injected morphine. Was it conclusively established how exactly the drug entered her system?

Like everything else about the Cindy James saga, it was never conclusively established. There was nothing more than theories from toxicologists and medical experts. They all had theories but nothing that could be conclusively proven.

From Neal Hall's book, here are some excerpts from the inquest...

By June 29, the preliminary toxicology tests showed Cindy had an overdose level of the prescription drug flurazepam in her system. Constable Jerry Anderson said he was informed that she likely would have remained conscious for no longer than 20 minutes after taking the drug. The level of flurazepam was eventually determined to be 10 times that of a lethal dose.

As for the morphine, also found at a level 10 times that of a lethal dose, Leask (attorney hired by Cindy's family) suggested that drug experts could not tell if it had been injected or ingested.

"That's true." Anderson said he learned that morphine was used on the hospital ward where Cindy worked, although there is a tight narcotic-control system in place at the hospital.

"Every drop of morphine used and received is recorded?" Leask asked.

"Yes."

"Did you check those records?"

"No," said Anderson, as Cindy's family and friends sighed in disgust. "I was told by the hospital there was no shortages.

"What other sources of morphine are there?"

"Drugstores, the street, doctor offices."

Anderson agreed with Leask that he did not check to see if there had been any drug store thefts of morphine prior to Cindy's disappearance, and he did not investigate Dr. Makepeace's access to morphine.

Pathologist Sheila Carlyle testified that, because of the state of decomposition of the body, it was difficult to determine whether the overdoses of morphine and flurazepam had been administered orally or by injection.

Carlyle theorized that the flurazepam was ingested orally since tablets were found in the contents of her stomach. She also believed it was likely that the morphine was ingested despite the needle mark on Cindy's arm.

Although Carlyle agreed with Leask that she could not rule out the skin puncture as an injection site for the morphine administered by someone other than Cindy, she added, "it is entirely conceivable and feasible that this could be a self-contrived event."

Carlyle had one reason to believe that Cindy had been alive where her body was eventually found. She felt that Cindy had been kneeling on her neatly spread out coat and had fallen over on her right side as she lost consciousness. Moreover, there was some mobility of the body as death neared, judging from how she was found. Her right knee had worked it's way under the natural vegetation floor which suggested the body hadn't been dropped after death but had some mobility until death."

Toxicologist Heather Dinn estimated the amount of flurazepam in Cindy's body would amount to 20-30 mg. tablets or up to 80 tablets of a lower dosage. She did not know how long it would take to swallow that many tablets.

Pharmacology expert John McNeil, who reviewed the toxicology test results, testified that either of the drugs in Cindy's body could have killed her. Both morphine and flurazepam cause progressive sedation and decrease brain activity, and an overdose would cause the person to become drowsy, then induce a coma and eventually death.

McNeil concluded the flurazepam was taken orally since it is only available by oral prescription. He estimated the dose in Cindy's system would have taken 15-20 minutes to sedate her and up to four hours to kill her.

The morphine could have been injected or taken orally, since it is available in tablet or liquid prescriptions. If ingested orally, McNeil noted, it could have been self administered and rendered Cindy unconscious within 15 to 30 minutes and could have been taken 30 minutes after the flurazepam.

If injected, the morphine must have been administered by someone other than Cindy since unconsciousness would have occurred almost immediately and killed her within 15 to 20 minutes, McNeil said.

As the death scene segment of the inquest ended with another puzzling possibility, it was clear that the police did not have any conclusive physical evidence that would prove Cindy James died of her own hand. Each portion of testimony seemed to be riddled with ambiguity.

After hearing months of testimony heavily laced with complex medical and psychiatric jargon that was confusing and tedious, the members of the jury looked weary. They wondered if they would ever get back to their normal lives.

MegtheEgg86

07-06-2013, 02:13 PM

Like everything else about the Cindy James saga, it was never conclusively established. There was nothing more than theories from toxicologists and medical experts. They all had theories but nothing that could be conclusively proven.

From Neal Hall's book, here are some excerpts from the inquest...

By June 29, the preliminary toxicology tests showed Cindy had an overdose level of the prescription drug flurazepam in her system. Constable Jerry Anderson said he was informed that she likely would have remained conscious for no longer than 20 minutes after taking the drug. The level of flurazepam was eventually determined to be 10 times that of a lethal dose.

As for the morphine, also found at a level 10 times that of a lethal dose, Leask (attorney hired by Cindy's family) suggested that drug experts could not tell if it had been injected or ingested.

"That's true." Anderson said he learned that morphine was used on the hospital ward where Cindy worked, although there is a tight narcotic-control system in place at the hospital.

"Every drop of morphine used and received is recorded?" Leask asked.

"Yes."

"Did you check those records?"

"No," said Anderson, as Cindy's family and friends sighed in disgust. "I was told by the hospital there was no shortages.

"What other sources of morphine are there?"

"Drugstores, the street, doctor offices."

Anderson agreed with Leask that he did not check to see if there had been any drug store thefts of morphine prior to Cindy's disappearance, and he did not investigate Dr. Makepeace's access to morphine.

Pathologist Sheila Carlyle testified that, because of the state of decomposition of the body, it was difficult to determine whether the overdoses of morphine and flurazepam had been administered orally or by injection.

Carlyle theorized that the flurazepam was ingested orally since tablets were found in the contents of her stomach. She also believed it was likely that the morphine was ingested despite the needle mark on Cindy's arm.

Although Carlyle agreed with Leask that she could not rule out the skin puncture as an injection site for the morphine administered by someone other than Cindy, she added, "it is entirely conceivable and feasible that this could be a self-contrived event."

Carlyle had one reason to believe that Cindy had been alive where her body was eventually found. She felt that Cindy had been kneeling on her neatly spread out coat and had fallen over on her right side as she lost consciousness. Moreover, there was some mobility of the body as death neared, judging from how she was found. Her right knee had worked it's way under the natural vegetation floor which suggested the body hadn't been dropped after death but had some mobility until death."

Toxicologist Heather Dinn estimated the amount of flurazepam in Cindy's body would amount to 20-30 mg. tablets or up to 80 tablets of a lower dosage. She did not know how long it would take to swallow that many tablets.

Pharmacology expert John McNeil, who reviewed the toxicology test results, testified that either of the drugs in Cindy's body could have killed her. Both morphine and flurazepam cause progressive sedation and decrease brain activity, and an overdose would cause the person to become drowsy, then induce a coma and eventually death.

McNeil concluded the flurazepam was taken orally since it is only available by oral prescription. He estimated the dose in Cindy's system would have taken 15-20 minutes to sedate her and up to four hours to kill her.

The morphine could have been injected or taken orally, since it is available in tablet or liquid prescriptions. If ingested orally, McNeil noted, it could have been self administered and rendered Cindy unconscious within 15 to 30 minutes and could have been taken 30 minutes after the flurazepam.

If injected, the morphine must have been administered by someone other than Cindy since unconsciousness would have occurred almost immediately and killed her within 15 to 20 minutes, McNeil said.

As the death scene segment of the inquest ended with another puzzling possibility, it was clear that the police did not have any conclusive physical evidence that would prove Cindy James died of her own hand. Each portion of testimony seemed to be riddled with ambiguity.

After hearing months of testimony heavily laced with complex medical and psychiatric jargon that was confusing and tedious, the members of the jury looked weary. They wondered if they would ever get back to their normal lives.

Thanks much, dynoguy. I didn't know flurazepam was also administered. That complicates things again (as does pretty much everything in this case). It's suspicious that limited groups of people have access to both drugs.

I still have no idea. I guess I figure she either really wanted to go out "peacefully" without betraying the notion of these attacks, or someone just wanted to kill her without regard to the drugs being detected at autopsy, maybe because they figured that as a nurse (she was still working as an RN at this point, right?) she would have access to morphine and flurazepam.

tsaun

02-23-2016, 11:05 AM

LooksLikeCRicci

02-23-2016, 11:52 AM

This may have been posted already, but does anyone else think this message is a woman trying to disguise her voice as a man? Listen carefully to the word "meat."

Here is the link since I can't get it to embed (It's Cindy's threatening phone message).

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

That's a pretty common thought, actually. I refuse to listen to the voice recording because it scares the crap out of me. So I'll take your word for it. :)

tsaun

02-23-2016, 04:13 PM

That's a pretty common thought, actually. I refuse to listen to the voice recording because it scares the crap out of me. So I'll take your word for it. :)

So that settles it. I'm guessing suicide.

alistaircranium

02-23-2016, 08:29 PM

I'm surprised and saddened so many people have written Cindy's death off as a suicide while her murderer walks among us.

tsaun

02-24-2016, 01:35 AM

Thanks much, dynoguy. I didn't know flurazepam was also administered. That complicates things again (as does pretty much everything in this case). It's suspicious that limited groups of people have access to both drugs.

I still have no idea. I guess I figure she either really wanted to go out "peacefully" without betraying the notion of these attacks, or someone just wanted to kill her without regard to the drugs being detected at autopsy, maybe because they figured that as a nurse (she was still working as an RN at this point, right?) she would have access to morphine and flurazepam.

It just doesn't make much sense that after all of the violent attacks throughout the years (strangulation, knife through the hand, beatings etc..) that this killer would then give her a peaceful death with morphine.

alistaircranium

02-24-2016, 06:11 PM

It just doesn't make much sense that after all of the violent attacks throughout the years (strangulation, knife through the hand, beatings etc..) that this killer would then give her a peaceful death with morphine.

It's the only thing that makes sense. She certainly didn't do it to herself.

MegtheEgg86

02-24-2016, 09:31 PM

Three years and another degree and a license later, I have a different appreciation for the toxicology aspect in this case.

On flurazepam: this drug is available in capsule form in the U.S., and that's the only form of which I'm aware. It may have been available in tablets in 1989, or perhaps Canada had or has different brands available in that form. I've never seen nor heard of flurazepam tablets--although morphine is certainly available in tablet form, and was at the time of Cindy's death.

On morphine: if levels were in fact ten times a dose sufficient to cause death, I have a very, very difficult time envisioning Cindy injecting herself. In fact, I am nearly absolutely certain it didn't go down like that. For had she done that, she would've rendered herself unconscious almost immediately, and there would've almost certainly been a syringe at the scene. If she was injected, somebody else would've had to have done it.

On routes of administration: flurazepam, again, is only available in oral form, and therefore may only be ingested. Morphine is available in oral, IM, and IV forms. It's kind of difficult for me to imagine someone forcing Ms. James to take a load of flurazepam by mouth somehow (and how much flurazepam that was is still not clear, as the excerpt from Hall's book describes 20-30 mg. tablets only--I think this was intended to be 20-30 tablets of some dose in mg EACH. Flurazepam today is available in 30 mg capsules, FWIW), and then injecting her with morphine. It doesn't seem to make sense to me.

Both drugs were available to Ms. James, and as an RN she knew clearly what would happen if she took above a therapeutic dose of each.

Someone ingesting a load of oral medications in order to intentionally overdose is tragically not uncommon. I suppose I figure it's far more likely that she willingly ingested the drugs in oral form than A) someone else forcing her to take both drugs by mouth, B) someone else forcing her to take the flurazepam by mouth and then injecting her with morphine, or C) Cindy taking the flurazepam and then injecting herself with morphine.

Just some thoughts.

JannTosh

02-24-2016, 10:41 PM

Cori aka ChrisSCrush

02-25-2016, 02:34 AM

If she had access to these drugs I wonder if she could have embezzled a little at a time over a long period so no shortages would be noticed. Ditto if the killer was someone with whom she worked who had access to them as well.

tsaun

02-25-2016, 07:40 AM

Cori aka ChrisSCrush

02-25-2016, 04:40 PM

If suicide sounds like a case of extreme dissociative disorder.

tsaun

02-26-2016, 02:33 AM

I believe she staged all this for attention/sympathy. She might have been mentally ill as well.

No witnesses to any of these harassment attempts?

She apparently knows the harassers but won't reveal who they are? Sorry, I am not buying it.

If she was so worried about people believing her, why not have some type of camera to watch the front and back yard?

dynoguy88

02-26-2016, 12:35 PM

If she was so worried about people believing her, why not have some type of camera to watch the front and back yard?

She did have a camera monitoring her backyard for a while. Ozzie Kaban bought it for her with money out of his own pocket.

I'll have to go back and check the book to find out how long the camera was back there. I can't remember off the top of my head.

dynoguy88

02-26-2016, 10:36 PM

O.K., I went back to the book for more info about the camera, and I could only find this one section where it mentions her using it...

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

On June 25, 1984, Kaban installed a TV camera in Cindy’s garage that viewed the backdoor and gate. It was connected to a closed-circuit TV monitor and a video recorder in her bedroom. “I realized she was short on funds,” Kaban recalls. “But it’s difficult to tell somebody, ‘Sorry, you can’t pay your bill. Go ahead and die.’ “ He figured he had been hired to provide her with proper protection and he would work out the bill later. Until then, it would come out of his pocket.

After the scare with Heidi, police also put a “special attention” designation on Cindy’s house, increasing patrols on the afternoon and night shifts. All was quiet during that time. Cindy received two no-talk calls at work, five minutes apart, on June 26th. Kaban, who was at Cindy’s home that day, also received a no-talk call while Cindy was at work.

The elusiveness of the person behind Cindy’s ordeal was becoming more and more exasperating by the day for Kaban, his employees, police and Cindy, who was losing faith in the authorities’ ability to catch her tormentor.

Another week passed with no incidents. Then on July 1st, Cindy was awakened after 3 a.m. by her dog’s growling and barking. Five minutes later, the doorbell rang. Cindy flicked on the front porch light. She saw a man’s face extremely close to the “peep hole” of her front door.

“Vancouver City,” the man called out. “We’ve had a call of a prowler in the area of your house. We want to talk with you about it.”

Cindy replied that she had not called police. The man said he could not hear her. At this point, she noticed the back of a second man standing on the porch.

“We’re the Vancouver Police, could we come in and talk with you,” the man asked, raising his voice slightly.

“I can’t see you,” Cindy told him, nervously. “Would you go around to the back so I can see who you are?” The man repeated that he could not hear her, so she shouted her request that he go around back. She then ran to her bedroom to watch the TV monitor, but no one came in the backyard. Panicking, she tried the telephone. The line was dead. She radioed Kaban for help, and his office called police.

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

I skimmed through the book to try and find other instances where the camera in her backyard would have been used and I couldn't find anything. She ended up moving two more times, one time getting evicted by her landlord after the fire in her basement. There was no mention of whether Kaban installed the camera at the other homes she lived in over the next 5 years.

bugnpinky

03-08-2016, 03:48 PM

alistaircranium

03-08-2016, 06:08 PM

Still one of my fave cases....yet I wish it could be solved. I would love to get a hold of the book but it's very expensive on Amazon even. And it seems like either explanation is plausible....that's what is so confounding

I agree.

I'm glad I picked up that magazine on Canada's Greatest Unsolved Mysteries. It was good to see this cold case get some new attention.

Arnold_OldSchool

03-18-2016, 12:43 PM

That story a few posts up gave me some serious chills!!!

Charlie99909

03-19-2016, 04:33 PM

That story a few posts up gave me some serious chills!!!

You should pick up the book of you can. It's really in depth and a good read.

LooksLikeCRicci

03-21-2016, 06:16 PM

I spent a good chunk of this weekend looking at this case a bit closer. That also included listening to the answering machine message that haunted my nightmares when I was a kid.

A few observations:

1. That message was way scarier to me as a child. When I heard it again, my response was, "Oh? That's it?" Perhaps that is just a change in my own perspective, as I've since heard some pretty chilling 911 calls in my everyday line of work... and I'm not 10 years old hearing it.

2. I agree with the consensus that the message sounded like a woman trying to mask her voice.

3. Has anyone ever explored whether Cindy had any issues with drug abuse? This was not common knowledge to me BEFORE I began working in the legal field, but apparently, addiction issues are fairly common with nurses. I'm assuming this is because of how readily available the drugs are to them in their jobs. I personally know several nurses who have lost their licensing due to theft of prescription drugs. Was Cindy ever disciplined for such behavior in the past? If so, it could provide a potential motive and explanation for her behavior.

4. That being said, I still cannot understand how she died and why it took so long for her body to be found. Someone earlier commented that all the evidence in this case is contradicting. I absolutely agree. While there is a big part of me that thinks that Cindy was a victim of her own mind and ultimately committed suicide, I cannot set aside these other red flags (such as her manner of death and how her body was found) and I am left with no answer.

dynoguy88

03-22-2016, 01:31 AM

3. Has anyone ever explored whether Cindy had any issues with drug abuse? This was not common knowledge to me BEFORE I began working in the legal field, but apparently, addiction issues are fairly common with nurses. I'm assuming this is because of how readily available the drugs are to them in their jobs. I personally know several nurses who have lost their licensing due to theft of prescription drugs. Was Cindy ever disciplined for such behavior in the past? If so, it could provide a potential motive and explanation for her behavior.

Cindy was not in nursing for the majority of those years. She worked at a pre-school called Blenheim House. It was a program that worked with behavioral and emotional problem children, filled with counsellors that helped tone down the children's behavior so they could be intergrated into kindergarten the following year. Cindy was the administrator, in charge of the staff. She also assisted in the therapy sessions at times and was beloved by the children and their parents. She had no access to prescription drugs in this line of work.

She had been working here for seven years when all her problems started in 1982. She was forced out of Blenheim House in 1988 because her depression from the six years of torment and a hospital stay had effected her work.

Now out of a job, she had no choice but to go back to being a nurse, which devastated her. She had been away from nursing for 16 years at this point and she needed to take a couple refresher courses before she was allowed to work at any hospital again. Less than a year later, she was dead.

RobinW

03-22-2016, 07:31 AM

4. That being said, I still cannot understand how she died and why it took so long for her body to be found. Someone earlier commented that all the evidence in this case is contradicting. I absolutely agree. While there is a big part of me that thinks that Cindy was a victim of her own mind and ultimately committed suicide, I cannot set aside these other red flags (such as her manner of death and how her body was found) and I am left with no answer.

I agree, the part that really bothers me is the unaccounted-for two weeks between when Cindy disappeared and when her body was found. By all accounts, it would have been impossible for Cindy’s body to have been in the yard that entire time without anyone noticing because traffic was constantly passing by and apparently, other people were in the vicinity of that yard during that two-week period. If Cindy did commit suicide, staged the entire scene, and there really was no one else involved in her death, then where could she have been during those two weeks?

Arnold_OldSchool

03-25-2016, 01:15 PM

You should pick up the book of you can. It's really in depth and a good read.

Super expensive on Amazon :(

linb

05-08-2018, 10:05 PM

I grew up in Richmond BC and lived at Blundell and Gilbert Rd, half way between where Cindy's car was found at the shopping center at #2 Rd & Blundell & where her body was found just north of Blundell Rd on #3 Rd.....it's quite a way to walk barefoot...she was found without shoes yet no shoes were found at the crime scene.......one would think if she'd walked that far (over a mile) barefoot, it would have shown on her feet.....Blundell is a bus route, so if she'd taken a bus from the shopping center and got off 1 block before #3 (where the bus turns) the bus driver would have remembered her.......her ex husband, who was a psychiatrist and whom Cindy claims she saw him disposing of 2 bodies on a local island they'd sailed to on their sailboat, would have known very well how to 'gaslight' her over time until she was in such an unstable mental and emotional state that if she ever came forward to accuse him of murder, she would never be believed........I could say a lot more as this was such a big case here and I lived in the area so I paid attention to the case........in this case I don't think the Mounties 'got their man'......She was written off as a suicide because it was supposed to be......Something traumatic happened to her a few months before the harassment started...Her then husband was a psychiatrist, probably knew the psychiatrist (Dr Termansen of North Vancouver) who admitted her to Lions Gate Hospital Psych ward in N Van could very well have been a friend of Dr Makepeace or at least a professional colleague whom consulted with her ex.......I also lived in N Van from the late 80s, Dr Termansen was well known in the community.......my theory is that Cindy was murdered and dumped at the site where her body was found.......I believe yes she was mentally/emotionally unstable due to years of being threatened and attacked, in order to make her unbelievable........the triggering trauma was witnessing her husband dismembering 2 bodies during their sailing trip & the consequent 'gaslighting' that followed in order to discredit anything she might say and in the end allow her death to be written off as a suicide.....Please read the book 'The Strange Case of Cindy James"..........Dr Makepeace has since passed away........Dr Termansen was stripped of his medical license in 2015 because of unprofessional behaviour of a sexual and personal nature.........you can verify through a google search.......We Canadians are very nice, but when we go 'bad' we go "Darth Vader' bad.......

linb

05-09-2018, 12:39 AM

I grew up in Richmond BC and am extremely familiar with this case......any police officer would stand back from the door in order to be recognized as the police, especially if they were familiar with this case. There is NO WAY the people at the door were police.

linb

05-09-2018, 12:40 AM

Amazon.ca has the book "The Deaths of Cindy James" by Neal Hall for about 10 bucks....

linb

05-09-2018, 12:44 AM

Forensics could now tell by recordings of both voices if the voice patterns are the same......

tsaun

05-09-2018, 02:24 AM

The threatening phone call message sounds like a woman. That makes me believe Cindy was setting this entire thing up

alistaircranium

05-09-2018, 08:30 AM

Cindy was murdered, and it breaks my heart when people claim she did this to herself. :-/

alistaircranium

05-09-2018, 08:31 AM

linb

05-09-2018, 03:02 PM

Or it could be her ex husband had someone do it.......this is why voice recognition should be used on the tapes.......

DazzlerSparkler

05-15-2018, 12:35 AM

How did the doctor get his license revoked?

linb

05-16-2018, 05:31 PM

He was involved in business ventures with clients and for sexual improprieties with patients.......The BC College of Physicians and Surgeons kicked him to the curb.....I've Termansen....he's a creepy guy!

blackdahlia28

07-12-2018, 09:59 AM

1-The ex husband is a psychiatrist asociated or related with/to another psychiatrist of very bad reputation involved in sex crimes
2- Psychiatrists know how to make a person look "mad" or mentally unstable as they treat with that kind of people all the time
3- The Ex had access to morphine and benzos.He knew how to put a syringe.
4- Some canadian 60s- 80s psychiatrists had very bad reputation (doing experiments with patients, working for the government in dark areas, see Dr. Cameron).
5- Ex husband doing gas lighting? Doing things just to drive he ex wife mad? There have been cases ,even famous movies...

IMO, I believe Cindy discovered some very dirty things about her husband and the coworker or other coworkers related to the psychiatry field. I don't know if murder... but just bad practices ... and the ex husband and the other people involved just tried to intimidate her, drive her insane, make her look like a mad woman.

If they were working for some area related to government, they could easily know where Cindy was ... changing her appearence, painting the car or moving to another home would mean nothing... because they could easily track her. And Richmond wasnt a big place... so painting the car it's very naive and ingenuous, IMHO.

Even if they weren't involved with government, just 2 bad guys doing some illegal stuff... changing the colour of you car doesn't protect you at all. I mean, even without facebook, you could track a person easily...in a very small place like Richmond. Were not talking about a big city.

I believe the ex husband knew very well how to drive her insane and make her look like a psychotic woman. Why? I don't know, but he was associated with very bad people. Cindy wasn't an idiot, she was a smart woman. She must have known about his activities or the activities of his coworkers.

If he was involved with organized crime or intelligence agencies, that could explain WHY she never said the name of the stalker publicly.

The only gap in this theory is that id she knew the ex was involved with very powerful people she must have known that painting the car would be useless... and she would have traveled to another city or even abroad, overseas or whatever. But staying at Richmond? Doesn't make sense. That's the only thing that make me think she was her own tormentor.

The dog thing doesn't make her a liar, because stressed people do odd things, even puting themselves at risk. Imagine if you were forced to live under those circumstances for years. Going early to bed, locking your doors and windows every night, the pannick about being alone in the home at night, etc... at some moment you would be tired and just wanted to rebell... IMHO.

alistaircranium

07-13-2018, 10:04 AM