Angela Hammond - Girl abducted from phone booth - Page 25 - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

reportertype · 07-27-2010, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TracyLynnS

RE: discrepancies in reports about the color of the abductor's vehicle.

I've even read about cases where the eye witnesses insisted a perp's vehicle was red, when it turned out to be a white vehicle with a red traffic light casting that color onto it.

Another possibility: color blindness. Three years ago, I realized that my teenage daughter is green/yellow color "blind". At that time, we also noticed that her father has the same problem, just to a lesser extent.

In my daughter's case, she sees green objects as having much more yellow in them than they really have.

Perhaps this was problem in Rob's description of the abductor's vehicle. And he may not even know he had this odd color blindness problem. At the time Angela was abducted, Rob was about the same age my daughter was when we found out she was partially color blind.

Of course, it could always have been reflections from traffic lights shining on the truck in Angela's case. After all, the same traffic light that casts a green glow on objects also casts a yellow glow as the light changes. That could account for why one person saw a green truck and one saw a yellowish truck.

Still, I don't know why there are discrepancies in the color description. Could have been fear, stress, mistakes, reflecting light, or even a rare condition limiting the viewer's perception of color.

I've done that; insisting a car was a certain color and I was totally wrong. I didn't know that about color blindness. Could be.

Oldschooler81 · 07-28-2010, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwcarolina

]
it's NOT a part of the story. Why in the world would the segment want to show Angela hanging out with her friend????? like i said, what i think happened (although you dont care) is Rob was dropped off, she went to hang out with her friend, then after that she went to a pay phone, called Rob to tell him she was going home and then the truck came and all the stuff Rob said happened. Like MANY have said, in order for Rob to have done this, he would've HAD to have help doing it. For example, who drove the car to hide her body so well that it hasnt been found to this day?? who cleaned up???? how has the police not found out about Rob and his helpers?? things like this are questioned.

Yeah, the segment also mentioned the police cleared Rob within a week. I do wonder though, if maybe they initially focused on him and as a result, the abductor was allowed to get away. I've heard the first 1-2 days are the most critical time in a kidnapping as far as them living or not, and that the victims are usually killed very close to home or taken way out of the area (both of these things were true in the Adam Walsh case, and according to John Walsh's book, some of the local police were really incompetent and just unequepped to know how to handle a situation like that as late as 1981).

Even though it wasn't mentioned, I'm sure they got fingerprints from the payphone as well as interviewed Angie's friend, as well as Rob's younger brother to back up the story.

That's a good point actually. For argument's sake if Rob was guilty, he definitely would've needed accomplices and they all must've been criminal masterminds or something. Plus, what motive could he have possibly had? The segment doesn't mention her being pregnant (but this thread does) but I could see him being the kind of guy who was thrilled to become a father, even if he was really young (18 in '91). You can clearly tell how upset he was about being so close but not quite being able to save her too.

MegtheEgg86 · 07-28-2010, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldschooler81

Plus, what motive could he have possibly had? The segment doesn't mention her being pregnant (but this thread does) but I could see him being the kind of guy who was thrilled to become a father, even if he was really young (18 in '91). You can clearly tell how upset he was about being so close but not quite being able to save her too.

I haven't seen the segment in a long time, but I thought it was understood that Rob and Angela were going to get married some time in the very near future. If that's true, I find it hard to believe he would murder his own girlfriend merely because she was pregnant (if THAT'S true, and I think it is).

The way I see it, Rob simply didn't have the time to commit the crime. He couldn't have been babysitting his brother for the length of time that he did, abduct Angela, murder her, find some manner or hide/dispose of her body, and intentionally damage the transmission in his car all in that short amount of time before he notified authorities. It reminds me of Bob Bean being accused of killing Sammy Wheeler when he was a hundred miles away at the time.

bell83 · 07-28-2010, 06:25 PM

I think it's hilarious that Onlooker came back for one post and stirred the pot this much. Based on the defensiveness, and the lack of paying attention to anything that anyone says that refutes the knowledge that Onlooker has as to the coldblooded murder of Angela by Rob...I've found myself asking if Onlooker is simply a troll, much like Sadie McKee, who used to post about the Wackers, incessantly. You'll notice that Onlooker appears nowhere but this one thread.

Cursiorandcursior · 07-29-2010, 10:19 AM

I have never commented on this case here but it is being discussed elsewhere and this case was brought up in the context of the 3MW case of Springfield, which is my main interest. (I lived in Springfield for 26 years)

The name of Kenneth McDuff has come up and he is long dead but there is some question of whether he was in custody at the time Hammond was abducted. He was known to do this kind of crime and owned a pick-up at least some of these crimes. And of course he was captured on April 4, 1992. So far as I know he left custody in 1990 and was on the street. Can someone set me straight on these facts? Having gone through Clinton about a 100 times from Springfield to K.C., it would be an ideal place for someone passing through who had an "itch" to commit a crime such as this.

If McDuff could be ruled out, and I have a completely open mind about his involvement, then I would want to look at the last known individuals have had contact with the victim. I am concerned about the specificity of the pickup truck. So far as I know we are being told what Angela is alleged to have said over the phone. I believe that is called hearsay. There is no direct evidence that I know of but I could be wrong. But as I say, that is just my $0.02. Thoughts?

Good discussion here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whew!!

Just waded through this entire thread. I knew about this case because I lived in Springfield and it was a well covered case at the time. I didn't know all the details until now. Some observations:

1) The color of the alleged pickup truck is unimportant as the night lighting could alter our eye's perceptions of color. This was also a factor in the 3MW case I have been interested in.

2) The make and model of the vehicle is evidently not nailed down so far as I can tell.

3) The time line is a source of some concern as so far as I can tell cannot be proven.

4) After reading all that has been said by those close to the case I now tend to doubt that her fiance was likely involved. Unfortunately we don't have actual provable information to establish it was not possible. It is not particularly relevant that anyone believes or disbelieves someone is innocent. There are far too many cases where the sweetest most wonderful people are found to be the perps. On balance, I would not consider him a serious suspect after looking at the case.

5) I'm troubled by the Trudy Darby case.

6) It appears that the local police forces did everything that could be reasonably expected of them. On the other hand I was astounded at the hostility of the state police to the son of Cheryl Ann Kenney. I regard that as reprehensible.

7) I still regard McDuff as a potential suspect as by all accounts he was on the street at the time and he was apprehended on April 4, 1992 in Kansas City, just up the road. I don't know why he would be discounted as a suspect. And he did drive a pick-up truck as noted in two of his murders.

8) Assuming her fiance is uninvolved it is more likely than not that this was a serial murderer. Which takes me back to why I am even on this forum regarding this case. Having poured over everything there is about the 3MW case I came away with the unthinkable. Perhaps we are looking at an unknown serial killer something I thought very much in doubt.

9) Going back over the facts of the case, what exactly was the reason that Angela Hammond placed the call at this location? Where was she when she started home? Why not place the call then? Being out late at night anywhere is dangerous in and of itself. If someone could clear that up for me, I would be grateful.

10) That the Kenney case and this case are being linked in the Charley Project site is significant to me. What do we know about that we don't know now? What are the similarities? Is there a separate thread on that case? I will do a search and see if there is. Any thoughts would be appreciated. (Never mind, I have found it. More reading ahead.)

11) One final thing. I regard polygraphs and eyewitness testimony near worthless. Polygraphs are not admissible in court and I believe eyewitness testimony should also be inadmissible. Too many innocent people have been sent to prison or even executed on bad eyewitness testimony. YES, it is possible to beat a polygraph test. Psychopaths do this all the time and innocent people fail them as well. But I have great confidence in DNA PROVIDING it has a provable chain of custody.

Great site. Lot of good and informative information with a relative lack of rancor which is always appreciated.

mwcarolina · 07-30-2010, 11:29 AM

haven't seen the segment in a long time, but I thought it was understood that Rob and Angela were going to get married some time in the very near future. If that's true, I find it hard to believe he would murder his own girlfriend merely because she was pregnant (if THAT'S true, and I think it is).
yeah, i think Rob had a motive, that's part is true, Rob had a motive but...................
The way I see it, Rob simply didn't have the time to commit the crime
That is one of my issues, TIME, Rob didnt have that time to do this. He would have to kill his girlfriend, hide her body, clean up the crime scene and do all that so her body wont be found for years. i bet that is hard to do.

Cursiorandcursior · 07-30-2010, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwcarolina

haven't seen the segment in a long time, but I thought it was understood that Rob and Angela were going to get married some time in the very near future. If that's true, I find it hard to believe he would murder his own girlfriend merely because she was pregnant (if THAT'S true, and I think it is).
yeah, i think Rob had a motive, that's part is true, Rob had a motive but...................
The way I see it, Rob simply didn't have the time to commit the crime
That is one of my issues, TIME, Rob didnt have that time to do this. He would have to kill his girlfriend, hide her body, clean up the crime scene and do all that so her body wont be found for years. i bet that is hard to do.

I don't really have all the facts regarding the time line. I think it more important to focus on a possible motive. Just because there were no issues up to that night doesn't mean that something didn't come up, a minor argument turned into a bigger argument, things spin out of control and she is killed.

I never met the gentleman, haven't looked into his eyes or heard him answer the questions posed. He has come up as a suspect by several people simply because he is the last known person to have heard from her before she was allegedly taken. And it is what he alleged she said; there is no independent verification of what was actually said.

The two witnesses who claimed to have seen the purported truck argue in his favor and give his account considerable weight.

The reason he came onto my radar screen had to do with the specificity of the alleged abduction and what was said over the phone. Seems too detailed to me but perhaps he got it just right. How would we know?

If she screamed at him as they were passing on the road she had to be screaming out of the right window as she wouldn't have been driving. With the road noise, engine noise, etc., in such old vehicles would it have been heard? I'm dubious.

I do believe there is very possibly a connection to the Kenney abduction. That argues against him as the perpetrator. We then have to look to the Darby murder and those perps. It is not inconceivable that all three abductions were their handiwork. Note: I just watched the "new information" from last year and the police said they had physical evidence and ruled out the Kenney and Darby cases as being connected. That is most significant.

If he didn't do it and I've never claimed he did, I would look to someone like Kenneth McDuff simply because, so far as I know he was on the street at the time, had a pick-up and was eventually apprehended in Kansas City in April, 1992. But how would the physical evidence tie to him?

What is this new DNA evidence they are talking about? We don't know.

mwcarolina · 07-31-2010, 12:18 AM

I don't really have all the facts regarding the time line. I think it more important to focus on a possible motive.
Well, here's the way i see it, he had motive, but the opportunity is hard. I am sure the police could check the phone records at that time, but for me the timeline wouldn't fit and in order for Rob to do this, he would have to be the PERFECT criminal. That's why i think he's innocent. Not enough proof that screams Rob. For example, if Rob did it, how did he clean up the crime scene so fast? if he did this, why hasnt the body been found and why didnt anyone speak up about him being missing for about 5 or more hours because it takes time to hide a body to where he won't be round for 10 years.
Just because there were no issues up to that night doesn't mean that something didn't come up, a minor argument turned into a bigger argument, things spin out of control and she is killed.
i am not saying that couldn't happen, i am just saying that Rob would have to either had help (highly unlikely) or be perfect at being a murderer (highly unlikely too). First off, it is VERY hard to make up a lie when you just did a crime, so i would expect Rob's story to have holes, how would a kid who just killed his girlfriend make up a good story like i chased the guy and my transmission failed. he would've said something dumb like, my transmission failed this morning or something.
The reason he came onto my radar screen had to do with the specificity of the alleged abduction and what was said over the phone. Seems too detailed to me but perhaps he got it just right. How would we know?
but you got to look at facts man. How could a man his age, not be caught in a lie??? his story hasnt even been questioned by the police or Angela's own family.
If she screamed at him as they were passing on the road she had to be screaming out of the right window as she wouldn't have been driving.
This is not impossible, first off what if his car isnt loud and second, what if she screamed loud.
I do believe there is very possibly a connection to the Kenney abduction. That argues against him as the perpetrator.
i dont know who did it, i dont follow Kenney much, need to look him up one day. I still think the guy who did this (and i have been questioned on this) is a guy whose not really got many friends. He's not known well at all. He's likely killed or raped and i think the man is an out of towner, he was likely driving through this town to somewhere else than in his sick mind saw an opportunity, and capitalized on it and likely kidnapped, raped and killed her and her body hasnt been found because he either buried her near where he lives (he's likely lives by himself) or he buried her in another town, city or state and maybe she was found, but because of where she was located, she is a Jane Doe. I want this case solved because there are so many questions that need answering.

Cursiorandcursior · 07-31-2010, 12:37 AM

I have read all of the various threads regarding this case and there were some interesting comments if you keep looking. I call your attention to the following for example:

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/...angela+hammond ; post #56.

The time line is of absolute critical importance.

For example; there was a case for example, unrelated to this one, in which the perpetrator actually drove about 2,200 miles one weekend to murder his wife half way across the United States. His alibi was that he was not in town and couldn't have done it. When the time line was run with an actual trip back and forth by the police officers, it was indeed possible. Then it came down to motive. Do we have a motive here? I don't know. I just read what was posted. You decide.

Remember, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I just look at the objective facts and possible motives.

Just for the record, I doubt that pregnancy was the motive. Could be, but I doubt it.

mwcarolina · 07-31-2010, 11:03 AM

The time line is of absolute critical importance.
yeah i know what you are saying, but i dont think he had time to do this which is why i think the killer is an out of towner. As for the guy who killed his wife, this is a different scene. First off, how old was the man??? Second, his reason for not killing her. His reason was how a normal person would answer. Rob's wasnt. Rob said he chased the guy and his transmission failed, that's a pretty good story to come up with if he's lying which isnt' easy to do when under pressure.

As for the motive, that SEEMS to be the only one i can see. I dont think Rob did it, he didnt come accross as suspicious in my view and his story seemed logical

crazytatsink · 08-01-2010, 01:17 PM

I am the son of Cheryl Kenney and yes there is another thread for her just search Cheryl Kenney under search these forums!

Cursiorandcursior · 08-01-2010, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazytatsink

I am the son of Cheryl Kenney and yes there is another thread for her just search Cheryl Kenney under search these forums!

I do intend to look at that case but have been wrapped up with the 3MW case in Springfield "forever" so to speak. Then I happened to run onto the Hammond case here and had no idea there was so much information. I was aware of your mother's case but would like to read it through its entirety. I wouldn't even want to venture an opinion at this point in time.

SageSlowdive · 08-02-2010, 05:09 PM

Everyone needs to stop beating a dead horse:

Rob was proven innocent through witnesses (his brother) and a polygraph test.

There's like a 2% chance Kenneth McDuff was the abductor.

1) Didn't fit the profile of the killer.
2) Lived almost 5 hours away from there.
3) Didn't fit his usual crimes (i.e. prostitutes) the only time he murdered people who were not prostitutes, he had an accomplice. And the whole deal with someone ducking down in the passenger side of the car is "out there", because if Angela could see the truck, driver, and what he was doing inside of the car, don't you think she could have saw someone ducking down?

Cursiorandcursior · 08-02-2010, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SageSlowdive

Everyone needs to stop beating a dead horse:

Rob was proven innocent through witnesses (his brother) and a polygraph test.

There's like a 2% chance Kenneth McDuff was the abductor.

1) Didn't fit the profile of the killer.
2) Lived almost 5 hours away from there.
3) Didn't fit his usual crimes (i.e. prostitutes) the only time he murdered people who were not prostitutes, he had an accomplice. And the whole deal with someone ducking down in the passenger side of the car is "out there", because if Angela could see the truck, driver, and what he was doing inside of the car, don't you think she could have saw someone ducking down?

I agree that the chances of McDuff being the abductor are near zero.

However, I'm not clear how a polygraph clears anyone of a crime. There are numerous examples of criminals who beat these tests. I have spoken to a former polygraph examiner and he told me plainly they can be beaten. And they are also notorious for showing innocent people as being deceptive.

There must be a reason why they are not permitted in criminal proceedings.

Can you expand on this a bit? Sometimes I'm a little slow about these things.

mwcarolina · 08-03-2010, 12:11 AM

However, I'm not clear how a polygraph clears anyone of a crime.
yeah, i dont really think a polygraph determines guilt or innocence. to me it's motive and oppourtunity and the timeline doesnt fit. For Rob to have done this he would've needed hours. When i say he needs hours, it's not to do the crime, it's to clean up the scene, hide/bury the body, and other things. Plus like this guy said, i think the motive isnt that great anyway.

07-28-2010, 06:25 PM	#364
bell83 You're in high school again. Senior Member Join Date: Oct 05, 2006 Posts: 1,033	I think it's hilarious that Onlooker came back for one post and stirred the pot this much. Based on the defensiveness, and the lack of paying attention to anything that anyone says that refutes the knowledge that Onlooker has as to the coldblooded murder of Angela by Rob...I've found myself asking if Onlooker is simply a troll, much like Sadie McKee, who used to post about the Wackers, incessantly. You'll notice that Onlooker appears nowhere but this one thread.
	__________________ Acid is groovy...kill the pigs.

07-29-2010, 10:19 AM	#365
Cursiorandcursior Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 18, 2007 Location: Arkansas Posts: 106	My $0.02 I have never commented on this case here but it is being discussed elsewhere and this case was brought up in the context of the 3MW case of Springfield, which is my main interest. (I lived in Springfield for 26 years) The name of Kenneth McDuff has come up and he is long dead but there is some question of whether he was in custody at the time Hammond was abducted. He was known to do this kind of crime and owned a pick-up at least some of these crimes. And of course he was captured on April 4, 1992. So far as I know he left custody in 1990 and was on the street. Can someone set me straight on these facts? Having gone through Clinton about a 100 times from Springfield to K.C., it would be an ideal place for someone passing through who had an "itch" to commit a crime such as this. If McDuff could be ruled out, and I have a completely open mind about his involvement, then I would want to look at the last known individuals have had contact with the victim. I am concerned about the specificity of the pickup truck. So far as I know we are being told what Angela is alleged to have said over the phone. I believe that is called hearsay. There is no direct evidence that I know of but I could be wrong. But as I say, that is just my $0.02. Thoughts? Good discussion here. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whew!! Just waded through this entire thread. I knew about this case because I lived in Springfield and it was a well covered case at the time. I didn't know all the details until now. Some observations: 1) The color of the alleged pickup truck is unimportant as the night lighting could alter our eye's perceptions of color. This was also a factor in the 3MW case I have been interested in. 2) The make and model of the vehicle is evidently not nailed down so far as I can tell. 3) The time line is a source of some concern as so far as I can tell cannot be proven. 4) After reading all that has been said by those close to the case I now tend to doubt that her fiance was likely involved. Unfortunately we don't have actual provable information to establish it was not possible. It is not particularly relevant that anyone believes or disbelieves someone is innocent. There are far too many cases where the sweetest most wonderful people are found to be the perps. On balance, I would not consider him a serious suspect after looking at the case. 5) I'm troubled by the Trudy Darby case. 6) It appears that the local police forces did everything that could be reasonably expected of them. On the other hand I was astounded at the hostility of the state police to the son of Cheryl Ann Kenney. I regard that as reprehensible. 7) I still regard McDuff as a potential suspect as by all accounts he was on the street at the time and he was apprehended on April 4, 1992 in Kansas City, just up the road. I don't know why he would be discounted as a suspect. And he did drive a pick-up truck as noted in two of his murders. 8) Assuming her fiance is uninvolved it is more likely than not that this was a serial murderer. Which takes me back to why I am even on this forum regarding this case. Having poured over everything there is about the 3MW case I came away with the unthinkable. Perhaps we are looking at an unknown serial killer something I thought very much in doubt. 9) Going back over the facts of the case, what exactly was the reason that Angela Hammond placed the call at this location? Where was she when she started home? Why not place the call then? Being out late at night anywhere is dangerous in and of itself. If someone could clear that up for me, I would be grateful. 10) That the Kenney case and this case are being linked in the Charley Project site is significant to me. What do we know about that we don't know now? What are the similarities? Is there a separate thread on that case? I will do a search and see if there is. Any thoughts would be appreciated. (Never mind, I have found it. More reading ahead.) 11) One final thing. I regard polygraphs and eyewitness testimony near worthless. Polygraphs are not admissible in court and I believe eyewitness testimony should also be inadmissible. Too many innocent people have been sent to prison or even executed on bad eyewitness testimony. YES, it is possible to beat a polygraph test. Psychopaths do this all the time and innocent people fail them as well. But I have great confidence in DNA PROVIDING it has a provable chain of custody. Great site. Lot of good and informative information with a relative lack of rancor which is always appreciated.
	Last edited by Cursiorandcursior; 07-29-2010 at 06:28 PM.

08-01-2010, 01:17 PM	#371
crazytatsink Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Feb 28, 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 50	Cheryl Kenney I am the son of Cheryl Kenney and yes there is another thread for her just search Cheryl Kenney under search these forums!

07-30-2010, 11:29 AM	#366
mwcarolina Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 01, 2010 Location: nc Posts: 466	haven't seen the segment in a long time, but I thought it was understood that Rob and Angela were going to get married some time in the very near future. If that's true, I find it hard to believe he would murder his own girlfriend merely because she was pregnant (if THAT'S true, and I think it is). yeah, i think Rob had a motive, that's part is true, Rob had a motive but................... The way I see it, Rob simply didn't have the time to commit the crime That is one of my issues, TIME, Rob didnt have that time to do this. He would have to kill his girlfriend, hide her body, clean up the crime scene and do all that so her body wont be found for years. i bet that is hard to do.

07-31-2010, 12:18 AM	#368
mwcarolina Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 01, 2010 Location: nc Posts: 466	I don't really have all the facts regarding the time line. I think it more important to focus on a possible motive. Well, here's the way i see it, he had motive, but the opportunity is hard. I am sure the police could check the phone records at that time, but for me the timeline wouldn't fit and in order for Rob to do this, he would have to be the PERFECT criminal. That's why i think he's innocent. Not enough proof that screams Rob. For example, if Rob did it, how did he clean up the crime scene so fast? if he did this, why hasnt the body been found and why didnt anyone speak up about him being missing for about 5 or more hours because it takes time to hide a body to where he won't be round for 10 years. Just because there were no issues up to that night doesn't mean that something didn't come up, a minor argument turned into a bigger argument, things spin out of control and she is killed. i am not saying that couldn't happen, i am just saying that Rob would have to either had help (highly unlikely) or be perfect at being a murderer (highly unlikely too). First off, it is VERY hard to make up a lie when you just did a crime, so i would expect Rob's story to have holes, how would a kid who just killed his girlfriend make up a good story like i chased the guy and my transmission failed. he would've said something dumb like, my transmission failed this morning or something. The reason he came onto my radar screen had to do with the specificity of the alleged abduction and what was said over the phone. Seems too detailed to me but perhaps he got it just right. How would we know? but you got to look at facts man. How could a man his age, not be caught in a lie??? his story hasnt even been questioned by the police or Angela's own family. If she screamed at him as they were passing on the road she had to be screaming out of the right window as she wouldn't have been driving. This is not impossible, first off what if his car isnt loud and second, what if she screamed loud. I do believe there is very possibly a connection to the Kenney abduction. That argues against him as the perpetrator. i dont know who did it, i dont follow Kenney much, need to look him up one day. I still think the guy who did this (and i have been questioned on this) is a guy whose not really got many friends. He's not known well at all. He's likely killed or raped and i think the man is an out of towner, he was likely driving through this town to somewhere else than in his sick mind saw an opportunity, and capitalized on it and likely kidnapped, raped and killed her and her body hasnt been found because he either buried her near where he lives (he's likely lives by himself) or he buried her in another town, city or state and maybe she was found, but because of where she was located, she is a Jane Doe. I want this case solved because there are so many questions that need answering.

07-31-2010, 12:37 AM	#369
Cursiorandcursior Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 18, 2007 Location: Arkansas Posts: 106	I have read all of the various threads regarding this case and there were some interesting comments if you keep looking. I call your attention to the following for example: http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/...angela+hammond ; post #56. The time line is of absolute critical importance. For example; there was a case for example, unrelated to this one, in which the perpetrator actually drove about 2,200 miles one weekend to murder his wife half way across the United States. His alibi was that he was not in town and couldn't have done it. When the time line was run with an actual trip back and forth by the police officers, it was indeed possible. Then it came down to motive. Do we have a motive here? I don't know. I just read what was posted. You decide. Remember, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I just look at the objective facts and possible motives. Just for the record, I doubt that pregnancy was the motive. Could be, but I doubt it.

07-31-2010, 11:03 AM	#370
mwcarolina Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 01, 2010 Location: nc Posts: 466	The time line is of absolute critical importance. yeah i know what you are saying, but i dont think he had time to do this which is why i think the killer is an out of towner. As for the guy who killed his wife, this is a different scene. First off, how old was the man??? Second, his reason for not killing her. His reason was how a normal person would answer. Rob's wasnt. Rob said he chased the guy and his transmission failed, that's a pretty good story to come up with if he's lying which isnt' easy to do when under pressure. As for the motive, that SEEMS to be the only one i can see. I dont think Rob did it, he didnt come accross as suspicious in my view and his story seemed logical

08-02-2010, 05:09 PM	#373
SageSlowdive the real hank queen Forum Regular Join Date: Feb 10, 2010 Posts: 659	Everyone needs to stop beating a dead horse: Rob was proven innocent through witnesses (his brother) and a polygraph test. There's like a 2% chance Kenneth McDuff was the abductor. 1) Didn't fit the profile of the killer. 2) Lived almost 5 hours away from there. 3) Didn't fit his usual crimes (i.e. prostitutes) the only time he murdered people who were not prostitutes, he had an accomplice. And the whole deal with someone ducking down in the passenger side of the car is "out there", because if Angela could see the truck, driver, and what he was doing inside of the car, don't you think she could have saw someone ducking down?

08-03-2010, 12:11 AM	#375
mwcarolina Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 01, 2010 Location: nc Posts: 466	However, I'm not clear how a polygraph clears anyone of a crime. yeah, i dont really think a polygraph determines guilt or innocence. to me it's motive and oppourtunity and the timeline doesnt fit. For Rob to have done this he would've needed hours. When i say he needs hours, it's not to do the crime, it's to clean up the scene, hide/bury the body, and other things. Plus like this guy said, i think the motive isnt that great anyway.