The Death of Norman Ladner?

[justins5256]

I'm on the fence on this one.

The wallet being missing - it could have been stolen by a paramedic or someone at the coroner's office with sticky fingers.

The laceration on the head - the police indicated that they found a root at the scene spattered with blood. His head could have struck the root after he fell.

The "signaling" device in the woods - real hard to tell exactly what this is. The family claims they had it looked at by someone who was retired DEA that said it was a device used to guide low flying planes dropping shipments of drugs. Okay. Did they get a second opinion? Also, there is no way to say how long it was there, what its purpose actually was, and so on.

The bullet the family found - it was in the ground several inches below where they claim Norman was. The police claim he was in a standing position when the shot was fired. Not to be graphic, but this should have been relatively easy to figure out based on blood spatter patterning. If he was standing, it doesn't make much sense for the bullet they found to be related to his death.

He "wouldn't commit suicide" - I hate to be crass, but who can really say this? We don't know what was going through his mind, and sometimes people who contemplate killing themselves don't reach out or say anything, or potential behaviors and waning signs that they do manifest are missed by those closest to them.

Overall, it is pretty ambiguous. I'd probably lean more toward suicide lacking more credible evidence of murder.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by justins5256

I'm on the fence on this one.

The wallet being missing - it could have been stolen by a paramedic or someone at the coroner's office with sticky fingers.

The laceration on the head - the police indicated that they found a root at the scene spattered with blood. His head could have struck the root after he fell.

The "signaling" device in the woods - real hard to tell exactly what this is. The family claims they had it looked at by someone who was retired DEA that said it was a device used to guide low flying planes dropping shipments of drugs. Okay. Did they get a second opinion? Also, there is no way to say how long it was there, what its purpose actually was, and so on.

The bullet the family found - it was in the ground several inches below where they claim Norman was. The police claim he was in a standing position when the shot was fired. Not to be graphic, but this should have been relatively easy to figure out based on blood spatter patterning. If he was standing, it doesn't make much sense for the bullet they found to be related to his death.

He "wouldn't commit suicide" - I hate to be crass, but who can really say this? We don't know what was going through his mind, and sometimes people who contemplate killing themselves don't reach out or say anything, or potential behaviors and waning signs that they do manifest are missed by those closest to them.

Overall, it is pretty ambiguous. I'd probably lean more toward suicide lacking more credible evidence of murder.

Wasn't he carrying a rifle, though? I forget the pattern of injury, but I thought it was through his head, transversing the temples horizontally. And I seem to remember something about a wound "on the peak of his head", to use Mr. Ladner's words, but I don't seem to recall it as a gunshot wound.

[crystaldawn]

Originally Posted by justins5256

Overall, it is pretty ambiguous. I'd probably lean more toward suicide lacking more credible evidence of murder.

Yes that's what I'm leaning towards as well. He loved those woods and knew them well so that could be a reason why if he did commit suicide he went there. It just seems more likely than he happened to stumble upon something he wasn't supposed to and was murdered.

[yourhomiebrian]

Originally Posted by peachysquirt21

There has been no evidence to suggest Norman was into drugs. Did you ever stop & think that just maybe Norman was the type of person who saved his money??? Not every teenager squanders there money. The way you make it sound is because he was carrying that much cash, oh he had to be going to buy drugs. Norman could of been the type that wherever he went he always carried his wallet & always kept his money in his wallet.

I think some are making way too much out of Norman having that much cash on him.

Unless other evidence comes forth, I still believe Norman stumbled upon something he should not have, (more then likely involving drugs) & was murdered to shut him up.

He very well could have just happened to have that kind of money and was not going to buy drugs but you definitely got to look at it as a strong possibility if you are considering it a murder.

[freakbook]

Originally Posted by yourhomiebrian

He very well could have just happened to have that kind of money and was not going to buy drugs but you definitely got to look at it as a strong possibility if you are considering it a murder.

To piggy back off of what you said about Norman buying drugs, perhaps he was a drug mule for someone? I thought it was weird for him to have large amounts of money openly given the fact that his family didn't seem that wealthy.

I wonder if a cop/possibly his father had Norman buying/selling drugs, and he was got by a dealer who robbed him? He could've been buying for himself, but given the fact that he had large sums, I wonder if a crooked cop paid Norman to be his mule? Maybe his father had shady dealings he had Norman do?

[undertakeress]

I tend to lean towards the drug deal, and stumbling upon it. The Dixie Mafia was still relatively big. Kirksey Nix had just ordered the murder of Judge Sherry and his wife 2 years earlier. The mayor of Biloxi, who was the ex law partner of Judge Sherry, had yet to be arrested and convicted of racketeering and conspiracy in The Sherry murder. Jeffery Carter was imprisoned at Angola, but he was a prodigy of Barry Seal, the Mena AR plane flyer himself. There's just too many co- incidences ( said in my best Danny Wheeler voice)

[yourhomiebrian]

Now that I think of it, it would be hard to murder Norman Ladner if he was carrying a rifle. He could use it to protect himself.

[freakbook]

Originally Posted by yourhomiebrian

Now that I think of it, it would be hard to murder Norman Ladner if he was carrying a rifle. He could use it to protect himself.

Not if you attacked quietly from the back.

[yourhomiebrian]

Originally Posted by freakbook

Not if you attacked quietly from the back.

The leaves probably would make noise when walking on them. It would probably be 2 or more people involved if it is murder.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by yourhomiebrian

Now that I think of it, it would be hard to murder Norman Ladner if he was carrying a rifle. He could use it to protect himself.

Nah. I think there tends to exist an idea that a firearm is universally protective. It's not. It's the person carrying the firearm that determines how protective that weapon is in such a situation. A rifle does no good if you freeze up and allow the weapon to be yanked out of your hands, or if you fire a rounds into the ground in front of your assailant because you're afraid.

[freakbook]

Originally Posted by yourhomiebrian

The leaves probably would make noise when walking on them. It would probably be 2 or more people involved if it is murder.

Keep in mind that Norman could've been attacked from a distance. Also he could've been blindsided. But I agree with MegtheEgg86 that just because he had a gun doesn't mean he had the courage to use it, or the knowledge. Also, it's possible that he didn't want to hurt anyone, so he chose not to shoot.

[Far Off Promise]

Are there are any pictures of the tree that Norman was found near? I'm curious as to if it was possible to climb that tree, or any of the surrounding trees.

My scenario goes like this -> Norman goes out hunting. Maybe he climbs into the tree to sit and wait for animals, or maybe he climbs up into the tree to get a better view of what's occurring in the clearing, or possibly to avoid detection by those in the clearing.

At some point, the person(s) from the clearing come walking into the woods, perhaps to use the electronic device that Norman's father later found. They might not have even known that Norman was in the tree, but as they are traversing through the forest, they discover him.

At this point, things could go a number of ways:

1) They shoot Norman out of the tree. He falls and hits the rock, thus producing lacerations on his head. This would also explain the somewhat uncommon location of where he was shot (relative to other suicides/type of gun used).

2) They force Norman to come down out of the tree at gun point, at which time they kill him. He falls and hits the rock on the ground, or maybe they roughed him before they killed him.

3) Norman confronts these people, whether in the tree or after descending, and quickly learns that their purpose for being there is nefarious.

You can understand Norman's reluctance to shoot these people. He didn't know exactly what they were doing there. He probably thought he would go undetected and could later return safely to his home. If he shoots and kills these people and it turns out they were doing something legitimate then he's just committed murder. If he shoots and misses then he's blown his cover, and if he's outnumbered then he's in big trouble. He's in a tree so it's not like he has many exit options.

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter which scenario occurred as both lead to the same outcome of murder. There's too much here that goes against the theory of suicide. I think it's simply a case of a young man goes out to hunt and finds himself in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[LakeForestPI]

Originally Posted by Far Off Promise

Are there are any pictures of the tree that Norman was found near? I'm curious as to if it was possible to climb that tree, or any of the surrounding trees.

My scenario goes like this -> Norman goes out hunting. Maybe he climbs into the tree to sit and wait for animals, or maybe he climbs up into the tree to get a better view of what's occurring in the clearing, or possibly to avoid detection by those in the clearing.

At some point, the person(s) from the clearing come walking into the woods, perhaps to use the electronic device that Norman's father later found. They might not have even known that Norman was in the tree, but as they are traversing through the forest, they discover him.

At this point, things could go a number of ways:

1) They shoot Norman out of the tree. He falls and hits the rock, thus producing lacerations on his head. This would also explain the somewhat uncommon location of where he was shot (relative to other suicides/type of gun used

2) They force Norman to come down out of the tree at gun point, at which time they kill him. He falls and hits the rock on the ground, or maybe they roughed him before they killed him.

3) Norman confronts these people, whether in the tree or after descending, and quickly learns that their purpose for being there is nefarious.

You can understand Norman's reluctance to shoot these people. He didn't know exactly what they were doing there. He probably thought he would go undetected and could later return safely to his home. If he shoots and kills these people and it turns out they were doing something legitimate then he's just committed murder. If he shoots and misses then he's blown his cover, and if he's outnumbered then he's in big trouble. He's in a tree so it's not like he has many exit options.

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter which scenario occurred as both lead to the same outcome of murder. There's too much here that goes against the theory of suicide. I think it's simply a case of a young man goes out to hunt and finds himself in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You are correct sir. I couldn't agree more. Whoever believes this was a suicide has probably blown their entire paycheck playing three card monte on more than one occasion.

[LooksLikeCRicci]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

Nah. I think there tends to exist an idea that a firearm is universally protective. It's not. It's the person carrying the firearm that determines how protective that weapon is in such a situation. A rifle does no good if you freeze up and allow the weapon to be yanked out of your hands, or if you fire a rounds into the ground in front of your assailant because you're afraid.

Or if they were at close range. I don't see how a rifle can protect you if the person is literally in your face...

[Steve W.]

I believe it was either murder or an accident, leaning towards murder.

It seems very unlikely for it to be suicide (even if the parents didn't really know what/how Norman's state of mind was at the time). There seemed to be too many other findings for it to be a suicide. The prime example is why would some stranger pull Norman's mother aside at the funeral service and basically tell her (paraphrasing) "don't try to figure out what happened to your son" if Norman killed himself?

I believe what happened to him was probably similar to the drug operation scenario shown in the reenactment (he stumbled upon it that day when it was already in full swing and then something along the lines of a lookout or two cornered and killed him) or that he was in a tree hunting but fell and the rifle discharged.

Also, why was that lead detective (interviewed in the segment) so staunch on ruling it a suicide? It makes him look either very stubborn or somewhat suspicious.