Heidi Allen case - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Awsi Dooger · 03-20-2017, 12:01 AM

Another example of the wrong people charged, innocent person convicted, and a district attorney who has absolutely no clue what he is doing and doesn't belong in that job.

Investigation Discovery reran that Dateline episode Sunday night, titled. "The Informant." I've seen it previously but it infuriated me even more this time.

Heidi Allen was abducted from a convenience store on Easter Sunday 1994. She was never found. When locals reported seeing a white van in the area and one person who owned a van matching the description came forward and said he bought cigarettes from Heidi shortly before she went missing, that man and his brother were charged with her murder. One was convicted, the second one acquitted.

Obviously that made no sense, with the same set of facts. Then fast forward many years when a girl comes forward with a different story, saying a man named Thumper confessed to his role in the crime to her and had plenty of details. That girl was too fearful to contact authorities. When she finally did, the district attorney Greg Oakes had her call another woman who supposedly overheard the same story from Thumper. That call was taped and was so matter of fact and damning that anyone with a shred of applied common sense would recognize the legitimacy, and the likelihood that the wrong people were charged.

Gregory Oakes is not the type for common sense or bare minimal competence in weighing variables. Nope, he's the genius tunnel vision type who has already placed a check mark beside that case and will do anything to uphold the original stupidity. Somehow the damning recorded phone call is rejected in favor of vague jailhouse snitch versions from the original time period.

That's the type of thing that boils me beyond description. Anyone with any basic training or related ability in the matter would understand that there is no comparison toward which version was more likely to be legitimate. It's not remotely close. If you submitted it to one of those organizations like the Vidocq Society their biggest problem would be suppressing laughter that anyone could favor the original theory. Yet someone like Gregory Oakes advances through the system like the plodder he is and somehow is allowed to make decisions like this. He even has no shame in appearing on television and arguing his side. I actually have more respect for the district attorneys and prosecutors in the same situation who refuse to appear on TV. At least we can guess toward their level instead of having it on full sickening display.

Clint Van Zandt's early profile of the case matched the second set of suspects perfectly but didn't begin to align with the two brothers who were charged. He was interviewed on the episode. No matter. The Greg Oakes types have their say far too often. I see he was recently re-elected. Fake news and phony convictions. What a wonderful world. Tally Ho.

03-20-2017, 12:01 AM	#1
Awsi Dooger Member Senior Member Join Date: Feb 18, 2003 Location: Miami Posts: 1,537	Heidi Allen case Another example of the wrong people charged, innocent person convicted, and a district attorney who has absolutely no clue what he is doing and doesn't belong in that job. Investigation Discovery reran that Dateline episode Sunday night, titled. "The Informant." I've seen it previously but it infuriated me even more this time. Heidi Allen was abducted from a convenience store on Easter Sunday 1994. She was never found. When locals reported seeing a white van in the area and one person who owned a van matching the description came forward and said he bought cigarettes from Heidi shortly before she went missing, that man and his brother were charged with her murder. One was convicted, the second one acquitted. Obviously that made no sense, with the same set of facts. Then fast forward many years when a girl comes forward with a different story, saying a man named Thumper confessed to his role in the crime to her and had plenty of details. That girl was too fearful to contact authorities. When she finally did, the district attorney Greg Oakes had her call another woman who supposedly overheard the same story from Thumper. That call was taped and was so matter of fact and damning that anyone with a shred of applied common sense would recognize the legitimacy, and the likelihood that the wrong people were charged. Gregory Oakes is not the type for common sense or bare minimal competence in weighing variables. Nope, he's the genius tunnel vision type who has already placed a check mark beside that case and will do anything to uphold the original stupidity. Somehow the damning recorded phone call is rejected in favor of vague jailhouse snitch versions from the original time period. That's the type of thing that boils me beyond description. Anyone with any basic training or related ability in the matter would understand that there is no comparison toward which version was more likely to be legitimate. It's not remotely close. If you submitted it to one of those organizations like the Vidocq Society their biggest problem would be suppressing laughter that anyone could favor the original theory. Yet someone like Gregory Oakes advances through the system like the plodder he is and somehow is allowed to make decisions like this. He even has no shame in appearing on television and arguing his side. I actually have more respect for the district attorneys and prosecutors in the same situation who refuse to appear on TV. At least we can guess toward their level instead of having it on full sickening display. Clint Van Zandt's early profile of the case matched the second set of suspects perfectly but didn't begin to align with the two brothers who were charged. He was interviewed on the episode. No matter. The Greg Oakes types have their say far too often. I see he was recently re-elected. Fake news and phony convictions. What a wonderful world. Tally Ho.