Recovered Shirt and Necklace

[Babes]

But according to sources familiar with the probe, authorities recovered the T-Shirt, an oversized garment emblazoned with the words "Irwin County Woman's Softball." And have forwarded it to a crime lab for testing.

"It's the kind of thing you might sleep in," said one source familiar with the probe. It is known that Grinstead, who vanished from her home, apparently without a struggle, on Oct. 22, had a similar t-shirt, though sources believe hers was a different color.

Investigators have also reportedly recovered a necklace Grinstead had been seen wearing the night she disappeared. It was found over the weekend on the floor of her home, and had apparently been overlooked in earlier searches, a source said.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/1105/0601_womas_t-shirt_found_in_Grinstead_probe.html

[crazyhorse]

This new information doesnt sound good :( the missed necklace sloppy investigation work on LE's part? I hope not. Who all attended the dinner at the superintendant's home? Could she have been followed from there?

[murdershewrote]

Big find with the shirt (in spite of color difference). Seems she might be close by where they found the article of clothing.

But whoever did this has to be pretty darn good, no evidence in the house, no signs of her at all, nobody heard anything that night. She seems like the type that would scream her head off. Weapon must have been used, gun or knife, to get her out of the house, IMO. Or else she was strangled/suffocated in bed, that's kind of my going theory.

No excuse for not finding that necklace on the floor.

[Babes]

Ocilla -- A softball jersey found in Irwin County yesterday most likely did not belong to Tara Grinstead. That news coming today from the command post set up to help find the missing high school teacher.

http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=4085549&nav=5kZQ

[Results]

Originally posted by Babes
But according to sources familiar with the probe, authorities recovered the T-Shirt, an oversized garment emblazoned with the words "Irwin County Woman's Softball." And have forwarded it to a crime lab for testing.

"It's the kind of thing you might sleep in," said one source familiar with the probe. It is known that Grinstead, who vanished from her home, apparently without a struggle, on Oct. 22, had a similar t-shirt, though sources believe hers was a different color.

Investigators have also reportedly recovered a necklace Grinstead had been seen wearing the night she disappeared. It was found over the weekend on the floor of her home, and had apparently been overlooked in earlier searches, a source said.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/1105/0601_womas_t-shirt_found_in_Grinstead_probe.html

I'm having a hard time with this necklace being found the weekend of Nov 6th. This is not a small necklace from what I can see of Tara's picture that was taken of what she had on that night. I'm so confused on this because I want to know if this necklace was found by AG or LE? Does anyone know for a fact who found this necklace? TIA

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by Results
I'm having a hard time with this necklace being found the weekend of Nov 6th. This is not a small necklace from what I can see of Tara's picture that was taken of what she had on that night. I'm so confused on this because I want to know if this necklace was found by AG or LE? Does anyone know for a fact who found this necklace? TIA

That's a great question. :beer: Who found the necklace? I remember discussing this on a thread here and the answer was never found.

If anyone other than LE found the necklace, the chain of custody was broken and it really can't be considered evidence.

[Results]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams


That's a great question. :beer: Who found the necklace? I remember discussing this on a thread here and the answer was never found.

If anyone other than LE found the necklace, the chain of custody was broken and it really can't be considered evidence.

I'm with you on this one. We can't find out who found the necklace? It is of importance to me of who found it. IF and I do say IF that necklace was brought back to the house I agree with you TD a FEMALE. But, AG wanted so bad for the GBI to look bad who is to say she didn't find it or have it. IF the GBI found it then I think they know someone brought it back. I don't believe that they missed it 4 times and on their last visit they find it. I'm not buying that. Who found the frigging necklace? And they wonder why we can't find Tara? We can't even get an answer on a necklace. As always just posting my frustration and my honest opinion.

[Results]

Exactly and if it is true that the GBI found it then I'm not buying it that they missed it. JMHO

[One2Snoop]

I don't buy that they missed it either!

[odette]

Well I've read everything available regarding the necklace and I still can't figure out who actually found the necklace. In this crimelibrary article it says that "Investigators have also reportedly recovered a necklace". Now, whether that means that the Investigators themselves, were the ones who found it or someone else did, who knows?.


Crimelibrary
Investigators have also reportedly recovered a necklace Grinstead had been seen wearing the night she disappeared. It was found over the weekend on the floor of her home, and had apparently been overlooked in earlier searches, a source said.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/1105/0601_womas_t-shirt_found_in_Grinstead_probe.html


eg. Answers.com

SYNONYMS recover, regain, recoup, retrieve. These verbs mean to get back something lost or taken away. Recover is the least specific: The police recovered the stolen car.

http://www.answers.com/recover


Here is a recap of some of the details regarding when/where the necklace was found.

Aired November 8, 2005 CNN (Tuesday)

GRACE: And it makes perfect sense with all of this traveling. Anita, another question about this necklace. This is also a new detail, a necklace found on the floor of her home. What was the necklace, and where was it found?

GATTIS: This was the necklace that she wore on Saturday night, the last time she was seen. It was laying on the floor. She had helped many girls get ready for a beauty pageant that afternoon, so she had various pieces of jewelry laying around. Interesting thing that we`ve just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night.

GRACE: What were they?

GATTIS: They were described to me by Missy Davis -- and that`s one of the last people that saw Tara -- as a chandelier-type earring. And Missy and I went through her jewelry yesterday for about an hour, and we cannot find the earrings.

GRACE: You know, Anita, that is a tiny, a subtle but important detail in this case. Now, the necklace that was found on the floor -- let me just ask you a couple of questions. What room was it found?

GATTIS: It was in her bedroom.

GRACE: OK. And that`s the same place the radio clock was found on the floor, that sat by her bed, and the lamp was cracked. Was that the same room where she charged up her cell phone?

GATTIS: Exactly. The cell phone was in the charger right by the broken lamp.

GRACE: OK. So then was that necklace one she wore that evening, or does anybody know?

GATTIS: That is exactly the one she wore. We`ve identified it. Yes, it was the necklace she had on Saturday evening.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/08/ng.01.html


JMOO

[TuscanDreams]

This case is absolutely frustrating because of the intrusions by persons other than LE. Not that LE is not to blame here, I think they could have released some info by now to help find Tara.

The simple question raised by Results is "Who found the necklace?"

Too bad there isn't an answer for that, all the info that can be located can be interpreted in 2 ways. 1- Anita found it. 2. LE found it.

this case is just outrageous. :cuss:

[Results]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams
This case is absolutely frustrating because of the intrusions by persons other than LE. Not that LE is not to blame here, I think they could have released some info by now to help find Tara.

The simple question raised by Results is "Who found the necklace?"

Too bad there isn't an answer for that, all the info that can be located can be interpreted in 2 ways. 1- Anita found it. 2. LE found it.

this case is just outrageous. :cuss:

You are so right. You have AG saying the GBI is not doing enough and then out of the blue the necklace is found on the bedroom floor. IF that necklace was there it will be in those photos that GBI took of that bedroom. That bedroom appears to be small. What a way to make the GBI look bad then to plant a necklace after they have been there so many times. The only thing we know is that the nekclace was "recovered". JMHO

[odette]

In this article, AG said the necklace was "thrown on the floor". How would AG know that the necklace was "thrown on the floor"?. Sounds to me like she was the one who found it IMOO or did the Investigators tell her that they had found the necklace thrown on the floor?. Something isn't adding up here ... or on second thoughts maybe it is.

Aired January 12, 2006 -

GATTIS: .... Also, a necklace that she had just made the night before. She used beads that she had and beads that were my grandmother`s necklace. She restrung, made her own necklace. That was thrown on the floor. Tara did not take care of her belongings like that.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/12/ng.01.html

JMOO

[Results]

Very good post. I noticed that AG said "MY" grandmother's beads. Was this not Tara's grandmother? I can see why the necklace to AG would have been important. It almost gives you the feeling that Tara shouldn't have had these Grandmother's beads afterall AG said it was her Grandmother's beads. Hmmmm...going to have to digest this one. Speaks volumes to me about AG. JMHO

[fsbiii]

Interesting. The beads must have belonged to Anita's biological dad's mother--who would be Anita's grandmother, but not Tara's. How did Tara end up with the beads?

Originally posted by Results
Very good post. I noticed that AG said "MY" grandmother's beads. Was this not Tara's grandmother? I can see why the necklace to AG would have been important. It almost gives you the feeling that Tara shouldn't have had these Grandmother's beads afterall AG said it was her Grandmother's beads. Hmmmm...going to have to digest this one. Speaks volumes to me about AG. JMHO

[Results]

Exactly what I am wondering!

[Results]

Hmmm, I been doing some thinking here. IF the GBI found this necklace I would think they would know that it was planted and I don't see them saying oh we just found it "thrown on the floor" not after they kept "missing it" in the first searches. No, I think they would have held that close to their vest to see who would ask about the necklace. There is something so wrong with this necklace scene. Something very wrong. JMHO

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by odette
In this article, AG said the necklace was "thrown on the floor". How would AG know that the necklace was "thrown on the floor"?. Sounds to me like she was the one who found it IMOO or did the Investigators tell her that they had found the necklace thrown on the floor?. Something isn't adding up here ... or on second thoughts maybe it is.

Aired January 12, 2006 -

GATTIS: .... Also, a necklace that she had just made the night before. She used beads that she had and beads that were my grandmother`s necklace. She restrung, made her own necklace. That was thrown on the floor. Tara did not take care of her belongings like that.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/12/ng.01.html

JMOO

Poor choice of words on AG's part unless she's the one who threw it on the floor otherwise I tend to look at it as more AG dramatics. JMO

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by One2Snoop
Poor choice of words on AG's part unless she's the one who threw it on the floor otherwise I tend to look at it as more AG dramatics. JMO

And there we have it! I wondered if she threw it on the floor, herself.

[odette]

Originally posted by Results


You are so right. You have AG saying the GBI is not doing enough and then out of the blue the necklace is found on the bedroom floor. IF that necklace was there it will be in those photos that GBI took of that bedroom. That bedroom appears to be small. What a way to make the GBI look bad then to plant a necklace after they have been there so many times. The only thing we know is that the nekclace was "recovered". JMHO

Tara's bedroom is really quite small and what with the double bed and the furniture taking up a large percentage of the space in that room, there really is not much floorspace at all. This necklace is very distinctive, it is long (almost waist length) and the beads were large.

The GBI/LE, would have surely been given a full description of what Tara was wearing when she was last seen and one would hope that the distinctive necklace she had been wearing, would have also been included in that description.

Now, either the necklace was there in the house when they did their initial investigations or it was not. If it was not there ... fine ... can't find something which isn't there in the first place ... if it was there, then why didn't they come across it?. It was after all, allegedly, just 'laying/thrown there on the bedroom floor' when it was found.

IMO, that necklace would have been obvious to even the most casual of observers if it was just laying/thrown there on the bedroom floor. I surely hope that the GBI took photos of the bedroom floor on that first day/night.

IMO it is quite odd, to say the least, that the necklace 'just happened to show up' on the weekend of 5th/6th of November. That is almost a fortnight later!. This really is one of those things which makes me go hmmmmm.


JMOO

[odette]

Originally posted by Results
Hmmm, I been doing some thinking here. IF the GBI found this necklace I would think they would know that it was planted and I don't see them saying oh we just found it "thrown on the floor" not after they kept "missing it" in the first searches. No, I think they would have held that close to their vest to see who would ask about the necklace. There is something so wrong with this necklace scene. Something very wrong. JMHO

The more that I think about this "overlooked" necklace, which didn't appear until nearly a fortnight later, the more I feel that there is definately very hinky about it all.

IF the necklace was not in the house during the initial investigation then where was it and for what good reason would it be returned to the house?. I just don't buy it that they kept "overlooking" it laying there on the floor of the bedroom. Going along with my theory that Tara has been harmed, I can't think of a logical reason as to why whomever harmed her would decide to return the necklace. It would be much more logical to just throw it off a bridge into deep water, for example. IF it was returned to the house there has got to be a good reason.

As has been suggested in other posts, one of the reasons could be to make it look like the initial investigators didn't do a very good job but who would benefit from doing that?. There would have been some who had legitimate access to the house when the GBI had finished the initial investigation ... could one of them have returned it?. It had to be someone who had a key to Tara's house. The perp would have her keys .. could the perp have snuck back under the cover of darkeness and entered the house?. hmmmm ... I'll have to think some more on that. Just thinking out loud.

JMOO

[TuscanDreams]

I no longer think that the necklace was overlooked by LE. I think it was found by the sister of the victim in this case. There is nothing to state otherwise.

LE in my jurisdiction misses things on a routine basis. Bullet holes in walls, shell casings, etc. We have a high number of murders in our inner city and our LE rush from one scene to another and they simply overlook things. I'd thought that since Ocilla isn't a high crime area that their LE department simply overlooked the necklace.

However, I think it's baloney. I don't think the necklace was overlooked, I think it was likely placed in the location it was found by the person who found it.

I'm not bagging on Anita, I know she must be desperate in searching for her sister.

All Just my Opinion! :patriot:

[Atok]

I speculate that the necklace made from AG's grandmothers beads was important to AG in a sentimental way. It may have been collected from the scene early on by her and then when it was noted that Tara had been wearing *that* necklace AG thought, "Oh my, I had better put that back where I found it!"

She did and it became "found" 2 weeks into the investigation.

This of course is speculative opinion. I can't possibly know for sure.

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by Atok
I speculate that the necklace made from AG's grandmothers beads was important to AG in a sentimental way. It may have been collected from the scene early on by her and then when it was noted that Tara had been wearing *that* necklace AG thought, "Oh my, I had better put that back where I found it!"

She did and it became "found" 2 weeks into the investigation.

This of course is speculative opinion. I can't possibly know for sure.

Although I have to wonder why AG would keep that info a secret? Why wouldn't she say, Hey, I found this last week and didn't realize it was important - why not be truthful about it? Unless of course there was an alterior motive? :shrug: JMO

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by One2Snoop
Although I have to wonder why AG would keep that info a secret? Why wouldn't she say, Hey, I found this last week and didn't realize it was important - why not be truthful about it? Unless of course there was an alterior motive? :shrug: JMO

JMO- I vote for an ulterior motive.

[odette]

Originally posted by Atok
I speculate that the necklace made from AG's grandmothers beads was important to AG in a sentimental way. It may have been collected from the scene early on by her and then when it was noted that Tara had been wearing *that* necklace AG thought, "Oh my, I had better put that back where I found it!"

She did and it became "found" 2 weeks into the investigation.

This of course is speculative opinion. I can't possibly know for sure.

I found this in my notes, from an old CTV post, referring to when Tara's house was released. It appears that the family wasn't given free access to the house until about the 2nd of November. I stand to be corrected. The necklace was "found" on the weekend of the 5th/6th of November.

quote:GBI's CSU arrived at 4:30 p.m. and began work at 5:00 p.m. The family wasn't allowed in the house until afer 3:00 a.m. on Tuesday escorted by 3 GBI agents. The house wasn't released until 8 days after.:end quote


JMOO

[Atok]

By this information authorities had already been over the scene and should have noted the large beaded necklace in the tiny bedroom. They either didn't mention it, because it was right on the floor along with other sundry items of not known import at the time... or it wasn't there and they didn't note it.

AG was allowed in the house Nov. 2nd... not before?

The necklace was found Nov 5-6.

If the necklace had been noted in the original scene reports and if AG took it from the scene Nov. 2nd and then returned it later, then the authorities knows she messed with the scene. She would explain her actions as sentimental? They wouldn't make her answer to tampering at such a time for the family, let it slide it was an honest mistake? But then she went and blabbered on and on at how could the LE miss this info? It would seem that alone would create nasty blood between the family and LE, wouldn't it?

If the necklace wasn't at the original scene and appeared found later by AG's hand, then authorities have to ask How did AG get to be in possession of the necklace Tara was wearing when she vanished? Which is a far more serious question.

Either way implications to AG would be obvious and the reason for some head scratching I imagine. I add it to the many things that don't sit right with this case and reasons why I don't think Tara is traveling the world on her own or with a friend in hiding somewhere.

I would imagine the police have as many scenarios as we do, it's nailing down the truth that's the bugger in this case and of course, finding out where Tara is now.

It seems to me that a lot of the conflicting information was designed to make sure this case stayed as cold and confusing as possible. Like it's not meant to be resolved. I hope the police resolve it despite that.

I'm sure they have their hands full, because crime doesn't take a vacation.

I hope that the person(s) responsible for this are wracked with guilt and misery in their daylight and nighttime hours for as long as they live, until it becomes unbearable and they crack.

You can always ask for forgiveness and get saved later.

[mooloo]

I never heard she wasn't in the house before Nov. 2! Surely that is NOT right. I thought she had rearranged and decorated before that to be sure everything looked okay for the public and the television.


Originally posted by Atok
By this information authorities had already been over the scene and should have noted the large beaded necklace in the tiny bedroom. They either didn't mention it, because it was right on the floor along with other sundry items of not known import at the time... or it wasn't there and they didn't note it.

AG was allowed in the house Nov. 2nd... not before?

The necklace was found Nov 5-6.

If the necklace had been noted in the original scene reports and if AG took it from the scene Nov. 2nd and then returned it later, then the authorities knows she messed with the scene. She would explain her actions as sentimental? They wouldn't make her answer to tampering at such a time for the family, let it slide it was an honest mistake? But then she went and blabbered on and on at how could the LE miss this info? It would seem that alone would create nasty blood between the family and LE, wouldn't it?

If the necklace wasn't at the original scene and appeared found later by AG's hand, then authorities have to ask How did AG get to be in possession of the necklace Tara was wearing when she vanished? Which is a far more serious question.

Either way implications to AG would be obvious and the reason for some head scratching I imagine. I add it to the many things that don't sit right with this case and reasons why I don't think Tara is traveling the world on her own or with a friend in hiding somewhere.

I would imagine the police have as many scenarios as we do, it's nailing down the truth that's the bugger in this case and of course, finding out where Tara is now.

It seems to me that a lot of the conflicting information was designed to make sure this case stayed as cold and confusing as possible. Like it's not meant to be resolved. I hope the police resolve it despite that.

I'm sure they have their hands full, because crime doesn't take a vacation.

I hope that the person(s) responsible for this are wracked with guilt and misery in their daylight and nighttime hours for as long as they live, until it becomes unbearable and they crack.

You can always ask for forgiveness and get saved later.

[lighthousedazy]

Originally posted by mooloo
I never heard she wasn't in the house before Nov. 2! Surely that is NOT right. I thought she had rearranged and decorated before that to be sure everything looked okay for the public and the television.


I don't have a link and I may be wrong, but I understood that AG was in the house that Monday evening or perhaps Tuesday after Tara went missing. jmo

[odette]

Originally posted by mooloo
I never heard she wasn't in the house before Nov. 2! Surely that is NOT right. I thought she had rearranged and decorated before that to be sure everything looked okay for the public and the television.




I thought she had rearranged and decorated before that to be sure everything looked okay for the public and the television.

IIRC
The first television airing of the inside of Tara's house was shown by America's Most Wanted on November 05 2005.

Followed by FoxNews/GVS on 07 November 2005 then Nancy Grace had two days coverage on 12th/13th January 2006.

There may have been other television coverage of the inside of Tara's house before AMW visited Ocilla but I do now know of any. As always I stand to be corrected.

JMOO

[lighthousedazy]

Originally posted by odette




IIRC
The first television airing of the inside of Tara's house was shown by America's Most Wanted on November 05 2005.

Followed by FoxNews/GVS on 07 November 2005 then Nancy Grace had two days coverage on 12th/13th January 2006.

There may have been other television coverage of the inside of Tara's house before AMW visited Ocilla but I do now know of any. As always I stand to be corrected.

JMOO I agree with you Odette. I don't have the links or the notes, but I agree AMW was the first. jmo

[odette]

Originally posted by lighthousedazy
I agree with you Odette. I don't have the links or the notes, but I agree AMW was the first. jmo

I did go to the 3 websites ie AMW, FoxNews, CNN and the dates I gave for the television airings are correct as far as I can make out.


JMOO

[odette]

Originally posted by lighthousedazy
I don't have a link and I may be wrong, but I understood that AG was in the house that Monday evening or perhaps Tuesday after Tara went missing. jmo

Further up on this page (12-02-2006 01:52 AM) I posted this quote from an old Crimelibrary post. I have the link to this from the Google Cache should you wish to verify it.

quote:GBI's CSU arrived at 4:30 p.m. and began work at 5:00 p.m. The family wasn't allowed in the house until afer 3:00 a.m. on Tuesday escorted by 3 GBI agents. The house wasn't released until 8 days after.:end quote

JMOO

[Results]

Originally posted by odette


I found this in my notes, from an old CTV post, referring to when Tara's house was released. It appears that the family wasn't given free access to the house until about the 2nd of November. I stand to be corrected. The necklace was "found" on the weekend of the 5th/6th of November.

quote:GBI's CSU arrived at 4:30 p.m. and began work at 5:00 p.m. The family wasn't allowed in the house until afer 3:00 a.m. on Tuesday escorted by 3 GBI agents. The house wasn't released until 8 days after.:end quote


JMOO

Thank you for bringing this up because we maybe getting closer to the truth about this necklace. JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by Atok
By this information authorities had already been over the scene and should have noted the large beaded necklace in the tiny bedroom. They either didn't mention it, because it was right on the floor along with other sundry items of not known import at the time... or it wasn't there and they didn't note it.

AG was allowed in the house Nov. 2nd... not before?

The necklace was found Nov 5-6.

If the necklace had been noted in the original scene reports and if AG took it from the scene Nov. 2nd and then returned it later, then the authorities knows she messed with the scene. She would explain her actions as sentimental? They wouldn't make her answer to tampering at such a time for the family, let it slide it was an honest mistake? But then she went and blabbered on and on at how could the LE miss this info? It would seem that alone would create nasty blood between the family and LE, wouldn't it?

If the necklace wasn't at the original scene and appeared found later by AG's hand, then authorities have to ask How did AG get to be in possession of the necklace Tara was wearing when she vanished? Which is a far more serious question.

Either way implications to AG would be obvious and the reason for some head scratching I imagine. I add it to the many things that don't sit right with this case and reasons why I don't think Tara is traveling the world on her own or with a friend in hiding somewhere.

I would imagine the police have as many scenarios as we do, it's nailing down the truth that's the bugger in this case and of course, finding out where Tara is now.

It seems to me that a lot of the conflicting information was designed to make sure this case stayed as cold and confusing as possible. Like it's not meant to be resolved. I hope the police resolve it despite that.

I'm sure they have their hands full, because crime doesn't take a vacation.

I hope that the person(s) responsible for this are wracked with guilt and misery in their daylight and nighttime hours for as long as they live, until it becomes unbearable and they crack.

You can always ask for forgiveness and get saved later.

This is an excellent post. You and odette may have just found out the truth about the necklace. JMHO

[Results]

I went back to the NG transcripts to read it about the necklace and all and something just occured to me while reading this.

ANITA GATTIS, TARA GRINSTEAD`S SISTER: That`s correct. He actually came home earlier than was planned. Unexpectedly, I believe.

GRACE: He comes back home unexpectedly. And again, this boyfriend, Marcus Harper (ph), has not been named a suspect by the GBI or the police. In fact, they`ve all been tight-lipped. If there are any suspects, we don`t know about them. So he comes home three weeks before she goes missing. Now, that week, the week-and-a-half leading up to her disappearance, they have two verbal confrontations, correct?

GATTIS: That`s correct.

GRACE: One as late as Tuesday, correct?

GATTIS: Right.

GRACE: So the night she goes missing, is it true that this ex- boyfriend, Marcus Harper, is at a bar, drinking? His friend on the police department comes and picks him up, they get in the police car together to do a ride-around that night, correct?

GATTIS: That`s correct.

GRACE: Now, one last question. Is this the same police officer that Tara Grinstead tried to get fired?

GATTIS: I don`t know that she tried to get him fired, but she did file a formal complaint against him. Earlier, he...

GRACE: Why?

GATTIS: He had been the arresting officer in the incident with the student who tried to break into Tara`s home. Marcus was in Iraq at that time, and when Marcus got back, Officer Fletcher (ph) released some confidential information to Marcus concerning this incident.

GRACE: Are you talking about Anthony Vickers (ph)?

GATTIS: Yes.

GRACE: Now, everybody, Anthony Vickers had been -- he`s a young man. He had been a former student of Tara Grinstead`s. This is very important. Vickers believes that he has had a relationship with Tara. He had a big crush on her. He went to her house, started banging on the door. A neighbor called police. Now, it turns out that this friend on the police force tells the ex-boyfriend, Marcus Harper, about the incident. Do I have that straight, Anita? Correct me if I`m wrong.

GATTIS: You`ve got it.

GRACE: OK. And it just so happens that the night she goes missing, the ex-boyfriend and this cop are together doing a ride-along.

GATTIS: Right. That`s right.

GRACE: OK. Now, that`s an unusual set of circumstance. Here`s another shot from the ride-around we did today in the search for Tara Grinstead.

Wonder why AG failed to mention anything about HD being there but mentions MH, SF, and AV. She left HD's name out of what she considers to be important apparently. It was not AV that MH would be worried about it was HD that I feel Tara would be worried about MH knowing. She did not bring up HD being there. Now, we have HD not mentioned about being at Tara's there that night and we have noone mentioning that he was there Sunday night or wee hours in the morning Monday before she is reported missing from AG not to mention how many lies there are that she told in this interview alone.

You know I would like to know if we knew that HD was there in the beginning and that HD was at Tara's that weekend how many of you would have taken a closer look at HD?

As always JMHO.

[Results]

AG mentions in my post above about MH having an arguement 2 times according to her last one on Tuesday but she fails again to mention HD being there on Oct 18th of 2005. No one seems to know what he was doing there that day. Also, another transcript from AG and NG:

GRACE: Back to Anita Gattis. Anita, you told me about a long-term relationship she had for about six years that had been broken off, all right? You told me about a young student that had been bamming on her door, in love with her. Also now there are rumors flying that a married cop may have been interested in Tara Grinstead. Truth or false?

ANITA GATTIS: She was friends with a police officer. We`ve been friends with his family for years. His dad was best man in my wedding. They went to high school together. As far as I know, they were just really good friends.

GRACE: Is he married?

ANITA GATTIS: Yes, he is.

GRACE: So is it your belief, Anita, that tabloids and others are taking the truth and twisting it for salacious reasons?

ANITA GATTIS: Well, you know how that story goes.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/23/ng.01.html

HD and TG are 5 years apart how did they go to HS together? She dismisses HD of anything and everything. AG has protected HD from the beginning and came out swinging on MH, SF, and LE. Why do all this unless she has something to hide herself? JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by Merrick
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Results
[B]I went back to the NG transcripts to read it about the necklace and all and something just occured to me while reading this.

Hey! Happy Holidays and welcome back!

You know, the fact that NO ONE mentioned HD being at Tara's house until Godwin let it slip that he was makes me wonder if anyone actually knew he was there. IMO, when he called FG from Tara's yard I don't believe he let her know where he was and I don't think he ever mentioned he was there to his very good friends, the Gattis'. IMO, he went to Tara's house not to check up on her but to make sure there was nothing there to link him or his wife to the scene. JMHO.

Also, the NG interview is not exactly accurate, IIRC. I believe that during the MH interview it was determined that MH left the bar, went to the OPD and had the dispatcher contact SF to let him know that MH was looking for him and subsequently the two caught up on SF's FOOT patrol. Stand to be corrected.

Hey Merrick. Thank you good to be back and Happy Holidays to you too. The interview is why I said there were so many lies in this interview alone to count. JMHO ;)

:seeya:

[Results]

Originally posted by Merrick


http://www.hhsreddevils.com/devils.htm

HD graduated HS in 1988, Tara in 1993. IMO, they did not go to HS together.

You know maybe instead of starting a thread FACTS ONLY we should start one with LIES ONLY. We might actually get somewhere. :shrug: JMHO

[odette]

Originally posted by Results
AG mentions in my post above about MH having an arguement 2 times according to her last one on Tuesday but she fails again to mention HD being there on Oct 18th of 2005. No one seems to know what he was doing there that day. Also, another transcript from AG and NG:

GRACE: Back to Anita Gattis. Anita, you told me about a long-term relationship she had for about six years that had been broken off, all right? You told me about a young student that had been bamming on her door, in love with her. Also now there are rumors flying that a married cop may have been interested in Tara Grinstead. Truth or false?

ANITA GATTIS: She was friends with a police officer. We`ve been friends with his family for years. His dad was best man in my wedding. They went to high school together. As far as I know, they were just really good friends.

GRACE: Is he married?

ANITA GATTIS: Yes, he is.

GRACE: So is it your belief, Anita, that tabloids and others are taking the truth and twisting it for salacious reasons?

ANITA GATTIS: Well, you know how that story goes.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/23/ng.01.html

HD and TG are 5 years apart how did they go to HS together? She dismisses HD of anything and everything. AG has protected HD from the beginning and came out swinging on MH, SF, and LE. Why do all this unless she has something to hide herself? JMHO

Right from day one, when AG came out with the “What did you do to my sister?” comment to MH at the OPD, she has IMO, been trying to convince everyone that he is responsible for Tara's disappearance. The more that I think about it, I really have to ask myself why?. Why is she so determined to try and convince us all of that?. Why is HD a taboo subject?. HD was, after all is said and done, the one who was having the alleged affair with Tara. Why does AG never bring up the subject of HD?. Why has AG never mentioned that HD was at Tara's house at 12:15am on Monday 24th?. I find it so suspicious that this was never mentioned in any of the earlier news reports ... Is she protecting HD?.

JMOO

[mooloo]

Thanks for the dates...I knew the television coverage was later...but there were people going through the house, sightseeing. Those were the ones, also, to which I was referring...not just the television camera...but all of the public, live and film version.




Originally posted by mooloo
I never heard she wasn't in the house before Nov. 2! Surely that is NOT right. I thought she had rearranged and decorated before that to be sure everything looked okay for the public and the television.

[Results]

Originally posted by mooloo
Thanks for the dates...I knew the television coverage was later...but there were people going through the house, sightseeing. Those were the ones, also, to which I was referring...not just the television camera...but all of the public, live and film version.






What are you talking about sightseeing? It appears that AG was allowed in the house Monday escorted by 3 GBI agents which I take as she was brought to the house by agents and was not left alone in there. That is what I got out of it. Then the house was sealed and not released for 8 days to anyone while they were investigating Tara's house. Then the necklace was found after they released the house. That is how I read it and if I'm wrong then I am totaly lost. I would like to know what people wanted to go to Tara's house to sightsee? What would be the purpose in that? Who allowed that? Who let them in? JMHO

[dixinites]

Aired November 8, 2005 CNN (Tuesday)


GRACE: And it makes perfect sense with all of this traveling. Anita, another question about this necklace. This is also a new detail, a necklace found on the floor of her home. What was the necklace, and where was it found?

GATTIS: This was the necklace that she wore on Saturday night, the last time she was seen. It was laying on the floor. She had helped many girls get ready for a beauty pageant that afternoon, so she had various pieces of jewelry laying around.
Interesting thing that we`ve just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night.


I still read this to mean that the "interesting thing" she was referring to was that they realized yesterday that they couldn't find the earrings...NOT that they had just found the necklace yesterday. ( AND I think if they ever find Tara's purse, the earring will be in it.) I don't think there is anything sinister going on about the necklace. JMO.

[odette]

The necklace was found over the weekend of 5th/6th November.

Crimelibrary ~Womans T-shirt Sent Out For Testing ~ 11/6/05 (Sunday)

Investigators have also reportedly recovered a necklace Grinstead had been seen wearing the night she disappeared. It was found over the weekend on the floor of her home, and had apparently been overlooked in earlier searches, a source said.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/1105/0601_womas_t-shirt_found_in_Grinstead_probe.html

ROCKWELL: Not necessarily, Nancy. But here`s the problem I have. My understanding is the house was searched once. It was re-searched, and on the second search, a necklace was found.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/12/ng.01.html


JMOO

[dixinites]

Well, color me "goofy", but I still don't think there is anything sinister going on about the necklace. JMO. Hopefully, the police know when it was found, by whom, and what, if any, significance it has in the investigation. It would only be significant, IMO, in establishing that Tara did return home after the BBQ, which has already been determined by the fact that the clothes she wore to the BBQ were there (unless of course the perp returned her clothes to make it appear that way...omg, that's a whole 'nother tangent).

And from some of the remarks that AG has made, God bless her, she's about as bright as a small appliance bulb. How could her sister attend high school with someone who graduated the year before she started? I don't think she's deliberately lying, I think her lips are getting ahead of her brain! I'm not trying to bash the victims sister here, but facts is facts.

[dixinites]

And another thing! I get the impression that she was not fond of MH, for whatever reason (young attractive male, didn't fawn over her, whatever), and
he was probably the last male that she knew about that her sister was dating. Let's face it, she didn't have a close relationship with her sister. I'm guessing the e-mail relationship was "forwards" of jokes and cutesy stuff, not newsy updates on "what's up with you today"? Could be wrong. JMO.

I think that if she knew what had been going on with Tara and HD, she would have been seriously PO'd and not nearly so fast to point the finger in MH's direction. After the facts started to unfold, maybe she realized this. Could explain why we have a sudden "radio silence" from that corner? HMMM?

JMHO.

[goldylocks]

dixienites, do you think AG would have been po'd to find out about the rumored affair with TG and HD because TG was seeing a married man, or do you think she would be more inclined to be mad because HD and his wife were close friends of hers, if they were, and maybe the rumored affair was discovered and embarassing to her?

i'm curious:confused: about AG's relationship with HD's wife. were they close? or was it just LG and HD who were friendly and AG really didn't KNOW HD's wife? i'd like to know that.
I was wondering if AG knew HD because his father was best man in her and LG wedding?

[dixinites]

My guess is that AG knew HD thru LG (since HD's father was his best man)
and that Tara probably knew him thru AG/LG. Since it wasn't possible for Tara and HD to go to high school together, it may have been an acquaintance thru mutual high school friends. Just a guess, since nobody's

I think AG would have been angry about the affair on both counts: 1- That it would be an embarassment to her socially, 2- Doubly so if the D's were considered to be "her" friends (as opposed to Tara's).

From everything I've read about AG and Tara's relationship, I get the vibe that there was alot of competition between them...How old is AG, anyway?

[BroadwayJoe]

dixienites, do you think AG would have been po'd to find out about the rumored affair with TG and HD because TG was seeing a married man, or do you think she would be more inclined to be mad because HD and his wife were close friends of hers, if they were, and maybe the rumored affair was discovered and embarassing to her?

i'm curious:confused: about AG's relationship with HD's wife. were they close? or was it just LG and HD who were friendly and AG really didn't KNOW HD's wife? i'd like to know that.

I'd like to know what the heck this has to do with anything since HD isn't a suspect.

[readmylips]

I'd like to know what the heck this has to do with anything since HD isn't a suspect.

i must have missed that press release. looks like everyone else did too. can you share where it's been stated that anyone has been cleared? that info could help.

[Results]

I'd like to know what the heck this has to do with anything since HD isn't a suspect.

What is HD's alibi? You seem to know that he isn't a suspect. We all want to know so go ahead and tell us.

[odette]

I'd like to know what the heck this has to do with anything since HD isn't a suspect.

The last I heard no POI had been cleared. Is this new information?. Who is your source please ... OPD/GBI ?.


JMOO

[PNut]

According to the press the release on her one year anniversary, there is no one been excluded as a poi. don't have the link handy, but I do remember that statement in particular.

[PNut]

I'd like to know what the heck this has to do with anything since HD isn't a suspect.


I'd like to know who the heck told you HD isn't a suspect. :cool:

[PNut]

Oh Merrick - you do have the sarcasm and wit about you!! :D

Of course, Broadway Joe hasn't come back to address his statement.

[One2Snoop]

HD is a POI. He was at Tara's home, left his card, called her mom, was so concerned he even broke down the door, found out she wasn't there, called in the troops and the investigation into Tara's disappearance was on. Ooops, sorry, that's wrong. I was thinking what would've happened in a perfect world. HD was just there, left his card and then carried his sorry butt out of there without any real concern or effort to find Tara. That's right, he was just there to clean up any evidence that he and his wife may have had anything to do with Tara's disappearance. Darn those pesky little latex gloves. JMHO.

I ran across this comment last night about the latex glove while I was searching for something else - HD claims he didn't see the glove or maybe the reason he didn't see it was because he didn't realize he dropped it.

Sometime after 12:15 a.m. Oct. 24, Godwin believes, the killer returned, and perhaps accidentally dropped a latex glove on Tara's front lawn. It had to have been after 12:15 Godwin said, because that was when Tara's old friend, Heath ****s, a police captain from a nearby community, had come by to check in on Tara, and had telephoned her mother when she didn't answer the door. He had not seen the glove. Nor had a former student of Tara's who had come by earlier Sunday to fetch a dog Tara had been pet-sitting, Godwin said.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/0306/2002_death_threat_grinstead_probe.html

[fsbiii]

I think it's strange/ridiculous how Godwin magically creates this "timeframe" just because, supposedly, HD and this student, didn't "see" the glove in the yard. Joe Portier (and anyone else at Tara's Monday morning) didn't see it either... until he came back OUT of the house and saw it in the front yard. There's no telling when the glove was dropped, placed, or blew to its location, IMO. No telling whatsoever.

[dixinites]

OK, folks...at the risk of sounding weirder than weird, I have to tell you about an experiment I have done with a latex glove. Six weeks ago, I placed a latex glove in my front yard, and marked its location with spray paint. Since that time we have had winds strong enough to blow over a ladder in my back yard and several limbs out of trees. The glove has moved 18" in that time frame. I was curious as to whether a glove could have "blown up" into Tara's yard or could have been dropped there by an animal. I live in coastal Georgia and the geography of my area is similar to Tara's yard. I no longer think it could have blown there. I'm sure that LE/GBI would notice teeth marks or saliva from an animal or if it had hair color residue on it. I am convinced that it had to be dropped. JMO.

[One2Snoop]

OK, folks...at the risk of sounding weirder than weird, I have to tell you about an experiment I have done with a latex glove. Six weeks ago, I placed a latex glove in my front yard, and marked its location with spray paint. Since that time we have had winds strong enough to blow over a ladder in my back yard and several limbs out of trees. The glove has moved 18" in that time frame. I was curious as to whether a glove could have "blown up" into Tara's yard or could have been dropped there by an animal. I live in coastal Georgia and the geography of my area is similar to Tara's yard. I no longer think it could have blown there. I'm sure that LE/GBI would notice teeth marks or saliva from an animal or if it had hair color residue on it. I am convinced that it had to be dropped. JMO.

Interesting dixinites - the glove is certainly a perplexing piece of evidence.

[fsbiii]

FWIW, does anyone remember when someone on here was trying to get us to think that Mr. Portier had owned up to the glove being his from a BBQ grill cleaning? It was many months ago. The poster was somewhat adamant that it was "common knowledge" in Ocilla that Mr. P had claimed the glove was his.

Naturally, no one believed the person (including me), due to the way Mr. P. had discussed the glove on tv, etc. But why was this person wanting us to think that way? Hmmm. Maybe a new perspective on this person's "information" can be weighed now many months later? JMO.

[Results]

That's exactly my point! He didn't realize he dropped it while he was cleaning up any evidence that might link him and his wife to Tara's house. Of course, jmho.

Is there something you know that makes you think that GD is involved? I have never thought she was involved and I always felt like she didn't know what was going on with HD and Tara because she did leave him after Tara's disapperance. JMHO

[One2Snoop]

I think it's strange/ridiculous how Godwin magically creates this "timeframe" just because, supposedly, HD and this student, didn't "see" the glove in the yard. Joe Portier (and anyone else at Tara's Monday morning) didn't see it either... until he came back OUT of the house and saw it in the front yard. There's no telling when the glove was dropped, placed, or blew to its location, IMO. No telling whatsoever.

I don't necessarily believe in what Godwin says, considering his source for information, although I would like to know if HD really did say "he didn't see the glove while he was there".

It's highly likely HD didn't see the glove (if he wasn't the one who dropped it) if it was dark outside - I wonder if Tara's front porch light and halloween decorations were lit up that night?

[odette]

I don't necessarily believe in what Godwin says, considering his source for information, although I would like to know if HD really did say "he didn't see the glove while he was there".

It's highly likely HD didn't see the glove (if he wasn't the one who dropped it) if it was dark outside - I wonder if Tara's front porch light and halloween decorations were lit up that night?

IIRC, I did ask 'back in the day', how did HD know that the glove was not there when he was in Tara's yard because it was dark and the reply to my post was simply "headlights on the lawn". :rolleyes:

IMO

[fsbiii]

Yep! I remember that classic response. Apparently, HD parked sideways across Tara's drive so that his headlights could beam on the lawn that night/morning... LOL! Some of his information is laughable to the point of stand up comedy.

IIRC, I did ask 'back in the day', how did HD know that the glove was not there when he was in Tara's yard because it was dark and the reply to my post was simply "headlights on the lawn". :rolleyes:

IMO

[fsbiii]

LOL. No it's a Dodge Stealth...wait, a Dodge Intrepid....wait, a Crown Vic....wait, an old red pickup....wait, a sled with reindeer out front....wait, he actually landed a UFO on Tara's roof and cast down light (sort of like the one in E.T.) to scan the ground for suspicious things like gloves, business cards, and/or dog bowls.

[mooloo]

Dang. What time did the No Name open today?? *g*

[Results]

What are you talking about sightseeing? It appears that AG was allowed in the house Monday escorted by 3 GBI agents which I take as she was brought to the house by agents and was not left alone in there. That is what I got out of it. Then the house was sealed and not released for 8 days to anyone while they were investigating Tara's house. Then the necklace was found after they released the house. That is how I read it and if I'm wrong then I am totaly lost. I would like to know what people wanted to go to Tara's house to sightsee? What would be the purpose in that? Who allowed that? Who let them in? JMHO


Bumping for Mooloo. Can you please tell me about this sightseeing that you referred to. TIA

[mooloo]

I can tell you the gist of what I was told by people who had been there before she disappeared and then went in almost immediately after she disappeared and then went in a little bit later. This person told me the house the first two times looked basically the same...but on the third visit, after others had been in, there were pictures that had disappeared and been replaced with other pictures, among other changes, the person told me the house appeared to have been rearranged and set up by someone else. The first few days after she was missing, people were allowed in the house--people that were not related. I cannot tell you exactly who told me this, seems like it was more than one person...it's been too long ago. I remember thinking how weird it was that people would just go to look, sort of morbid? can't explain it, it was just a strange feeling. I do remember thinking something like--why would anyone want to go look through a person's house when the person is missing and also wondering why in the world the house was not off-limits. The person that told me about the changes is a person I trust.

Bumping for Mooloo. Can you please tell me about this sightseeing that you referred to. TIA

[Results]

I can tell you the gist of what I was told by people who had been there before she disappeared and then went in almost immediately after she disappeared and then went in a little bit later. This person told me the house the first two times looked basically the same...but on the third visit, after others had been in, there were pictures that had disappeared and been replaced with other pictures, among other changes, the person told me the house appeared to have been rearranged and set up by someone else. The first few days after she was missing, people were allowed in the house--people that were not related. I cannot tell you exactly who told me this, seems like it was more than one person...it's been too long ago. I remember thinking how weird it was that people would just go to look, sort of morbid? can't explain it, it was just a strange feeling. I do remember thinking something like--why would anyone want to go look through a person's house when the person is missing and also wondering why in the world the house was not off-limits. The person that told me about the changes is a person I trust.

I agree with you that is morbid and that is why I was asking. When you say people do you know if it was people that knew Tara or like outsiders or do you know? If they went in the first few days after she went missing then it is a lie that the GBI sealed the house for 8 days. Pictures that disappeared does that mean someone took Tara's belongings without permission and do you know who let them in because I notice you said not family that entered the home? TIA

[Results]

IIRC, there was a poster here that stated she/he had actually driven by Tara's home and took photos with their cell phone of Dolly in the yard. This was months and months after Tara went missing and generated a lot of posts. That's the type of "sightseeing" that was going on, IMO.

I recall the issue about the photos being changed and the furniture rearranged coming up after one of the on scene interviews. Can't remember if it was GVS or the second or was it third, NG interview. IMO, I think AG "cleaned" up the place to give people a certain impression of Tara. Of course, JMHO.


Merrick,

Mooloo said The first few days after she was missing, people were allowed in the house--people that were not related. Who are these people and who let these people in is what I am asking if the GBI had not released the house for 8 days?

[mooloo]

I shuddered when I was told people were going just to look at the house of someone who had disappeared. Creepy. My thought was that it was abolutely none of my business and that it should have been sealed from the beginning. I do not know if it was sealed, not when it was sealed. When a house like that is "sealed"...exactly what is done?


I know there were people who knew her, do not know if any were outsiders or not. Both family and others were in the house, according to my source. My source, who knows first-hand, said it was a family member that was removing/swapping pictures and rearranging and making it more camera-ready. Done for appearances. IMOO appearance seems to be extremely important.


I agree with you that is morbid and that is why I was asking. When you say people do you know if it was people that knew Tara or like outsiders or do you know? If they went in the first few days after she went missing then it is a lie that the GBI sealed the house for 8 days. Pictures that disappeared does that mean someone took Tara's belongings without permission and do you know who let them in because I notice you said not family that entered the home? TIA

[BroadwayJoe]

I agree. IIRC, didn't NG make a big thing out of the bedding being like something out of a magazine? I think when they seal a house, they lock the door, post a notice and put up police tape. IMO, it's not much more than that. Considering the way this case has been handled from the start, it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't even do that much.

For the life of me, I will never understand why anyone would want to gawk at an empty house of an alleged missing person.

JMHO.
I agree that it does seem a bit strange for individuals to drive by a missing person's house and/or take photographs as earlier posted, but I suppose that's a part of normal human nature to be curious-- yet I still don't think it's right. But more importantly, WAS the question ever answered about who SPECIFICALLY was in the house after Tara was missing?

A previous post from Mooloo appears to contradict who said what and when:

Originally Posted by mooloo
"I can tell you the gist of what I was told by people who had been there before she disappeared and then went in almost immediately after she disappeared and then went in a little bit later. This person told me the house the first two times looked basically the same...but on the third visit, after others had been in, there were pictures that had disappeared and been replaced with other pictures, among other changes, the person told me the house appeared to have been rearranged and set up by someone else. The first few days after she was missing, people were allowed in the house--people that were not related. I cannot tell you exactly who told me this, seems like it was more than one person...it's been too long ago. I remember thinking how weird it was that people would just go to look, sort of morbid? can't explain it, it was just a strange feeling. I do remember thinking something like--why would anyone want to go look through a person's house when the person is missing and also wondering why in the world the house was not off-limits. The person that told me about the changes is a person I trust."

The first part of this post looks as if Mooloo can't remember the source, yet the last part emphatically states Mooloo trusts the source. Who exactly DID go into the house afterwards? Does anyone really know that info or is this speculation as well?

[BroadwayJoe]

I'd like to know who the heck told you HD isn't a suspect. :cool:
Someone who has brains told me. I couldn't possibly reveal a source of that information on a message board, so please don't ask me to. And you are all correct that "no one has been cleared", but most of us already know what a catch phrase that is.

[BroadwayJoe]

It seems from previous posts that EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Are we to assume that everyone is a suspect at this point? No part of HD not being a suspect defies logic. You just fail to see the whole picture.

[ipswitch]

IIRC, there was a poster here that stated she/he had actually driven by Tara's home and took photos with their cell phone of Dolly in the yard. This was months and months after Tara went missing and generated a lot of posts. That's the type of "sightseeing" that was going on, IMO.

I was the one who took pictures on my cell phone. The only reason I took them was that people were saying that Dolly wasn't in the yard, that someone had taken her to their house on "vacation".

It was just to prove that it was another fabrication. It wasn't morbid sightseeing, it was to prove that yes, Dolly was in the yard, not on vacation.

I didn't go to Ocilla just to prove that, I happened to be in town to visit my husbands family and friends I have in that area. If you have a problem with that, please take it up with me in PM's.

***everything is my opinion only***

[One2Snoop]

It seems from previous posts that EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Are we to assume that everyone is a suspect at this point? No part of HD not being a suspect defies logic. You just fail to see the whole picture.


Are we to assume that everyone is a suspect at this point?

YES!

You just fail to see the whole picture.

If everyone fails to see the whole picture does that mean you see it? :shrug: Does this mean you know what happened to Tara and whose involved?? Please explain. TIA

[One2Snoop]

I was the one who took pictures on my cell phone. The only reason I took them was that people were saying that Dolly wasn't in the yard, that someone had taken her to their house on "vacation".

It was just to prove that it was another fabrication. It wasn't morbid sightseeing, it was to prove that yes, Dolly was in the yard, not on vacation.

I didn't go to Ocilla just to prove that, I happened to be in town to visit my husbands family and friends I have in that area. If you have a problem with that, please take it up with me in PM's.

***everything is my opinion only***

I don't see anything wrong with what you did ipswitch - Thanks for clarifying why you took pictures of Dolly in the yard.

[Results]

I agree that it does seem a bit strange for individuals to drive by a missing person's house and/or take photographs as earlier posted, but I suppose that's a part of normal human nature to be curious-- yet I still don't think it's right. But more importantly, WAS the question ever answered about who SPECIFICALLY was in the house after Tara was missing?

A previous post from Mooloo appears to contradict who said what and when:

Originally Posted by mooloo
"I can tell you the gist of what I was told by people who had been there before she disappeared and then went in almost immediately after she disappeared and then went in a little bit later. This person told me the house the first two times looked basically the same...but on the third visit, after others had been in, there were pictures that had disappeared and been replaced with other pictures, among other changes, the person told me the house appeared to have been rearranged and set up by someone else. The first few days after she was missing, people were allowed in the house--people that were not related. I cannot tell you exactly who told me this, seems like it was more than one person...it's been too long ago. I remember thinking how weird it was that people would just go to look, sort of morbid? can't explain it, it was just a strange feeling. I do remember thinking something like--why would anyone want to go look through a person's house when the person is missing and also wondering why in the world the house was not off-limits. The person that told me about the changes is a person I trust."

The first part of this post looks as if Mooloo can't remember the source, yet the last part emphatically states Mooloo trusts the source. Who exactly DID go into the house afterwards? Does anyone really know that info or is this speculation as well?

I agree with you that the answer who specifically was in that house has not been answered and I don't think it will come out. It could be all innocent who the heck knows anymore? The thing that caught my eye with mooloo's post was the sightseeing. I personally can't imagine that therefore I asked about it. I have to remember just because I wouldn't do it doesn't mean it is wrong for other people to do it. Each to their own. The real issue that I was getting at WAS WHO LET THEM IN? That question is important to me. Just one of those things again NO ONE KNOWS!

FWIW Broadway Joe ... I believe that Mooloo is being careful not to reveal her source and for that I have alot of respect for her. You posted on another post that your source had brains. There was no need for that and besides you didn't name your source either which I also respect you for that. All sources that DO NOT want to be named should not out of respect for them be named. It is up to us who to decide what to believe and Mooloo in my opinion has never came to the boards to lie or start trouble that I am aware of. I believe her. JMHO

[Results]

It seems from previous posts that EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Are we to assume that everyone is a suspect at this point? No part of HD not being a suspect defies logic. You just fail to see the whole picture.


It appears that ALOT OF PEOPLE NOT EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Now if we have failed to see the whole picture then who else was at Tara's in the middle of the night and calling Tara in the middle of the night that weekend. Only one person is known to be there by cellphone records and that is HD. Not one article or one source has said that anyone was there except HD.

FWIW BroadwayJoe this is the picture that I get...HD is in a home when AV banged on her door and was arrested but HD never came outside. HD took Tara to the County Fair in October of 2005 and his wife and children were not with them. Why not? HD picks up Tara from school several days after the incident with MH which is knows to be the date of October 18, 2005. HD phones Tara on Saturday night. HD is spotted at Tara's Sunday during the day and that is the same day that he made however many phone calls and phone messages. HD is at Tara's house at 12:15 AM (how long he was there before he made that call or how long he was there after he made that call...who the heck knows). HD cries in the parking lot of the OPD on Monday when nobody knows anything at this time. HD's wife leaves HD very SOON after Tara's disapperance. HD and wife get back together and get saved. HD gives CL a brief phone intervew and says that he had not seen Tara in weeks. October 18th and Tara last seen on October 22nd is not weeks.

What more behavior change is the GBI looking for?

What is the picture that I am failing to see because the picture above of HD is not a pretty one in my opinion.

JMHO

[odette]

It seems from previous posts that EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Are we to assume that everyone is a suspect at this point? No part of HD not being a suspect defies logic. You just fail to see the whole picture.

Merrick: Since that time it has become known he was all over Tara's house and making all sorts of calls the weekend she went missing.

The way I read the above quote is that Merrick was talking about HD being all over Tara's house, the weekend she went missing, not about the people who were coming and going from the house after Tara was officially declared missing. How many people were in Tara's yard at 12:15 am Monday?. I only know of one person who was there at the time .. Mr HD. I would still like to know if HD went to work on Monday 24 October?. If he did not that would certainly raise a red flag for me. Can your source tell us that much?.

JMHO

[granny]

Tara Grinstead wasn't the first to go missing in Ocilla. Just thought you all should know that. There was a black lady who lived here who disappeared years ago. Her abandoned car was found at either Wal-mart or K-mart in Tifton. She has never been found and her sisters and children have never heard from her since. Her family thinks that her abusive husband killed her and supposedly domestic disturbance reports were made. I heard from one of the family members that the husband beat her and tied her up but she escaped and called the police. They let the guy go and not long after that the lady went missing. They never found her body and all was forgotten. No body, no crime, right? Why hasn't ANYONE from here ever mentioned this other lady? She deserves as much attention as Tara.

As for Tara, just about anyone in LE knows that in most cases of missing or murdered women the boyfriend or husband are the killers. I know nothing about police policy and procedures but I read somewhere that part of MH alibi was that he went on a call with an officer about someone "shining deer" on their property. Seems strange to me. So non officers can ride with officers on calls? Hope that officer and area have been questioned and searched though. Speaking of searching, I read that the last time they wanted to search MH property he got all in a tizzy. Said they were harrassing him and called his lawyer or something. Is it true? If my girlfriend of 5 years were missing and I didn't kill her I would say search where ever you want. I would even help them search. I also think MH saying she talked to him about suicide is crap too. If one of you tells me you are thinking of suicide I am gonna try to go talk to your family so you could get some help. I am not going to wait and mention it after you are missing. Recently I have been reading about her emails. It isn't that hard to write yourself an email. I know my spouses password and could email myself a letter from that email address if I wanted to. Does anyone really know for sure that it was MH that broke up with Tara or could it be the other way around? I have heard of the other men in her life but no other women in his. Maybe if he couldn't have her then no one else could either.

If the family of the first missing lady is reading this, I just want you to know that I think she is just as important as Tara and deserved more attention than what the police or media gave her. I pray that your family finds peace and know that there people out there who will never forget.

If the person who took Tara is reading this and I know you are, you should do the right thing and bring an end to all the misery you have caused. You didn't just hurt Tara but you hurt everyone who loved her and you have hurt yourself more than anyone. You will never rest till you clear your concience and there is still time to be forgiven. Until you do you will think about what you have done for the rest of your days and it will do nothing but bring sadness and heartache. I pray that you do the right thing.

[Results]

I have never mentioned her because I didn't know about her. Can I please have her name?

[odette]

Today, 12:52 PM
granny
Registered User

<snip> Speaking of searching, I read that the last time they wanted to search MH property he got all in a tizzy. Said they were harrassing him and called his lawyer or something. Is it true? <snip>

You can read the full story at the below link. No mention of any lawyers that I can see.

http://www.tiftongazette.com/homepage/local_story_073221816.html?keyword=topstory


jmho

[granny]

check this link out when you can: http://www.crimelibrary.com/new/original/0306/1401_tara_grinstead_tensions_mount2.html the link may not work properly but the story title is Tensions mount as search for Tara Grinstead drags on and as for the other missing lady it's been so long ago I can't remember her name but I will ask my mother if she can remember because she worked with her sister in Fitzgerald. The story was on WALB news so if I can find her name maybe they still have it in the news archives and when I find it I will post a link.

[granny]

when you get to that page just type in Tensions mount on the search bar and a list comes up. It should be the first one that says, Tensions mount as search for Tara Grinstead moves on.

[mooloo]

Oops, sorry, didn't mean to cause gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands. Let me see if I can clarify that post.....

Several folks mentioned other people who had been in the house--people who didn't seem to have much connection to Tara and who just went "to look at the house". The one person who told me about the changes in the house told me personally about the changes. This person saw the "before" and "after" appearance and was shocked that the changes had been made and wondered why it was allowed.

Perhaps I didn't make it clear that several people told me about the sight-seeing and wandering through the house. Only one person (NOT in the afore-mentioned group) told me about the rearranging/redecorating/whatever that was done to the house.

I do not know if the house was ever officially "sealed" and monitored to be sure no one went in. If I were a betting person, I'd say that it wasn't, but I have no proof of that--just sort of what I have gathered from sitting and listening to other folks talk.

Thank you, Results, for the nice comment.

I agree that it does seem a bit strange for individuals to drive by a missing person's house and/or take photographs as earlier posted, but I suppose that's a part of normal human nature to be curious-- yet I still don't think it's right. But more importantly, WAS the question ever answered about who SPECIFICALLY was in the house after Tara was missing?

A previous post from Mooloo appears to contradict who said what and when:

Originally Posted by mooloo
"I can tell you the gist of what I was told by people who had been there before she disappeared and then went in almost immediately after she disappeared and then went in a little bit later. This person told me the house the first two times looked basically the same...but on the third visit, after others had been in, there were pictures that had disappeared and been replaced with other pictures, among other changes, the person told me the house appeared to have been rearranged and set up by someone else. The first few days after she was missing, people were allowed in the house--people that were not related. I cannot tell you exactly who told me this, seems like it was more than one person...it's been too long ago. I remember thinking how weird it was that people would just go to look, sort of morbid? can't explain it, it was just a strange feeling. I do remember thinking something like--why would anyone want to go look through a person's house when the person is missing and also wondering why in the world the house was not off-limits. The person that told me about the changes is a person I trust."

The first part of this post looks as if Mooloo can't remember the source, yet the last part emphatically states Mooloo trusts the source. Who exactly DID go into the house afterwards? Does anyone really know that info or is this speculation as well?

[odette]

It appears that ALOT OF PEOPLE NOT EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Now if we have failed to see the whole picture then who else was at Tara's in the middle of the night and calling Tara in the middle of the night that weekend. Only one person is known to be there by cellphone records and that is HD. Not one article or one source has said that anyone was there except HD.

FWIW BroadwayJoe this is the picture that I get...HD is in a home when AV banged on her door and was arrested but HD never came outside. HD took Tara to the County Fair in October of 2005 and his wife and children were not with them. Why not? HD picks up Tara from school several days after the incident with MH which is knows to be the date of October 18, 2005. HD phones Tara on Saturday night. HD is spotted at Tara's Sunday during the day and that is the same day that he made however many phone calls and phone messages. HD is at Tara's house at 12:15 AM (how long he was there before he made that call or how long he was there after he made that call...who the heck knows). HD cries in the parking lot of the OPD on Monday when nobody knows anything at this time. HD's wife leaves HD very SOON after Tara's disapperance. HD and wife get back together and get saved. HD gives CL a brief phone intervew and says that he had not seen Tara in weeks. October 18th and Tara last seen on October 22nd is not weeks.

What more behavior change is the GBI looking for?

What is the picture that I am failing to see because the picture above of HD is not a pretty one in my opinion.

JMHO

Does ANYONE know why HD came to Irwin High School and Tara left school early to go somewhere with him?. TIA

imo

[odette]

Could that have been the day they went to the Fair? The timing would be right, IMO.

The fair would have been over.

2005 GEORGIA NATIONAL FAIR OCTOBER 7-16, 2005


jmho

[Results]

[QUOTE
Thank you, Results, for the nice comment.[/QUOTE]

I just call them as I see them and I do appreciate your information that you share. Your Welcome!

:beer:

[Brainstorm]

Thanks, Odette. Maybe it could have been fall out from their outing at the fair. JMO. You know, gossip and all that could have gotten back to Tara and HD and they needed to regroup.

If gossip got back to Mrs.D,which is very likely IMO,she could have been thinking about "regrouping"also.I don't know HD or his wife and this is strictly my own humble opinion.

I'm not trying to be funny.This is a very sad case.IMOO


MOO

[One2Snoop]

If gossip got back to Mrs.D,which is very likely IMO,she could have been thinking about "regrouping"also.I don't know HD or his wife and this is strictly my own humble opinion.

I'm not trying to be funny.This is a very sad case.IMOO


MOO

I agree, this is a very sad case. I noticed you used the "flamming mad icon" - may I ask what you're so upset about as I see this is only your first post under Tara G's forum? :shrug: TIA

[Results]

[QUOTE=granny;8789714]Tara Grinstead wasn't the first to go missing in Ocilla. Just thought you all should know that. There was a black lady who lived here who disappeared years ago. Her abandoned car was found at either Wal-mart or K-mart in Tifton. She has never been found and her sisters and children have never heard from her since. Her family thinks that her abusive husband killed her and supposedly domestic disturbance reports were made. I heard from one of the family members that the husband beat her and tied her up but she escaped and called the police. They let the guy go and not long after that the lady went missing. They never found her body and all was forgotten. No body, no crime, right? Why hasn't ANYONE from here ever mentioned this other lady? She deserves as much attention as Tara.

If the family of the first missing lady is reading this, I just want you to know that I think she is just as important as Tara and deserved more attention than what the police or media gave her. I pray that your family finds peace and know that there people out there who will never forget.QUOTE]

Granny, you come in here with this post and tell the family you have not forgotten her and when your called up on it YOU DON'T KNOW HER NAME now how do you think her family feels with your post that you don't know their daughters name that you will never forget.....just a little advice when you come to post on a Crime message board and your packing that kind of post of racial slur and one is getting attention and one is not have THE NAME OF THE LADY because maybe that is why Tara has a thread and this lady doesn't...and one more thing I have tried everything to find out about this woman and I can't find anything. JMHO

To any locals or the family of this lady that granny has mentioned can you please provide the name of this lady. TIA

[Brainstorm]

I agree, this is a very sad case. I noticed you used the "flamming mad icon" - may I ask what you're so upset about as I see this is only your first post under Tara G's forum? :shrug: TIA

Sorry,One2Snoop and all others,that icon was meant to imply that Mrs.D would be flaming mad IMO if gossip got back to her about HD and Tara.Didn't know how to insert it in the right spot.Maybe I should just stick with words?!

Brainstorm

IMO,MOO,IMHO

[BroadwayJoe]

Results have you seen cell phone records with HD's number on them? Also, have you seen other cell phone records with other individual's numbers on them?

[BroadwayJoe]

Specifically Results, have you viewed ANY cell phone records related to this case?

[odette]

It appears that ALOT OF PEOPLE NOT EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Now if we have failed to see the whole picture then who else was at Tara's in the middle of the night and calling Tara in the middle of the night that weekend. Only one person is known to be there by cellphone records and that is HD. Not one article or one source has said that anyone was there except HD.

FWIW BroadwayJoe this is the picture that I get...HD is in a home when AV banged on her door and was arrested but HD never came outside. HD took Tara to the County Fair in October of 2005 and his wife and children were not with them. Why not? HD picks up Tara from school several days after the incident with MH which is knows to be the date of October 18, 2005. HD phones Tara on Saturday night. HD is spotted at Tara's Sunday during the day and that is the same day that he made however many phone calls and phone messages. HD is at Tara's house at 12:15 AM (how long he was there before he made that call or how long he was there after he made that call...who the heck knows). HD cries in the parking lot of the OPD on Monday when nobody knows anything at this time. HD's wife leaves HD very SOON after Tara's disapperance. HD and wife get back together and get saved. HD gives CL a brief phone intervew and says that he had not seen Tara in weeks. October 18th and Tara last seen on October 22nd is not weeks.

What more behavior change is the GBI looking for?

What is the picture that I am failing to see because the picture above of HD is not a pretty one in my opinion.

JMHO

HD gives CL a brief phone intervew and says that he had not seen Tara in weeks. October 18th and Tara last seen on October 22nd is not weeks.

I'm guessing this is why HD hasn't given any more interviews.


JMHO

[readmylips]

Results have you seen cell phone records with HD's number on them? Also, have you seen other cell phone records with other individual's numbers on them?

are you saying that godwin's account of hd's calls should not be trusted? or are you implying that you have seen those phone records yourself? if it is the latter, maybe you should share and clear it right up?

[Brainstorm]

I'm guessing this is why HD hasn't given any more interviews.


JMHO

This guy must have been really "shook up" and not thinking clearly IMO to say he hadn't seen Tara in weeks.Did he not think all his activities would and probably already had been ,IMO, carefully scrutinized at that point and he should TELL THE TRUTH? If he had told the truth I believe Tara would be resting in peace now. HD,if you are reading this listen (read)carefully---YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED of trying to hide behind GOD !!!!!!! The first rule of being saved,IIRC, is confessing our sins!!!!!! Then HE will forgive anything.
I'm sorry,to everyone else.Am I allowed to say these things? Of course,this is MY OWN OPINION.

brainstorm

[odette]

The way I read the above quote is that Merrick was talking about HD being all over Tara's house, the weekend she went missing, not about the people who were coming and going from the house after Tara was officially declared missing. How many people were in Tara's yard at 12:15 am Monday?. I only know of one person who was there at the time .. Mr HD. I would still like to know if HD went to work on Monday 24 October?. If he did not that would certainly raise a red flag for me. Can your source tell us that much?.

JMHO

I would still like to know if HD went to work on Monday 24 October?. If he did not that would certainly raise a red flag for me. Can your source tell us that much?.

Bumping for BroadwayJoe

http://boards.crimelibrary.com/showthread.php?p=8789606#post8789606


JMHO

[BroadwayJoe]

Odette, I don't know if HD worked on 10/24 or not. I will see if I can obtain that information. Perhaps in the meantime Results can answer my cell phone questions, which may clear up your question as well.

[Results]

Odette, I don't know if HD worked on 10/24 or not. I will see if I can obtain that information. Perhaps in the meantime Results can answer my cell phone questions, which may clear up your question as well.

This is too funny! I see that you are worried about some cellphone records here. Why would you be so concerned of what I have seen or not seen? TIA

[odette]

Odette, I don't know if HD worked on 10/24 or not. I will see if I can obtain that information. Perhaps in the meantime Results can answer my cell phone questions, which may clear up your question as well.

I fail to see whereby Results answering your questions would clear up my question as well, ie Did HD go to work on 10/24 2005?. Either he reported for work on this day and carried out his daily duties or he didn't. Care to elaborate. TIA


JMHO

[BroadwayJoe]

I fail to see whereby Results answering your questions would clear up my question as well, ie Did HD go to work on 10/24 2005?. Either he reported for work on this day and carried out his daily duties or he didn't. Care to elaborate. TIA


JMHO

As I stated earlier, I have no idea if HD worked that day or not. Also, if you fail to see why cell phone records would clear anything up, then maybe you have not explored all possibilities yet. I know none of these people, yet I am leaving all options open. Your tone of "either he did or he didn't" and "care to elaborate" seems to imply I know this information, which I do not. I did say I would contact someone who might know, and I have done that. Regardless if he worked or not, IMO and based on information relayed to me, he still isn't a suspect in this case. JMO, no offense to anyone else's theories or speculations. Leaving all options open, based on credible information, opens the window wide enough to solve a case.

All JMO.

[odette]

As I stated earlier, I have no idea if HD worked that day or not. Also, if you fail to see why cell phone records would clear anything up, then maybe you have not explored all possibilities yet. I know none of these people, yet I am leaving all options open. Your tone of "either he did or he didn't" and "care to elaborate" seems to imply I know this information, which I do not. I did say I would contact someone who might know, and I have done that. Regardless if he worked or not, IMO and based on information relayed to me, he still isn't a suspect in this case. JMO, no offense to anyone else's theories or speculations. Leaving all options open, based on credible information, opens the window wide enough to solve a case.

All JMO.

Also, if you fail to see why cell phone records would clear anything up, then maybe you have not explored all possibilities yet.

Why would cellphone records have anything to do with whether or not HD went to work on 24 October 2005?. I didn't say anything about cellphones in my post. I was not implying that you knew the information which I asked. All I asked you was whether your source knew if HD went to work that day and you are talking about cellphones?. Thank you for trying to find out for me but I still fail to see what cellphone records have to do with whether HD went to work that day.

JMHO

[odette]

As I stated earlier, I have no idea if HD worked that day or not. Also, if you fail to see why cell phone records would clear anything up, then maybe you have not explored all possibilities yet. I know none of these people, yet I am leaving all options open. Your tone of "either he did or he didn't" and "care to elaborate" seems to imply I know this information, which I do not. I did say I would contact someone who might know, and I have done that. Regardless if he worked or not, IMO and based on information relayed to me, he still isn't a suspect in this case. JMO, no offense to anyone else's theories or speculations. Leaving all options open, based on credible information, opens the window wide enough to solve a case.

All JMO.

I did say I would contact someone who might know, and I have done that.

Did this "someone who might know", tell you if HD went to work on 24 October 2005 or are you still waiting for his/her reply? TIA

JMHO

[Results]

I don't know much about the Perry PD but in a lot of PD's when officer's achieve the rank of Captain they usually work a steady shift. IMO, if HD was on the day shift he must've taken off early to be at the OPD crying in the parking lot. He probably was very tired too, considering he was in Tara's yard after midnight. JMHO.

Now that was funny! :lol:

[odette]

Did this "someone who might know", tell you if HD went to work on 24 October 2005 or are you still waiting for his/her reply? TIA

JMHO

Bumping for BroadwayJoe. TIA

[odette]

Odette, I don't know if HD worked on 10/24 or not. I will see if I can obtain that information. Perhaps in the meantime Results can answer my cell phone questions, which may clear up your question as well.


Odette, I don't know if HD worked on 10/24 or not. I will see if I can obtain that information.

Also BroadwayJoe, would it be possible for you to find out from your source if HD has taken a GBI administered LDT yet? To my knowledge this information has NEVER be reported in the media. TIA


JMHO

[dixinites]

Odette, I don't know if HD worked on 10/24 or not. I will see if I can obtain that information.

[QUOTE=odette;8794896]Also BroadwayJoe, would it be possible for you to find out from your source if HD has taken a GBI administered LDT yet? To my knowledge this information has NEVER be reported in the media. TIA


Good luck with that... Lol.

[odette]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwayJoe View Post
Odette, I don't know if HD worked on 10/24 or not. I will see if I can obtain that information. Perhaps in the meantime Results can answer my cell phone questions, which may clear up your question as well.


Also BroadwayJoe, would it be possible for you to find out from your source if HD has taken a GBI administered LDT yet? To my knowledge this information has NEVER be reported in the media. TIA
JMHO

Bumping for BroadwayJoe ... TIA


JMHO

[Seems2me]

It appears that ALOT OF PEOPLE NOT EVERYONE was all over Tara's house. Now if we have failed to see the whole picture then who else was at Tara's in the middle of the night and calling Tara in the middle of the night that weekend. Only one person is known to be there by cellphone records and that is HD. Not one article or one source has said that anyone was there except HD.

FWIW BroadwayJoe this is the picture that I get...HD is in a home when AV banged on her door and was arrested but HD never came outside. HD took Tara to the County Fair in October of 2005 and his wife and children were not with them. Why not? HD picks up Tara from school several days after the incident with MH which is knows to be the date of October 18, 2005. HD phones Tara on Saturday night. HD is spotted at Tara's Sunday during the day and that is the same day that he made however many phone calls and phone messages. HD is at Tara's house at 12:15 AM (how long he was there before he made that cal l or how long he was there after he made that call...who the heck knows). HD cries in the parking lot of the OPD on Monday when nobody knows anything at this time. HD's wife leaves HD very SOON after Tara's disapperance. HD and wife get back together and get saved. HD gives CL a brief phone intervew and says that he had not seen Tara in weeks. October 18th and Tara last seen on October 22nd is not weeks.

What more behavior change is the GBI looking for?

What is the picture that I am failing to see because the picture above of HD is not a pretty one in my opinion.

JMHO

This is the oldest reference to October 18, 2005 that comes up on the search engine. Is there a link to where I can find the earlier references concerning Tara and HD on the 18th? I am not trying to start problems, its just that I do not understand where the information about the 18th originated?

[readmylips]

This is the oldest reference to October 18, 2005 that comes up on the search engine. Is there a link to where I can find the earlier references concerning Tara and HD on the 18th? I am not trying to start problems, its just that I do not understand where the information about the 18th originated?


"In fact, although she dated at least one other man, one friend told Crime Library that she remained deeply in love with Harper. In mid October one friend said, Grinstead had made efforts to reconnect with Harper, and when he resisted, she became so overwrought that she took a long drive and had to pull over and call for assistance to get home. The next day, uncharacteristically, she called in sick to school. A few days later, when a policeman from a neighboring community whom she had dated turned up at school, she left early. That too was unusual for the highly devoted and motivated ninth grade teacher." 11/2/05
http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/1105/0201_tara_grinstead_relationships.html

from what i understand this piece of the article has been modified from its original form. this is how it appears now. much like popcorns statements regarding hd's midnight visit to tara's home on sunday night. it's no longer there but it was what it was. hope this helps you.

[fsbiii]

This is the other one:

"A few days later, ****s, a policeman from nearby Perry and long-time friend of both Grinstead and her family, a confidant whom she had recently been dating turned up in Ocilla. She left school early. That too was unusual for the highly devoted and motivated eleventh-grade teacher."

[One2Snoop]

02-11-2007, 10:01 AM I just received information that not only was HD there in Ocilla on October the 18th but he was in his police vehicle. It appears we are finding out what vehicle HD uses to go to Ocilla. JMHO

Results posted the above under the Searching for Tara Thread. We all know how good Results is at finding information-Thanks Results. :beer:

[Dr Lewdwig]

And add to that the Dr. G's dropping the information that HD was in Tara's yard at 12:15 am on 24 Oct. IMO, he's not talking because he's afraid he'll trip himself up, again.

JMHO.

Hi, i'm new to this forum but I have read all the threads about Tara's disappearance and have become intriqued with this mystery. I can't recall reading anyone's ideas as to why HD was in TG's yard early Monday morning using his cellphone. Was Tara still in the house at that time or had she already been abducted? Was she being abducted by HD at that moment?
I understand that no one knows, but just looking for ideas.

I'm also curious about JP, the next door neighbor. Was he given a LDT?

[Lizbeth]

Welcome, Doc!

[Dr Lewdwig]

Thank you Merrick and Lizbeth.

[Brainstorm]

Hi, i'm new to this forum but I have read all the threads about Tara's disappearance and have become intriqued with this mystery. I can't recall reading anyone's ideas as to why HD was in TG's yard early Monday morning using his cellphone. Was Tara still in the house at that time or had she already been abducted? Was she being abducted by HD at that moment?
I understand that no one knows, but just looking for ideas.

I'm also curious about JP, the next door neighbor. Was he given a LDT?
Welcome, Dr,we(I) believe this was about the LAST CALL made by HD iin his ALIBIs for the so many lies & weird activites during that wknd.
IMO Tara was killed probably around 12 or 12:30to maybe just a little longer.So no Tara was not in the house at that time, I believe she was dead and those phone calls were coming fron the one that killed her.I then think he went home and waited on the call,that he knew would probably come from Anita..BTW....did we ever hear how HD "heard Tara was missing?

and as far as the neighbor, I dont know the answer but IMO if those good fplks get drug tho the mud anymore,I will be no part of it. They treated her like a daughter,when her own family was not there. I am not here to bash Tara parents either, I truly hope & pray they find their daughter,and I can understand why they are quiet, AG controlled the situation from day one, & there in the background was (her mother or stepmother) not saying a word.She probably is like me and in the most traumatics experiences in life I may be speechlees too,for a while,
JMHO

[Dr Lewdwig]

Dr. Lewdwig, would never drag anyone through the mud, but some of the facts make me curious about Mr. P.
1. Mr. and Mrs. P were very friendly and helpful to TG.
2. Mr. and Mrs. P's bedroom and TG's face each other at a distance of
approx. 15 feet. The P's looked at TG's window quite often.
3. Mr. P told NG that TG's lamp NEVER came on that Saturday night.
4. Mr. P had a key to TG's door.
5. Mr. P said that he went to his farm on Sunday.
6. Mr. P told NG that he unlocked TG's front door at around 8:15 AM Monday.
7. Mr. P said that he found the rubber glove in front of TG's house.
8. Mr. P drove TG's car somewhere and washed it.
None of these facts appear real sinister, but they do make me wonder. IMHO

[One2Snoop]

Dr. Lewdwig, would never drag anyone through the mud, but some of the facts make me curious about Mr. P.
1. Mr. and Mrs. P were very friendly and helpful to TG.
2. Mr. and Mrs. P's bedroom and TG's face each other at a distance of
approx. 15 feet. The P's looked at TG's window quite often.
3. Mr. P told NG that TG's lamp NEVER came on that Saturday night.
4. Mr. P had a key to TG's door.
5. Mr. P said that he went to his farm on Sunday.
6. Mr. P told NG that he unlocked TG's front door at around 8:15 AM Monday.
7. Mr. P said that he found the rubber glove in front of TG's house.
8. Mr. P drove TG's car somewhere and washed it.
None of these facts appear real sinister, but they do make me wonder. IMHO

I don't think there's anything sinister about the glove and Mr. P either - IIRC he'd already let other people into the house that morning - maybe one of them dropped it? :shrug:

[Dr Lewdwig]

Never mind

[Results]

Dr. Lewdwig, would never drag anyone through the mud, but some of the facts make me curious about Mr. P.
1. Mr. and Mrs. P were very friendly and helpful to TG.
2. Mr. and Mrs. P's bedroom and TG's face each other at a distance of
approx. 15 feet. The P's looked at TG's window quite often.
3. Mr. P told NG that TG's lamp NEVER came on that Saturday night.
4. Mr. P had a key to TG's door.
5. Mr. P said that he went to his farm on Sunday.
6. Mr. P told NG that he unlocked TG's front door at around 8:15 AM Monday.
7. Mr. P said that he found the rubber glove in front of TG's house.
8. Mr. P drove TG's car somewhere and washed it.
None of these facts appear real sinister, but they do make me wonder. IMHO

Welcome aboard! Your sentence you say some of the facts make you curious and you listed that the P's looked at TG's window quite often what does that mean? Then you said Mr. P told NG that the lamp NEVER came on that Saturday night but I was under the impression that the P's went to bed early therefore didn't see the light if it had been turned on or not. Do you know this information from some where else or have I missed this information? TIA

[Results]

Never mind

Don't get discouraged. Take a breath and take your time and help me see what you are seeing. I would like to know what you are thinking on this.

[Results]

There are some posters in the LHG that have said things about Mr P also just in discussion that made me look and see thing differently. This is a new set of eyes that is thinking something about the P's lets give this poster a chance. We can't just say no...not Mr. P or Mrs. P. We all have our theories by now who done what but no evidence to prove anything we say. I would like to hear what the Dr has to say! If you don't want to put it on the board then PM me. I will be more then happy to accept a PM from you but I would rather you put it out here on the boards for debate. JMHO

[Dr Lewdwig]

Welcome aboard! Your sentence you say some of the facts make you curious and you listed that the P's looked at TG's window quite often what does that mean? Then you said Mr. P told NG that the lamp NEVER came on that Saturday night but I was under the impression that the P's went to bed early therefore didn't see the light if it had been turned on or not. Do you know this information from some where else or have I missed this information? TIA

Here is a copy of what NG and Mr. P said

GRACE: Very quickly, to Tara`s neighbor, Joe Portier. You know, a lot of people think it`s outlandish that you would know when someone was home in your neighborhood, but that`s not true. In areas like that, like where I came from, you know your neighbors` habits. You know what outside lights they have on, can tell if they`re home or not from the long day at work. So that night, you saw nothing unusual. What about her bedroom light?

PORTIER: Nancy, it never did come on that night, which wasn`t unusual. On the weekends, she had a lot of studying to do. She had her papers to grade for the classes that she taught at the high school. So not seeing the light was nothing unusual on the weekend.

[Results]

Here is a copy of what NG and Mr. P said

GRACE: Very quickly, to Tara`s neighbor, Joe Portier. You know, a lot of people think it`s outlandish that you would know when someone was home in your neighborhood, but that`s not true. In areas like that, like where I came from, you know your neighbors` habits. You know what outside lights they have on, can tell if they`re home or not from the long day at work. So that night, you saw nothing unusual. What about her bedroom light?

PORTIER: Nancy, it never did come on that night, which wasn`t unusual. On the weekends, she had a lot of studying to do. She had her papers to grade for the classes that she taught at the high school. So not seeing the light was nothing unusual on the weekend.

I believe Mr P is talking about Sunday when the P's were coming home from the farm. No lights were on at Tara's. Which you bring up