Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Whodunit? Two Stockbrokers Murdered in Jersey; No Clues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (466)	11/2/1999 12:11:00 AM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1156

Janice, Aahhh... no. Don't think so. Conkling and X call the victims at around 7:30, a few minutes from the house Not likely to be able to do so without leaving behind records of the call. Why? Conkling lived a good distance away, so if he called from home there'd be a telephone record of it. If they used a mobile or cell phone, all those calls are recorded. If they used a pay phone, all of those calls are recorded as well. The only way a call could have happened without leaving a record of it is if the call was placed from within the calling area on a private telephone line. And that might mean that there would be someone out there that could say they used my telephone... And, had Conkling used any weapon he'd have left residues on his person and on his clothing that you just can't easily rid yourself of. I'm certain that the NJ authorities are competent enough to have ruled out the possibility that Conkling was involved in the commission of the actual crime. As far as leaving behind physical evidence (say strands of hair or something), that could easily be dismissed presuming that this was not the first time Conkling had visited the estate. No, I think Mr. Conkling (and friend) is not guilty of this one. KJC

To: Janice Shell who wrote (466)	11/2/1999 12:41:00 AM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1156

>>they return, "find" the gate still open, the door unlocked. And th<< Nah, too much of a chance the Sheriff Pusser might accidently run a paraffin test on them. >>of permitting the killers to leave all sorts of physical evidence around without it presenting any danger to them. << Nah, they could deny all physical evidence anyway becasue they were always at the house.

To: Janice Shell who wrote (466)	11/2/1999 12:46:00 AM
From: The Duke of URL©	Respond to of 1156

Sure wish we knew what the wife told police, has she given a statement?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (466)	11/2/1999 12:50:00 AM
From: Sarkie	Respond to of 1156

Probably the best thing going for this case is that it didn't happen in Boulder, Co. After this one gets solved you might want to try your hand at the Ramsey case. ~Sarkie

To: Janice Shell who wrote (466)	11/2/1999 12:16:00 PM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1156

So 4 guys were supposed to spend the evening and then sleep over at the house. The 2 guys that show up and discover the bodies...my sense is that they were supposed to be ther earlier than 1:00 AM, right? Maybe the 2 guys or one of the 2 guys who discoved the bodies at 1:00AM were the original target(s). Maybe the killers wanted to know where Conkling and the other guy were. Why did Conkling and the other guy calling all night? How did they know when it was safe to go in?