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 : Murder Mystery: Who Killed Yale Student Suzanne Jovin? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (53)	12/12/1999 1:52:00 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Respond to of 1397

Here's an interesting web site on the murder. After I found out about it from another friend here on-line I wrote to the creator and asked about her motivation. She said she is a senior in high school and the site was her English project! members.xoom.com What deeply impressed me was that she obviously really thought logically about the facts presented. For example, in response to the part in Vanity Fair about the woman who thought she saw someone matching Jim's description walking a few paces behind Suzanne: This is obviously a tentative identification that could be highly biased by the television-news context in which it was made. But think about this, it may be a good thing for Van de Velde to be that person she saw. If he was that white guy behind Jovin and he was the killer, what he did was catching up with Jovin and talked to her. Then he had to use his car to bring her to 1.7 miles away at the intersection of Edgehill and East Rock Road to kill her because she was found dying there. But the whole thing doesn't make sense. If he walked behind Jovin at the College Street, suppose he was stalking her , how come his car would be nearby for him to drive Jovin away? OK. It is a possibility that he parked his car there deliberately so he could drive her away. But this is a very unlikely one because he wouldn't know Jovin would use the roundabout way, i.e. going north on College Street, to go home even he knew she was going home. Even his car "coincedently" was there at College Street, so he could use it to drive Jovin away, it could easily be seen as a set-up. If I were Jovin, I would think, why Van de Velde would park his car so far away that he had to walk there along College Street to get it back? This just doesn't seem right. If I were asked to get into his car, I would say "No." in any circumstances. OK. Let say she DID climb in a car with Van de Velde, why drive a half-mile past his house and kill her on a corner? It also doesn't make sense. So it may be a good thing instead for Van de Velde to be proved that he WAS there behind Jovin. Yep. I agree! - Jeff

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (53)	12/13/1999 3:15:00 PM
From: CJ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1397

<Am I at least barking up the right tree here? :)> . LOL! Congrats., you are closer to being in the right forest. Only have a few minutes now, and I cannot "speak" for "IE"/JD. In brief - and informally written - reply: <Yale's actions are not just posturing; the New Haven police have been whispering in their ear. If so, then, yes, I'd say that is quite accurate.> Good -- you're entering Sherwood. <g> <There is absolutely no doubt that -- to the outside world -- the New Haven police have always maintained that Jim did it... that while they didn't have a shred of evidence> a shred of suspicion? <nor a motive> pretty much agreed <that was based in anything but wishful thinking, their stellar police intuition would be proven correct, somehow and some way. > good! <When the Jovins published a letter urging the mother of the killer to do the right thing (blatantly aimed at Jim's mother),> why did you take it that way? i am not 'fencing' with you; from the moment you first wrote that, i didn't agree ==> wouldn't the mother of the murderer, whoever he/she/it/them is/are, likely reside in the greater NH area ? ............ <When the New Haven police said they would recheck the murder scene, did they go 3/4 of a mile from that point in any of three directions that didn't lead directly to Jim's house? No.> this is a real problem = if neither the NHPD, nor investigators for Jim, thoroughly checked the entire area of any possible paths along the +/- 1.7 mi. routes . < They don't have a clue who really did this because they spent an entire year concentrating on one person, hoping and praying they guessed right .... > agreed; AND, in doing so, I have to admit, you are under the shade of the right tree. <g> <To use a analogy that longtime SIers can relate to, ....> Good imagery, but, IMO, with no offense intended, it is a bit spurious, in terms of outcome; HOWEVER : <This is precisely why I'm not here to defend Jim but to try and solve this darn thing!> IF IT LED YOU TO THAT, I imagine that all the other participants here are as very pleased as I am. When a person knows a suspect, and has long known the suspect in a reputable context, it is extremely difficult to be objective; yet, that objectivity and detachment are absolutely necessary to be of any real assistance. . What led me to consider the theory that the murderer may be someone who had it "in" for Jim, and/or had something to gain by tarnishing his reputation, is the location of the wounds [back vs. front]; the possibility/likelihood that the murderer was not completely random; yet, not someone real close to Suzanne; the overwhelming opinion that she would not have voluntarily entered the vehicle of someone she didn't know at all; thusfar, no apparent motive directed toward Suzanne for wanting Suzanne murdered, and the like. . Thoughts?