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 (131)	12/30/1999 4:47:00 PM
From: Carolyn	Respond to of 1397

Jeff, in looking at your expanded map (excellent), is it possible that she was returning to the church, perhaps for a forgotten item? It looks that way, strictly looking at the map. She could have been acosted or, having arrived unexpectedly at the church, witnessed something untoward. Why didn't she drive to the church? 1. Time limit on use of car? 2. Didn't feel right about unauthorized use? 3. Any number of reasons

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (131)	12/30/1999 7:21:00 PM
From: IEarnedIt	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1397

Jeff I have a question to ask you. Are you interested here in attempting to solve the murder of Suzanne or are you merely interested in proving that Jim is innocent??????? I definitely get the total impression that you are more interested in proving Jim's innocence than in solving the murder. There have been quite a few loose end type strings placed here that you seem to not want to follow up on. ie statistics of knives vs guns, people in attendance at the Pizza Party and your insistence for some reason that the statement made by the Jovins was as a result of what was said to them by the local police. I will reiterate that this statement by her parents "It pains us terribly to imagine that she may have met her fate as a victim of her very positive, but critical outlook". is a most BOLD and most UNUSUAL statement to make after hearing about the death of your daughter. It implies that she created more than one enemy due to her outspokenness. It implies that the field and scope of the investigation has been far far too narrow, it even implies that "random" is a totally incorrect theory to have as far as this case is concerned. I have been feeding you possibilities all the way from random to conspiracy theories. In every response you have given, your total bent is to prove that Jim didn't do it rather than go with the possibility and expand on it, even your questioning of witnesses was done in a leading manner. I have no problem walking away from this thread and just plain leaving it up to the authorities as I am quite busy. I ask you again: Are you being just as narrowminded and narrowscoped in this case as the local police have been so far? Are you here to solve this case or are you here to prove to us and anyone who will listen that Jim is innocent? Just as the local police have been attempting to prove that Jim is guilty. In the meantime, WHO is really trying to solve this murder? JD