The Unsolvable Mystery

The Unsolvable Mystery

  3:49 AM    Unknown

---

Pictured is a recent photo of the home where Tara Grinstead lived in 2005.

The Unsolvable Mystery

We're never going to know what happened to Tara Grinstead.

If you're reading this, you're probably one of the thousands of people who are intensely interested in solving the mystery of what happened to her. We're not going to solve that mystery.

Oh, we might have a strong suspicion or a flawless theory of what happened in Ocilla on the week of October 23, 2005, but we'll never know for certain if our suspicions or our theories are true. Someone will always have a competing theory, and probably, our theory will be propped up on speculation and rumor.

There won't be a smoking gun. There won't be photos or videos that spell out exactly what happened. There won't be an eyewitness who saw it all.

Or at least, the only eyewitnesses will never be fully believed because we'll suspect they were somehow involved in her death and its cover-up. And maybe they were.

I'll give you an example of how difficult it is to actually know something in this case. In my last blog entry, I asked the public to help me learn the 2005 address of Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes, the two men accused of crimes in association with Tara's death. According to stories that have emanated from Bo and his girlfriend, Brooke Sheridan, Bo and Ryan were roommates at the time Tara went missing.

People were more than willing to help with my request, as I got more than half a dozen responses from people about the address. Unfortunately, I got four different locations: One in Wilcox County, one in Fitzgerald, and two in Ocilla.

I haven't had one "eyewitness" though. Not one person has said, "I went to their house several times, and it was..." wherever. So unless such a person comes forward, how can I know which is the real address?

Even if Ryan or Bo told me where they lived, I wouldn't necessarily believe them, which is a situation we've run into with the case overall. No eyewitnesses have come forward, and we don't seem to believe Ryan or Bo.

Maybe that's because we're taking their stories, or what we've pieced together of their stories, together, as one integrated whole, when they should be considered separately. Maybe we're taking two conflicting narratives and expecting them to make sense, when their conflicts make the stories wholly incompatible.

More on that in a bit, but for now I want to express why the address is important to me.

If they lived in Wilcox County, it would cast doubt on Bo's apparent assertion that Ryan left their house to go to Tara's home in Ocilla after everyone passed out at their house, and also it would cast doubt on stories I've heard about Ryan being too "messed up" to remember details about what happened to Tara. It's hard to imagine a 21-year-old driving close to 30 miles after partying with his friends, and it's also hard to imagine he would not have sobered up after driving 30 miles and after the harrowing, adrenaline-filled events that would have transpired at that house.

I doubt they lived in Wilcox County though.

If they lived in Ocilla, it would mean Tara's house was within walking distance of their home, although neither possible location was particularly close to Tara's home. If they lived in Fitzgerald, or anywhere outside of Ocilla, it raises questions about how Ryan or anyone else got to Tara's home, although Bo has apparently said that Ryan took Bo's white truck. If someone drove to Tara's house, they had to park somewhere, which opens up a new line of questions.

All of these things may factor in to the possibility that Tara's car was driven somewhere that night, as certain clues or potential clues seem to point toward her car being driven after she came home from a barbecue some time after 11 p.m. October 22. For instance, I can imagine a scenario in which someone who walked to Tara's house might panic after she died and might have taken her car to go get help. Since that person might also have fished through her purse for the keys, and his fingerprints could have been left on both, that might explain why both her keys and purse were stolen and missing.

It's hard to flesh out any theory of what happened to Tara without knowing where Ryan and Bo lived. But even if I learn where they lived even somewhat conclusively, my theories will just be theories. The only people who know what really happened are the killer or killers, and we don't seem to believe them, so we'll never really know.

And I doubt that will satisfy many people out there.

After three months of theorizing and speculating about the case since Ryan Duke's arrest, the online community that has arisen about this case is still flourishing, but instead of eliminating possibilities like an investigator might do, the community seems to take every opportunity to introduce new possibilities. If this was a game of Clue, and the answer was that Colonel Mustard was the killer, I somehow think many in the online community would decide Mayor Mayonnaise hired Judge Juniper to do the deed and framed Colonel Mustard for it.

A pragmatic, realist friend of mine has been wary of this wheel of speculation for a while. He said that people don't want the story to die. He's right. The Tara Grinstead mystery has become, for good or ill, an important aspect of the lives of many people. For some, it is the center of their social lives, and if there was nothing to talk about, no new facet of the case to mull over, they would have to face the scary task of finding something else to do with their time.

I'm guilty of it myself, at least to some degree. And even if I wasn't, I would certainly be guilty of being one of the main people fanning the flames of the fervor surrounding the case. I've introduced a lot of the fodder for these online discussions and offline speculations.

Although I've tried, and sometimes failed, to present information in a rational, responsible way, there's an old saying about the road to Hell and good intentions. This was never more true than with the guy the community has taken to calling "Buddy" and the list of names that apparently came from his suicide note.

In my last blog entry, I wrote about how someone released the list to a private discussion group but that it was immediately leaked to people on the list. I wrote about how I wished the list had not been released publicly, even in a "private" group. I cautioned people that we didn't know the context of the list, and I expressed my concern about dozens of amateur investigators tearing apart the lives of people who were probably not involved in any way with Tara's death.

But I also wrote extensively about Buddy, and while I presented reasons to disbelieve his story, I inadvertantly poured fuel on the fire. I knew I failed to make my points clearly enough when someone commented on Facebook asking me for a link to the list.

I saw people saying the people on the list should just come forward. They said that the fact that they don't come forward is suspicious. It's not. Just because you think coming forward might be the best thing to do, even if it's what you would do, it's perfectly reasonable to be afraid of what the public response would be to speaking publicly about your inclusion on the list.

I think many or most people on the list are confused about their inclusion. They don't understand it, so how can they explain it? How can they defend it?

If someone on the list went on Up and Vanished, denied having anything to do with Tara's disappearance, but gave the very unsatisfactory answer of "I don't know" to question after question about the list, do you think the public would believe them? If you do, you haven't been paying attention.

Most people I've interviewed about the case want me to hide their identity because they know instinctively that going on the record can be a gamble. It's easy to sit back as an uninvolved person wanting answers and expect people to answer the questions you have, but it's another thing entirely when you know that coming forward can have deep repercussions on your life.

Consider Marcus Harper for just a moment. He attempted to explain his innocence on national television, yet he was still hounded by allegations for more than 11 years, enduring everything from public accusations to YouTube videos analyzing what his speech sounded like when played backwards. Coming forward did little to clear his name even though he was innocent.

Meanwhile, I've seen where people who were clearly not involved in Tara's disappearance were interviewed and have been vilified just because one person or another thought they were "sketch af" in their interview. I actually had to defend a friend who I don't think even lived here when Tara went missing because someone thought his wife's Facebook friends were suspicious. Not his Facebook friends. His wife's.

It doesn't take much for someone to seem suspicious to some people these days. Do you really think someone on the list talking publicly would clear his name when there are people who seriously believe that Bo Dukes' past talk about his love of Jim Beam whiskey is a coded reference to someone with the initials JB? That's an actual theory that has been circulating in online circles this week.

This isn't Mission Impossible. This probably isn't some vast conspiracy. It's a small town murder, and even though it is a complicated one, it's probably not as complicated as the rampant speculation and endless rabbit holes are making it seem to be.

After my last blog post, suddenly many people were more convinced than ever that Buddy knew something about what happened to Tara. I saw, and was dismayed, that some people were convinced that every person on the list knew something about what happened to Tara. We don't know that the author of the list knew anything, much less the people on his list! In fact, if I was pressed, I'd guess Buddy probably didn't know anything, but there's no way to be sure.

Even if Buddy did know something, which is possible, I sincerely doubt all or even most of the people on the list knew anything. Many of the people were close friends of Buddy, and most of them were not known to be close friends with Ryan Duke or Bo Dukes. In fact, members of Buddy's circle of friends and members of Bo's circle of friends were involved in a bloody fight against each other in Mystic in 2004, so it seems more likely that they were enemies than friends. I've heard that some people from those groups refuse to speak to each other even today.

I should note that I've never heard that Buddy, Bo, or Ryan were involved in that fight. I only bring it up to point out that it seems highly unlikely that Buddy's friends on the list were involved in some conspiracy with Bo or his friends.

Last week, someone publicly released the list of 16 names for everyone to see on the Up and Vanished discussion board. Dr. Maurice Godwin, who I was told was the original source of the list, also said that the complete list contains 18 names, and he hinted at the name of one of the undisclosed names on the discussion board. I've also heard that some people who thought they were on the list were not on the list, while some who were on the list were never interviewed by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, which I had thought had investigated the people on the list.

All of this just makes me less convinced the list is meaningful.

But people are convinced that people on the list knew something... based on what? Gut instincts? Let your guts try to solve an algebra problem for you, and you'll see why Sherlock Holmes used his deductive skills instead of instinctive hunches.

Just because we don't understand something does not make it suspicious. It just makes it unknown.

We need good reason to be suspicious. We need stories with origins. We need reliable information. We need facts, and in the absence of facts, we need theories that make the puzzle fit together without the need to create a bunch of fantastical new pieces.

If someone out there had the complete story, if they knew every detail about what happened to Tara and knew everyone that was involved and what role they played, they could tell their story on the Up and Vanished discussion board or a similar online forum, and people would be fascinated with it. For a few days. Then they would add in their own theories and speculation, or they would find reasons to argue about it, or they would move on to other theories entirely.

I've already established that we're never really going to know what happened, so the idea that all the speculation is going to solve the case is, unfortunately, a fantasy. I'm not saying that it's completely without merit. The online community and its speculations have helped me personally narrow down my theories greatly, but one day I hope to arrive at a conclusion about this case, while the community as a whole probably never will. Individuals will, but probably not the whole community. There will always be a new or forgotten aspect to explore, a new rabbit hole to run down.

So, we as individuals, me included, need to use some foresight and compassion knowing that we're only really pursuing our own conclusions about the case, not truly solving it. We need to understand that our actions aren't necessary and that they have repercussions.

I've heard it said on several occasions that Tara was the only real victim in this case, but, with all due respect to her, that's simply not true. Family and friends continue to shed tears for her loss. For more than a decade, innocent men like Marcus Harper lived under a specter of suspicion. Now, these people on that list are suffering a taste of that same bitter suspicion, and most or all of them are probably just as innocent.

Although I was disappointed by the effect of my last blog post, at least some good came of it. An old friend of mine who follows the case heavily was gung ho about investigating people on the list, but he told me that after reading my blog, he decided not to pursue his sleuthing. To know that I had that kind of positive effect on someone meant as much or more than all the kind compliments my writing has received these past several months.

I realize that I've become an important voice in this case, and I hope I can do more good than bad with that voice, so hopefully more people will read and will leave the people on that list alone and come to treat the case with a softer touch and a bit more rationality.

To that end, I've going to do something that my pragmatic friend would appreciate: Present a simple solution.

You see, at this point, regarding what actually happened to Tara and the motive, I've narrowed down my theories to two. Basically.

There's a lot of wiggle room in both theories, and they don't really even touch on things like Buddy or the fire on Snapdragon Road or whether a pond or fire at a party were involved.

One of the theories has a lot of missing pieces, so I'm not ready to write about it. In fact, I may never be willing to write about it, even if I can't eliminate it as a possibility. Honestly, I may never get past these two theories, but then both of them could be wrong, and I might have a new theory next week if I learn something new.

What I will say is that the theory I won't write about depends on the idea that Bo Dukes is not telling the truth because the theory I am writing about is the possibility that Bo may be telling the truth or something close to it.

Judging from all I've read, I don't think people have given that idea much credence or considered it very deeply. I think people want Bo to be guilty of more than the GBI alleges. There's a general impression within the community that Bo is a bad guy that cannot be trusted.

He is a convicted felon who stole from the U.S. Army while he was serving, so he's no prince, and he seems to have admitted to burning a woman's body, which is a truly reprehensible act. But that doesn't mean he's lying. Some would say the Devil himself would tell the truth if it suited his purposes, and Bo, for all his faults, is not the Devil.

And there are compelling reasons to at least consider that he might be telling the truth. First, the GBI seems to believe him, at least to some extent. Second, it's possible that the GBI gave him a polygraph test, which, if they did, I doubt he failed it if the GBI was willing to give him a deal and base its case on his testimony.

The GBI must have interviewed everyone who was told by Bo through the years and many people close to both Bo and Ryan. They must have checked phone records and other evidence that might have corroborated his claims or disproved them. Yet the GBI continues to believe him, as I've said, at least to some extent.

Further, Bo's text messages to his friend, Dustin, that were revealed through Up and Vanished are consistent with the story his girlfriend is telling. Assuming that Bo and Dustin didn't set it up for their text messages to be revealed, Bo would not have likely expected his friend to betray him, but the story remained consistent. Although some collusion between Bo and Dustin is possible, and I've heard Bo is very smart and even manipulative, I doubt Bo is the type of Machiavellian criminal mastermind to plot such an elaborate, and not particularly necessary, scheme of text message deception.

And if Bo is making up his story, why include specific details such as that Bo did not see Tara's body until days after she disappeared. Brooke Sheridan, Bo's girlfriend, said on Up and Vanished that Ryan told Bo and their other roommate that he killed Tara, which regardless of whether the roommate confirmed or denied that claim to the GBI, why would you include such a falsifiable detail if the story was made up? It would be easier and more sensible to not mention the roommate being told if it wasn't true instead of introducing a point that could be denied by the roommate and could jeopardize the GBI's trust in Bo.

As I said in the beginning, I think we mesh Bo's story with what Ryan supposedly has said, and it doesn't make sense to us, but Bo's story could make sense on its own. Unfortunately, based on the arrest warrants and the indictments, the GBI seems to be meshing those stories together, too, so that leaves us all doubtful. Something feels wrong.

For instance, the indictments allege that Ryan broke-in to Tara's home to commit theft, but that doesn't make sense to us. Why would someone target Tara's small home when there were other more affluent homes in the immediate area? But Bo seems to have said that he doesn't know what Ryan's motive was. That too sounds doubtful, but it is, to me, less unlikely than the GBI's allegations about Ryan's motive.

Then we've heard stories that Ryan claimed to hit Tara, while Bo seems to have said strangulation was the manner of death. The prosecution, perhaps playing it safe, alleges that Ryan used "a hand," which would pretty much be true no matter what happened. Although it is possible that someone could die from a punch, I personally find strangulation to be more plausible.

To me, the glaring problems we've heard about the GBI's allegations must stem from Ryan, not Bo. In fact, in some ways, what we've heard from Bo is more believable than the GBI's allegations, but the GBI needs its allegations to fit whatever admissions Ryan may have made so they can use them against him in court.

Now look, I'm not defending Bo in any way. As I've said, I think it's possible that his story is full of lies or half-truths, as the other theory that I'm still considering is nothing like what he has said. I think it's highly possible that there's a kernel of truth to Bo's story but also important details left unsaid or large swaths of events entirely omitted. But to my hopefully rational mind there is no reason right now to eliminate Bo's story as a possibility, and like it or not, there are reasons to believe it could be true.

I hope that people out there will give some consideration to a simple solution, even if we find the source of that solution to be personally distasteful. Like you, there's a part of me that wants Bo's story to fall apart because I'm afraid he will walk away from this horrible crime without jail time, but just because we want him to be a liar doesn't mean he is lying.

I heard a story recently where someone had talked to a member of the GBI before the gag order was in place. This someone said that when all is revealed everything is going to be remarkably simple. Well, it's hard to imagine that what actually happened in this case was in any way simple, but it has to be simpler than some of the things people are imagining.

Unfortunately, we'll never really know.

Bo Dukes and Ryan Duke are innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law.

Read More

The Tara Bottle and Other Stories

The Tara Bottle and Other Stories

  6:22 AM    Unknown

---

Photo: A Coca-Cola bottle with the name "Tara" sits in The Ocilla Star office during my interview with "Oscar."

The Tara Bottle and Other Stories

Warning: This report contains graphic details that most will find disturbing, so read with caution.

When I started writing about recent events last week, I knew exactly how I was going to write it. I was going to start by talking about my friend Daniel, who is one of those people who wants explanations to be simple. For instance, he thinks that what happened to Tara Grinstead must be very close to what the Georgia Bureau of Investigation alleges.

Daniel thinks that many people don't want the story of Tara's disappearance to end, so they entertain wild, even weird stories that seem at least improbable. There's probably some truth to that.

He told me to write a blog post with the weirdest stories I've heard just to show how ridiculous some of the theories are. I said something like, "But Daniel, I don't know that the weirdest stories I've heard aren't true."

And that's true enough.

From there, I would have told about various strange stories I've been told in recent weeks, and why they might be believable, and why they might not be. Then, I would have tried to create a scenario that closely fit the GBI allegations and the stories I believe have been told by Bo Dukes and Ryan Duke. Then, I would have shown the flaws or weaknesses in that scenario, such as trying to explain how a small man like Ryan could put a body in the back of a truck by himself. No one seems to think that would be very easy, and some seem to think it would be impossible.

But I ran into problems last week in the midst of writing my story. An apparent carpal tunnel issue caused my thumb to go numb. Then, a sudden loss meant I spent time with grieving friends, family and extended family rather than writing. And in the midst, certain events made me consider ending or changing my coverage of Tara's death and disappearance.

And then, as with most weeks, a lot happened this week in regard to the case, so my writing plans I had last week are pretty much shot. So, instead, I'll just start from the beginning, or where I left off, which really starts with my blog post "The Stories of Ryan and Bo?" which was published almost a month ago.

I thought it might be my last blog post about Tara's case, at least for a while, because I felt like I had learned what I was trying to figure out for months: What Ryan and Bo were telling the cops. But it also proved to be my second most popular post with more than 30,000 views, and suddenly people were coming to me with stories like never before.

One guy who called me had several stories to tell, and I'll call him Oscar, ironically because he was a nice guy, not a grouch. I could tell Oscar really cared about sharing his story and hoped it would lead to the truth of what happened to Tara. He had already shared his stories with the GBI, but I don't think he was confident the truth was known. I share that sentiment.

Some of the things Oscar had to share were about the man the Up and Vanished community has taken to calling "Buddy," a man who claimed to know who killed Tara and who later committed suicide.

This is a touchy subject for me because Buddy's brother, whom I will call Angelo, is one of my oldest and best friends, so I especially don't in any way want to harm their family, but Angelo also seems to want to clear Buddy's name, in a way, so I've decided to tell Buddy's story, as I know it.

It was 2008, I believe, and I was the city editor for The Tifton Gazette working by myself late one night, when a mutual friend of mine and Angelo's called me. The mutual friend told me Angelo's brother was freaking out because the people who killed Tara Grinstead were out to get him. I told our friend that if Buddy knew who killed Tara that law enforcement needed to know, so I called the Irwin County Sheriff's Office.

Later that night, Angelo called me and told me that deputies showed up, questioned Buddy, and determined he was just mentally disturbed.

Warning: This is about to get graphic.

Later, Angelo told me more of what his brother believed. Buddy told him that he and a friend encountered the killer or killers on a dirt road. Buddy said the killer or killers had a "black girl" with them in the trunk of a car, and he and his friend were forced to carve their initials in her flesh and rub their DNA on her, so that if they ratted the killer(s) out, they too would be implicated.

I know that story sounds hard to believe, and one reason I personally found it hard to believe is that I did some research and could not find any missing black women or unsolved murders of black women in Georgia from around the time Tara went missing. Then, once I started hearing rumors that Tara's body was burned, I came to a horrendous idea.

What if it wasn't an African-American girl? What if it was a charred female body? What if it truly was a "black" girl?

According to his brother, Buddy was warned to leave the state so he went to Tennessee, but after he still received threats, he fatally shot himself about a week after arriving in the other state.

I was told the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation investigated and turned Buddy's suicide note over to the GBI. Somehow, Dr. Maurice Godwin obtained a list of names of people mentioned in the suicide note. I've heard varying numbers, but the list I've seen has 16 names. Some, probably all of these people were interviewed by the GBI, and the fact that none of them are in jail indicates to me that they probably had nothing to do with Tara's death.

Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes are not among the 16 names.

That is one reason to doubt the veracity of Buddy's claims, but there are others as well. Buddy supposedly went to show Angelo a message he received on a cell phone, but no message was there, and this was in the days before Snapchat and disappearing text messages. The guy who was supposedly with Buddy reportedly denied the story. And while I think his word might not count for much more than Monopoly money, Bo Dukes seems to have said that Buddy did not know anything, at least according to communications I've seen that allegedly originated with Bo.

Payne Lindsey devoted a lot of time in the early days of the Up and Vanished podcast to Buddy's story. He explored the possibility that a car wreck may have caused a head injury that made Buddy delusional. While Payne seemed to find that scenario was possible, the experts he talked to also seemed to express that it was highly unlikely. While it could be that Buddy really did have some mental issues, it could be that he was sane and his claims were real. And certain things I've learned recently at least make his stories seem plausible.

And it started with Oscar.

One of the first things Oscar told me was that Buddy died only a few days after Ryan Duke was arrested and charged with DUI, and Oscar was right. Ryan was arrested twice on suspicion of DUI, according to arrest reports. He was arrested once in Tifton in 2008 and again in Ocilla in 2010.

Shortly after one of those arrests, less than a week later, Buddy died. That's a pretty big coincidence. It could also just be a coincidence, but it makes you wonder if someone was afraid that Ryan was arrested for reasons other than DUI and was afraid of what he might say to the police.

Of course, Angelo said Buddy was being threatened and with Ryan in jail at least part of the time and since I believe Bo was in the Army at the time, it makes me wonder who could have been threatening him.

Angelo said Buddy mostly talked about people from Wilcox County when he spoke about Tara Grinstead. In particular, he spoke of fearing a drug dealer from Wilcox County.

For those not from the area, Irwin County is where Tara lived and taught school. Ocilla is the county seat. Ben Hill County is directly north of Irwin, and that is where a pecan orchard was searched in February for Tara's remains. Fitzgerald is the county seat. Wilcox is a county north of Ben Hill, not too far from the location of the pecan orchard. Abbeville is the county seat.

Bo Dukes, from what I understand, has lived in Wilcox County at different points in his life and probably has social ties there. One of the key pieces of information we've been trying to figure out lately is where exactly Bo and Ryan lived as roommates in 2005. There's a possibility they lived in Wilcox County, but even if they did, that may have nothing to do with Buddy or his claims. With the exception of the possibility of Bo and Ryan, I had never heard of anyone who lived in Wilcox County being possibly involved in Tara's disappearance.

But then Oscar told me another story.

If you're from around the area, you've seen some of the many missing posters featuring Tara. Oscar told me that he saw a man from Wilcox County, a guy about the same age as Ryan and Bo, back away from one of those missing posters "as if a rattlesnake bit him," Oscar said. He said the man exclaimed something like, "I saw that girl burned down there!"

Oscar wasn't sure of the exact details of what was said next, but he said the man mentioned something about two men in a Ford Ranger. The man's father seemed to try to shut the man up, and the father said something about the man witnessing a fiery car wreck, but I don't think Oscar believed him. This was in approximately 2014, Oscar said.

This is morbidly thought-provoking because there are persistent rumors that Tara's body might have been burned in front of other people, particularly at a party maybe a week after she disappeared. If so, some of the people might not have known, although Oscar's story of the "snake bit" man makes it seem at least possible that some others did know what was happening.

Oscar also told me another story about how someone told him Buddy and another man were involved in the disappearance of a woman. Now, the word "involved" can mean a lot of things. When I go to cover a football game for the newspaper, you could say I was involved in the football game, but that doesn't mean I played quarterback. I think that what Buddy claimed about knowing who killed Tara could be construed as "involvement" without him actually being involved in killing her.

My point about all this is that the other man who was said to be "involved" was also from Wilcox County.

Finally, Oscar also told me a story that had nothing to do with Buddy. He told about how a relative of his, who is now deceased, gave a drunk young man a ride home from the White Horse Saloon in Fitzgerald one night in, he believes, late 2005. The drunk man said that sometimes he blacked out from getting drunk. The drunk man said that one night he blacked out and someone told him he killed someone.

Oscar's relative didn't know the man's name, and he's no longer around to identify him, but Oscar clearly wondered if the drunk man his relative met was Ryan Duke.

Even more than the strange stories Oscar told me, what happened in the midst of our conversation may have been weirder and was definitely spookier.

Oscar arrived at my place of work, The Ocilla Star office, drinking a bottle of Coca Cola. As he told his stories and I contemplated their meaning, I found myself staring at his bottle. And then I realized what it said:

"Tara."

My arms erupted in goose pimples so badly it looked like flesh-colored bubble wrap. I pointed the bottle out to Oscar and his arms did the same thing. He lowered his head and hid his eyes from me. He later told me he was nearly in tears. He refused to drink another drop from the bottle.

I don't believe in signs or portents or ghosts or spirits. I don't believe in anything supernatural, but I'm also not so arrogant in my beliefs to completely ignore what could be a message. Although that was likely a coincidence or even a subliminal choice of the "Tara" bottle by a man with Tara on his mind, that doesn't mean I ignored it. In fact, I kept the bottle.

But like so much about this case, I don't know what to make of it either.

So, that night, after talking to Oscar, I was intrigued by the leads he gave me. So, without revealing the stories I was told, I asked the members of a private discussion group if they knew anything about Buddy. A friend set me up with a phone call with a woman who seemed to have information about him. I will call this woman Naomi.

I won't go into the specifics of how Naomi obtained her story, but if what she said is true, the original source of the story is the GBI. It's a doozy though.

She said "They tortured that poor girl," and moved her body three times. She was unsure of who went to Tara's house, but she said whoever it was propositioned her and she refused. She said the person or persons got offended by the refusal, and that led to her murder.

I've heard other versions of the culprit or culprits getting offended and angry, but sometimes the details vary. It's one of the few plausible motives I've heard.

Naomi said that first Tara's body was taken to a pond where a cinder block was tied to her feet and they tried to submerge her in the pond. A pond was searched in 2015 that was just north of Fitzgerald, just a few miles from the pecan orchard which was believed to be her resting place for the past 11 years. I was told by multiple sources at the time that all they found was a block with a rope tied to it, which could have been used as an anchor for a Jon boat, but if this story is true it could have been used for a more nefarious purpose.

She said that after 3 or 4 days, they removed the body from the water and moved it to an unoccupied house on Snapdragon Road in Irwin County. This house is infamous in the community devoted to solving this case. The house burnt down only 2 weeks after Tara went missing, and the GBI did an extensive search of the husk of a building. Reportedly, cadaver dogs hit on some locations at the house, and although some were explained away as sewer lines which can confuse cadaver dogs, I've never heard an explanation for why the back glass of a burned SUV parked there supposedly was hit on by a dog.

Naomi said they tried to burn the body at Snapdragon but just charred it. She said they moved the body and then encountered two guys on a dirt road. And now we're back to Buddy's story.

Naomi said the two guys were riding four-wheelers, and although Buddy's brother Angelo did not know that detail, he said it made sense. He said Buddy and his friends often rode four-wheelers, and the guy who was supposedly riding with Buddy has family in the area, but that reminds me that I haven't told the area, at least, where we believe this happened, if it happened at all.

Angelo said the encounter happened on a bridge on a dirt road. There are not many bridges on dirt roads in Irwin County, but one such bridge is on Daisy Road in eastern Irwin County, only a few miles from the house on Snapdragon Road. The bridge covers Little Brushy Creek, a wide, swampy bit of brown water that flows east eventually into the Atlantic Ocean.

The bridge area and the creek there were searched by the Irwin County Sheriff's Office 13 months after Buddy died. However, the source of the tip did not seem to be Buddy. Sheriff Donnie Youghn told me at the time that he could not reveal the source of the tip because it would put the tipster in danger, which obviously would not apply to Buddy. The local television station, WALB, reported that the tip came from a neighbor who witnessed two men acting suspiciously on the bridge a few days after Tara went missing.

Warning: Things are about to get graphic again.

Naomi said the reason Buddy said it was a black girl was because her body was charred. She said the killer or killers made Buddy and the other man carve their initials in her flesh. 

She said that from there, they took her body to the pecan orchard, where a wood chipper was used. She said that afterward, they burnt the remains repeatedly and then covered them with pine straw. I've heard independently that the remains that were found were not really buried, so that sounds like it could be true, even if horrifyingly gruesome.

Could all that be true? I think it's possible, but I admit that it sounds like someone took every story they've heard and put them all together. But that doesn't mean it's not true. All these stories had to originate somewhere and some of them seem to resonate.

So, about the same time I was learning all these stories, I also went through the ordeal with the Grand Jury investigation, which I won't rehash since I already wrote about it in "I Hope This Doesn't Land Me in Jail." Nothing else has happened with that, so maybe I was being paranoid, but when the GBI and the district attorney tell you not to do something you've already done and you damn well know you're going to do again, you get a little nervous.

Then, last week, on top of everything else from my numb thumb to the Dave Prater Music Festival, I finally bought a car! I've been meaning to write more about that to thank the people who helped me buy it, but the thumb and other circumstances have conspired against me. My description of the car is coming soon.

But another thing happened last week which also affected my urgency to write. You know how I mentioned that Buddy left a suicide note and 16 names were mentioned in it? Someone released those 16 names last week. While I disagreed with that choice, it was the reaction to the release of the list that really distressed me.

I first learned about the release of the list when a friend contacted me and told me that several people on the list had received a copy of it. They were understandably not happy. Then, I saw some reactions that made me question the morality of the fervor that surrounds this case.

Someone said that all the names on the list were fair game for investigating. I disagree. Maybe for the GBI. Maybe for a private investigator like Dr. Godwin. Maybe even for a journalist like me or Payne, although I've had the list for months and only did the scantest of unintrusive investigations. Basically I just asked a friend who the people on the list were, or at least, the ones I didn't know.

But what seemed wrong to me was to hand over the list to dozens of people who would pore through these other people's lives without regard for their privacy or how it affects them. I've been interviewed by the GBI twice. I've had Godwin reveal information about me that made me feel like he had investigated me. It's not a good feeling to feel like your life is being scrutinized.

Remember, we don't know the context of how these names appeared in the suicide note. For all we know, he was saying goodbye to friends. I saw someone say "We NEED to know this information," in regard to the list, and I thought, no, you just want to. But in the feverish fervor that has risen in certain circles about this case, it feels like a need.

And I asked myself, am I contributing to this? Am I just as guilty?

And I really don't know. I worry about it often. Am I doing the right thing? Am I doing it the right way? I don't know.

I just wrote extensively about someone who committed suicide. Is that wrong? I included details that are horrifying and I'm sure would deeply disturb some people. Is that wrong? Is my entire coverage of this story, feeding people's desire to understand this bewildering mystery? Is that wrong?

I really don't know. I feel like I'm trying to be respectful. I don't use people's names or include identifying information unless they are public figures or publicly related to the case already. I include details in the hopes they will spark someone else's memory or connections or even their logic to help better understand what really happened. And details are important. While it may be going too far to mention something like a wood chipper, it could explain how a body could be burning at a party and people might not realize it was happening.

All I can do is ask people to try to put themselves in others' shoes, to try and empathize with them and consider their feelings. And I ask that you put yourself in my shoes and understand that I make mistakes.

But thinking about all this left me at a crossroads. I thought about quitting writing about the case on my blog, although I still would have written the book I'm planning because I feel committed to it. I think part of me wanted to quit because it is a lot of stress, a lot of pressure, covering this story. But then, I don't think I really could quit.

People come to me with their stories. They post questions for me. And furthermore, it's also my day job. Even if I stopped posting my more speculative, opinionated pieces on my blog, I would still be writing about the latest events in the case in the newspaper.

I feel like I have a responsibility to write about Tara and her story, to point out what went wrong so it can be fixed and possibly to help solve the case. And honestly, I think we're getting closer. Maybe even close.

I'll be honest, too. Although most of the decisions I make are based on balancing journalistic interest with human morality, I have a fear that the public will turn against me. So far, the overwhelming response I have gotten for my coverage of the case has been positive, and I'm thankful, but I know how easy opinions can change. Already I've had people I defended at the cost of my own reputation turn on me.

I've seen it happen to Payne, too. Since the GBI made an arrest, I've seen a select few people turn on him like rabid dogs. Some people who loved the podcast suddenly think he should shut up or blame him for being successful due to his hard work. People who live and breathe the case get angry when he doesn't have new information on new episodes, even though 99 percent of the million or so listeners have never heard the information before. People blame him for posts other people make on the Up and Vanished discussion board, even though, in my experience he's been willing to take down offensive or even borderline offensive posts if asked.

Those sort of sentiments mean people either love or hate Payne around Ocilla. He's got plenty of fans, but he also has people who wish he would leave our small town alone, even if he may have indirectly contributed to solving a murder case that haunted the town for more than a decade.

Tuesday, we had what is called Legislative Appreciation Day, which is a yearly event where the local state senator and state representative are honored and politicians from across the state come to visit Ocilla to play golf and shop. This year, a tour of local places of interest was added with the tour to start after lunch.

Just after lunch, I was looking for the guy leading the tour when I turned and saw, of all people, Payne Lindsey walk in the door. I had no idea Payne was coming to the event, but I was glad to see him, although immediately I detected that I would be in an awkward situation. The first stop of the tour was Hudson Pecan Company.

Payne said he was recording for a follow-up podcast similar to a previous segment about "Tara and Ocilla," in which he planned to interview me and the mayor and update people on how the arrests of Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes affected the town. He went to each event unobtrusively recording with his hand-held recorder clearly visible, and he even offered to help one of the places we visited to promote their products.

Later, I received criticism because I didn't tell people Payne was there, but I don't think it is my duty to warn everyone about his presence. It never even occurred to me to warn people about him, and even if it had, I wouldn't have done it because it would be a rude thing to do to a friend, or anyone really.

I was not the only one there who knew who he was. His photo has been in the newspaper multiple times, and whenever I'm with him, people recognize him and approach us, usually to give compliments and tell him to keep up the good work. 

I know that to some extent I have divided loyalties, probably in part because I'm trying to keep everyone happy, but just to show that I'm not choosing one side over the other, Payne asked me for my notes about Hudson Pecan, and I didn't share, even though he assures me that the part he planned to broadcast about the company would be entirely positive. I'm not even sure if he's going to broadcast anything about the company now after we talked, but if he does, that's his decision. I didn't try to sway him one way or another.

Not that Payne isn't above putting some pressure to sway me! Throughout the day, he repeatedly tried to get me to reveal my sources for information about the search at the pecan orchard in 2005. I held strong, but I said something like, "Payne, you try harder to get my sources than the GBI!"

We had an interesting debate about journalistic ethics. We didn't really agree, but it wasn't an argument either. I can tell he puts a lot of thought into his decisions, which is all you can ask of anyone. He's a far better investigator than me, and he's trying to be a big-time journalist, and I'm trying to, well, I'm still figuring it out. If he had my attitude, he wouldn't have gotten as far as he has. If I had his attitude, I would get run out of town, so we have different considerations.

Speaking of that 2005 search, it may turn out to be sadly important. I learned that the tip that led to the search could jeopardize the charges against Bo Dukes. In each of the three arrest warrants against Bo, the text states that the statute of limitations is tolled because the alleged crime was not known at the time. That means that the statute of limitations does not apply because the alleged crime was unknown.

But because someone reported, at least to some extent, details about the alleged crimes, it could mean the statute of limitations does apply, and obviously the statute of limitations would already be passed or nearly so if the warrants specified that the statute of limitations was tolled.

This could mean that Bo Dukes ends up with no charges against him, even without an immunity deal.

In other news related to the case, or at least of interest to those who follow the case, Wendy Floyd was arrested this week. I mean no ill will toward Miss Floyd, but I've seen people talking about it or asking about it, so this is the record, as straight as it can be.

Miss Floyd pressed charges against another woman for simple assault, and they had a hearing before Chief Magistrate Judge Heather Culpepper. At the conclusion of the hearing, the other woman was arrested and charged with simple assault, but Miss Floyd was also arrested and charged with harassing communications. Both were released on bond. The charges are misdemeanors, but both women were banned from social media until the end of the case, unless the judge changes her orders.

In other news, Brooke Sheridan, Bo Dukes' girlfriend, appeared on CBS's 48 Hours. I haven't seen the full interview, but I've gotten a lot of questions about it, particularly if she is under the gag order in the Ryan Duke case. She is not.

The original gag order might have applied to her, as it affected potential witnesses in the case, but the newer, modified gag order only affects current and former law enforcement officers and office personnel who participated in the investigation of the case, the attorneys involved and their personnel, and Bo Dukes.

I'm admittedly suspicious of the story that is being told by Brooke and Bo. While the story seems to mostly be consistent, I'm wary that they have seemed to try so aggressively to tell their side of the story, almost as if they want to drown out any competing narratives.

Time will tell. And I am starting to believe it will. For a while now, I've been worried we won't know the truth, but I've found hope again. If you want to help, tell me where Bo and Ryan lived in October 2005 and what they were driving. And if you've heard anything about a party in which a body was burned, please let me know.

Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Read More

The Hippie Saves the Cat

The Hippie Saves the Cat

  10:50 AM    Unknown

---

Joe "The Hippie" McCrimmon watches his dog, Lulu, who isn't the same dog he battled over the life of a kitten.

The Hippie Saves the Cat

The best book I've ever read about storytelling was "Save the Cat" by screenwriter Blake Snyder. In it, you learn that in good stories, the hero has a "save the cat" moment where early in the story they save a cat or defend a bullied child or help an old lady cross the street: A moment when a small act of kindness wins you to the hero's side.

Well, I have a friend named Joe McCrimmon whom we call the Hippie, because, well, he's a hippie. He's a good-hearted vagabond with a fondness of jam bands, freedom and tie-dyed T-shirts. He's also a savior of kittens, and I'll tell you why.

On the Saturday night before Mother's Day, the Hippie was hanging out with some friends when a Jack Russell terrier walked onto the scene. Jack Russell's were bred to hunt foxes and other small mammals. Well, this one found a kitten.

Hippie heard something behind him and turned to see the little dog with a kitten struggling in its mouth, and the kitten was caterwauling in pain and fear. Suddenly, the womenfolk there started howling in alarm, and the Hippie knew he must take action.

Suddenly, he was in a life or death battle.

He dove to the ground and grabbed the dog to try to wrestle the kitten from its maw. But the determined little dog would not let go. Momentarily, he wrenched the kitten free, but the dog quickly snapped its trap, biting the soft tissue of the kitten's belly. The kitten loosed a pitiful, high-pitched wail.

Well, you know how in a professional wrestling match, sometimes a popular wrestler like the Rock will do a run-in and start beating up everyone in the ring? Well, that's what happened with the mama cat.

The Hippie said he saw the mama cat charge in with his peripheral vision. The cat, clearly rushing to its baby's aid, began attacking everyone that wasn't the kitten. Cats are known for their claws, but they can bite, too, as the Hippie found out as the cat treated his wrist like Fancy Feast.

He said his first thought was "It's going to mess up my tattoo!"

So, the kitten tried to get away from the terrier who tried to get away from the human, and the mama cat ripped at all of them like a banshee buzz saw.

"Somebody get this cat off of me!" Hippie bellowed, and our friend, Debbie, pried the cat away.

Finally fighting through the flurry of fur and fangs, the Hippie pried the dog's jaws open enough to let the kitten dash away to hide under a shelf. But the ordeal was not over, as the angry little terrier continued to snap and snarl as it felt under attack by the Hippie.

The Hippie grabbed hold of the mad mutt in two places and quickly tossed the predatorial little beast into a nearby tool cage. The dog almost immediately went to sleep.

As for our heroic Hippie, he just laughed, although he had a collection of new scratches and bite marks. Luckily, his tattoo was unharmed.

So what about the mama cat, who showed the deepness of a mother's love just the day before Mother's Day? She seemed to be grateful.

"She jumped up on the back of the truck with her tail wagging. She was loving on me and stuff," the Hippie said. "At least somebody loves me."

Read More

I Hope This Doesn't Land Me In Jail

I Hope This Doesn't Land Me In Jail

  3:34 AM    Unknown

---

I Hope This Doesn't Land Me in Jail

How can you keep secrets you do not know?

I feel like I've been charged with that impossible task. I'm worried I may be charged with other things, too.

As many of you know, I am a member of the current Irwin County Grand Jury, but Superior Court Chief Judge Bill Reinhardt excused me from participating in the presentments and deliberations about the Ryan Alexander Duke case because of the extensive coverage I have devoted to the disappearance and death of Tara Grinstead, whom Duke is accused of killing, in both The Ocilla Star and this blog. I wrote about the situation in my blog posts "If I Was on the Grand Jury" and "The Grand Jury Decisions."

Then, a week ago I received a letter from the office of District Attorney Paul Bowden. It read:

"Dear Mr. Vassey,
Circumstances following the April 12 meeting of the Grand Jury require inquiry into the means by which certain information presented to the grand jury was released publicly. We would like to meet with you prior to the next scheduled meeting of the Grand Jury. In that regard, I have scheduled time to meet at the Irwin County Courthouse at 9 o'clock on May 2, 2017, in order to accomplish this inquiry. If you are unable to meet with us at that time, please notify my office at (a phone number). Please note that this is not a judicial recall of the Grand Jury.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Paul Bowden."

This letter immediately concerned me because I wondered if I was the only one to receive such a letter. Was I being singled out? Common sense told me that it almost had to be related to the Ryan Duke case, but why would Bowden call me to meet with him considering that I was not part of the Grand Jury's handling of the Duke case?

In my previous blog entry, "The Stories of Ryan and Bo?," I wrote about information that supposedly originated with a member of the Grand Jury, although I do not know who the grand juror may have been and I don't even know if the information truly came from a grand juror. Perhaps paranoidly, I wondered if I was being called to meet with Bowden in some sort of attempt to learn my source.

Then, I arrived at the courthouse May 2 and saw a crowd of people waiting in the courtroom. The entire Grand Jury, or nearly so, was in attendance, although no judge was presiding, as this was, as the letter said, no judicial recall of the Grand Jury. The secrecy oath we took as grand jurors should not apply to what happened May 2, but I'm a little confused about that oath, as I'll explain.

The district attorney and his office's investigator were joined by at least four agents from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. The GBI agents began pulling grand jurors off one-by-one for individual interviews. Obviously, based on the letter, they were investigating a supposed leak or leaks from the Grand Jury.

I wondered to myself if those GBI agents time might be better spent solving crimes in which victims were actually harmed beyond a man alleged to have committed murder who may or not have even been harmed by any possible Grand Jury leak. And if the evidence presented on the Up and Vanished podcast about Bo Dukes is to be believed, these were some of the same agencies apparently willing to cut an immunity deal with a convicted felon who was alleged to have committed the inhuman act of destroying a person's body, but they seemed to be prepared to arrest an ordinary citizen who committed the very human act of sharing a secret.

I mean, did they not expect this? Small towns are gossipy anyway, so how could you expect about 20 people to stay silent about a topic with such intense public interest. Personally, I wouldn't have shared what happened in that Grand Jury room because I would have taken the duty seriously, I'm afraid to go to jail, and I've become well practiced in keeping secrets the past few months, but people are people, and chances are, one or more of them have talked to someone, whether they are the source of any supposed leaks or not.

So my turn came and I was called into a room to speak with a GBI agent. I was unfamiliar with the agent, and he seemed to be unfamiliar with me. He seemed surprised that I was not part of the Grand Jury deliberations about the Ryan Duke case. His reaction made me at least doubtful about my most paranoid theories about the DA and the GBI targeting me. It seemed that I was only called in because all the members of the Grand Jury were called in.

He had a prepared script to follow to ask me questions, and he asked me about two Up and Vanished discussion board posters that I was unsure if I was familiar with at the time. I later went back and looked for their posts, and I had encountered one of the names and even inquired about him or her. With the other name, I had probably read through some of his or her posts, but I don't know if I had ever really paid attention to his name.

I see a lot of names on that board. I check it nearly every day and usually multiple times.

I don't know if they were actual Grand Jury leaks, and one of them claimed that his or her information did not come from the Grand Jury, from what I read. In fact, I had previously personally investigated whether the information one of them shared was a Grand Jury leak and decided there was nothing to it and dismissed it. What I read that they posted was nothing I had not read from a non-Grand Jury source as far back as 9 weeks ago, but there's no way to know if I saw everything the alleged leakers posted.

I was surprised that the agent did not ask about my source who claimed to have information that originated with the Grand Jury. The agent seemed to not even be aware that I had written about a supposed Grand Jury leak.

When he neared the end of his script, I was probably free and clear, but I've got this bad habit of being honest.

And the last question was whether I had any information that might be pertinent to the investigation, so I told him about reporting about a supposed Grand Jury leak.

I had seen someone post on the Up and Vanished board about information that supposedly came from the Grand Jury, and I later spoke to them. This person told me that someone told them information that supposedly originated from a grand juror. As to whether it actually did, I cannot know, and in fact there was good reason to doubt part of it. As I wrote, some of the information conflicted with other information I've learned about the case that seems to be true.

When asked, I repeatedly refused to give my source's name, and I also refused to give his or her screen name on the UAV board. I said that as a journalist I have to protect the names of my sources or else no one will trust me and I will be unable to do my job.

The agent dismissed me but asked me to wait outside, and then he called Bowden in to talk for a few minutes before summoning me back. I was already on edge, and I was a little angry to be, to my knowledge, the only one called back for a second interview, this time with the DA present.

The agent told me I should not report on anything that came from the Grand Jury. I said, truthfully, that I did not know if what I reported came from the Grand Jury. He said that I was told it came from the Grand Jury. The district attorney said the same thing, and he either said or intimated that it was a violation of my oath as a grand juror.

In the past two months, as regards this case, I have been told a lot of things. There is no way all of them are true, so being told something is no gauge of truth. And most importantly, in this instance, I cannot know if it is true because I do not know what the Grand Jury was told about Ryan Duke's case.

The Grand Jury oath of office says "You shall keep the deliberations of the Grand Jury secret unless called upon to give evidence thereof in some court of law in this state."

I was not part of the deliberations on the Ryan Duke case. I do not know what those deliberations were about. As I said in my opening statement, how can you keep secrets you do not know? Should we re-convene the Grand Jury so my fellow jurors can inform me of all the secrets I am supposed to protect?

I asked Bowden what the point was of being excused from the Grand Jury. I was well angry by that point, which may be why I don't remember him giving me a good answer or if he answered at all.

You see, the judge offered to let me off the Grand Jury because, I was told, it would be a very difficult position that I would be in, trying to report on the case as intensely as I have while also keeping the deliberations secret. The whole purpose of being allowed off the Grand Jury for that case was to prevent me from having conflict between my duties as a reporter and grand juror. That's why I accepted the offer as well.

But the judge told me that even had I remained on the Grand Jury for the Ryan Duke case, I could have reported on information I learned independent of my Grand Jury service. And the information the DA and agent said I shouldn't have reported came from public posts on an online forum and hearsay testimony given to me by someone who was not a member of the Grand Jury. Any other journalist would have been allowed to report on it without complaint.

And I firmly believe the district attorney wanted me off the Grand Jury for the Ryan Duke case. I was told he sent a copy of my "If I Was On the Grand Jury" blog post to the judge only shortly before the April 12 Grand Jury meeting, and I think it is a safe guess to presume the reason was to have me removed from the case. Now the DA is telling me I have to abide by the rules of the Grand Jury for that case even though he seems to have gotten his wish.

That's a cake and eat it too situation, and I'm the cake, and I think it violates the pretenses under which I was excused from the Grand Jury and the spirit of the Grand Jury oath if I am bound to keep deliberations I have never heard secret. That's an even more impossible situation than if I had served as a grand juror in the case while still reporting on it.

And clearly if I have my ability to gather news curtailed in this unprecedented and perhaps unique situation, it's at least a constitutional issue if not an outright violation of my First Amendment rights.

So, I'm going to continue to report. I'm scared spitless, but I reminded myself of what one of my benefactors said in a letter, one of those kind people who donated for me to buy a newer car that I still haven't bought, even though it will be coming soon if I stay out of jail. He said in his letter, "Keep 'em honest." I still owe it to people like him, to people like you, to report the truth even when I feel intimidated to stay silent.

And I am afraid. I'm afraid that a judge will try to force me to give up my source and will have to jail me for contempt because I won't give up a name. I'm afraid that something I write will be construed as a violation of my oath as a grand juror and I will be jailed. I'm afraid that something else I write, perhaps this very article, will anger the district attorney or the GBI and they will charge me for what I've already written.

I hope I'm just being paranoid. I know I can be.

But it's like I told the GBI agent when he asked me for my source's name a final time. He said that he was investigating a crime and it was serious. I knew it was serious, but although to an attorney or a law enforcement officer there might not be anything more important than the law, to me there is, such as personal integrity, not only as a journalist but as a human being. I gave someone my word I would keep his or her name confidential and unless he or she gives permission for me to share it, his or her

name will remain secret.

So when the agent asked a final time for my source's name, I told him I was sorry I couldn't help him, and I said something like, "A few weeks ago I had to make a decision whether to be a journalist or a grand juror. I chose to be a journalist, and I'm going to stick to that decision."

And even though I'm afraid there will be unjust consequences, I'm going to continue to stick to that decision now.

CASE UPDATE: The day I posted this, May 4, 2017, Ryan Duke was scheduled for arraignment at the Irwin County Courthouse. According to WMAZ-TV, his attorney requested that he be able to enter a plea without Ryan Duke appearing in court. From what I understand, this sounds like a procedure known as waiving arraignment which allows a defendant's attorney to enter a plea of not guilty without having the defendant appear in court. Although we will not know for sure until later today, it seems likely Ryan Duke will enter an initial plea of not guilty. This does not guarantee a trial will be held though, as he can change his plea at a later date if he wishes.

Read More