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

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

The Maddening Role of Social Media

The Maddening Role of Social Media

  3:33 AM    Unknown

---

Photo: Pictured is part of my computer desktop showing some the social media I had open as I finished this article, including Facebook and the Up and Vanished discussion board.

The Maddening Role of Social Media

Since the disappearance of Tara Grinstead in 2005, the importance of social media in the lives of people throughout the world has grown incredibly.

Since the early days of the search for Tara, the internet played a steady role, but the role expanded quickly to include chat rooms, discussion boards, and private discussion groups. After the arrest of Ryan Duke was announced, Facebook became my headquarters for information and even allowed me to conduct several interviews, but it also served as a massive distraction that took up hours each day of checking messages, reading comments and responding to them both.

Because I am working on a book about Tara and her disappearance, I want to record some of the strangeness that has arisen in this case due to social media. It's never been as crazy as this week, at least not to me, so the topic is timely.

After I wrote the story "The Day Ocilla Stood Still" for my blog, my life changed due to social media. I went from less than 500 friends on Facebook to almost 1,700. I gained hundreds of followers on Facebook, too. Suddenly, I went from writing for an audience of maybe 3,000 with The Ocilla Star newspaper to having as many as 35,000 people reading what I was writing.

And don't get me wrong, the compliments and encouragement I have received not only touched my heart, I think they pulled me out of a depression that has lasted most of my adult life. I feel like your response to what I wrote woke me up and made my life feel worthwhile again.

But, when someone asked me recently how it felt to be a celebrity, I didn't demure modestly and timidly say that "I'm not a celebrity," which I certainly could have. I'm only famous within a certain group and even now, that minor celebrity is fading. No, I still gave an honest answer.

How does it feel to be a celebrity? "Nerve-wracking," I said.

And it is. I have to worry about the implications of everything I write now. I have to worry about possibly angering people accused of despicable crimes. I have to worry about some of the things I've said shaping public perception. I even have to worry about things I say in private messages being twisted or told to the public at large.

I've always tried to be careful with my writing, but now I have to be careful on a whole new level, and it's not just with my writings. Because I've become something of a public figure in this case, I even have to watch what I say. Very closely.

Am I exaggerating? Not even slightly.

About angering people, I was told this weekend that someone was threatening me on the Up and Vanished discussion board. I was told that someone said I needed to keep the name Bo Dukes out of my mouth or else. Bo Dukes is accused of helping to cover up Tara's murder.

I couldn't find the post where I was supposedly threatened, but there are thousands of posts on the UAV board every day, so it's difficult to be sure it doesn't exist. Whether it's true or not, I already had that worry at the back of my mind. I also have the chain locked on my door, which I don't usually.

About shaping public perception, I've been told by several people in the Irwin County community that most people don't believe the official story the Georgia Bureau of Investigation is presenting through the arrest warrants for Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes. I worry that what I've written may have shaped that perception because I have either questioned the official story or hinted at its weaknesses before.

I really hope I haven't led to this belief, especially since I think the official story makes the most sense right now, from what we know. Of course I'm skeptical, but the GBI must have investigated this story very well. It wouldn't surprise me if there were polygraph results, testimony, DNA and other evidence that point toward the GBI's conclusions.

About watching what I say in private messages, it was just today that I learned just how much I should be watching my mouth, or in this case, my fingers typing. I'll have to start from the beginning, which was only a few days ago.

Friday, I woke up with a scratchy throat and feeling miserable, so I called in to work. It may have just been allergies since by now, on Sunday, I feel almost OK, although my voice is gone. Regardless, I slept till like 7 p.m. Friday, and I noticed a message on Facebook I must have missed.

This person with an obviously made-up name had sent me a message. I'll call this person Courtney, since I don't even know if it was a man or woman and I've heard of both men and women with that name. Courtney warned me about how someone was being rude toward me in online discussions. Since I couldn't verify what Courtney said, I won't say who was supposed to be being rude. Supposedly, this person refers to me as "Dumb Dusty."

Courtney and I had a long conversation in the wee hours of Saturday morning in which we discussed various aspects of the case. Through the midst of the conversation, it was clear that Courtney was, for lack of a better term, pro-Bo Dukes. By that, I mean that he or she believed or supported the GBI's official story and believes that Ryan Duke was the killer of Tara Grinstead.

This put me in the position of playing devil's advocate, which was easy enough since I am somewhat skeptical of the official story, so I gave Courtney some of my reasons for questioning the GBI's story. This was all through a private discussion.

For instance, one of the things that doesn't make sense to me is why Tara's purse was taken from her house. For months now, even before the arrests, I've said that if you could explain to me why Tara's purse was taken, I could tell you what happened to her.

Months ago, before the arrests, I started a blog entry in which I examined three possible scenarios. Tara was last known to be seen at a barbecue in Ocilla. When she left the barbecue either one of three things must have happened. Either she 1. Never went home, 2. Went home and left voluntarily, or 3. Went home and was taken from her home (either alive or dead).

Although I never finished the blog entry, I already knew that the idea that she was taken from her home was the least likely because of the missing purse. Why would someone take her and also take her purse? I can come up with reasons such as there being blood or fingerprints on the purse or that it was some half-hearted attempt to make it look like a theft-motivated burglary, but none of those seem very plausible.

Courtney said to ask if I had any specific questions, and this was the question I posed. Why was her purse missing? Courtney didn't know.

Courtney was very knowledgeable about the case though, or seemed to be. He or she was so knowledgeable that I wondered and still wonder if I was talking to someone very close to Bo Dukes or even Bo Dukes himself.

It may have even been both, as there was some indication that I was talking to two different people. I was told, Courtney "is asleep now" by someone using his or her account. Who was saying that?

Courtney was very adamant that I not expose what he or she was telling me, but this put me in a strange position. I don't know who he or she is. I don't know why he or she was talking to me. I don't know what his or her agenda is.

In my career as a journalist, I've rarely had to protect an anonymous source, at least until the past month or so. But every time I have had to protect an anonymous source, the source hasn't been anonymous to me. It's hard to feel a sense of loyalty to someone who won't even share their own name with you.

(The long-time online girlfriend I never met would find that last statement ironic).

Anyway, after this conversation with Courtney, the next day two of the things I said to him or her in this private conversation wound up on the Up and Vanished discussion board in a twisted fashion. Most prominently, a poster named koeli said that I said Ryan Duke had a child.

What I told Courtney was that someone told me Ryan had a child, but I also said I had only heard it from one person. For what it's worth, I think if he did have a child I would have heard it from more than one person by now. An Up and Vanished administrator said the idea that Ryan had a child was false, too, for what that's worth.

But this led me to wonder how this koeli person knew even that I was told Ryan had a kid. Was koeli Courtney? They certainly seemed different. While Courtney seemed almost pro-Bo, koeli seemed virulently anti-Bo. Koeli claimed not to have talked to me. Did Courtney tell koeli? Or had I told someone else the things koeli seemed to know?

One person contacted me and told me that a woman I know through Facebook told a private discussion board that I told her Ryan had a kid. Since all my communications with this woman were through Facebook, I read through our conversations. I never told her anything about Ryan having a kid, so it couldn't have been her. So why was someone trying to tell me that this woman was the source?

What the hell is going on?!

It really doesn't matter I suppose. Ryan probably doesn't have a kid, and I just need to be more careful with what I say, especially on social media like Facebook, even in private.

It was really my first personal taste of the sort of drama I've read about on the Up and Vanished boards. It seems that this sometimes duplicitous artificial community has grown out of the discussion board. People are accused of being trolls or hackers, people argue, and more than once, I've been told to look out for this person or that.

It really makes you wonder why. I mean, why participate at all? I do, somewhat, because I'm a journalist actively covering this emerging story who is also writing a book about it. I have to participate in the board, at least to some extent. But why do so many other people participate in the sometimes poisonous exercise of posting on the boards?

I really can't answer. I know the level of fascination with this case borders on obsession, and I'm no different than many, many others in that regard. Even if I wasn't a journalist doing all those things I listed above, I think I would still be utterly fixated by this case. It's compelling because it's a mystery and remains so even after the arrests. More than 11 years of speculation have left lots of dangling parts which still fascinate the public like a baby's diorama.

This segues into another interesting story about my interactions with social media in regard to Tara's case. Several weeks ago, I joined a private discussion group, in part due to curiosity. This is a group that requires a password to join, not an open, public forum like the Up and Vanished board. I wanted to know what these people were saying and why they were caught up in the case so deeply that they would spend their Friday night discussing it with strangers.

I was actually interviewing someone on Facebook at the time, and since most people use cell phones to type, the interview was going slowly, so I would sort of spy on the discussion board without actually participating for the first hour or two.

I noticed that some of the discussion reflected something that has become a pet peeve of mine when it comes to Tara's case: Irrationally holding on to past theories about who killed Tara. There's no reason at this point to consider folks like Marcus Harper or Heath Dykes or a few others persons of interest in this case, and unless new, earth-shaking evidence is revealed that points toward them, it's beyond cruel to continue to accuse them. Yet, some people still do. It's maddening.

So, when my interview ended, I was like a dog off its leash. I started tearing into the illogical nature of these accusations, probably a bit too strongly. I said that it was wrong to publicly accuse people without good reason.

One of those who was pointing fingers started arguing with me, and I argued back for a moment, but then I backed off after just a bit. But even after I backed off, the guy continuously said something like, "I wish you could read as well as you write."

I really didn't understand what he meant, at least not at first. I politely thanked everyone and left the discussion group.

After I left, I realized what I wasn't reading. I was saying it was wrong to accuse people in public, but the accusations were being made in front of a private group. How can you accuse someone publicly in private? Fair enough. I get the point.

But, you can have a party with thousands of people that is by invite only and call it private, but if you say something in front of those thousands of people, I still feel like that's saying something in public. This was maybe 20 people, but it still felt like "public" to me.

A friend who is a journalist I respect recently said that my writings are feeding the speculation I despise, but I don't really mind speculation. It's the irrational accusations, especially in public, that annoy me, and I hope I'm not contributing to that.

I think it's worthwhile to explain why accusing people in public is my pet peeve. Some may call me a hypocrite, but I feel like I've learned from my mistakes. It takes some explaining.

I've never thought Marcus Harper was responsible for Tara's disappearance or death. He was probably the most accused, publicly denigrated person in this whole ordeal, since suspicion tends to fall on husbands, boyfriends and exes, but I never thought it was him.

For full disclosure, Marcus and I were in the same class in high school, and I considered him a friend, although we weren't all that close. I was the type of kid who was picked on a lot, and I never remember Marcus being one of those who would do the picking. He was always kind to me. But I had not talked to him in more than 20 years until recently.

My friendship with Marcus is not the reason I never suspected him. The reason I never suspected him is that the idea of his involvement didn't make sense to me. I worked at The Tifton Gazette newspaper when Tara went missing, and on October 26, 2005, a photographer and I came to Ocilla to search for Tara with a couple of Tifton Police officers. One of those officers worked part-time in Ocilla and he knew Marcus and Tara. The officer said that Marcus could have been with Tara if he wanted, that Tara was madly in love with him, and 11 years of studying the case only reinforced those points and provided new reasons not to suspect Marcus, such as the fact that he had alibis for much of the time when Tara went missing.

Of course, I had my suspicions over the years, and since I never thought it was Marcus, you might guess who I suspected, but even then I wasn't convinced. Although I sometimes discussed theories in private, I never got on discussion boards sharing my theories. I never felt sure that someone was guilty, at least until about 5 months ago.

In November, the night before I had surgery to remove a lump on my buttock... I can't make this up... I received information that kept me up all night and convinced me I knew who killed Tara Grinstead. Although it was minor surgery, there's always a chance you never wake up, so there was a part of me happy to know that I wouldn't die without knowing who killed her. After I woke up, I spent the next several months putting together a theory about how, why and by whom Tara was killed.

Of course, my theory was completely wrong.

I realized I was probably wrong the night before Ryan Duke's arrest was announced. I had forgotten that the FBI said Tara was suspected to be wearing jogging pants and a specific pair of tennis shoes when she went missing. I could not make those facts logically fit what was already a convoluted theory.

I thought of this as I went to sleep February 22, and then the world changed on February 23.

And I felt guilty, and I should have, for being convinced someone who was innocent was guilty. But more than just suspicions and speculation, I had told several people about my theory, and since some of the people I talk to most work in a public place, some of those discussions were held where anyone could have overheard.

It's shameful, I know, but all I can do now is try never to do something like that again, and it's why I hate it when people publicly accuse people now, especially those who almost certainly had nothing to do with Tara's death. I despised that I was the kind of person who did that, and I despise it now when others do.

But we hate most the things we hate most about ourselves.

But really, it's just human nature. All nature, human or otherwise, abhors a vacuum, and something always rushes to fill it. A mystery is a vacuum and that vacuum is filled with our suspicions.

I could just as easily rail against people making accusations in private, but that's just completely unrealistic. People are going to judge, no matter what we do, but if they kept their accusations private, at least people could live in peace.

So, now I'm going to lightly touch upon the social media drama I inadvertently caused last week with my previous blog post.

As I said, I had not talked to Marcus Harper in more than 20 years until recently. But several weeks ago, I had just talked to Anita Gattis, Tara Grinstead's sister, on Facebook through her Missing Tara Grinstead Facebook page. Literally minutes later, I got a message from someone named Talbot von Sregor thanking me for my unbiased coverage of Tara's case through the years.

Recognizing that Talbot von Sregor was probably a made-up name and since I had not seen an Anita Gattis Facebook page at that time, I asked, "Is this Anita?"

Talbot responded, "Hell no! This is Marcus!"

Normally, I wouldn't reveal his secret identity, but he made it clear who he was last week on my Facebook page. In fact, several weeks ago, someone asked me if Talbot was Marcus, which put me in a tough situation. If I said yes, then I would have betrayed Marcus' trust. If I said no, I would be a liar. So I said nothing. I just completely ignored the question, even when I was asked again.

These are the sorts of weird decisions I must make lately.

So, then last week I posted my blog entry, "Revelation," and when I woke up the next day, my internet was out. I didn't work that day, so it wasn't until I visited my mom that afternoon that I had access to the world wide web. My mom told me Facebook was going crazy. She was understating.

One of the first comments about the blog entry on Facebook was from Dr. Maurice Godwin, the private forensic investigator who has investigated Tara's case since 2006. He said something to the effect of "Someone is off their medications again." I don't know exactly what he said because he erased it and replaced it with another statement accusing the blog post of being circular reasoning.

I'm not sure how a blog post that includes two stories of completely different natures, one about me overcoming my cowardly inclinations and the other revealing facts and rumors about the Tara Grinstead case, can be circular reasoning, but to each his own.

People will find a way to rationalize why they don't like something when they are unable or unwilling to articulate the real reasons. For instance, about a year ago someone else said they didn't like one of my blog entries because it was "too soap-boxy." All opinion pieces are soap-boxy! It's like saying "I don't like this salt because it's too salty."

Obviously, I'm thin-skinned when it comes to criticism, but when someone insults you or your work in a public forum like Facebook, a discussion board or a comments section, it isn't meant to be constructive. It is meant to tear you down. And when it is someone you have assisted on a number of occasions, it's particularly frustrating.

People on the Up and Vanished board wondered if Godwin's original statement about the medications was some sort of inside joke between friends. It wasn't. At the risk of stirring up drama, this is the truth.

This is not the first time Godwin has been needlessly critical toward me. Once he was critical of a previous blog entry, and though he had some good points in the discussion that followed, his tone really bothered me, particularly the use of SMH, for "shaking my head," in response to me. I wrote a long, polite response, but I held it back with the reasoning that it might burn my bridges with him and that I might be being too sensitive.

Afterward, I was glad I didn't respond because we had several conversations over the past year about Tara's case. We seemed to have a good working relationship, helping each other. Then, on the same day at nearly the same time he was asking me for help on Facebook, he publicly told someone on the Up and Vanished board that you need Prozac to read one of my blog posts. Still I held my tongue, not wanting to burn bridges.

But this was strike three. I've been nice enough.

And Marcus, apparently no fan of Godwin, seemingly rushed to my defense when Godwin made his "off the meds" comment. "Maybe you need another prescription then?" Marcus said to him.

To his credit, Godwin's response to some of the things Marcus said was not rude. He even said he was glad he was wrong about Marcus being a person of interest.

Then, Anita Gattis and others joined in the conversation. And I'm not going to rehash everything that was said. The relationship between Marcus and Anita is long and complex, and they are both adults who can speak for themselves. I'm not going to even touch what they said.

Those are some bridges I obviously don't want to burn, and like when someone asked me if Talbot was Marcus, I think the best thing for me to do in this situation is nothing.

But then Wendy Floyd got involved.

Wendy is probably the most vocal of those who still believe Marcus had something to do with Tara's death. She believes God told her he did. I won't judge her for that, as many people have religious beliefs I don't personally believe, but I obviously don't think that's true.

But I think I need to draw a line. Wendy, if you read this, you can say whatever you want to say, and I won't bother you for it, but please do not accuse people on my Facebook page anymore. Please show me the respect not to do that. Thank you.

Some might say, "Why not just delete what she posted?"

That seems antithetical to my entire purpose of existing, frankly. My job is to record history, not erase it.

But social media has obviously made my job more difficult, even as it is necessary for me to use it for my job in today's environment.

Now, imagine how much more difficult the job is for law enforcement for the same reasons. Not only must they investigate cases in the normal fashion, I wouldn't be surprised if they have someone monitoring the Up and Vanished discussion board right now or even the Facebook pages of certain characters, perhaps even mine.

As someone who has spent a weekend sick and doing almost nothing but monitoring social media because of various hi-jinks, I can guarantee you, that is a grueling, thankless job. But unfortunately, it may now be a necessary one.

Read More

Revelation

Revelation

  3:03 AM    Unknown

---

Photo: A truck passes on Highway 129 on February 28, 2017, near the pecan orchard I believe was searched in 2005.

Revelation

I wish I was as brave as that guy on Up and Vanished.

But I'm a coward.

Last week, I wrote a blog entry revealing some facts I've agonized over for weeks now. I'd already weakly stated some of these facts, or at least hinted at them, but I'd never solidly said, "I believe this happened." At least not on my blog or in the newspaper.

I hinted at it hard in the last blog entry I posted about the Tara Grinstead case, as I was worried that someone was trying to keep it covered up. I still am, but even then, I stayed mostly quiet.

Like a coward.

Then I wrote what I wrote last week, a blog entry I started on the one-month anniversary of the day the arrest of Ryan Duke was announced in Tara's case. I spilled the beans, or most of them, enough of the beans to cook a bowl of chili, if not the whole pot.

But I didn't post that blog entry. The one with the beans. The one with the revelation.

Because I'm a coward.

Well, that's not the only reason. Thursday and Friday of last week were quite hectic for me because I was headed out of South Georgia. I conducted a long interview with a cool couple who moved from the Virgin Islands to the deep country to be maybe the smartest, hippest farmers I've ever met, and then I had to hurriedly write the story based on the interview before I left town. I had to pack and charge my batteries.  I had to get my head and face shaved so I didn't look like Animal from the Muppets.

You see, my brother, Dylan, got married in Walhalla, South Carolina, Saturday. That's about a 4-and-a-half hour trip from my hometown of Irwinville. My sister and I were leaving Friday afternoon, and that trip compressed my time so much that if it was coal it'd be a diamond by now.

Thursday, although my worry and contemplation had culminated in a decision to make a revelation in my blog, I had other concerns, too. I wanted to make a better version of a song I made for Dylan and his new wife, Amber, when their son, my nephew, Samuel passed away last year. The song, "Sammy," is written in honor of that little angel of a kid, but the song itself was originally composed with a threadbare chord progression with very little music because in an eerily similar circumstance, I didn't have the time to make a complete song because my sister and I were rushing to get to South Carolina for the funeral.

So, I made some improvements to the song Thursday and Friday. But even then, I didn't share the song with my brother or sister-in-law. Weird. "Sister-in-law."  I've never said that before. I've never had a sister-in-law. That's kinda cool.

I don't know why I didn't share the song. Maybe it's because I think the threadbare version was better, more raw and less polluted. Maybe it's because I worried that I would stir up sad emotions during a joyous occasion.

Maybe I'm just a coward.

And likewise, I didn't share the blog entry I wrote, the one with the revelations. I finished it, somehow, in the midst of all I had to do over those two days, and I think if I had maybe an hour or two more, I might have worked up the courage to post it.

But I didn't, and it weighed on me all weekend.

The thought that kept coming back to me is what someone wrote to me recently. It was one of the people who gave me money to buy a newer car (which I still haven't done, though I have started looking). When he sent me a check, he left a note that said, "Keep 'em honest."

And I can be a coward all I want when it comes to asking girls out or driving long distances or being too afraid to open my door because there are wasps flying around it. I can be a coward when it only affects me, but by accepting those checks, by accepting your praise and encouragement, I have created an obligation to those of you who want me to be an upstanding truth teller.

I can't be a coward for you.

So I decided that when I came home, I would post some version of that blog entry. I decided I would make my revelation.

But being the only redneck in South Carolina without a cell phone, I went almost 3 days without Facebook access, and I didn't know Judge Melanie Cross ruled on the gag order Friday after I left town. So when I got back to Irwinville, I was instantly distracted trying to sort out what the new gag order meant. For the record, I think it's a definite improvement, but you can read more about that in this week's Ocilla Star.

Of course, I was exhausted after a long trip, so I crashed into bed early, but then I woke up early on Monday, too. I locked myself into overdrive mode. Even though Monday is my busiest day as the writer for The Ocilla Star, as it's not uncommon for me to work 20 or more hours on a Monday, I was determined that I was going to stay undistracted and get my work done as quickly as possible so I could get some of my other work done at home later.

But circumstances are just witchy sometimes.

Because today, the friendly, talkative internet guy was installing new wires and equipment, which was distracting. And just when I thought I had finished my writing, the chief showed up with two weeks of police reports. The power went out twice in Ocilla because a big tree limb fell on a power line. That set me back, and it got even worse because after the power outage, my computer started taking nearly 2 minutes to save, and when your work on news pages autosaves every 5 minutes, that means you can work only about 60 percent of the time.

That's how I normally work, about 60 percent of the time, but since I was in a rush my nerves were fraying, especially when a certain thought entered my mind.

Nearly two weeks ago, when the judge held a hearing on the gag order in Tara's case, Payne Lindsey interviewed me for the Up and Vanished podcast. In that podcast, I spoke some about the revelations I was scared to make. I wasn't sure exactly what I said to Payne, but I knew it was something he might put in an episode, and the new episode was due to premiere that night, Monday night.

I didn't want to scoop myself.

But circumstances ground on through the night and I finished with my Ocilla Star work about halfway through the latest episode of Up and Vanished. I was relieved because my name was not mentioned, and there weren't even any unidentified voices in the background that were actually me, as has happened once or twice before. But then, Payne introduced me, and I cringed.

I cringe a little every time I come on Up and Vanished because I talk so fast and sound like I've got my nose stuck in a door I slammed shut to keep from getting stung by wasps, but this time was special because, as I've noted, I was really scared about making these revelations. There are a variety of reasons why.

First, I'm scared of cops, in general. Some of them I consider to be friends, even good friends, but when push comes to shove, I wouldn't either push or shove them because I don't want to go to jail. I also don't want to cross cops because I don't want to come home to find a planted bail of marijuana on my front porch. Maybe that's why I keep so much garbage there.

But aside from my probably irrational fear of law enforcement officers, I have a certain responsibility to my community, and this revelation could be bad for my community. A Chamber of Commerce expert that recently spoke to the local Chamber told a story about how she convinced her local reporters to keep a story quiet for some time, at least months, because it was better for the community.

But was it, really? Surely it was to her because she got what she wanted, which was more than 2,000 new jobs for her town. But if I lived in her town, which I don't, but if I did, I would have a hard time trusting the local press if I knew this story.

How can we, as reporters, decide which truths are worth hiding? I don't think that ethically we can, not if something is important. We can ignore a comment a county commissioner makes about his pastor at a meeting because it's not important to the public at large, but if that same commissioner said he illegally gave the pastor county money to build a home for orphaned children, I think we have a responsibility to tell it, even if it was for a good cause.

If the press is important at all, then it is important that the press be trusted, and I think both are important. Look at our country right now and how trust in the press is eroded, and it's scary, frankly. Look at the confusion and anger and fear in our world right now, and a lot of it started with dishonest journalism.

We have to be honest, and like my benefactor told me, we've got to "keep 'em honest."

When I talked to Payne that night after the gag order hearing, I told him about when I first started working for The Ocilla Star and how I encountered some push-back from local leaders. There was an attitude in Ocilla of trying to keep everything positive, and I wasn't entirely afraid to stand up and point out when something was wrong. That seemed to be a bit unusual for this small town, and some folks didn't like it. They still don't.

But to me, pretending that everything is positive is like someone who is dying of cancer but they won't get treated because they won't even admit anything is wrong. A person who won't fix his ills will die from them, and a community, especially a small town, is much the same way. If we don't fix our problems, they will continue to ail us.

That is the most important and necessary job of a journalist, pointing out what needs to be fixed, and this revelation may point out something that needs to be fixed.

So when I listened to the podcast tonight, and I heard myself make the revelation, I instantly felt relieved. All the anxiety and worry poured from me. I even felt proud.

And I thought, I wish I was as brave as that guy on Up and Vanished.

Me.

Just to be clear, the revelation I've been talking about is the fact that I believe very strongly that law enforcement received and followed up on a tip about Ryan Duke and Tara Grinstead in 2005, only weeks after she went missing.

I won't reveal everything I've heard about that tip, but I have heard the meat of the story from at least two people whose stories mesh perfectly with each other and whose honesty and integrity I do not doubt. I believe what I say about this tip to the very edge of certainty.

My sources do not want to go on the record, at least not yet, and I certainly don't blame them. I wish I could tell you everything I know, but I can't without compromising the identities of those who wish to remain anonymous.

Here is what I wrote last week but was afraid to post.

Remaining questions

Believe it or not, as I write this, it has been exactly one month since the Georgia Bureau of Investigation announced the arrest of Ryan Duke in the Tara Grinstead murder case.

Of course, February is a short month, but we've learned a lot in this short month, though we still have plenty of questions.

This will be a summary of what I know, what I believe I know, and what the rumors seem to suggest. I will, as best as I can, try to provide the source for what I say, but sometimes I can't because I'm keeping dozens of secrets right now about a variety of things. Some people are bound by the gag order, some think they might be bound by the gag order, and some worry about the danger their secrets might place them in. Some just don't want folks to know they're talking to the press.

With all that in mind, don't easily dismiss something I say with confidence. I might know more than I'm saying.

Let's start with the beginning, which is frankly the period of time about which I have the most remaining questions.

On October 22, 2005, Tara Grinstead helped girls prepare for the Georgia Sweet Potato pageant at her home and later attended the pageant in Fizgerald. Later she attended a barbecue at the home of former Irwin County school superintendent Dr. Troy Davis in Ocilla. At about 11:15 p.m., she left a barbecue and was never seen publicly again.

We don't know if Tara drove directly home after the barbecue, but she indicated to Davis that she planned to go home, change into her pajamas, and watch a tape of the pageant. This mentioned pageant tape has long been a source of interest for me because I've always heard no tape was ever found.

A friend of Tara's told me that it is possible that Tara meant she was going to watch another pageant tape, such as tapes of the past pageants she competed in herself. This sounds plausible, as Tara might have had her nostalgic feelings of past glory stirred by seeing other girls compete that night.

If the GBI's allegations against Ryan Duke are factual, then we know Tara somehow made it the few blocks from Davis' home to her own Ocilla home. We know this is part of the GBI's story because all of the crimes Ryan Duke is alleged to have committed are alleged to have taken place in Tara's home some time on October 23, 2005. Those alleged crimes were burglary, aggravated assault, murder, and concealing the death of another.

When I first met Payne Lindsey, host of the Up and Vanished podcast, he told me that Tara's phone received the first phone call she did not answer some time early on October 23, which was a Sunday. Payne told me the time of the call, and I can't swear to it, but I believe it was 12:20 a.m. It was some time between midnight and 1 a.m. I believe this information was told to him by Dr. Maurice Godwin.

The point of giving this specific time is that, if true, it may indicate a time when Tara could not answer her phone.

As to what actually happened at Tara's tiny home on Sunday, October 23, 2005, we know very little, and it's amazing how little rumor is circulating about what may have happened there, at least from what I hear. No one seems to know what happened in that house, and few even seem to have a good guess.

I have heard one rumor about that night that had a somewhat believable motive, but I've also heard three different versions of that story now, and the motive isn't the same, depending on the source. It also involves a third culprit, and no third arrest appears to be coming. I was surprised when I visited a friend at the Irwin County Detention Center recently and learned that a version of this rumor had even reached behind bars.

But I don't believe that rumor. I have no proof of this, and it's really just a guess, but I doubt a third culprit was involved at all.

The vaguely illustrated charges against Ryan Duke do little to enlighten us about what happened at Tara's house. This may jibe with what I continue to hear about Ryan Duke's discussions with the GBI. I've heard that he has talked to the GBI, and I've heard repeatedly that he confessed. However, I've also heard he's told the GBI little about what happened, even if he did confess.

That could all be rumor, of course, but if no one who was inside the house is talking to the GBI, then it might explain why the charges listed in the warrants against Ryan Duke were so vague.

What the arrest warrants allege is that Ryan Duke broke-in to Tara's house to commit aggravated assault and murder, that he assaulted her with his hands, that he caused her to die while committing a felony, and that he concealed her death.

A lot of people in the community are wondering about the level of participation of Bo Dukes in these allegations. The GBI arrested Bo Dukes in relation to concealing Tara's death and burning her body in Ben Hill County, the neighborring county to Ocilla's Irwin.

All of the charges against Bo Dukes stem from his alleged activities in Ben Hill County. He has not, to public knowledge, been charged with any crimes in Irwin County, and Ryan Duke was not charged with any crimes in Ben Hill County, to public knowledge. This leaves an incomplete picture unless we believe someone did a macabre exchange at the county line.

Most people, me included, think Bo Dukes has cooperated with the GBI in some fashion and that he probably has a plea deal arranged, at least in principle. Heck, I've heard Bo Dukes may have talked with the GBI for months before the recent arrests.

On, March 3, 2017, the day Bo Dukes was arrested and released just a few hours later on a $15,000 bond, the District Attorney for Irwin County, Paul Bowden, arrived at the Ben Hill County Law Enforcement Complex, where Dukes was being processed. Bowden has no authority in Ben Hill County, so his presence was interesting to say the least. Surely it wasn't coincidence.

It's made me wonder if Bowden was there to in some way certify a deal with Bo Dukes, but that's just my speculation.

Since I'm speculating, I'm going to guess that the motive for whatever happened to Tara wasn't theft since her tiny house might be the least likely target for that sort of crime in that neighborhood, and it wasn't anything as twisted as someone who wanted to kill for the thrill of killing, like a serial murderer. I think the motive had to have something to do with the fact Tara was a beautiful, popular young woman: Either someone was attracted to her or was angry or jealous about one of her romantic relationships.

I've heard Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes were roommates when Tara went missing. I've heard this so much I believe it's true, but I've confusingly heard they lived in Valdosta, Tifton and Fitzgerald.

I've heard that Bo has said that Ryan showed up in the middle of the night on October 23, 2005, and said he needed help with something.

The GBI's tale alleges that Tara's body was destroyed between October 23 and October 28, 2005 at a pecan orchard called Fitzgerald Farms, north of the town of Fitzgerald. So far, to public knowledge, only Bo Dukes has been charged in relation to the allegations regarding the pecan orchard.

I believe Tara's remains were found.

We probably would know that already, but the gag order is probably preventing it. The GBI announced the search at the orchard on February 28, and by March 3, the search was apparently over. This highly suggests they found what they were searching for.

I've heard that Bo Dukes had trouble pointing out the exact location of the burn site. And every rumor I've heard since the day of the announcement of Ryan Duke's arrest has said the body was burned. I even heard that before the arrest announcement.

I have no idea if Tara's pocketbook and keys, or any jewelry she may have been wearing, were found.

So how did this crime stay a secret for more than 11 years?

It didn't.

I've been told it was like an urban legend to young people of a certain age group, although they were only kids when Tara went missing. Somehow people throughout the community seemed to be accusing Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes even in the hours before Ryan Duke's arrest was announced. And I think some people had heard the rumor but dismissed it because they thought it had been investigated and found false.

I believe that in 2005, a tipster overheard some talk at a party that alarmed him. I believe that between 2 and 6 weeks after Tara went missing, local law enforcement officers were told about this tipster's allegations. I believe this led to a search at a pecan orchard north of Ocilla known as Fitzgerald Farms.

In 2005.

Nothing was found. I was told the tipster couldn't find the burn pile or found the wrong burn pile. Remember, I heard Bo Dukes also had trouble locating the burn pile. It's a big orchard. I've heard 100 to 150 acres.

I don't know how far the investigation went, such as whether Ryan Duke was interviewed. Right now, we can look back with our perfect vision and say, "That should have been investigated more heavily," and we'd be right. But this was 2005, and that was a strange time for Ben Hill-Irwin community, especially for law enforcement.

Usually, the most damning trouble an officer has to deal with in Irwin County is a deer vs. car wreck, because there are a lot of them. Suddenly, the officers in Irwin and Ocilla were getting flooded with tips and leads. "Check yonder near that old silo!" "I heard there was a moonshiner's shanty house back in them woods!" "I saw somebody acting funny at the swamp!"

This is how I think the media coverage in Tara's case might have actually hurt, because law enforcement was following so many tips, they might not have been able to tell the bad from the good. And, if you think about it, "I was drinking at a party and heard somebody bragging about killing Tara Grinstead" doesn't really sound like a good tip.

And I think, to a large degree, the local law enforcement served as an unintentional filter for the GBI, because I believe GBI Special Agent In Charge JT Ricketson was being honest when he said Ryan Duke was "never on our radar." Even if it wasn't true, I think he believed it was true. I doubt the tip was ever handed up to the GBI because there didn't seem to be anything to it.

In probably 2008, I called in a tip about someone who thought the people who killed Tara were out to get him. I talked to local deputies and they checked it out, determined there was nothing to it, and that was it. My tip involved someone who was later investigated by the GBI, but I was never even called by the GBI about it, so I doubt that tip was passed up either.

Maybe it didn't need to be passed up, as I don't think my tip had anything to do with Tara's disappearance. But with this other tipster, the one who talked about Ryan Duke, I think the filter may have filtered out the wrong thing.

In early 2006, I believe, some sort of tip led to a massive search of the Queensland area, which is very near the pecan orchard. This was a time when the tips had slowed down and a search was worth a news story on its own. It makes you wonder if this was someone else coming forward with a similar tip, but this time it was someone anonymous who could not point out the specific location in person.

I'm just about done, but I will say that according to the guys I talked to in jail, Ryan Duke is being kept mostly isolated from the other inmates. Apparently he has gotten a haircut, and a shave, too, I think.

I want to address some of you conspiracy theorists out there. Let go. I know some of you have believed for years that this person or that person was guilty of something in Tara's case, but to continue to hold onto these diabolical fantasies about people who should be cleared at this point is maddeningly arrogant and truly thoughtless.

I'm not sure I believe the GBI's story yet, because we really haven't heard it in full, but around Ocilla, where people have lived and breathed this case for more than a decade, no one believes any of the usual suspects associated with Tara were involved in any way. I haven't heard the first rumor locally that involved anyone whose name was known outside Ocilla before February 23.

And I hear a lot of rumors, as you've read.

Read More