A Thousand New Questions

A Thousand New Questions

  4:50 AM    Unknown

---

(NOTE: For those who have read this blog entry previously, the theory I presented about the burglary charge against Ryan Duke is apparently wrong. I had speculated that the burglary may have happened after Tara Grinstead's murder, but the warrants for Ryan Duke's arrest allege that Duke entered the home to commit murder and aggravated assault).

The busiest day of my professional career was followed by another busy day on only two hours of sleep, but this time, the feverish frenzy of Thursday, February 23, 2017 was replaced by a more subdued day in Ocilla. If not for the presence of a few television network vans and camera crews, Friday, February 24 could have been mistaken for any other day in Ocilla, at least on the surface.

But social media and private conversations belied the truth. Our community and much of America was still abuzz with news, rumor and speculation. Ocilla had changed because an answer to the town's biggest question had seeded a thousand new questions in its wake.

To recap, on the previous day, Ryan Alexander Duke was charged with murder and other crimes in relation to the October 2005 disappearance of beloved teacher and former beauty queen Tara Grinstead.

As someone who investigated and reported on Tara's disappearance since the first week, I was befuddled to learn that someone of whom I had never heard was charged with Tara's murder. I almost felt like the investigation was starting over from zero.

And truly after years of speculation and potential leads discussed in the public and in the media, almost none of the many topics and names associated with the case seemed to be connected at all.

Since it seems clear from the charges that Tara's murder at least allegedly happened at her home in Ocilla, certain clues have gained added weight, at least in the realm of hypothesis. Certainly, the latex glove found in her front yard has always seemed ominous and seemed no less so after Duke's arrest.

Could the killer or an accomplice have worn the glove, and have matches been found to the DNA and fingerprint found in the glove? Could the broken lamp in her bedroom have been broken during a struggle on October 23, 2005? Could the beads on the floor and the broken clasps found by Dr. Maurice Godwin be further signs of a struggle?

These are questions asked before, but they gained added heft after more became known about the alleged facts of Tara's death.

(Note: Please read this section with caution. I later learned the theory I presented was incorrect. See the second note below).

One particular aspect of the facts of her death that seems to be generating much discussion is the burglary charge against Duke. People hear the word "burglary" and they might imagine a person prying a window open, sneaking inside a home and filling a sack full of stolen jewels. As someone who sees dozens of police incident reports every week, I can assure you most burglaries are committed by someone with the intention of robbing a home of its valuables. People hear Duke was charged with burglary and many assume Tara was killed in a "burglary gone wrong," which begs the question does a burglary ever truly go right?

Regardless, although most burglaries are perpetrated for the purpose of stealing, this is not the only type of burglary, at least in Georgia law.

According to the law, "A person commits the offense of burglary in the first degree when, without authority and with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, he or she enters or remains within an occupied, unoccupied, or vacant dwelling house of another or any building, vehicle, railroad car, watercraft, aircraft, or other such structure designed for use as the dwelling of another."

Often in police reports, someone will break-in to a home, but they won't be charged with burglary. They will be instead be charged with the lesser charge of criminal trespass. The difference is that someone who commits criminal trespass does not illegally enter a place "with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein."
Essentially, you commit burglary if you illegally enter a place with intent to commit a crime other than the crime of breaking and entering, but that intended crime does not have to be theft. It can be any felony.

Because the arrest warrant on the burglary charge does not specify what theft or felony Duke is alleged to have intended, we can only speculate, but it does not necessarily mean that he broke-in with the goal of robbing her. He might not have "broke in" at all.

He could have broke in to assault her. He could have broke in to murder her. He could have been invited inside but refused to leave because he wanted to assault or kill her.

With all the rumors flying around, I've never heard an even remotely believable motive for Tara's murder, which is a question unto itself. Without investigation details that might not come out until a trial or after a plea, we may not know anything about a motive, but logic provides us some room for exploration.
It's frankly hard to imagine that Tara's very tiny home was the target of a random burglary with the intent of robbing her of valuables. There are larger, nicer homes in the area.

If she was targeted for sexual assault, and that was the intended crime of the burglary charge, it would seem likely that Duke would have been charged with some kind of sexual offense. He wasn't.

If he broke in to murder her, such as if he was some sociopathic burgeoning serial killer, why did he seem so broken at his bond hearing? Duke may be many things, but at least during that one glimpse of the man, he did not appear to be remorseless.

None of my speculation is in any way conclusive, but an idea I had sounds at least plausible. We know the murder and the burglary are alleged to have happened on the same date, October 23, 2005, but what if they did not happen at the same time. What if the murder happened before the burglary?

If Tara originally allowed Duke inside of her home that night, he might have killed her while he was otherwise lawfully inside. Then, he may have left, possibly to get latex gloves or an accomplice or for any number of reasons, and then he could have come back to move her body. Duke was charged with concealing a death, which could be the felony he is alleged to have intended which led to the burglary charge. If Tara was already dead when he returned, she could not have granted lawful authority for him to enter the house.

Time will tell if that is what happened.

(NOTE: I later had time to read Duke's arrest warrants and the warrants clearly indicate the intended crimes that led to the burglary charge were murder and aggravated assault, so my theory was wrong. However, there are some questions raised by the charges in the arrest warrants as well, so expect more to be written about them soon.)

I spent most of the morning of February 24 trying to find out conclusively if a search was being conducted for Tara's remains somewhere in South Georgia. On Thursday, I heard rampant rumors about Wilcox County, two counties away from Irwin County, but Ben Hill County, the county between Irwin and Wilcox, was the place I heard more resonantly on Friday morning. Of course, the specific area I was told by multiple sources may have overlapped between Ben Hill and Wilcox counties.

It was all just rumors, really, but there were reasons to suspect some truth to the rumors. Ocilla and Irwin County, which we know are alleged to be the location of Tara's murder, are part of the Tifton Judicial Circuit. Thursday, the Cordele Judicial Circuit District Attorney not only spoke at the press conference, he also sat in with the local assistant district attorney during Duke's bond hearing.

The Cordele Judicial Circuit has nothing to do with Ocilla and Irwin County, but if a body was moved to one of the counties in that circuit, a crime would have been committed there, and thus, the district attorney of that circuit would become involved. The Cordele Judicial Circuit includes both Ben Hill and Wilcox counties.
Ben Hill County may be further indicated by the presence of Ben Hill County Sheriff Lee Cone and some of his deputies at the press conference Thursday. While this might be explained because the Ben Hill Sheriff's Office was involved in search efforts for Tara through the years or even as extra security manpower for the conference, the presence of both the sheriff and the DA suggests some deeper connection to the case.

I called the clerks of court offices in both Wilcox and Ben Hill counties, but I could not find a search warrant. I wondered if the Georgia Bureau of Investigation might have used a federal judge or some other out-of-district judge to obtain a search warrant to avoid letting the press find it. A law enforcement officer told me I probably was one of dozens of media folks who were trying to find a search warrant, but they said the LEOs know all our tricks.

I heard members of a film crew later saying that their producers had somehow been denied the search warrant, but even though I asked, I couldn't learn much details. But I got the impression a search warrant existed, but the network could not obtain a copy. The producers even warned the film crew's reporter that she might be charged with trespassing if she tried to film at the location.

That, along with the overwhelming rumors, surely sounds like there is a search somewhere, but I never was able to conclusively find proof.

One of my closest friends lives near the area about which I keep hearing, so I had considered spending Saturday driving backroads with him looking for police tape or GBI vehicles, but I'm not sure I will. I want to prove there is a search because I want Tara to be found, and I want people to know that the law enforcement officers have an idea where her remains must be. It's great news that an arrest was made, but until we know Tara herself has been found, this is still a missing person case in many ways.

I want Wednesday's Ocilla Star headline to read "Tara Grinstead Found," and I think that would be a truly cathartic revelation for my community. The arrest is, at best, half the mystery solved, but the questions remaining leave many mysteries looming large.

Still, even if I found out with 100 percent proof that there is a search, if I found the address with yellow tape stretched from tree to tree, I don't think I would reveal the location. I don't always agree with the secrecy of law enforcement, but I want to see this case solved and don't want to do anything to jeopardize it. If everyone knew the location, Looky Lous and curious thrill-seekers might sneak onto the property and conduct their own searches. If a large property is being searched, it may be logistically impossible for the GBI to control the perimeter through any measure except secrecy.

I spent most of the afternoon interviewing law enforcement officers, running out of paper in my notebook along the way, and also talking with people who might point me toward more of the puzzling past of Ryan Duke. I got some good quotes and interesting leads, but I didn't learn anything that moved the earth.

Late Friday afternoon, Ocilla and I seemed to be winding down after a strange but eventful week. I just wanted to relax, eat some pizza with friends and sleep a long, long time. But Payne Lindsey of the Up and Vanished podcast and his manager Donald, both of whom I like and have helped and shared information with me, asked for me to appear with Payne on ABC's Niteline. After a bad experience years ago on the Nancy Grace program, I really, really did not want to do it, so I refused, but after some gentle begging I caved and said I would let them interview me.

So for 2 to 3 hours, a crew set up equipment in The Ocilla Star office, and finally, I sat down for my 15 to 20 minute interview. Compared to my performance on Nancy Grace and even though I told the reporter "I apologize that I have a face for radio and a voice for books," I thought I did well. I even got a little choked up talking about some of the more emotional aspects of the case, which absolutely surprised me.

But when Niteline aired, they didn't use any of my interview. I was shown for less than 10 seconds, and they mispronounced my name. I hope I never do television again.

I like the print media, which given that I'm using a blog now, perhaps I should say written media. With written words, we present a more in-depth, definitive view of a story.

Not that I'm finding as much definitive information as I'd like about Tara's case.
Still, through my many discussions, I've been told a few things off the record, which I can't print or say, and which puts me in an odd situation in this case especially. Someone might tell me something off the record, which I appreciate because it points me in the right direction, lets me ask the right questions, and frankly, satisfies my personal curiosity. But it also puts me in a situation where I might be told something off the record that I either already strongly suspected or have confirmed through other sources, so then I'm worried about saying what I know by other means because my off-the-record source might think I'm betraying their trust.

And then, by the end of more than 36 hours of non-stop discussion and investigation about this case on only one meal and two hours of sleep, I was so tired and hungry I barely knew what I was saying anymore.

I'll tell you what I definitely haven't been told, and that is an answer to probably the two most burning questions in everyone's minds. I have not been told anyone else was charged in relation to Tara's death. And I have not been told a body was found.

So, for now, the mystery continues.

Read More

The Day Ocilla Stood Still

The Day Ocilla Stood Still

  7:53 AM    Unknown

---

This was something I wrote to settle myself down after the crazy events of February 23, 2017. The result was an article that was part opinion piece, part report and part narrative story. It's essentially a piece of gonzo journalism about the events of that day. I apologize for the irreverent style, but this was just my attempt to record the events of that strange day for myself. My reports in The Ocilla Star newspaper will be much different.

I woke up that Thursday morning, February 23, 2017, with my arm thrown halfway off my bed and some sort of critter biting my knuckle. I crushed it, hoping it wasn't a flea because I recently let a friend bring a dog that wasn't supposed to have fleas in my house, yet I watched it biting at fleas the whole time. It was 9:30 a.m. Figuring I had a late day due to a ribbon cutting in the afternoon, I went back to sleep.

At about 11 a.m. my phone rang, dashing my dreams of sleep. I towed myself out of bed and answered. It was one of my best friends, Eric, whom I regrettably had neglected in recent months. He wouldn't be the last long-lost friend who decided to call me that day.

He told me there was a press conference about Tara Grinstead scheduled for 3 p.m. at the Irwin County Courthouse. I was interested, of course, but after 11 years of dead ends, rabbit holes and false alarms, I wasn't overwhelmed with confidence that the case would be resolved. Then, a police officer beeped in while I was talking to Eric.

The police officer said for me to wear my very best clothes to the courthouse at 2:45 p.m. (For the record, I wore the best clean clothes I had available, blue jeans and a burgundy button-up, untucked). The officer passed the phone to another officer who proudly proclaimed that the conference would include "very good news." My interest level increased quickly past the point of excitement.

As I feverishly showered, tooth brushed and deodorized myself, I considered what the "good news" could mean. I thought it must mean that there must at least be an arrest in the case, perhaps even Tara was found. I even entertained the idea that she might be alive, and that brought a sheer amount of joy to my heart that surprised me. I could think of no one I would rather be able to interview, not because I'm a journalist, but because it would mean she was alive.

My car has a belt that squeals so loudly I'm probably considered a public menace in my hometown of Irwinville, which was 10 or so miles from Ocilla, the Irwin County Courthouse, and the 3 p.m. press conference. My car also recently developed a tic where random lights come to life on the dashboard. It's so unreliable that I went to my mom's to borrow her car, because I was hell-bent on getting to Ocilla that day.

But my mom wasn't home, so I called work, The Ocilla Star newspaper, and told Miss Beverly, our advertising executive, that if I didn't make it to Ocilla in 30 minutes, to come find me where I broke down. If I had crashed or passed out, she better have found some way to resuscitate me.

This is all 100 percent true, but I made it to Ocilla without the need of a rescue.

As a former Boy Scout, I know about being prepared, when I want to be. So I was desperate to have every base thoroughly manned for this press conference. At home, I deleted all the songs off an MP3 player that has a record feature. I found a microphone that had a long cord covered in cob webs and Dr. Pepper spatter. I grabbed a pair of head phones for reasons I cannot fathom. At work, I read in the user manual how to take videos with the camera I got for Christmas. Still not done, I went to City Hall and borrowed the city's audio recorder it uses to record meetings under the thin pretense that the press conference was an event the City of Ocilla would want recorded for posterity.

At work, the phone rang incessantly with curious friends and those genuinely thoughtful people who wanted to make sure the local paper covered the press conference, because even though those police officers said I was the only one to receive a personal invitation, plenty of media got an impersonal invitation because Facebook was clogged with announcements about the press conference from news agencies across the state.

My friend, Payne Lindsey, host and creator of the Up and Vanished podcast about the Tara Grinstead investigation, arrived at The Ocilla Star office winded and wild eyed. We had both heard the name circulating around town and social media, and it was a name neither of us had heard before the day began. This was someone out of left field, or as GBI Special Agent in Charge J.T. Ricketson said later, someone not on our radar.

I'll skip ahead.

At 3 p.m., Ricketson announced the worst kept secret in Georgia, that Ryan Alexander Duke was charged with murder in the death, no longer disappearance, of Tara Grinstead. The announcement was a relief, to actually hear that an arrest was made, satisfying a sense of justice, but the announcement also brought a heart-breaking finality to those lingering hopes that Tara would be found alive and well some day. Though I didn't know her myself, I saw that silly dream I had of interviewing her one day disappear, and I felt aching condolence when I embraced one of her closest friends on the courtroom floor.

Even though the law enforcement officers seemed to announce "We got our guy," the announcement also felt, in a way, hollow, because for hours many of us had heard the rampant rumors about what would be announced. We heard there were multiple arrests. We heard remains were found. We heard these rumors, but the Georgia Bureau of Investigations would not confirm them.

But the GBI didn't deny them either, which just made those questions more resonant in the minds of those of us who wanted answers.

My most pointed unanswered questions were about a scenario I learned about before the press conference began, from a phone call I received earlier while still at the office, so let's return to that time period. Someone called to talk about the then upcoming press conference. I said, "It's crazy because it's someone that's never been on anyone's radar," which the GBI later said, too.

But this person, a reliable source, said that wasn't entirely true. He said that shortly after Tara disappeared in 2005 there was talk about Ryan Duke killing Tara, but I'm going to hold onto the details for now until I can verify them. This was all based on second-hand or even third-hand knowledge, but I was told this story hours before the press conference officially revealed Duke as the arrested murder suspect. And the information jibed with other rumors rippling through town, including names of people and descriptions of locations.

Later in the night, Payne recorded an on-the-record interview with someone making some very similar claims to those made by my source. I am sure Payne will play all or most of the recording on Up and Vanished.

But my source also told me that a specific person heard about these allegations against Duke at the time, presumably in 2005, and this specific person reported the information to law enforcement. Later, I saw this specific person and asked if it was true. He said "No comment."

Of course, none of these rumors are confirmed to be true. We've spent 11 years talking about rumors and speculation which contained very little truth if any, but if I had been taking notes when I talked to my source or if I had conducted the interview Payne did later, I would feel comfortable printing the story both sources portrayed, although their claims would be attributed. Because if they knew of this story before Duke was announced as the murder suspect, and at least my source absolutely did know before the announcement, then that means Duke was not totally off the radar. It means that some people suspected Duke's involvement some time ago, probably years ago, possibly a decade or more.

Backtracking to earlier, I arrived at the courthouse at 2:30 p.m., thinking I would manage to get there early and get a good seat. I hadn't anticipated that every media outlet east of the Mississippi would descend on Ocilla. The array of video cameras slammed together in the front of the courthouse seats reminded me of an invasion of spidery robots.

And the people! Just this month, I've attended meetings in that courtroom full of angry people opposing tax-cutting measures by the county and another meeting of angry people opposing closing voting precincts. Neither so fully filled that courtroom's first floor, and I had forgotten the courtroom even had a balcony, but I heard some folks were worried it might collapse, although they may have been jesting.

It was loud and boisterous as people discussed the upcoming announcement, but the room turned library quiet when the press conference started. I imagined the other half of the community outside the courtroom glued to their computer screens and smart phones, watching live streams of the event. It was as if Ocilla stood still.

When the press conference was over, I told County Chairman Joey Whitley, "If you have any bad news about the county, this is the week to share it. Nobody will notice."

I conducted some interesting interviews. I could feel the relief pouring from former Special Agent in Charge Gary Rothwell, who was especially happy that those people tried in the capricious court of public opinion were finally exonerated in the public's eye. At least, most of the public's eye. One person told me that the GBI was wrong and she knew who really did it, because God told her so. Anything is possible I suppose, but I think I'll believe the GBI's conclusions for now.

And to be honest, I think I share Rothwell's sentiment. Although it must have been a truly awful 11 years for Tara's family and friends to suffer without any answers, it must have been something even more traumatizing for people like Marcus Harper, Heath Dykes, and some others, people who also cared about Tara, but who were unfairly judged and condemned by so many, especially in public forums. What relief they will feel to be able to walk about their hometowns without the accusing looks and whispers. Hooray for them to finally have some peace!

And to some degree, I feel exonerated myself, since I was one of the 200 or so people whose DNA was tested in this case, even though I never met Tara.

I was told to wait at the courthouse until 4:30 p.m. because Duke would be presented for a bond hearing. More than half of the news crews either didn't know or just didn't stay for the event, but that still left more than 10 cameras in the courtroom. Those who didn't stay missed out on a far more informative event.

While the press conference only revealed that Duke was charged with murder and provided almost no details about the crime, the bond hearing listed four charges and the basic details of those offenses. He was charged with burglary, aggravated assault, concealing a death, and murder.

This is the picture those charges and their details paint, along with known details about her disappearance: We knew Tara left a barbecue at the school superintendent's house at about 11 p.m. Oct. 22, 2005, and that was the last she known to have been seen alive. Some time after midnight on Sunday, Oct. 23, and I would guess probably some time in the early morning, Duke is alleged to have entered Tara's home against her will with the intent of committing a felony, which could mean he intended to rob the house or do harm to its occupant. Tara was killed due to some aggressive action using the hands, such as strangulation or beating, and Duke is alleged to be the culprit. Then, Duke is alleged to have moved Tara's body from her home.

Even though those details leave out important aspects such as motive, mode of entering her home, and whether accomplices were involved, if true, these details tell us far more than we've ever really known about Tara Grinstead's disappearance because this is the first time we actually know something was definitely part of the crime.

Sometimes you learn more by what isn't said than what is, too. The district attorney for the Cordele Judicial Circuit not only was at the press conference, he spoke at it, and he sat in with the local assistant district attorney during the bond hearing. This strongly suggests to me that some charges against someone are forthcoming from the Cordele Circuit, which includes Ben Hill, Crisp, Dooly and Wilcox counties. Of course, I heard rumors about Wilcox County all day long, and I'm determined to get to the bottom of it.

There are still miles of unanswered questions, but as of right now, we don't know if oft discussed clues like the latex glove or the black truck had anything to do with the case at all. What we, the public, know is very little now, because Ryan Duke was not someone picked apart by the media and public opinion. It's almost like starting over at the beginning, but now those of us who want to know what happened are not wandering blind and dumbly pointing fingers.

I spent most of the night talking with Payne and his friend Donald about the case, tracking down leads and discussing implications. I got plenty of phone calls from long-lost friends, a former girlfriend, and even my brother, who lives in South Carolina and had not called me in months. One friend, a fan of the podcast, even sort of accidentally broke into The Ocilla Star office, but it was my fault for not shutting the door well. It was a bit of a tense moment though, when I returned and found the back door wide open.

All of these friends wanted to know what I've learned. They wanted the scoop.

So this is it.

That's not entirely true, of course. There are rumors like the ones I discussed earlier and details about them, but I'm mostly holding back until I can get more verification. As I've said, we've been dealing with tons of untrue rumors for 11 years now. I'm trying to vet all these rumors and make them facts, but that may be an impossible task.

I will say this though. From what I'm hearing, this case may not end with Ryan Duke. This case may be more complicated than we imagined when people were busy speculating about police cover-ups or secretive love affairs. It could just be as simple as "We got our guy," which was the general feeling I got from the press conference, but the more I hear, the less I think he was the only guy.

Only time will tell. For years, law enforcement officers have said Tara's case was not cold.

It's still not.

I want to make an appeal to anyone reading this who knows more to contact me. If you know something about Ryan Duke, what happened to Tara that night, or anything else you think might be relevant, contact me on Facebook or by emailing ocillastar@windstream.net . Even if you don't want your name used, you might be able to point me in the right direction.

Read More

WHAT THE? HELL?

WHAT THE? HELL?

  9:15 PM    Unknown

---

This week, someone said I was going to Hell if I died because I'm not a Christian. Believe it or not, that's not even the worst insult I've faced this week, but it was certainly the most damning. It made me think though, so I did a little research.
People can believe whatever they want, which is one of the freeing aspects of being a non-believer, because many of the faithful, but I find that often people's religious beliefs are a bit skewed. In fact, they are often not based on what they think they are, or the actual teachings of their religion are a bit different than what they believe. Sometimes modern beliefs are based on centuries of traditional teachings, dogma, and sometimes even on pure ignorance.
For instance, the rapture isn't really in the Bible, despite its prevalence in modern Protestant Christian thought. So, I wasn't surprised when I discovered that Hell isn't really either.
Oh sure, if you read the King James version of the Bible or the New International Version, you will find the word "Hell," although not always in the same places, but if you research the original words that "Hell" replaced, you'll discover that these places don't match at all the idea of "Hell" that modern Christians have.
Early Judaism, and thus much or all of the Old Testament, has no concept of Hell. Over the centuries, an Orthodox and mystical tradition of describing "Gehinnom" developed and it could be interpreted as "Hell," but it's not really from the Bible. More on Gehinnom in a moment.
The Christian view of Hell is based primarily on the New Testament, but in the original texts, three different words were used that have since been translated into "Hell," and all three of those words have different meanings. None of those meanings will be recognizable to most modern Christians.
Hades or Sheol: The Greek word "Hades" appears 10 times in the New Testament, and in the King James version, it was translated to "Hell," but really Hades is more similar in meaning to the Hebrew word "Sheol," which is a place of the dead. It is a destination for both the righteous and unrighteous dead, not a fiery place of punishment.
Gehinnom or Gehenna: The Greek word "Gehenna," from the Hebrew "Gehinnom" is used 11 times in the New Testament and is translated to "Hell" in the KJV and NIV. "Gehenna" referred to an actual place on Earth, the Valley of Hinnom, which was a garbage dump outside of Jerusalem. The bodies of those who were thought to have died in sin were tossed there and burned, but it wasn't a metaphysical place of torment. It was just a big burn pile.
Tartarus or Tartaroo: "Tartarus" was used only once in the New Testament, but it was translated to mean "Hell." It comes from the epic poem the Iliad, and is used in II Peter to indicate a place of fallen angels. This particular "Hell" mentions nothing about the afterlife or the souls of humans being sent there as punishment.
Now you may say that there are other references that surely mean the Hell you envision when you close your eyes and wish the person that just pissed you off would go there. And it's true there are mentions of condemnation and punishment and especially in the wacky Book of Revelation, lakes and pits of fire. But none of those are actually described as "Hell" in the Bible.
So, I'm not particularly worried about going there. I don't think you should be either, but I'm sorry if you're bothered or worried by what I wrote.
But if you feel relieved or even if your curiosity is raised a little bit, here's another tidbit of Biblical trivia: The idea of "going to heaven" isn't really in the Bible either...

Read More

Reasons to be bothered by the Muslim Ban

Reasons to be bothered by the Muslim Ban

  3:53 AM    Unknown

---

Here are some accurate answers to use when someone asks why you're bothered by the Muslim Ban.
1. If they say it's not about Muslims: During his campaign Trump proposed a temporary ban on Muslims entering the US. Rudy Giuliani told Fox News that Trump contacted him about helping create a "Muslim ban" and asked how to do it legally. A committee was formed and they later decided to drop the religious basis, at least officially. Furthermore, Trump told the Christian Broadcasting Network that Christian refugees would be given priority in terms of refugee status, which is clear in the actual terms of the executive order, which says that minority religions from a region will be given preference. This is a Muslim ban and that is what it was always intended to be.
2. If they say it will allow us to review our vetting techniques: When has anyone actually provided any evidence that our vetting techniques were shoddy or even questionable? When the debate about Syrian refugees was big news last year I learned that the process for refugees to enter the US was very stringent. I can't say for sure about the other ways of entering the US, but the simple fact that Islamic terrorist attacks are very rare compared to the amount of violence in the Middle East suggests that the vetting process is doing a fairly adequate job. Furthermore, we know the real reason for the ban is to ban Muslims, not to improve vetting, so don't buy the propaganda.
3. If they say it's only temporary: It may be only temporary. We don't know. Meanwhile, people are dying. Anne Frank's father tried for months to get a visa to the US but was denied. Would she still be alive if a visa was granted? Whose diary will we read next?
4. If they say it's about safety: No refugee from these countries has ever committed an act of terrorism in America, and none of the four countries of origin of the 9/11 terrorists are on the ban list. Honestly, the entire threat of Islamic terrorism is vastly overblown. There are currently 15,000 or more Muslim doctors in the United States, including several in my very rural part of the world. In the United States, you are probably more likely to be shot by a non-Muslim American and have your life saved by a Muslim doctor than to be harmed by a Muslim terrorist.
5. If they say why do you care about refugees but you don't care about veterans, cancer victims, etc.?: Tell them you would be bothered by laws that would leave veterans or cancer victims in war-torn areas, but no such laws exist, unless you count the Iraqi veterans who assisted our American soldiers in their country who cannot escape the chaos there or the cancer victims who cannot get medical treatment in their home country because the war we started led to their hospitals being bombed by ISIS. Tell them you are trying to fight those laws.
6. If they say you're being hysterical: Say maybe I am. Say maybe I'm losing my mind because I see the country I love stomping on its own heart. Say maybe I'm hysterically angry that people will defend a despicable fascist rather than admit they voted for a tyrant. Tell them you're hysterically upset because you care about the world beyond imaginary borders and you're hysterically scared of what the world is going to look like in four years after Trump and Putin are done, whether they're working together or not.

But you're not hysterical. You just see that Islamic terrorism isn't the biggest threat the world is currently facing.

Read More

The Disappearance of Tara Grinstead: The Glove

The Disappearance of Tara Grinstead: The Glove

  7:08 PM    Unknown

---

On the weekend of October 22, 2005, a school teacher and former beauty queen named Tara Grinstead disappeared from the small town of Ocilla, Georgia, and she has never been found. I graduated from high school in Ocilla, grew up 10 miles away, and I have covered her story as a newspaper reporter since the week of her disappearance. This is my examination of one particular clue in the case: A latex glove found in her yard. For more information on the case, links are provided at the bottom of the story.

Since the Up and Vanished podcast about Tara Grinstead began I feel like I learn something new about the disappearance of the Irwin County school teacher almost every day from both the podcast and the conversations the podcast has spurred in the Ocilla community. In the most recent episode, forensic investigator Dr. Maurice Godwin said that he believes there is a 50-50 chance the latex glove found in Tara's front yard was planted there.

Recently, I've put a lot of thought into that glove, and I respectfully and politely disagree, although the glove certainly could have been planted from what we know.

Here is what we know about the glove: On Monday, Oct. 24, 2005, shortly after she was discovered to be missing, a latex glove was found within a few feet of Tara's doorstep at her home in residential Ocilla, a town of about 3,000 people. Law enforcement officials have told me male DNA was found in the glove, and Godwin stated on Up and Vanished that it was white, male DNA and that about 200 men have submitted to DNA tests. I think it is a safe assumption that no match has been found.

Now let's examine the possibilities of the glove logically, examining what is probable or likely, and what is improbable or unlikely, as best we can.

First there are three basic options with the glove:

1. The glove had nothing to do with Tara's disappearance, such as that it was left there by someone doing yard work, or the wind blew it into her yard. This seems like too great a coincidence, and I consider this the least likely scenario.

2. The glove was planted, presumably by the person who abducted or killed her. This too seems unlikely because of a variety of reasons. First, someone would have to think of the idea to plant a glove to distract from their crime, which is, to my knowledge, unheard of. This is the sort of move one would expect from a villain in an Agatha Christie novel, not in real life. If the glove was planted, then the crime was almost certainly premeditated, because people don't just drive around with gloves containing other people's DNA. They must have deliberately found or saved some glove to use for this express purpose, which again seems unlikely.

And in that scenario, whoever the DNA actually belongs to might point in the direction of the actual culprit. If someone was found to be a DNA match, but did not make sense as a suspect, the gloves might point to someone else who made better sense as a suspect who also had access to the other person's latex gloves or their DNA.

Usually the most obvious answer is the most likely to be true, and in this case that is:

3. The glove was used in the disappearance of Tara Grinstead. In fact, the presence of the glove is one of the strongest indicators that something malevolent happened to Tara or that someone covered up what happened to her on that weekend in 2005. Whether a murder or abduction occurred or the gloves were worn to cover up an accidental death, it seems likely the gloves were used for something illegal.

The presence of DNA probably indicates the gloves were already worn. Unless the gloves were used to hide fingerprints at another location, such as a second site where a murder took place, it seems most likely that they were dropped as someone was leaving Tara's property.

If someone wore the gloves at a previous location, and they took them off and put them in their pocket for instance, it seems like a big coincidence that the glove randomly fell out of their pocket near her doorstep. Most likely the glove was found not due to some random drop from a pocket but during some sort of motion, such as taking the glove off or putting it in a pocket.

If the culprit meant to put the gloves on to hide their fingerprints as they entered Tara's home, and they acted to put the gloves on, they would have noticed that they dropped a glove and probably would have found and retrieved it, assuming it was not too dark. However, if they were leaving and taking the gloves off, someone might very well move to put the gloves in their pocket and not notice that one fell to the ground.

Considering all those factors, it seems most likely that the glove was dropped by someone who had finished using the gloves for whatever purpose they used the gloves for and that the gloves were used to hide the person's fingerprints which otherwise would have been left at Tara's home or on her car.

Still accepting that anything is possible, but trying to find the most likely scenario, I think we have narrowed down to one of two most likely scenarios, and I believe either one or the other, or a combination of the two, is the most probable explanation for the glove found in Tara's yard.

1. For years, I believed that the glove was probably used by someone who drove her car that weekend, and this still may be the most likely scenario. The sports car was found parked in her carport when Tara was reported missing.

One of the often discussed possible clues is that the driver's seat of her car was moved back, as if it was driven by someone taller than Tara, who was only slightly taller than 5 feet. A law enforcement officer familiar with the case has told me that this might be a false clue though, because the seat may have been moved back by a law enforcement officer processing the car for clues. Processing was not definitely the cause of the seat being moved back though, so it is still possible that someone taller drove the car. Of course, most men would be taller.

A friend of Tara's told me that Tara would not let anyone drive her car, which lends to the idea that if someone taller did drive it, that they were involved in her disappearance. The friend also told me that the car was very muddy at the time of the disappearance, which indicates the car was driven somewhere other than the paved streets of Ocilla or neighboring Fitzgerald.

I've also heard that someone had her car washed after it was processed, but I've also heard that the Georgia Bureau of Investigation confiscated the car and still has it in storage. Both could be true, I suppose, if the car was impounded after it was washed, but I don't understand why the GBI would allow it to be washed, if that is even true.

For years, based on these apparent clues, I found it most likely that someone wore latex gloves to drive the car back from some location and they dropped the glove when walking away from the car, probably toward the road. I've asked a law enforcement officer familiar with the scene and the location of the glove, and he said that scenario is possible.

The implications of this scenario are interesting, however. If someone drove the car back to Tara's house, they had to leave somehow. This indicates that if the person left with Tara, this person's car was left at Tara's home, such as the black truck that was reported, or they lived within walking distance of Tara's home. Otherwise, at least two people were involved in her disappearance, because someone had to be there to pick up the person that drove her car home.

If two people were involved, this might explain why a DNA match has never been found, assuming no DNA match has been found. The person who drove the car and who dropped the glove might be an accomplice with no obvious connection to Tara, while the person who picked them up might have a more obvious connection. There is a slight improbability about this scenario though, as we would assume that the person with the stronger connection is the likely killer or abductor, and why would the accomplice take on the riskier assignment of driving the car back to her home? This is not a strong improbability though, as it might be simply explained that the murderer or abductor had his own vehicle at the scene and thus preferred to drive it, or that neither of those involved was more or less involved in the crime than the other.

Another point of interest about the possibility that someone used gloves to drive the car back is why they would have hidden their fingerprints at all. It seems likely that the person was someone whose fingerprints should not have appeared in the car at all or it was someone who knew that Tara did not allow anyone else to drive her car so they believed they should hide their fingerprints. Of course, it is possible that someone just obliviously thought that if they were committing a crime they should wear gloves.

This entire car-glove connection scenario is predicated on the idea that whatever happened to Tara happened away from her home and that the car was driven back to her home. Presumably, in this scenario, if the car was left at its previous location it would have indicated something more about the case, such as what happened to her and where.

This separate location might have been the home of the culprit, which may add improbability that the culprit was someone who lived within walking distance of Tara's home.

There is also a possibility that Tara was abducted or killed at her home and the culprit used her own car to transport Tara to another location and then brought the car back. This is possible, but less likely than other options because someone would have likely had their own vehicle there, unless they lived within walking distance, which several men connected to the case did, but they all presumably were DNA tested and were not a match.

Furthermore, many men drive trucks which would probably be better suited for whatever purposes an abductor or killer would need a vehicle for, and if the culprit had options, they would have likely chosen their own vehicle rather than Tara's sports car simply because being caught in it would have been extremely suspicious.

So, if the glove is connected to the car and assuming that murder is what most likely happened, this is the most likely scenario:

One or more people murdered Tara Grinstead somewhere muddy or only accessible by a muddy road, and one of them, a taller white male, wore latex gloves to drive her car back to her home in Ocilla where he either retrieved his own vehicle or was picked up by an accomplice.

Of course, those are actually two scenarios, one with an accomplice and one without. If I had to choose, I would choose the one with the accomplice as the most likely because it would best explain the use of latex gloves to hide fingerprints and would best explain why a DNA match has not been found. But I consider either scenario nearly equally possible.
But there is another possible, even probable, explanation of the glove.

2. As I said, for years I thought the car-glove connection was the most likely explanation for the latex glove. Then, several weeks ago, I watched the British television show "The Fall," in which the star of "50 Shades of Grey," Jamie Dornan, plays a slightly less creepy role as a serial killer. In the show, there is a scene where he leaves a woman's house after burglarizing it, and after he shuts her door, he immediately starts to take his gloves off.

Chills ran down my spine like tremors down a fault line.

Yes. Absolutely someone who had just finished illegally entering a home and doing illegal things inside might take off their gloves as they exited if they were finished with whatever nefarious purposes they were up to inside. Outside, they would not want to be caught in suspicious gloves, so they would probably immediately take them off. They would likely stuff the gloves into a pocket, nervously, and in their anxiety they might not notice as one of those gloves fell to the ground. The scenario seems so likely that it is in fact rather obvious. It does not negate the car-glove connection, and in fact, someone who exited her home could also have driven her car, but dropping the glove after leaving the front door seems even more likely than dropping it leaving a car, at least on the surface, if for no other reason, the close proximity of the door to the glove.

I presented this idea to a friend, and they argued that someone would wait to take off the gloves until they reached their own car. It's possible, but not likely. If you were in the midst of committing a crime, you would not want to be caught with gloves on outside as that would be extremely suspicious. My friend said the person could have stuffed their hands into their pockets, and that is true, but that also seems a bit suspicious. If someone saw a person leaving Tara Grinstead's with their hands stuffed in their pockets that weekend that person would have probably already been arrested because it would look highly suspicious. Furthermore, if the person taking off the gloves risked running into someone as they walked back to their car, they might have had to shake hands with someone or might have even been obliged to wave. Remember that we do not know what time the glove was left in the yard. Taking off the gloves and slipping them into a pocket immediately would be the safest course.

Also, it's just natural, I believe, to take off gloves once you are done using them, at least that's my experience when I clean my bathroom. Once I am done cleaning, I want to immediately take them off, but this may just be a personal preference as I find gloves unwieldy and uncomfortable. I would be interested to hear some feedback on how others treat wearing gloves.

Furthermore, the simple fact that someone left a glove in the yard is highly indicative that someone did in fact take the glove off. Assuming the glove was not a plant, if they had stuffed their hands in their pockets, I would not be writing this because we would know nothing about a glove.

I picture someone closing the front door and using their body to shield themselves as they pull their gloves off and then they casually walk down the steps and push the gloves into their pocket, but one falls to the ground, or the glove falls after a second because it was not pushed deeply enough into the pocket. It certainly could have happened that way.

But why would someone wear gloves and take them off at all? Probability and logic are a bit limited here, as we need to use our imaginations more than with other scenarios because we know little about what happened inside the house.

Could there have been a struggle inside? I am a bit confused about the evidence as the facts have mixed with hearsay over the years. I've heard a lamp or clock was turned over. I've heard a bed's headboard was damaged. I've recently heard a necklace was found on the floor? I've heard that a very small amount of blood was found though I've also heard that might be explained through shaving or a household accident. None of that may be true.

The truth is, I don't know what was found in the house. I wasn't there, and I doubt law enforcement investigators have revealed everything that was found or that wasn't.

And what wasn't found may be more of a clue than what was, as I find it highly likely that if the glove was left when exiting the home that whoever dropped it was either covering up or removing some sort of evidence. I say this because someone who was abducting Tara would not have taken off the gloves while toting or otherwise moving her to a vehicle. They might have placed her in a vehicle and then went back to clean something up or remove some evidence, and then taken off the gloves, but they would not take the gloves off in the midst of moving her.

Since it is so improbable that someone took off the gloves while moving her there must have been some reason for them to go inside her home or to go back inside. To me it seems like the reason must have either been to cover up evidence at her home or remove evidence from it. Let us examine those two possibilities, although it certainly could be both. Someone might have cleaned up a blood stain and removed a murder weapon, for instance.

1. Covering up evidence: This, most likely, would be hiding signs of a crime. The culprit might have simply straightened up some overturned objects, although based on the clues I'm unsure about, there might have still been some overturned items that he missed.
He might have been cleaning a blood stain, but this seems unlikely for a few reasons. I think the GBI would have found some evidence that chemicals were used to clean up blood, and even though they might not have revealed that evidence to the public, that evidence would have changed the nature of the initial investigation. The case would have probably been announced as a murder investigation from early on, rather than a missing person case. The fact that it was a missing person investigation also makes it probable that there were no obvious signs of a struggle.

If an abduction or murder happened at her home, it seems likely that it was either bloodless, easily cleanable or was cleaned by someone who knew how to clean it properly. That last option of course suggests the possibility of someone with law enforcement knowledge, but I don't even find it all that probable that someone was even there to clean up the scene.

It would be a large risk to go back to the scene of the crime to clean up the scene, and probably not worth it considering that after she was gone a few days people would start assuming something criminal happened to her, which is exactly what happened. Now, someone might go back to remove evidence that pointed to them, so I find the second option at least somewhat more probable.

2. Removing evidence: If someone went inside Tara's home to remove evidence, then we can only speculate what was removed. I think the only safe assumption would be that whatever was removed would have somehow identified the culprit. For instance, it could have been a weapon with fingerprints, a glass that the culprit used when visiting her home, or evidence of a sexual encounter. It might have been a love letter, but although it was not as prevalent in 2005 as now, the use of digital communication was rising, so a physical love letter seems like a stretch. Most likely the thing or things removed would be something that contained DNA or fingerprint evidence.

But this brings us back to something discussed earlier in the car-glove connection scenarios. Why would someone whose DNA or fingerprints would be expected to be found inside Grinstead's home try to hide their DNA or fingerprints? Why would a boyfriend, a neighbor or a childhood friend we know was inside her home at some time in 2005 try to hide their fingerprints or DNA when they would likely be found inside the home anyway?
Of course, we assume that people would behave rationally, but that is only an assumption. Often people act far from rationally, especially in high pressure situations.

But assuming that the culprit or culprits were behaving rationally, if they were using gloves and if they were removing evidence, then they very well might not be someone that is an obvious suspect. Again, this is an assumption, but this would explain why no DNA match has been found to the glove.

I began writing this expecting that the glove-left-while-exiting-the-home scenario would be as probable as the car-glove connection, but I've convinced myself otherwise. I still believe the car-glove connection is more probable because it best fits the circumstances and any reason for someone to go inside the home seems improbable without further evidence. For instance, if a knife was found to be wiped down of prints that would highly indicate that someone went back inside the home, but no such evidence exists. Without corroborating evidence, all reasons for going inside the home are only speculation while the car-glove connection links to several clues or possible clues such as the car seat and the mud on the car.

This does not negate exiting the home scenarios, but it makes the car connection seem somewhat more likely. Nearly anything is possible, of course, but I still believe the most probable scenarios are those previously mentioned:

One or more people murdered Tara Grinstead somewhere muddy or only accessible by a muddy road, and one of them, a taller white male, wore latex gloves to drive her car back to her home in Ocilla where he either retrieved his own vehicle or was picked up by an accomplice.

Of course, many people already believe that is exactly what happened without attempting to analyze every detail. And it could be a combination in which someone drove the car and went inside. They could have covered up evidence and removed evidence. They could have driven the car to a place on a paved street or there could be six culprits rather than one or two.

A few points that I have not previously mentioned should be put forward. The presence of the latex glove does make the idea that whatever happened was a premeditated crime seem more likely, but if it was not premeditated, then it is more probable that the culprit was someone who had easy access to latex gloves, which would include people in law enforcement or medical professions, which includes several white males connected to Tara Grinstead. Of course, anyone can buy latex gloves, so this is not definitely true. For all we know, Tara could have died on Saturday night/Sunday morning and someone could have purchased latex gloves on Sunday and went back to clean up the scene.

I may later write a couple of similar examinations of other aspects of the case.

I would like to analyze what most likely happened to Tara Grinstead. I think most people believe she was murdered, and that is the most likely scenario, but the more I learn the more I think that suicide is a possibility, but I think someone covered it up if she did killer herself, probably because they were scared it would look like murder. And there are several other possibilities as well.

Assuming she was murdered, an examination of possible motives might prove interesting, but they would be less about probability and purely about speculation. Of course, this is all speculation to some extent.

I could say something is 30 percent probable or 90 percent probable, but the truth is, each scenario is either 100 percent probable because it is exactly what happened or it is 0 percent probable because it didn't happen that way at all. We simply don't know, so all this is just barely informed speculation measured by a modicum of logic, but hopefully someone will read this and will think of something I've missed or an investigator with more knowledge about the case will make a connection because of what I've written.

Maybe this will help solve whatever happened on that mysterious weekend in October 2005. I certainly hope it does.

For more information on the Disappearance of Tara Grinstead:

The Up and Vanished Podcast by Payne Lindsey.

The Web Sleuths Tara Grinstead forums.

Dr. Maurice Godwin's Tara Grinstead blog.

An award-winning Ocilla Star article I wrote on the fifth anniversary of Tara's disappearance.

An Ocilla Star article in which I interviewed friends of Tara Grinstead about who she was as a person.

An Ocilla Star article I wrote on the 10th anniversary that features a timeline of events.

The Wikipedia entry.

Read More

Lex Luthor for President

Lex Luthor for President

  4:15 AM    Unknown

---

Imagine a world in which Lex Luthor ran for president of earth against Wonder Woman. Would it be that different than what is happening in America today?

CLICK ON THE IMAGES TO SEE A LARGER VERSION.

[gallery ids="206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213,214,215,216,217" type="columns"]

Also, if you haven't heard it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQxTAmBHcJM

Read More