Here is some simple points to keep the fuzz from you anytime soon. Though ask a baby not to cry, it would seem impossible to do, like using birth control, being falsely accused would seem like an act of Devine Punishment if one does some simple homework keeping themselves beyond blame from the cops.
1. Do not hang out with known criminals who have any domestic violence convictions on their record. You may think you can help Mr. Smith, but what if Mr. Smith wacks his mate and then blames you for the crime?
2. Do not live in a area with a history of utter corruption. Though any police department can get systemic corruption thanks to one or two bad seeds, if those bad seed is the one under some sort of leadership position in the department, run for the hills or the nearest city.
3. Only worry about an urban area if you are a minority. Maybe suburbs and smaller communities cannot handle a minority, at least the racism is not endemic as it is in the big city.
4. Have plenty of money and prestige. Being in the upper class cuts down on false accusation for murder outside the family. No officer goes after a rich person if some stranger turns up dead. It is usually the people from the poorer classes they always go after. Poor people generally cannot afford top-notch lawyers unless the case is notorious enough to attract a high-powered legal defense team out of the belief that they understand the prosecution is abusing their power and belief in innocence is quite high.
5. Do have a criminal record. Then again maybe not in some jurisdiction. Often, smaller departments go after the person with the clean record, thinking their inexperience with the system would force a confession out of them. The only place this would not work well is the police in a big metropolis and its suburbs. A suspect with a prior record know every trick in the book more than their small-town counterparts.
6. If there are multiple suspects in a case, a police depart would go after the suspect that is not difficult to bring to justice. The most difficult suspect is the one in jail in another jurisdiction for fear the suspect would fight extradition. Even if he or she is the one who did it, the cops more likely would go after a suspect they do not have to fight the court system to obtain. It does seem right sometimes, but if the hard-to-get suspect lies to the cops who want him, they would behave as if it is the truth and guess the schmuck who gets the murder charges?
7. Assume the wrong person would be arrested in a case of a discovery of a dead body. A stiff with no doer in sight is just asking some police officers to cloud their judgement when someone fitting their possible crime reconstruction comes to mind. Though some arrests often nab the real killer, some killings result in a person or persons falsely accused. Bad policework, bad prosecuting and bad forensics are three of the biggest reasons the wrong person stands accused. Meanwhile the real killer continues to roam the street.
8. If an ex-lover is mad at you, be prepared for a cop to get an earful. Either they believe them or they don't. If you ever did something to cause an ex pain, expect a cop to haul you downtown more ofter than said ex taking you down into the ground. No crime will be overlooked when an ex is after you for money, the kids or other property.
These are just the beginning. There may be more over the course of time. But these basic rules can keep you from decades rottening in jail for making someone mad enough to frame your sorry ass, whether a criminal mastermind, overzealous office, corrupt prosecutor or combinations of the three.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Buster and Billie (1974) - A Tale of Bittersweet Romance
The setting of "Buster and Billie" is the rural part of the American South in the late 1940's, when normalcy met the post-war world. The movie starred Jan-Michael Vincent and Jean Goodfellow as unlikely lovers just finishing high school. Vincent plays Buster, a gutsy, no-nonsense model student who wants to follow his father in the farming trade. Goodfellow plays Billie, the dirt-poor lass from the wrong side of the tracks, who is the object of scorn to many a teenage boy, including the boys Buster hangs out with.
There is some excellent stand-out acting in this teen romance, from Pamela Sue Martin, who is marvelous as Buster's former flame to Robert Englund in his film debut as Whitey (long before he became Freddie Kreuger in "Nightmare on Elm Street"). Look out for Clifton James standout performance as Jake.
But the best scene is saved for last as the scene is split between the local sheriff and his people wondering about a series of petty crimes and Buster's movements of utter sorrow, but to explain more would ruin the mystery. Otherwise, if you find an uncut version, enjoy the fact that it was one of the first mainstream movies featuring full-frontal male nudity, something that was unheard of in 1974, six years after the death of the Hays' office. It earned its R rating and then some. But ladies everywhere got an eyeful of Jan-Michael Vincent in his nakedness! Daniel Petrie had some nerve letting that one through.
So for the story alone, it would deserve a DVD release or a remake. I was thinking, how about Josh Hutcherson, that young lady from "Hugo" and maybe Gavin Fink to play Whitey. Though the original was one of Petrie's masterstrokes as a filmmaker, along with "Lassie", which he directed two decades later. (The TV series was just ending in 1974 and Vincent actually had a recurring role on that classic series earlier in his acting career.)
There is some excellent stand-out acting in this teen romance, from Pamela Sue Martin, who is marvelous as Buster's former flame to Robert Englund in his film debut as Whitey (long before he became Freddie Kreuger in "Nightmare on Elm Street"). Look out for Clifton James standout performance as Jake.
But the best scene is saved for last as the scene is split between the local sheriff and his people wondering about a series of petty crimes and Buster's movements of utter sorrow, but to explain more would ruin the mystery. Otherwise, if you find an uncut version, enjoy the fact that it was one of the first mainstream movies featuring full-frontal male nudity, something that was unheard of in 1974, six years after the death of the Hays' office. It earned its R rating and then some. But ladies everywhere got an eyeful of Jan-Michael Vincent in his nakedness! Daniel Petrie had some nerve letting that one through.
So for the story alone, it would deserve a DVD release or a remake. I was thinking, how about Josh Hutcherson, that young lady from "Hugo" and maybe Gavin Fink to play Whitey. Though the original was one of Petrie's masterstrokes as a filmmaker, along with "Lassie", which he directed two decades later. (The TV series was just ending in 1974 and Vincent actually had a recurring role on that classic series earlier in his acting career.)
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
The Last Hated Minority: Our Children
To quote from the 1994 movie, "My Life in Pink"... "people are (crap)". In fact an accurate statement about all bullies in our lives. This could be all people whoever done us wrong. It is just how one person takes the abuse that they would lash out. In the Jake Nesbitt case in 1926, the man confessed that his wife made him feel bad, which in the 1920's, when women mostly were not a large part of the labor force as they are in these times, is a fatal stab at the man's maledom. His pride hurt, he proceded to kill her, burn the evidence that morning and go to work like he had nothing to do with it. I wondered if the cops back then sifted the fireplace for evidence of a recent blaze in the fireplace. I wonder what forensics these day do to find tell-tale signs in the bathtub, the plumming the floors, the sinks as well as the fireplace to figure out if what was said weeks later was true. The private eye hired by the company they worked for was indeed lucky. What if a similar crime today find guilt or innocence?
To think Nesbitt was even not allowed to die in prison of old age, but in freedom in an ordinary traffic crash in his early fifties with second wife and maybe a kid or two surviving his death! Those were simple times where good behavior said something. That a man or woman can remake themselves after something bad happening to them or to someone else that affected them. Not in today's world where one little sin and your marked for life, even if that sin was as simple as having sex with their best friend.
That friend's parents might have felt good to allow the other kid to be destroyed, even though if the prosecutor had been even more of an ass, he would have charged both boys with sexually abusing the other. No one has the right to charge kids with sex crimes ever if it is among other kids, though to support that makes people look at you strangely. It is not that we want to do that to them too. We just want a wedge removed that can be used for evil designs by any adult who cannot stand their offspring screwing their best friend in a friendly way. Parents should accept that even multiple acts of kissing, holding hands, hugging and sex will not turn their kid into a homosexual or lesbian. They may end up loving girls or for girls, boys; alas in a better way now that they learned to be tender to their mate. Whoever said boys should not hug and kiss and hold each other? Our bodies are programmed to respond to positive stimuli.
But we allow people like Angela Corey and John Bongivengo and Tom Corbett to behave like kids are property of the state and their parents. I hate to tell you this. Kids are not property as much as we adults are not property. We should not sell our kid and not get jailed? We also should not enslave another person and force them to plow our fields or do housework without attracting the feds or the state? Why does kids have to be treated like their mere chattel by us and by the state? We thought as a free country, an example for the whole world, we were beyond all that. Now we are the laughingstock of the world. with the exception of Britain, who also feel that way about sex like us. Though I have to see how many boys and girls are marked for life because they had sex with another kid and the parents went bonkers because of that.
Now who is the real abuser? Certainly in these above cases it is the adults who mentally and physically abused the kids in these cases. Forcing a kid on a register for life is the mental abuse and encourages future abuse of all kinds down the road. It screams out, "Oh boy! Let's make it easy for the named and shamed to become a real crook as an adult. Then we will feel justified we did that bad thing to him to put him in this manner." What the fick is going on around this land? As that Russian-American comedian would say, "Nice country, they still mark you as enemy of the state, just like the Soviets do."
I learned that every facet of history has a person or a people to hate to the point of outright warfare. Now that gays are out, what have we to trun against? Our own kids is now the answer to that question. Our kids are always treated like blacks were treated until recently. Kids are all colors and creeds, so hatred knows no ethnic background or sexual orientation.
LGBT's are still queasy around kids saying they are like them for they were for years equated with pedophiles in the hatred of the straights against their movement. So after people like Anita Baker objected to them, they allowed teens to be thrown under the bus of hatred. Even today, gay adults still do not accept kids seriously as one of them even though the feeling that made them what they are today originated before they were even born! So with that evidence, denying kids from their destiny is useless. They should not be afraid and stand up to a homophobic adult persecuting two boys for their feeling for each other. These two cases in Ohio were just a start. More kids are prosecuted for homosexual conduct with their mates than straight friends. There are more straights than gays in this world, but who gets the most ink? It is surely not most of the boys and girls I knew were screwing each other when parents are out on the town. It is the tow boys who seriously love each other that one parent or both of one child goes bonkers on that get busted over the boy and girl making out on the couch during the world series. Hypocrites all of those parents, who act before they think. One wonders if said act would set the real victim (the kid prosecuted to later think murderous thoughts if the wrong things happen to him, like getting raped in juvenile prison).
It makes me think this country is going downhill because we treat our next generation badly. We reap what we sow when they later screw us with worse things, like global war or the end of the world. We must stop beating up our kids. We must stop treating them as adults. We must stop persecuting them for having sex with other kids. We must start redefining childhood as well. We must make exceptions to stop overzealous prosecutors before that hurt any kid or any adult for anything. One way to start is treat kids fairly. Not prosecutor the kids for their sexual behavior. What is it with people and birth control? Fifty years and we still squabble over the Pill. Why?
To think Nesbitt was even not allowed to die in prison of old age, but in freedom in an ordinary traffic crash in his early fifties with second wife and maybe a kid or two surviving his death! Those were simple times where good behavior said something. That a man or woman can remake themselves after something bad happening to them or to someone else that affected them. Not in today's world where one little sin and your marked for life, even if that sin was as simple as having sex with their best friend.
That friend's parents might have felt good to allow the other kid to be destroyed, even though if the prosecutor had been even more of an ass, he would have charged both boys with sexually abusing the other. No one has the right to charge kids with sex crimes ever if it is among other kids, though to support that makes people look at you strangely. It is not that we want to do that to them too. We just want a wedge removed that can be used for evil designs by any adult who cannot stand their offspring screwing their best friend in a friendly way. Parents should accept that even multiple acts of kissing, holding hands, hugging and sex will not turn their kid into a homosexual or lesbian. They may end up loving girls or for girls, boys; alas in a better way now that they learned to be tender to their mate. Whoever said boys should not hug and kiss and hold each other? Our bodies are programmed to respond to positive stimuli.
But we allow people like Angela Corey and John Bongivengo and Tom Corbett to behave like kids are property of the state and their parents. I hate to tell you this. Kids are not property as much as we adults are not property. We should not sell our kid and not get jailed? We also should not enslave another person and force them to plow our fields or do housework without attracting the feds or the state? Why does kids have to be treated like their mere chattel by us and by the state? We thought as a free country, an example for the whole world, we were beyond all that. Now we are the laughingstock of the world. with the exception of Britain, who also feel that way about sex like us. Though I have to see how many boys and girls are marked for life because they had sex with another kid and the parents went bonkers because of that.
Now who is the real abuser? Certainly in these above cases it is the adults who mentally and physically abused the kids in these cases. Forcing a kid on a register for life is the mental abuse and encourages future abuse of all kinds down the road. It screams out, "Oh boy! Let's make it easy for the named and shamed to become a real crook as an adult. Then we will feel justified we did that bad thing to him to put him in this manner." What the fick is going on around this land? As that Russian-American comedian would say, "Nice country, they still mark you as enemy of the state, just like the Soviets do."
I learned that every facet of history has a person or a people to hate to the point of outright warfare. Now that gays are out, what have we to trun against? Our own kids is now the answer to that question. Our kids are always treated like blacks were treated until recently. Kids are all colors and creeds, so hatred knows no ethnic background or sexual orientation.
LGBT's are still queasy around kids saying they are like them for they were for years equated with pedophiles in the hatred of the straights against their movement. So after people like Anita Baker objected to them, they allowed teens to be thrown under the bus of hatred. Even today, gay adults still do not accept kids seriously as one of them even though the feeling that made them what they are today originated before they were even born! So with that evidence, denying kids from their destiny is useless. They should not be afraid and stand up to a homophobic adult persecuting two boys for their feeling for each other. These two cases in Ohio were just a start. More kids are prosecuted for homosexual conduct with their mates than straight friends. There are more straights than gays in this world, but who gets the most ink? It is surely not most of the boys and girls I knew were screwing each other when parents are out on the town. It is the tow boys who seriously love each other that one parent or both of one child goes bonkers on that get busted over the boy and girl making out on the couch during the world series. Hypocrites all of those parents, who act before they think. One wonders if said act would set the real victim (the kid prosecuted to later think murderous thoughts if the wrong things happen to him, like getting raped in juvenile prison).
It makes me think this country is going downhill because we treat our next generation badly. We reap what we sow when they later screw us with worse things, like global war or the end of the world. We must stop beating up our kids. We must stop treating them as adults. We must stop persecuting them for having sex with other kids. We must start redefining childhood as well. We must make exceptions to stop overzealous prosecutors before that hurt any kid or any adult for anything. One way to start is treat kids fairly. Not prosecutor the kids for their sexual behavior. What is it with people and birth control? Fifty years and we still squabble over the Pill. Why?
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
The Key to Framing Another Person is a Crime Which Either the Victim is Mistaken or Dead
It is the oldest templete in the book of a crime, where a person or animal (yes there are those too) is framed for something they did not do.
The first step to a frameup is there has to be a victim. It does not matter if the victim is living or dead (preferred to be the latter in cases of murder). There may not even be a victim at all. Sometimes a person might fake their deaths or other deaths to make a suicide look like a murder either accidently or on purpose. Maybe there is no victim or body, but it does not matter if there is other ways to prosecute someone.
People had been thrown in prison even without a body. Just ask Vince Doan, whose was convicted in a Ohio courtroom over a decade ago without a body of the ex-grilfriend he allegedly killed in cold blood. The prosecutors used other evidence to throw him into a prison cell. So much for needing a body that may have been obliterated by the killer or by the killer's family.
But the road to a frame job starts with a body being found. Many times the real killer is caught, but other times the wrong person or people are caught. Bad science, faulty witnesses, rotten police work, bad defense lawyering and even prosecutorial misconduct can factor into each case. Thought the main ingredient is a stiff or a victim or witness so confused by the attack they could misidentify the culprit. Innocents are jailed. The real doer is free to commit more crimes.
I still say that when a minor is falsely accused of murder or any other capital crime, rest assured the real culprit is 18 or over. There is no other way another kid committed the crime unless the later work in such cases reveal this. Until we can run into a falsely accused kid for another crime committed by another kid, we can automatically assume the real doer is not only of age to know right or wrong, but would be old enough to face hard time or in many cases, death.
They also have many things working to keep them uncaught, which is why in a few cases, Josh Young of Louisville comes to mind, where the real killer hoodwinks the system to falsely accuse someone else. This is why Josh Gouker, Josh's own father falsely accused his own son. We do not understand exactly what he said that convinced the prosecution to falsely accuse the teenager for killing his stepbrother Trey Zwicker last May, but it is clear from what is out in the wild that Gouker had the method down to a science. The sudden quickness he convinced a court to claim his son two months before the murder was just as quick as it took for Gouker to take the life out of Trey's body. He made Trey's poor mother witness the murder. He threatened her. God only knows if he is doing any further intimidation of her. With the antics of Gouker's cousins proving his reach is enormous, the more he is asking for the full weight of the law coming down on him once they realized they were made into a bunch of fools by a hardened felon who proved in his earlier sins he is patently dangerous to all people, things and animals. It is almost a given that the case will fall apart once it goes to trial. None of the evidence fits Josh Young, but it sure fits Josh Gouker. Get your Joshs right, Mr. Prosecutor. Do let a Known Felon throw his son to prison for the rest of life. Drop this case before it ruins you forever.
The first step to a frameup is there has to be a victim. It does not matter if the victim is living or dead (preferred to be the latter in cases of murder). There may not even be a victim at all. Sometimes a person might fake their deaths or other deaths to make a suicide look like a murder either accidently or on purpose. Maybe there is no victim or body, but it does not matter if there is other ways to prosecute someone.
People had been thrown in prison even without a body. Just ask Vince Doan, whose was convicted in a Ohio courtroom over a decade ago without a body of the ex-grilfriend he allegedly killed in cold blood. The prosecutors used other evidence to throw him into a prison cell. So much for needing a body that may have been obliterated by the killer or by the killer's family.
But the road to a frame job starts with a body being found. Many times the real killer is caught, but other times the wrong person or people are caught. Bad science, faulty witnesses, rotten police work, bad defense lawyering and even prosecutorial misconduct can factor into each case. Thought the main ingredient is a stiff or a victim or witness so confused by the attack they could misidentify the culprit. Innocents are jailed. The real doer is free to commit more crimes.
I still say that when a minor is falsely accused of murder or any other capital crime, rest assured the real culprit is 18 or over. There is no other way another kid committed the crime unless the later work in such cases reveal this. Until we can run into a falsely accused kid for another crime committed by another kid, we can automatically assume the real doer is not only of age to know right or wrong, but would be old enough to face hard time or in many cases, death.
They also have many things working to keep them uncaught, which is why in a few cases, Josh Young of Louisville comes to mind, where the real killer hoodwinks the system to falsely accuse someone else. This is why Josh Gouker, Josh's own father falsely accused his own son. We do not understand exactly what he said that convinced the prosecution to falsely accuse the teenager for killing his stepbrother Trey Zwicker last May, but it is clear from what is out in the wild that Gouker had the method down to a science. The sudden quickness he convinced a court to claim his son two months before the murder was just as quick as it took for Gouker to take the life out of Trey's body. He made Trey's poor mother witness the murder. He threatened her. God only knows if he is doing any further intimidation of her. With the antics of Gouker's cousins proving his reach is enormous, the more he is asking for the full weight of the law coming down on him once they realized they were made into a bunch of fools by a hardened felon who proved in his earlier sins he is patently dangerous to all people, things and animals. It is almost a given that the case will fall apart once it goes to trial. None of the evidence fits Josh Young, but it sure fits Josh Gouker. Get your Joshs right, Mr. Prosecutor. Do let a Known Felon throw his son to prison for the rest of life. Drop this case before it ruins you forever.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Something Quite Common Here (clue: common among wrongfully accused people)
Let's say someone deliberately goes out of their way and hurts someone else. It is enough to send them to the hospital. Despite the brave efforts of the medical staff, this person expires. From there as required by law, the lead doctor pronounces the death at the date and time it says on their clock, which by law is required. Accuracy is of the importance, so this time is scrutinized to get the exact time down to the second if possible, the minute at best.
This is also the case in a accident or a murder seen by a good amount of people, from witnesses to medical personel, even if able, the victim themselves. A shatted timepiece freezing sometimes the time of attack if the clock mechanism somehow stopped. Time stamps on certain cameras are scrutinized. In case of murder in this interconnected age, security cameras public and private are culled by investigators often without hesitation. Other times the civilian population could offer other evidence that can point to time of death. Even public tragedies of certain people and places will not escape the collective time stamp since many people are viewing on all kinds of recording devices. As the secretary of Dallas merchant, Abraham Zapruder, once said to her boss that fateful morning, "It isn't every day that the President of the United States visits Dallas."
It is these timepieces that make crime detection a whole lot easier for law enforcement and the people they interview and scrutinize over the issues of a crime and punishment. Having a definite time of death, along with the time the crime occurred can narrow down a suspect or suspects to a mere formality. Circumstancial evidence aside cannot pin down a person more than time of day itself. No one can be two places at once unless he or she has devine attributes. So if a suspect said he was playing bingo at the local American Legion as their estranged wife is being killed, this can be checked. If this is the case, someone else my dear Melissa is behind the caper.
Then the question is the person who cannot accout for where he or she was when a crime occurred. What were they doing in the area? Did the person have a beef with the victim? Was they foul play involved with them? Are their any witnesses that can pin said person there? The mind goes on and on. Basically speaking, if they were confirmed committing the act via witness, forensics, video and photographic records, phone records, even audio from an answer maching or cell phone, the law has their crook red-handed doing the act of criminality.
Which is where the vast majority of innocents are not is those with good timekeeping and forensic reconstructions of what might have happened. These are the type of cases that are classic "open and shut". All is needed is a guilty plea from the crook and plea for a lighter sentence (mercy).
Not so in cases of a crime that occurs privately without public oversight, where sometime later, if at all, some person or something comes across the body of a person or animal that is either buried, concealed or in plain sight if one looks good. These cases call on the skills and guesswork of the same investigators who deal with cases with more lively victims, witnesses and suspects. In these cases, it is let the best guesswork obtain a plausible reconstruction of what might have occurred. Such public records normally available could be lost. Examples include camera, data, witness and even the victim, who is sadly not alive. This leads to a glaring possiblilty of the cops being right or, if they get one guess off a bit, wrong.
Which leads to this case involving Josh Young, which falls into the found the body but no idea of how the death occurred or where for that matter. Trey Zwicker fell into foul play between eleven-thirty to one in the morning. This gives the doer a ninety-minute window to do their worst. The exact time of death is pure guess worked since there was no life left in the body. So guesswork would be haphazard at best by the people at the scene and in the morgue. The Medical Examiner cannot for the life of them not give an exact time of death, even if it is right in front of them. They would say, "I say the victim expired between such and such a time on such and such a date."
That estimate would be a too-wide window for even an innocent boy of fifteen like Josh Young to say they were at home asleep during at that time period. Even though he also told authorities when he last saw Trey, along with other details of that night, it seems to have gone in one ear and out the other when Detective Scott Russ interviewed Little Josh after Gouker's interview with the same detective in Alabama. Detective Russ acted like Josh was not saying the truth once he accepted Goukers side of the story, backed by Cassie and John telling him about Little Josh meeting with them later that night and spending the night at their house. Though, as I can personally attest their timeline would have rendered Josh too tired to attend school that day at Fern Creek, which I assume he went to the morning after the murder went down.
Which leaves the time scale also being too wide for Josh Gouker, Amanda Campbell (though more victim than suspect) and his cousins, Cassie and John when one also puts the data set on them. We have all sorts of guesswork of what might have gone down, but who killed Trey is definately pinned on Gouker. He had past trouble with his wife, so taking it out on Trey would be easy. Trey has to be assumed is very protective of his mom, so the reason he died is that he first suspected Gouker's true motives about his mother. His sneaking out of the house proved to be an act of rebellion that turned Gouker into his monster mode. Amanda tried to put a stop to it but it was for nothing. My guess is Gouker made her watch him murder Trey. That he beat on her and her surviving kid, maybe even Little Josh over that month to keep the truth from being told. (This is the worse case senerio: the beatings may have been limited to just Amanda herself.) I guess Gouker did not even say anything about him doing it in front of his boy or his little stepdaughter. Though Amanda knew he did the dirty deed,she was going through an act to keep all of them alive and Gouker from becoming the same wild animal he was in the tenth of May, 2011.
Sometime from late May to early June, Amanda Campbell got her chance to get away with her daughter, though for some reason she left Little Josh alone with the Psycho. She filed that protective order, which was of a vague reference that she suspected Gouker of murdering Trey.
This is all I know of the piece, but the ink was merely dry on the protective order when Gouker and Little Josh went off into the countryside with one or two other women. The car they were in broke down. So somehow they thumbed for some rides. Though he had to be ruthless with one lady, whose kidnapping led to the end of the line for Gouker in tiny Madison, Alabama in late June.
Little Josh even had that Amber Alert issued on him with Gouker suspected of kidnapping. Since it crossed state lines, the FBI should have filed federal charges against him. With his sexual history and criminal past, Gouker should have been sent to a Federal Court in Alabama or Kentucky to face justice. Had that occurred Little Josh would have been off the hook for the killing. Further police work, including the breaking of Cassie and John would have exposed Gouker. Boldened by this, Amanda would tell the cops everything. Gouker would be facing a count of Capitol Murder in Kentucky if he ever weaseled his way out of Federal Court on the Kidnapping Charge.
Things unfortunately fell apart. Amanda was to vague in the protection order, which agitated Gouker to do his little OJ Simpson-style act. Cassie and John intimidated everyone they get their hands on, even robbed Amanda that summer. The lead detective, looking for closure fell for Gouker's bear trap. No one had the guts from CPS to file kidnapping charges against Gouker, for they were the ones who put the boy in harm's way. The final blow was Little Josh even talking to the cops on more than one occasion with no lawyer or parent present. All this put an innocent boy behind bars.
This is also the case in a accident or a murder seen by a good amount of people, from witnesses to medical personel, even if able, the victim themselves. A shatted timepiece freezing sometimes the time of attack if the clock mechanism somehow stopped. Time stamps on certain cameras are scrutinized. In case of murder in this interconnected age, security cameras public and private are culled by investigators often without hesitation. Other times the civilian population could offer other evidence that can point to time of death. Even public tragedies of certain people and places will not escape the collective time stamp since many people are viewing on all kinds of recording devices. As the secretary of Dallas merchant, Abraham Zapruder, once said to her boss that fateful morning, "It isn't every day that the President of the United States visits Dallas."
It is these timepieces that make crime detection a whole lot easier for law enforcement and the people they interview and scrutinize over the issues of a crime and punishment. Having a definite time of death, along with the time the crime occurred can narrow down a suspect or suspects to a mere formality. Circumstancial evidence aside cannot pin down a person more than time of day itself. No one can be two places at once unless he or she has devine attributes. So if a suspect said he was playing bingo at the local American Legion as their estranged wife is being killed, this can be checked. If this is the case, someone else my dear Melissa is behind the caper.
Then the question is the person who cannot accout for where he or she was when a crime occurred. What were they doing in the area? Did the person have a beef with the victim? Was they foul play involved with them? Are their any witnesses that can pin said person there? The mind goes on and on. Basically speaking, if they were confirmed committing the act via witness, forensics, video and photographic records, phone records, even audio from an answer maching or cell phone, the law has their crook red-handed doing the act of criminality.
Which is where the vast majority of innocents are not is those with good timekeeping and forensic reconstructions of what might have happened. These are the type of cases that are classic "open and shut". All is needed is a guilty plea from the crook and plea for a lighter sentence (mercy).
Not so in cases of a crime that occurs privately without public oversight, where sometime later, if at all, some person or something comes across the body of a person or animal that is either buried, concealed or in plain sight if one looks good. These cases call on the skills and guesswork of the same investigators who deal with cases with more lively victims, witnesses and suspects. In these cases, it is let the best guesswork obtain a plausible reconstruction of what might have occurred. Such public records normally available could be lost. Examples include camera, data, witness and even the victim, who is sadly not alive. This leads to a glaring possiblilty of the cops being right or, if they get one guess off a bit, wrong.
Which leads to this case involving Josh Young, which falls into the found the body but no idea of how the death occurred or where for that matter. Trey Zwicker fell into foul play between eleven-thirty to one in the morning. This gives the doer a ninety-minute window to do their worst. The exact time of death is pure guess worked since there was no life left in the body. So guesswork would be haphazard at best by the people at the scene and in the morgue. The Medical Examiner cannot for the life of them not give an exact time of death, even if it is right in front of them. They would say, "I say the victim expired between such and such a time on such and such a date."
That estimate would be a too-wide window for even an innocent boy of fifteen like Josh Young to say they were at home asleep during at that time period. Even though he also told authorities when he last saw Trey, along with other details of that night, it seems to have gone in one ear and out the other when Detective Scott Russ interviewed Little Josh after Gouker's interview with the same detective in Alabama. Detective Russ acted like Josh was not saying the truth once he accepted Goukers side of the story, backed by Cassie and John telling him about Little Josh meeting with them later that night and spending the night at their house. Though, as I can personally attest their timeline would have rendered Josh too tired to attend school that day at Fern Creek, which I assume he went to the morning after the murder went down.
Which leaves the time scale also being too wide for Josh Gouker, Amanda Campbell (though more victim than suspect) and his cousins, Cassie and John when one also puts the data set on them. We have all sorts of guesswork of what might have gone down, but who killed Trey is definately pinned on Gouker. He had past trouble with his wife, so taking it out on Trey would be easy. Trey has to be assumed is very protective of his mom, so the reason he died is that he first suspected Gouker's true motives about his mother. His sneaking out of the house proved to be an act of rebellion that turned Gouker into his monster mode. Amanda tried to put a stop to it but it was for nothing. My guess is Gouker made her watch him murder Trey. That he beat on her and her surviving kid, maybe even Little Josh over that month to keep the truth from being told. (This is the worse case senerio: the beatings may have been limited to just Amanda herself.) I guess Gouker did not even say anything about him doing it in front of his boy or his little stepdaughter. Though Amanda knew he did the dirty deed,she was going through an act to keep all of them alive and Gouker from becoming the same wild animal he was in the tenth of May, 2011.
Sometime from late May to early June, Amanda Campbell got her chance to get away with her daughter, though for some reason she left Little Josh alone with the Psycho. She filed that protective order, which was of a vague reference that she suspected Gouker of murdering Trey.
This is all I know of the piece, but the ink was merely dry on the protective order when Gouker and Little Josh went off into the countryside with one or two other women. The car they were in broke down. So somehow they thumbed for some rides. Though he had to be ruthless with one lady, whose kidnapping led to the end of the line for Gouker in tiny Madison, Alabama in late June.
Little Josh even had that Amber Alert issued on him with Gouker suspected of kidnapping. Since it crossed state lines, the FBI should have filed federal charges against him. With his sexual history and criminal past, Gouker should have been sent to a Federal Court in Alabama or Kentucky to face justice. Had that occurred Little Josh would have been off the hook for the killing. Further police work, including the breaking of Cassie and John would have exposed Gouker. Boldened by this, Amanda would tell the cops everything. Gouker would be facing a count of Capitol Murder in Kentucky if he ever weaseled his way out of Federal Court on the Kidnapping Charge.
Things unfortunately fell apart. Amanda was to vague in the protection order, which agitated Gouker to do his little OJ Simpson-style act. Cassie and John intimidated everyone they get their hands on, even robbed Amanda that summer. The lead detective, looking for closure fell for Gouker's bear trap. No one had the guts from CPS to file kidnapping charges against Gouker, for they were the ones who put the boy in harm's way. The final blow was Little Josh even talking to the cops on more than one occasion with no lawyer or parent present. All this put an innocent boy behind bars.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Give Me Five: People who justifed trying children as Adults
In my first "Gimmie Five" installment, we look at the five individuals who doomed the future of all kids from 9 to 16, because of numerous quirks in the law in each state affected, overzealous prosecutors and maybe the victim's family going "age blind" when it comes to justice. I go from personal seriousness of their crimes against society.
1. Willie Bosket (1978): New York Times reporter Fox Butterfield in "All Good Children" decribed Bosket in his book as an intellgent man from a long line of criminals of both genders, dating back to slavery days in pre-Civil War South Carolina. The man's daddy even earned a degree from the University of Kansas! Willie started getting into trouble with the law since he was five. Despite all that and his scholastic record, Bosket tried to be a good wannabe, but a rash decision of criminality at fifteen in 1978 left him in juvenile hall. His conviction for murder in juvenile court led to rash changes in New York law that lowered the age of criminal transfer to thirteen in a number of cases from assult to murder. It was borderline racist when it passed overwhelmingly, but Bosket's bad behavior as an adult literally justified the change of the law. Bosket was barely out of trouble when he: tried to break out of a juvenile facility; four years after that, he was out 100 days when he assulted another man at the arpartment complex he and the man were living at; then he was convicted of assult and arson in actions related to his assult conviction. He struck out and was given twenty five years to life in prison for his habitual-offender status. Since then, he had not been a model prisoner. He is currently held in a specially-made cell in isolation with limited contact due to periodic attacks on guards and other prisoners over the years. (Just like Hannibal Lechter!) Now known as 84A6391, Bosket is now housed in that special cell at the Woodbourne Correctional Facility. He not up for parole until 2062, which means he is going to die there.
2. Eric Smith (1993): Thirteen-year-old Smith did a dumb thing which made him fall for the Bosket law in a big way. Not even born when the law was passed, the boy not only killed four-year-old Derrick Robie in their Upstate New York town of Savona, he raped and mangled the little kid. In 1994, he was convicted as an adult for the murder in the second degree despite a valient defense of his actions, which was felt was caused by a mental disorder. He was given nine years to life, the maximum penalty at the time for his crimes. He tried hard to get released after serving nine years, but the little boy's family want him to die in prison, afraid of Smith's intentions of moving back to Savona if released. They have never accepted any of the young man's apologies since that day their boy was found dead. It is like they have no heart of forgiveness despite Eric's letters and interviews with the media which has him forgiving himself for something he would never would have done as a grown-up. Since 2002, Smith has been denied parole five times. Nothing will ever change as long as members of Robie's family still harbor ill feeling and evil thoughts about the older boy for what he did to their little boy. This year will see Smith go up for parole again and get rejected for a sixth time. Sometimes, there is no forgiveness, even for undersized kids with glasses and red hair.
3. Cameron Kocher (1989): Five years before Smith's major crime came this case set in neighboring Pennsylvania. Cameron Kocher was accused of shooting and killing his seven-year-old neighbor and friend Jessica Carr in cold blood over a video game she beat him in over and over again. The prosecutor of this case at the time was making a name for himself in the Pocono Mountain political scene. So he thought he can try nine-year-old Cameron as an adult. He might has well have written his resignation papers that day. The blond-haired, blue-eyed kid, who never was in serious trouble in his short life, was facing life without parole for first-degree murder as an adult. Unlike fellow Pennsylvanian, Jordan Brown (whose own charges were false to the point of insanity), Kocher was released to his parents on $50,000 bail. Three long years past before it was learned that the prosecutor made a big mistake in his accusations agaist the boy. Kocher was sentenced as a juvenile on reduced charges and given probation. Karr's family was further devistated and never forgave either the boy or the state. Though questions of even innocence waft through the Poconos to this day, no one ever looked again at this murder or properly investigated the crime in the first place. The magical bullet that killed Carr was never found that day or ever, leading me to believe maybe the Carrs or their neighbors concealed it or someone else killed her. Also it was never really positive if Kocher even fired the .33 caliber rifle that day. The neighbors, who she was riding snowmobiles with the day she was killed that snowy day in the winter of 1989, were having domestic troubles. The lady left the man, leading the man to kick in the door of a family friend's house in an altercation that October, over six months after Jessica's death. The violation of his restraining order saw the man face jail time for the crime of passion. Also, the prosecutor in the original case who wanted to send Kocher to a life sentence had his career destroyed in a scandal involving child abuse, serving more time than Cameron did in jail. As of this year, Kocher has not gotten into any trouble. Let us hope it stays that way.
4 and 5. Mitchell Scott Johnson and Andrew Douglas Golden (1998): Two boys, one bad day and two different fortunes for the two blood brothers and best friends. Four kids and one teacher killed, with ten other people injured in a shooting spree on Mar. 25, 1998 outside their middle school in Jonesboro during the Golden Age of School Shootings (1998 to 2001). Mitchell was thirteen. Andrew was just eleven and a half. The prosecutor in the case later said if not for their ages, the boys would have been facing the death penalty or an adult charges like life without parole. Though both boys were sentenced in juvenile court, people affected by the shooting never forgave the kids or the state for trying them as juveniles. But I have to thank the prosecutor for the right decision for once. The results in retrospect led to two different fortunes. This is due to the nature of the two families. Andrew had a better family structure, so when released on his birthday in 2007, he started out with a clean slate, leaving Mitchell in the dust. (Andrew also had heard by that time of the older ex-buddy's misadventures.) Mitchell's life after release in 2005 was not so good, he was put in prison twice: once for drug charges and another for theft, financial identity fraud and drug possession. In 2008, the older man was sentenced to four years in jail. These days, it is much easier for Arkansas to persecute kids as young as eleven as adults in a variety of senerios. Time will only tell when another falsely-charged juvenile will show that said laws are patently unfair and illogical.
1. Willie Bosket (1978): New York Times reporter Fox Butterfield in "All Good Children" decribed Bosket in his book as an intellgent man from a long line of criminals of both genders, dating back to slavery days in pre-Civil War South Carolina. The man's daddy even earned a degree from the University of Kansas! Willie started getting into trouble with the law since he was five. Despite all that and his scholastic record, Bosket tried to be a good wannabe, but a rash decision of criminality at fifteen in 1978 left him in juvenile hall. His conviction for murder in juvenile court led to rash changes in New York law that lowered the age of criminal transfer to thirteen in a number of cases from assult to murder. It was borderline racist when it passed overwhelmingly, but Bosket's bad behavior as an adult literally justified the change of the law. Bosket was barely out of trouble when he: tried to break out of a juvenile facility; four years after that, he was out 100 days when he assulted another man at the arpartment complex he and the man were living at; then he was convicted of assult and arson in actions related to his assult conviction. He struck out and was given twenty five years to life in prison for his habitual-offender status. Since then, he had not been a model prisoner. He is currently held in a specially-made cell in isolation with limited contact due to periodic attacks on guards and other prisoners over the years. (Just like Hannibal Lechter!) Now known as 84A6391, Bosket is now housed in that special cell at the Woodbourne Correctional Facility. He not up for parole until 2062, which means he is going to die there.
2. Eric Smith (1993): Thirteen-year-old Smith did a dumb thing which made him fall for the Bosket law in a big way. Not even born when the law was passed, the boy not only killed four-year-old Derrick Robie in their Upstate New York town of Savona, he raped and mangled the little kid. In 1994, he was convicted as an adult for the murder in the second degree despite a valient defense of his actions, which was felt was caused by a mental disorder. He was given nine years to life, the maximum penalty at the time for his crimes. He tried hard to get released after serving nine years, but the little boy's family want him to die in prison, afraid of Smith's intentions of moving back to Savona if released. They have never accepted any of the young man's apologies since that day their boy was found dead. It is like they have no heart of forgiveness despite Eric's letters and interviews with the media which has him forgiving himself for something he would never would have done as a grown-up. Since 2002, Smith has been denied parole five times. Nothing will ever change as long as members of Robie's family still harbor ill feeling and evil thoughts about the older boy for what he did to their little boy. This year will see Smith go up for parole again and get rejected for a sixth time. Sometimes, there is no forgiveness, even for undersized kids with glasses and red hair.
3. Cameron Kocher (1989): Five years before Smith's major crime came this case set in neighboring Pennsylvania. Cameron Kocher was accused of shooting and killing his seven-year-old neighbor and friend Jessica Carr in cold blood over a video game she beat him in over and over again. The prosecutor of this case at the time was making a name for himself in the Pocono Mountain political scene. So he thought he can try nine-year-old Cameron as an adult. He might has well have written his resignation papers that day. The blond-haired, blue-eyed kid, who never was in serious trouble in his short life, was facing life without parole for first-degree murder as an adult. Unlike fellow Pennsylvanian, Jordan Brown (whose own charges were false to the point of insanity), Kocher was released to his parents on $50,000 bail. Three long years past before it was learned that the prosecutor made a big mistake in his accusations agaist the boy. Kocher was sentenced as a juvenile on reduced charges and given probation. Karr's family was further devistated and never forgave either the boy or the state. Though questions of even innocence waft through the Poconos to this day, no one ever looked again at this murder or properly investigated the crime in the first place. The magical bullet that killed Carr was never found that day or ever, leading me to believe maybe the Carrs or their neighbors concealed it or someone else killed her. Also it was never really positive if Kocher even fired the .33 caliber rifle that day. The neighbors, who she was riding snowmobiles with the day she was killed that snowy day in the winter of 1989, were having domestic troubles. The lady left the man, leading the man to kick in the door of a family friend's house in an altercation that October, over six months after Jessica's death. The violation of his restraining order saw the man face jail time for the crime of passion. Also, the prosecutor in the original case who wanted to send Kocher to a life sentence had his career destroyed in a scandal involving child abuse, serving more time than Cameron did in jail. As of this year, Kocher has not gotten into any trouble. Let us hope it stays that way.
4 and 5. Mitchell Scott Johnson and Andrew Douglas Golden (1998): Two boys, one bad day and two different fortunes for the two blood brothers and best friends. Four kids and one teacher killed, with ten other people injured in a shooting spree on Mar. 25, 1998 outside their middle school in Jonesboro during the Golden Age of School Shootings (1998 to 2001). Mitchell was thirteen. Andrew was just eleven and a half. The prosecutor in the case later said if not for their ages, the boys would have been facing the death penalty or an adult charges like life without parole. Though both boys were sentenced in juvenile court, people affected by the shooting never forgave the kids or the state for trying them as juveniles. But I have to thank the prosecutor for the right decision for once. The results in retrospect led to two different fortunes. This is due to the nature of the two families. Andrew had a better family structure, so when released on his birthday in 2007, he started out with a clean slate, leaving Mitchell in the dust. (Andrew also had heard by that time of the older ex-buddy's misadventures.) Mitchell's life after release in 2005 was not so good, he was put in prison twice: once for drug charges and another for theft, financial identity fraud and drug possession. In 2008, the older man was sentenced to four years in jail. These days, it is much easier for Arkansas to persecute kids as young as eleven as adults in a variety of senerios. Time will only tell when another falsely-charged juvenile will show that said laws are patently unfair and illogical.
How Normal was the Life of Josh Gouker and his former Lover, Ms. Young
I wonder how normal her life was over the last fourteen years of her life. She was in most part a teen mother or close to adulthood. I got to see what her age was relative to Gouker and their son. We know that Gouker was seventeen when Little Josh was born.
Typically in the late teens the range of girls when guys are sexually active is from early to late teens, with a good precentage active within their age group. What is troubling with guys fifteen to eighteen (roughly) is those who might either hook up with a young girl or a young woman. The one end with a younger girl looking at a older guy as more mature and more likely to support any baby that comes out of such union. The other end looking for a mature woman as a mother substitute. Tradition might hold that an young girl looks on the older boy as the father substitute and the younger guy looking at the older girl or woman as a mother substitute. Though both couples playing the sharp edge of society's view toward said relaitionships.
Take Christian Fernandez's parents for instance. At twelve years old, it was an older guy who impregnated Christian's mother and in effect paid the price for said pregnancy. In the effect on Christian's mother seeing both mother and son put in foster care, I see society not only going down hard on the daddy, but the mommy too. Such young pregnancy's disrupt both, posing its own unique circumstances for the parents and the child.
Take for instance the daddy. Such unions might meet with immediate disapproval from both sets of the parent's parents. Often the younger member's parents accusing the older member of the relationship for knocking up their daughter. (I wonder why it is the daddy that gets the worst of the social beating.) This is why the greater the age gradient, the bigger chance for the older male partner or the younger male partner to run from their part in the pregnancy and evential rearing of the child.
Also it is the older male parter or the older female partner to face a variety of criminal charges resulting in their sexuality. This often see these parents disadvantaged from the start of the parenthood. Often left with a jail sentence and registering as a sex offender, though as low as a level-one, least likely to reoffend, it could mean their means of supporting the child and the mother and themselves to be dead in the water. There goes their future in the heartbeat of the child produced from the relationship. Even if the pregnacy is ended via abortion or the child placed for adoption or even miscarried (this is a teenage girl), the record follows a person forever in many states. Ruined for life just as the state deems them as such.
Gouker was seventeen when his son was born, so how old was Josh's mom? Maybe from backtracking their couples misfortunes, along with their son's life can we maybe deduce how all three spiraled downward into this tangent which presents a reality where Josh Young is falsely accused of murder by his old man. Something in Gouker's life was disjointed in the year after Josh's mom and Gouker's ex-lover left this planet. I wonder what it was. The most-common explaination is jealousy of Little Josh's prospects compared to Gouker's own. Overlapping that was the growing suspecions in that of his stepson, who was suspecting that Gouker was physically and mentally abusing his mom, Amanda.
That night in May it just snapped for Joshua Gouker to the point that Gouker killed him, maybe behind the high school or somewhere close. Remember the area is in the middle of huge shopping area southeast of the airport with a nearby suburban neighborhood, so there would be few places Gouker could have done the dirty deed. Also, as I read these pages of drivel, I gauge that between eleven and one is the timeframe the crime might have occurred. So the victim did indeed sneaked out of the house while Gouker and Amanda had their alone time. One of them must have realized that Trey was not there. Whether Gouker went alone or had Amanda with him is anyone's guess, but I was erring on Gouker maybe by himself. If Amanda was with him, she was not with him when the murder occurred, but he would have either lied about it or told her of the deed, threatening to kill her too if she talked about it the cops. Why indeed that July would Gouker's cousin and boyfirend rob her of some property if they were not part of a conspiracy? Why did Amanda not do much talking either in Gouker's presence or alone with a cop? Her protective order was the first indication that something was out of the ordinary with Gouker and his treatment of her since the murder of her boy. Gouker's running off with one or two females and his son was equivalent of a signed confession. (The case of the dad in Seattle who blew himself up, along with his two sons in front of a social worker waiting outside is much as saying, I killed someone, now watch me avoid criminal responsibility.)
Gouker's talking with the cops after his arrest later that month and their waiting until he was back in their correctional system to formally charge his son is the result of a conspiracy of three people. Namely, Gouker's cousin and boyfriend (cousin in terms of relationship), who lied to the cops about Little Josh coming over to their house later that night. This is going on as Gouker changed clothes and dragged Amanda along for that Circle K ciggy run. This would have left Little Josh alone with his little step-sister, oblivious of what went on while they slept. It is quite possible that sometime between leaving the Circle K to the afternoon of the discovery of Trey's body that Gouker got together with his cousins Cassie and John to statergize and keep Amanda from spouting off to the cops about what he did to her boy. (Mr. Zwicker did notice at the scene of the crime, Amanda's appearence and emotions toward the crime and Gouker. He thought his ex-lover was being abused.) Gouker just got Amanda to pretend the moment the body was discovered that they were just getting home and found Trey has not gone to school that day. That they were not informed by Seneca High School of this anomaly before one that afternoon is pure speculation at if they even got the call. They knew a whole lot more than they let on to the cops that day or up to the middle of June when Amanda had enough of Gouker, filing the protection order. Afraid of his own arrest for murder, Gouker fled with Little Josh.
So in order to prevent his evential prosecution, the second part of his frame-up came into being, namely to spout of his falsehoods to a stumped lead detective, whom he had deceived from day one. The next was to use his cousin and their friends to intimidate any possible witness who could refute him, even down to what Cassie and John did to poor Amanda that July. The protection order shocked Gouker, who took Little Josh. That prompted the Amber Alert. Next Gouker and company's missteps on the road from Louisville to Tennessee to Alabama was guarenteed to eventially result in arrest. (It was the dumbest crime spree I ever heard of!) When it seemed that Little Josh was rid of his old man, the old man comes back and frames for Trey's death. Then it takes until November to even charge the boy with the murder. By that time, Gouker and company, not to mention the prosecution, had all their ducks in a row. They will not budge, not until this fall. God only knows if Josh, nearly the same age his old man was when he was born, will be found innocent. What will the State do to Gouker once they know they were duped? Even if the jury hears this one, what if the jury is hung, but the net effect the truth about Gouker is the reason? One would speculate innocence or a hung jury would result in Gouker be the time his son turns seventeen will be the one facing the capital murder charges, on top of the actions he and his people did to frame Josh, resulting in not just him but at least two other people getting jail time. It is a matter of time, Mr. Gouker, before your sin is paid in full in this world and in the next. The clock is ticking. The Death Chamber in Frankfort is awaiting a possible victim; it might be you.
Typically in the late teens the range of girls when guys are sexually active is from early to late teens, with a good precentage active within their age group. What is troubling with guys fifteen to eighteen (roughly) is those who might either hook up with a young girl or a young woman. The one end with a younger girl looking at a older guy as more mature and more likely to support any baby that comes out of such union. The other end looking for a mature woman as a mother substitute. Tradition might hold that an young girl looks on the older boy as the father substitute and the younger guy looking at the older girl or woman as a mother substitute. Though both couples playing the sharp edge of society's view toward said relaitionships.
Take Christian Fernandez's parents for instance. At twelve years old, it was an older guy who impregnated Christian's mother and in effect paid the price for said pregnancy. In the effect on Christian's mother seeing both mother and son put in foster care, I see society not only going down hard on the daddy, but the mommy too. Such young pregnancy's disrupt both, posing its own unique circumstances for the parents and the child.
Take for instance the daddy. Such unions might meet with immediate disapproval from both sets of the parent's parents. Often the younger member's parents accusing the older member of the relationship for knocking up their daughter. (I wonder why it is the daddy that gets the worst of the social beating.) This is why the greater the age gradient, the bigger chance for the older male partner or the younger male partner to run from their part in the pregnancy and evential rearing of the child.
Also it is the older male parter or the older female partner to face a variety of criminal charges resulting in their sexuality. This often see these parents disadvantaged from the start of the parenthood. Often left with a jail sentence and registering as a sex offender, though as low as a level-one, least likely to reoffend, it could mean their means of supporting the child and the mother and themselves to be dead in the water. There goes their future in the heartbeat of the child produced from the relationship. Even if the pregnacy is ended via abortion or the child placed for adoption or even miscarried (this is a teenage girl), the record follows a person forever in many states. Ruined for life just as the state deems them as such.
Gouker was seventeen when his son was born, so how old was Josh's mom? Maybe from backtracking their couples misfortunes, along with their son's life can we maybe deduce how all three spiraled downward into this tangent which presents a reality where Josh Young is falsely accused of murder by his old man. Something in Gouker's life was disjointed in the year after Josh's mom and Gouker's ex-lover left this planet. I wonder what it was. The most-common explaination is jealousy of Little Josh's prospects compared to Gouker's own. Overlapping that was the growing suspecions in that of his stepson, who was suspecting that Gouker was physically and mentally abusing his mom, Amanda.
That night in May it just snapped for Joshua Gouker to the point that Gouker killed him, maybe behind the high school or somewhere close. Remember the area is in the middle of huge shopping area southeast of the airport with a nearby suburban neighborhood, so there would be few places Gouker could have done the dirty deed. Also, as I read these pages of drivel, I gauge that between eleven and one is the timeframe the crime might have occurred. So the victim did indeed sneaked out of the house while Gouker and Amanda had their alone time. One of them must have realized that Trey was not there. Whether Gouker went alone or had Amanda with him is anyone's guess, but I was erring on Gouker maybe by himself. If Amanda was with him, she was not with him when the murder occurred, but he would have either lied about it or told her of the deed, threatening to kill her too if she talked about it the cops. Why indeed that July would Gouker's cousin and boyfirend rob her of some property if they were not part of a conspiracy? Why did Amanda not do much talking either in Gouker's presence or alone with a cop? Her protective order was the first indication that something was out of the ordinary with Gouker and his treatment of her since the murder of her boy. Gouker's running off with one or two females and his son was equivalent of a signed confession. (The case of the dad in Seattle who blew himself up, along with his two sons in front of a social worker waiting outside is much as saying, I killed someone, now watch me avoid criminal responsibility.)
Gouker's talking with the cops after his arrest later that month and their waiting until he was back in their correctional system to formally charge his son is the result of a conspiracy of three people. Namely, Gouker's cousin and boyfriend (cousin in terms of relationship), who lied to the cops about Little Josh coming over to their house later that night. This is going on as Gouker changed clothes and dragged Amanda along for that Circle K ciggy run. This would have left Little Josh alone with his little step-sister, oblivious of what went on while they slept. It is quite possible that sometime between leaving the Circle K to the afternoon of the discovery of Trey's body that Gouker got together with his cousins Cassie and John to statergize and keep Amanda from spouting off to the cops about what he did to her boy. (Mr. Zwicker did notice at the scene of the crime, Amanda's appearence and emotions toward the crime and Gouker. He thought his ex-lover was being abused.) Gouker just got Amanda to pretend the moment the body was discovered that they were just getting home and found Trey has not gone to school that day. That they were not informed by Seneca High School of this anomaly before one that afternoon is pure speculation at if they even got the call. They knew a whole lot more than they let on to the cops that day or up to the middle of June when Amanda had enough of Gouker, filing the protection order. Afraid of his own arrest for murder, Gouker fled with Little Josh.
So in order to prevent his evential prosecution, the second part of his frame-up came into being, namely to spout of his falsehoods to a stumped lead detective, whom he had deceived from day one. The next was to use his cousin and their friends to intimidate any possible witness who could refute him, even down to what Cassie and John did to poor Amanda that July. The protection order shocked Gouker, who took Little Josh. That prompted the Amber Alert. Next Gouker and company's missteps on the road from Louisville to Tennessee to Alabama was guarenteed to eventially result in arrest. (It was the dumbest crime spree I ever heard of!) When it seemed that Little Josh was rid of his old man, the old man comes back and frames for Trey's death. Then it takes until November to even charge the boy with the murder. By that time, Gouker and company, not to mention the prosecution, had all their ducks in a row. They will not budge, not until this fall. God only knows if Josh, nearly the same age his old man was when he was born, will be found innocent. What will the State do to Gouker once they know they were duped? Even if the jury hears this one, what if the jury is hung, but the net effect the truth about Gouker is the reason? One would speculate innocence or a hung jury would result in Gouker be the time his son turns seventeen will be the one facing the capital murder charges, on top of the actions he and his people did to frame Josh, resulting in not just him but at least two other people getting jail time. It is a matter of time, Mr. Gouker, before your sin is paid in full in this world and in the next. The clock is ticking. The Death Chamber in Frankfort is awaiting a possible victim; it might be you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)