A Blink On Crime Exclusive: DeDe Spicher speaks for the first time about her ordeal in the Kyron Horman investigation- continued  ©

S. Christina Stoy, Editor In Chief- Blink On Crime

DeDe Spicher and Terri Moulton Horman

In the first part of blinkoncrime.com’s exclusive interview with DeDe Spicher,  she revealed that after over 3 years of attempting to provide Multnomah County Sheriffs Office as well as Assistant Deputy Attorney Norm Frink with the necessary information they requested to clear her from any suspicion in the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Skyline second grader Kyron Horman; she has finally been cleared after passing a polygraph as part of her requirement under an immunity deal that has been sealed with the court.  Unofficially cleared, that is.

Spicher and her attorney Chad Stavley,  who have since refused all local media requests,  would very much like the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office and current District Attorney Rod Underhill to clear her officially and publicly.

Spicher is adamant that law enforcement never had any reason to question her statements to them from the beginning, has cooperated fully for over three years and recently testified before the grand jury to prove she had nothing to hide.  While she would like the public to know that any assertions to the contrary are untrue, and sometimes have been offered maliciously,  her desire to speak out about her experience over the last three years is primarily to force investigative resources to review it’s progress- and hopefully adjust in a way to further leads in Kyron’s case.

As was proven not only by her recent polygraph,  but also by the verification that no evidence ever existed to support investigator’s theory in the first place,  Spicher had no information about anyone’s potential involvement in Kyron’s disappearance, let alone her own.

The continuation of our interview, which provoked some very interesting revelations long felt to be a possibility by many, was confirmed by Ms. Spicher  as she says- told to her by Terri Moulton Horman are prompting new possible theories in the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Kyron Horman.  Two days after Kyron Horman’s eleventh birthday.

Stoy: So, in your estimation then,  why do you think that detectives Herron and Kravfe were so sure that you were involved or knew who was.

Spicher:  I have thought about this a lot, and I think there were a few reasons.  I think because I was advised through a meeting Terri had with a family friend and attorney that she should assume that all of her communication was being monitored by law enforcement and anyone she had contact with.  He told her to assume the house was bugged as well as vehicles, etc.  I also believe you did an article a while back that pointed out her phone was in Kaine’s name.   As this was a day or two after she was served with the restraining order,  she was also told that

Stoy (interrupting): You bought a prepaid phone after June 28^th and never had one before that?  I had read that you or someone else purchased them the day of or the day after Kyron’s disappearance.

Spicher: No.  I purchased one prepaid phone, after Terri shared the info from her meeting, in my own name, either June 29^th or 30^th.    I think they were hung up on the fact that I came to her aid with no contact for so long so they just were convinced there had to be.

Stoy: ok, sorry, continue.  So you are not saying that LE was suggesting that you were hiding some other number you had and that was how they were alleging that you HAD to have been in contact with Terri or some other person prior to and on June 4th and that escalated your “poi” status in your opinion?

Spicher:  They did not say that to me specifically, but what they repeated over and over again, was that Terri and I had to have had some form of communication we were hiding.  It never made any sense to me because I knew I only had my cell that I had forever until the end of June,  and I knew I had not been in contact with Terri since her 40^th birthday party in March.  So I would ask- well then I guess that means that you don’t have any contacts you can’t verify from either of us so why am I even in this “interview”?

To my recollection they never shared with me or answered any of my questions in response when something they kept hounding me about seemed absurd and conflicting with their theory.

Stoy: Which was?

Spicher: At first,  I think that they really believed I was involved,  and at some point I think they were talking more “accessory after the fact” because I got the impression ( although they did not share it with me) that Terri’s cell phone activity that day was nowhere near where I was,  and my vehicle never left, nor did I.  They would not verify that they located the ceramics/glassware artist [pottery artisan] I told you about and still have not.

Stoy: So in your opinion, you were clearly the linchpin of this case,  they [LE] believed you held the key to solving it and/or implicating Terri exclusively at that point, they no longer entertained your involvement per se?

Spicher: I honestly don’t think I could say that I ever believed that they stopped treating me as some sort of suspect.  I never felt that way,  but yes, absolutely they 100% believe that Terri is responsible and I definitely believed we all had to be interviewed and scrutinized or whatever,  but I really thought up until the meeting with Norm Frink that they [LE] would abandon that theory quickly because if they were positive I was the key, and I knew I was not, that would also eliminate Terri, who I did not and do not believe, but have no proof, was involved or knew anything.

Stoy: Right, so if you had nothing, and they felt you were the only nexus, it had to mean that they had no independent evidence of anything or anyone else so they would start in another direction?

Spicher: Right, but every interaction I had with them following and including the request to participate in the sting against her, made me believe they never did.  To get back to the why question you asked me- my final thought on that is that they kept pointing out that I was the person to tell everyone not to speak to them without attorneys in the beginning.    I would ask like who do you mean,  because that would have been my opinion across the board for any situation, but it was definitely based on what was getting out about how they were going about this.  I was scared and it turned out it was good reason.   I also would point out to them that I did not think that was or should be the basis for suspicion because if it was, it seemed to me that I was told that several staff members at Skyline had hired counsel, and Kaine was the FIRST to have one between he and Terri and I had told her at least a week or so before that she should.

Stoy: Why do you think she did not immediately take your friendly advice?  Your Dad was LE, and I presume she knew that.  People can say what they want, but I know many members of law enforcement in different jurisdictions and agencies.  I have worked with them or contributed analysis to cases with them privately [I cannot and would not ever include that in anything I choose to write on] and I can tell you that I do not know one of them that if they were the focus of a criminal probe or internal investigation they absolutely do not agree to an interview without a representative.  In fact,  Herron is or was the President of Mulnomah County Police Union or was, if I recall correctly.  So to that end, I find that a pretty hypocritical reason for suspicion of anyone.

Spicher: (laughs) Interesting.  I am not sure that I knew that. The reason Terri didn’t get an atty before the RO was because she was told by LE that if she did, she wouldn’t be privvy to any of their investigative discoveries, she would be out of the loop in finding Kyron.

Stoy: Have you had a desire or opportunity to review any sort of past events regarding the MCSO, I guess I should add, that involve anyone in this case or investigation you have had contact with?

Spicher: No,  do you mean like any other detectives or that sort of thing?

Stoy: Have you ever met with or been interviewed with any other agencies or detectives?

Spicher:  I believe I either met or just said hello to the guy you mentioned in that recent article of yours while he was at the house.  Both Kaine and Terri were there at the time as well.

Stoy: Bobby O’Donnell?

Spicher: That’s it,  yes, him.  Why did you ask me if I am aware of any sort of events- should I be?

Stoy: Well, I think that tangentially if I were you I would be considering just about everything as it related to what you have been through,  and I am aware of some what I will refer to as “stuff” but what I don’t want to do prior to the completion of our interview process is temper any of your responses with anything I know peripherally if that’s ok with you.  If you wish, once I publish the continuation which will have that sort of information,  I would invite you to comment on it for the record if you choose- are you ok with that?

Spicher: yes, that’s fine and probably a good idea.

Stoy: back briefly to the “sting request against Terri- On that issue- the request they extended to you outside the presence of your attorney and that they asked you not to tell Chad, as you think back ,  considering you have had no communication with Horman for over three years did you believe they thought it would work?  What did your attorney say when you told him?

Spicher: I can’t and won’t address any conversations I have had with my attorney,  but to answer your question as to my opinion,  I really don’t know for sure, I knew that I did not, and thought it was really, really odd- that was my first reaction.  After more thought,  and other conversations,  I don’t see how they thought it would work, or why they were still seemingly convinced after I had just passed the poly, etc, Terri was still their suspect and responsible.   What is your opinion on it?

Stoy:  I think I may reserve my thoughts on that for my piece.  Again, not wanting to temper your opinions  as we move along here and I think that could happen if I did.  Is that ok with you?

Spicher: Sure, thank you.

Stoy: I would like to move on to another subject for discussion.  I would just like to confirm for the record that I have never prior to this interview, asked you any questions about your potential knowledge of steroid use by yourself, or by Terri or Kaine Horman.  Is that correct? (more…)

Special Appearance Announcement: S. Christina Stoy, Editor In Chief,  www.blinkoncrime.com,  investigative journalist and criminal analyst will be a guest on this evenings THE DANA PRETZER SHOW- Host Dana Pretzer, discussing the Arias case LIVE.  Click Here To Listen To The Podcast

  ...” Why does most human violence occur between those who are emotionally involved, or more technically, within an attachment paradigm?

Dr. J. Reid Meloy from Violent Attachments

Phoenix,  AZ- Arguably the best psychological witness presented at trial, Dr. Janeen DeMarte, clinical psychologist, took the stand last week as the first witness in the State of Arizona’s rebuttal case in the trial of Jodi Arias for the murder of Travis Alexander.

In stark contrast to her previous behavior in court, Jodi Arias refused to look at Dr. DeMarte on the stand, and feverishly took notes or whispered to her attorney Jennifer Wilmott through the State’s direct examination of their witness.

With one exception.  When Dr. DeMarte was asked by Prosecutor Juan Martinez if Jodi Arias was a victim of domestic violence resulting in battered woman syndrome,  Ms. Arias looked up for DeMarte’s answer.  “No.”

After a battery of psychological tests were completed and scored, and approximately  12 hours of clinical interview with defendant Arias- Dr. DeMarte diagnosed Jodi Arias with Borderline Personality Disorder.  Dr. DeMarte had the added luxury of having her home vandalized and her laptop stolen following the start of the trial.  That information was not shared in open court.

Significant from a psychological evaluation perspective, Jodi Arias’ expert witnesses Alyce LaViolette and Dr. Samuels felt Arias was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a result of the killing of Travis Alexander on June 4, 2008 at his home in Mesa, Arizona.  Only Samuels was licensed to test Arias similarly to DeMarte, and it appears the results were very different.   Samuels testified that he never re-tested Arias after he learned her accounts of June 4 were fabrications and that was an error on his part in his finding Arias suffered from PTSD.

Cross examination of Dr. DeMarte induced a migraine headache suffered by Arias (her 3^rd since trial) although she is taking Imitrex for the condition.   Earlier in the day, Wilmott began her cross by repeatedly stating that DeMarte was practicing therapy without a license prior to her licensing exam, to which DeMarte responded “That is not correct, it is permitted under the supervision of a licensed psychologist, which I was.”

Wilmott went on to question DeMarte’s credentials specifically related to expertise in domestic violence and her current knowledge of the practices of Dr. Lenore Walker- largely considered the pioneer of domestic violence research and testing.  Walker’s work is novel within the psychological community in the area of the battered woman syndrome diagnosis.

Wilmott unsuccessfully tried to trip up DeMarte by suggesting that Walker no longer uses her own 6 point scale to include the possibility of battered woman syndrome to which DeMarte replied, “I would say that you are being inaccurate.”

DeMarte completed her testimony with very limited juror questions, although it was clear that a juror or two was not sold that Arias’ only disorder is BPD.

While DeMarte represented the State well in my opinion; Jodi Arias remains the round peg in the jello rhomboid to me.  Too many unanswered behavioral observations from a criminal profiling perspective to fit into the BPD mold.

Prior to the start of the State’s rebuttal case, defense counsel Kirk Nurmi recalled a witness for the defense who never made it into the witness list for trial, Mr. Bryan Neumiester.

In previous hearings where Neumiester appeared as an expert for the defense in the authentication of the May 10, 2008 phone sex recording made by Arias, the State agreed to a stipulation that it was indeed Travis Alexander’s voice on the tape, and that it was made on May 10.

In earlier testimony Juan Martinez elicited from Jodi Arias, Martinez accused her of recording the tape without Alexander’s permission or knowledge.  Arias was forced to admit that at no time is the fact that the conversation is being recorded heard mentioned by either party during the recording.  More on that recording in a bit.

Neumiester was able to magnify the very haunting last image of a live Travis Alexander’s face in the shower, specifically his iris, and gain agreement via stipulation that the reflective image contained therein is that of Jodi Arias.  She was not holding a gun or knife and the image was time-stamped correctly.

This was the second time Juan Martinez agreed to a stipulation from the same expert witness regarding the recorded media, both digital and audio in this case- outside the presence of the jury.

Mr. Neumiester is an expert witness for colleagues in Mr. Martinez’s own office as well as the Mesa Police Department.  Might suggest offsite meetings going forward.

The final witness listed for the State’s rebuttal case is an investigator for the Mesa County Police who specializes in computer forensics, Detective Robert Brown.    Detective Brown describes himself as a Computer Forensics Detective:

As a Digital Forensics expert, I possess attention to detail in my forensic capability, as well as the ability to explain complex technical concepts in a non-technical manner.

In the course of my regular duties, I also perform the following:

-Support ongoing internal investigations and litigation matters
-Utilize a variety of forensic tools (Encase, FTK, Helix, Cellebrite, Wireshark, etc.)
-Perform storage forensics (for example, hard drives, phones, USB storage)
-Perform network captures for traffic analysis
-File-system analysis and file carving (for example, to extract email, documents, and other trace evidence)
-Identifying , collection and analyzing electronic information, relevant to a case, incident or event of interest
-Establish timelines and patterns of activity of individuals and electronic devices and software
-Following forensically sound practices, including preserving chain of custody
-Efficiently and effectively report progress, risks and issues associated with assignments to varying levels of management

Following sound practices including preservation of chain of custody is looking like a welcome addition to this case.

In testimony from Detective Michael Melendez where the images allegedly taken by Travis’s camera were recovered from the deleted or unallocated portions of the memory stick via Encase software we learned that the infamous afternoon of highly graphic sex images of both Travis and Jodi that were dated and time-stamped on June 4^th took place that afternoon prior to Travis’s murder.

Thus, making Jodi Arias an invited guest.

As an invited guest spending the day indelicato delicto, it certainly makes it difficult to prove the felony murder charge she is facing- and does not help the pre-meditation or murder in the first degree allegation because the basic motive is that Jodi went there to murder Travis because he was not going to take her to Cancun.   While certainly a possibility, I would offer that just about every psychological professional who sat across from Arias missed the fact that she literally saw her old boyfriends more than once along her trek that ended up with her last breakup.  Weird, yes.

Otherwise known as a raging sign of dependent personality disorder.

…” You are the worst thing that has ever happened to me…”

-Travis Alexander

 According to the text messages back and forth between Jodi and Travis the weeks prior to his murder, it was patently clear that Alexander wanted Arias out of his life for good.

Has what the state since learned after having Jodi on the stand under oath and repeated in cross examination opened the door to further investigation of the electronic media in this case in preparation for rebuttal?  Looks that way.

Keeping in mind that the phone sex recording was May 10^th.  About a week later, Arias testified, she thought the phone was stolen.  She alleges it was found by her Aunt in 2010 in her grandfather’s car.  This would be the same aunt that she pointed out in court, and who has not been seen in court in weeks although she had attended daily.

Arias writes in her journal entry May 22, 2008 that there are several explicit photos on her stolen phone, and 2 recorded sex tapes.   In 2010, Arias though her attorneys, deliver this phone into evidence with no chain of custody information in a then 2 year old case.   Miraculously, this occurs just as Arias is moving from the “maybe not the ninja’s” defense.  From the defense perspective it has some statements from Alexander on it that they feel support’s their defense.  From the State’s perspective it proves that Arias was certainly very open to the sexual practices of the couple and never felt abused, nor was she put off by the comments by Alexander.

A win-win for both sides so why not agree to its stipulation, right?

Is this why Juan Martinez was hammering home the journal entry written about the “fruitful imaginations” the two explored, causing Arias to miss Lonnie’s christening?

The infamous sugar fest that takes place just before Arias allegedly walks in on Alexander in masturbatory behavior where some image of a boy lands at her feet on January 21^st?  I note that one of the pictures allegedly from the June 4^th date seems to show Alexander engaged in some self-satisfaction that ended with a surprise photo taken from the point of view of the chair next to him.

You’ll see where I am going with this momentarily. (more…)

Tonight LIVE On The DANA PRETZER SHOW

Click Here To Listen To Blink Podcast

*BLINK DISCUSSES THE JODI ARIAS TRIAL TONIGHT LIVE AT 9PM ON THE DANA PRETZER SHOW

PODCAST ADDED CLICK HERE*

Phoenix, AZ-  In a terse exchange prior to the hiatus in the Arias trial, the defense repeated their contention that they want The Honorable Sherry Stephens to order a directed verdict or a mistrial in the State’s case against Jodi Arias.

As reported exclusively by BOC it does seem the prosecution missed quite a bit of potential evidence including a possible motive- the duct tape around Travis’s right arm.  Was it the final straw that made Jodi Arias snap as she was allegedly taking photos of Travis in the shower without his knowledge?

There was also an exparte hearing held in Judge Stephen’s chambers, however, the contents of those minutes have not yet been filed- although the docket suggests they have.  The defense is now testing Jodi Arias’s canon camera for some undisclosed reason.

With the defense preparing to start its case next week in spite of the outstanding motions before the court- have the prosecution’s actions harmed their case?

The issue at the forefront seems to hinge on something that the prosecution never introduced- On Purpose, says Prosecutor Juan Martinez.

The prosecution’s very first witness, Maria Hall, who was the female friend attending the Cancun trip with Alexander  on June 10^th,  told the court that Travis told her he had been stalked while on a date with another girl and had his tires slashed.   The intimation before the court was clear regardless of the defense attempts to point out that Travis never said it was Jodi who was responsible.

Nancy Grace and Jane Velez Mitchell lit up their HLN evening roster discussing Arias’s stalker behavior with several associates of Alexander.  Dr. Karl  Hiatt said one Sunday he was told that he had his tires slashed and that it was possible that something might escalate and he may not show up for dinner as a result.

Outside the presence of the jury Juan Martinez argued that they did not call the witness who Travis was on that particular date with because he did not want to create “an inflammatory” situation for the jury causing an appellate issue.

However,  Martinez also lets it slip that Lisa Andrews Daidone does not want to testify and the defense tells the judge the prosecution has withheld her contact information from them and THEY intend to call her.  Daidone recently deleted her FB profile and other social media sites in her name.

Does it make any sense to anyone why a prosecutor would not call a witness who could place a dangerous weapon in the hands of a person committing a destructive and openly violent act who they allege is guilty of doing exactly that for exactly the same reasons in the instant case?

From Daidone’s bog entry in 2008:

 ”…So because Heavenly Father allowed this to happen, I have grown in such a way that I couldn’t have otherwise, or at least not as quickly. While if you asked me a few months from now if I could go back would I change it, I would say “Absolutely,” I’m not sure how much I would actually change about it. Of course I wouldn’t want Travis to be taken. I might even opt for Jodi to be popped instead. But who am I to decide the fate of the hundreds of people that have been effected by this? It’s hard

to say which way is better. Travis always talked about Opportunity Cost. He spoke of how his time could be used best, to benefit the maximum amount of people. I’m sure he wishes he could have done more while he was here, but I don’t think he regrets leaving. He is doing something amazing up in the Spirit World. I know it. I can feel it. He is continuing to learn and progress. He’s helping others to do the same. He is the same wonderful, creative, spontaneous, caring, gentle, driven, foe- paint-loving, show-tune-singing man that I fell in love with…”

Is it because in the 48 Hours Mystery program so frequently noted by the defense Detective Flores openly states there was no evidence whatsoever that Jodi was involved in that incident  after he repeats his theory that Travis was shot first?  Both these statements made by the lead detective in the case on national television  directly conflict with the prosecution’s case as testified by Esteban Flores.

NO.

Is it because they already know who was responsible for the multiple tire slashing incidents and presenting that information might corroborate a story told to them by Arias in the past?

In her own words, Lisa Andrews Daidone began dating Travis Alexander in July 2007.  According to the minutes filed from trial January 16^th,  the tire slashing incident was in December 2007, both Alexander and Andrew’s tires were slashed and the individual came to the front door .  Martinez states Andrews will testify to these facts.   Prior to dating Alexander,  Daidone was dating a common friend and member of their Mormon ward- Steve Bell.  Arias claims she and Travis began dating  February 2,  2007.

Daidone will not go into how she and Travis began dating, or why, but there is a  Steve Bell connected to this group that has had some serious troubles with the law immediately preceding the break up, and many following.

Could the mystery stalker have been on her end and NOT Arias?  If so, you can bet the defense will be bringing that issue into court next week and providing the jury with this eye opening gem- expected to cause further problems with the State’s theory.

That’s not all, unfortunately.

Thomas Brown, a former roommate of Travis Alexander in the home of his murder, was interviewed up to three times by Detective Flores whereby he told them that Jodi had open access to the home when he was around and the Arias he knew was completely shy and somewhat awkwardly withdrawn.  He was having a hard time picturing her do this without help and he told cops that.

He also told them something about Travis being shocked to get the call that Jodi Arias was standing outside the home the early morning hours of June 4, 2008 and that he had been up all night performing some sort of protection rite.   Brown’s information was not included in any information given to the defense and he was not even aware his name came up in the investigation by Jodi Arias herself.  I would expect that issue to surface promptly as well.

Gus Searcy,  $100K ring earner for Prepaid Legal Services and now Legal Shield was noticed to be available this week for interview.  Travis was scheduled to be on the conference call with Searcy at 6:45PM the evening of his murder.

Artful  Dodging

While the trial is in hiatus, one are of Jodi Arias’s life is quite active and well, pecuniary.

Arias, through her family, has taken to EBay to sell her personally rendered offerings the macabre set is snatching up for a few hundred clams a piece during the trial.

It is believed to be managed by Arias’s mother Sandy,  who uploaded images to Arias’s MySpace after her incarceration to include one of Gary Alexander- Travis’s older brother.

The defense portion of the Jodi Arias trial for the murder of Travis Alexander led by Kirk Nurmi and Jennifer Willmott will begin its case January 29^th.

Check back to blinkoncrime.com for updates.

Jacqueline Beaufort, contributing editor

S. Christina Stoy “Blink”,  Editor In Chief www.blinkoncrime.com discusses the Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre and this year’s top true crime cases as special guest of Dana Pretzer, host of  THE DANA PRETZER SHOW on scaredmonkeys radio tonight at 9 PM.

Dana’s  featured guests will also include Retired FBI Criminal Analyst Clint van Zandt , Richard Muti and Charles Buckley – former New Jersey Prosecutors and National Authors of “The Charmer” and Editor In Chief “Red” of www.scaredmonkeys.com

Unfortunately, 2012 was a year filled with blinkoncrime’s coverage of  Jerry Sandusky,  Isabel Celis,  Joshua Powell,  Kyron Horman,  Etan Patz, Christine Sheddy,  Megan Sharpton , Jessica Ridgeway , Kelli Bordeaux and many other topics to be discussed.

Click To Listen To Podcast

Happy Valley- PA On the heels of convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky’s transfer to his new home,  what most predicted would follow- has.

Former Penn State President Graham Spanier,  fired by the Penn State Board of Trust the same day as legendary late-Nittany Lions Coach Joe Paterno, is facing serious charges today filed by Sandusky’s prosecutors.

Spanier is facing counts of obstruction of justice,  perjury, conspiracy, endangering the welfare of children and failure to report allegations of child abuse.

Tim Curley and Gary Schultz,  who were facing perjury and charges based on “non-reporting”,  are now facing all five similar charges as Spanier-  additional filings occurred simultaneously.

Linda L. Kelly stated the men “used their positions to conceal and cover up for years the activities of a known child predator,” on Thursday following the announcement.

Please check back to www.blinkoncrime for this developing story.