The Case of Preston Hughes III: Brain Teaser #4

Barbara Lunsford has graciously shared with me all the case documents and photos which she acquired on her own initiative and her own dime. (Thousands of dimes, actually.) One set of photos was described as Preston's Apartment. That collection consisted of 14 interior and 2 exterior shots. For now, I offer only the 2 exterior shots.

Consider the photos carefully. There is exculpatory evidence here, and there is mystery.

I offer 10 points for the first person to explain why they photos are exculpatory. I offer 10 points for the first person to identify the mystery. I offer 50 points for the first person to explain (to my satisfaction) why the HPD took these photos.

This is an open book brain teaser. Feel free to search the HPD police reports, any of my previous posts, the interior photos Barbara has already posted online, Google, Bing, etc.

ADDENDUM (10 July 2010):
I award Matt (from California) the 10 Skeptical Juror points for being the first to mention the photos were taken at night (or very early morning) though the police photographer claimed he got the call at 8:30 AM.

Hale's police report indicates to me that he received the call to head over to Preston's apartment at about 8:30 AM. Whether he is off by a little bit or not, there can be no denying at that time of year that the sun would have been up for some time. But the pictures of the stairs leading up to his apartment and of his front door were both taken well before sunup. Seems like the times do not add up at all.

The darkness is exculpatory because it impeaches the HPD claim about their search of Preston's apartment, particularly when coupled with the 2:42 AM log in time for the evidence collected from his apartment.

Preston claims the HPD planted Shandra's glasses in his apartment, then faked the Voluntary Consent for Search and Seizure form. He was certainly right about the form being manufactured. (See Documents Gone Wild.)  The HPD, on the other hand, now seems to have lied (one again) about when they searched Preston's apartment. 

Advantage Preston.

(Except for the small issue of Preston facing execution while the HPD guys go on about their lives as if they did nothing wrong.)

ADDENDUM (11 July 2010):
I award Rene vd Berg (from the Netherlands) the 10 Skeptical Juror points for being the first to recognize that the two photos were of different buildings.

first photo is from a different house taken at night for the reason stated above,staircase is wooden.second photo is taken bij daylight,light is unlit en must be taken at the actual search.later was not possible because of the police sealing of the house, which must be visible after the search,the stickers ribbon etc.

Not only are the two staircases different, the two buildings have different siding material. I disagree with Rene, however, on the timing of the photo. Though it is not as obviously taken in the dark as is the first photo, I believe nonetheless that it was. Consider the shadows cast by the right hand railing. They are crisp and dark, as if the railing was being illuminated by bright direct lighting such as a flash or a spotlight. The shadows are not faint and indistinct as they would be if illuminated by early morning, post sunrise, diffuse lighting. Consider also the darkness underneath landing at the lower right of the photo.

The fact that the photos are of two different buildings poses a mystery in three parts.

1. Given that only the second photograph is of Preston's apartment (as per the address), what building was captured in the first photograph?

2. Why was the building photographed?

3. Why was the photograph included in response to Barbara Lunsford's request for all the photos associated with the case of Preston Hughes III?

Fifty points still remain to be awarded to the first person to solve the mystery. I can (and will eventually) provide a specific answer to the first question, but I can only speculate regarding the second two. I will therefore award the fifty points to anyone who provides the correct answer to part 1 of the mystery, and 100 bonus points to anyone who can provide a definitive answer to parts 2 and/or 3.

ADDENDUM #3 (12 July 2010)
I hereby award Rene vd Berg (from the Netherlands) the fifty points for properly identifying the building in the first photograph.

i think that the first photo has been taken from the north west corner of the lakewood complex looking south east.the object just left looks like the garbagedisposel which is stil in place today ( goolemaps).the roofline corresponce ,with notch, also look at the vert.lines, bricks wood. the wooden staircase is also the same used in the lakewood complex.why? i think it is the view from the hole in the fence.just for the general view...

That gives Rene 60 Skeptical Juror nugatory points total. Not only is Rene now in the lead as an individual, Netherlands is now in the lead as a country. This is, in my unbiased opinion, bigger than all the ice skating gold medals I anticipate they will win in the upcoming Olympics.

I offered 50 points for this portion of the brain teaser because it required not only observational skills (limited to the documents I present in my post) but investigation mettle as well. Rene relied on Google maps to search both the Lakehurst apartment complex (where Preston lived) and the Lakewood Village complex (where some other interesting characters lived). I search both Google maps and Bing maps. I found the best view of the building from Bing's bird's eye view.

Here ya go.

I've circled the northwest apartment building in the Lakewood Village complex. Rene identified that building as the one in the first photo. It's not at all obvious from this satellite view. I'm not sure how Rene homed in on that building, but I magnified to the max allowable, then scanned each of the complexes from multiple directions. I did so in both Google Earth and Bing Bird's Eye. Here's a better shot, looking from the south, using Bing's Bird's Eye view.

Then I clipped the image and magnified further using Gimp. Here's the best shot.

It's a bit blurry due to the latest magnification, but you can clearly see the staircase, the distinctive design of the front of the building, and even the metal container still in the lower right corner. The clincher for me was the quarter-circle curb to the right of the building. I find nothing close anywhere else in either complex.

That is certainly the building in the first photo, so I awarded Rene the 50 points. I do not, on the other had award any points for providing a compelling explanation on why the photo was taken and included in the package sent to Barbara Lunsford. Rene suggested it was simply take to provide a general view of the region surrounding the hole in the fence.

Incorrect. Thanks for playing.

If you were, on that night, standing by the infamous hole in the fence, you would not be able to see the building. A tall fence would be in the way. Here's a reminder photo from Shandra's Trail

See? The photographer must have been standing just on the other side of the fence at the left of the screen. But why? I have some thoughts, but I want a definitive answer. The 100 bonus points remain to be won. I suspect they can be won only by someone with intimate knowledge of the building or the HPD. Speculation is nonetheless welcome.

 <-- Previous                           Table of Contents                              Next --> 

The Case of Preston Hughes III: Summary

Current as of September 23, 2012:

Sixteen year old Shandra Charles and her three-year old cousin Marcell Taylor were stabbed to death in a dark, overgrown, wooded field located in west Houston. Each suffered two stab wounds: one each to the chest and one each to the neck. Shandra's left carotid and jugular were completely severed. Marcell's left carotid and jugular were punctured.

The evidence that Preston Hughes committed the murders consists of:

1. Shandra Charles identified her assailant as "Preston" to a police officer before she died.

2. The murder weapon was found in Preston's apartment. There was blood on the knife.

3. Preston's clothes, recently worn, had blood on them.

4. Shandra's glasses were discovered in Preston's apartment.

5. Preston Hughes confessed, not just once, but twice.

I summarize my findings below.

1. Shandra Charles could not have possibly identified anyone as her assailant. Anyone with a severed carotid artery will lose brain function within 90 seconds. They will die soon thereafter, within several minutes. The police officer claiming to have heard a dying declaration arrived on the scene no earlier than 15 minutes after the stabbing. The officer reported that, rather than attempting to staunch the blood from her bleeding neck wound, he interviewed her. The officer reported that she was calm and spoke in complete sentences. This cannot be true.

Pools of Blood
Eleven Twenty Five
Cases Involving Carotid Arteries
Exsanguination
Silence of the Lambs
Where's Willis?
Shime-Waza

2. Preston's knife, the one found in his apartment, was not the murder weapon. The knife has a single-edge blade approximately 1" wide. The neck wounds were made with a double-edged blade approximately 5/8" wide.

Shandra's Neck
Stabbings Well Done
Stabbings Redeaux
On Being Blunt
The Right Tool for the Job
Marcell's Neck

3. No blood was visible on the clothing. The police seemed particularly uninterested in testing the clothing for blood. After 213 days of no testing, the clothing was subjected to a presumptive test for blood just 4 days before the head of the serology lab would testify at trial. The presumptive test would be positive for blood. The areas of clothing highlighted during the presumptive test were then subjected to a definitive test. The definitive test was negative for blood. There was no blood on Preston's clothing.

The Searchers
Down the Rabbit Hole

4. A pair of eyeglasses was indeed found between the cushions of Preston's sofa. The police conducted two searches of Preston's apartment: one before 2:58 AM and one after sunrise. Items from Preston's apartment were secured during the first search and turned into the property locker at 2:58 AM. The eyeglasses were not listed among the items turned in. The items were then removed from the property locker, returned to Preston's apartment, and staged for photographs taken during the second search. The eyeglasses appear only during this second search in which the other items were clearly staged.

The Searchers Part 2
The Searchers Part 3
Singularity
Down the Rabbit Hole

5. Preston's two confessions are the most exculpatory documents of all. They reveal that he had no knowledge of the crime. In each confession, he confessed to stabbing Shandra as many as ten times.  In the first confession, he made no mention of Marcell being stabbed. In the second confession, he confessed to stabbing Marcell in close proximity to Shandra. Both confessions are falsified by the facts of the crime scene. Shandra and Marcell were each stabbed only twice, and in identical, precise fashion: one stab wound to the chest and one stab wound to the neck. Shandra and Marcell were not stabbed in proximity to one another.

Confession #1
A Blogger's Cruelty
14244
The Big Why
The Big How
Easy Peasy
The Gingerbread Man
Confession #2

In summary, not a single piece of evidence used to convict Preston Hughes withstands scrutiny. There is no viable evidence that Preston Hughes committed the crime.

None.

 <-- Previous                           Table of Contents                              Next --> 

Independence Day 2012

June 25, 2012

Mr. Preston Hughes III
Polunsky Unit #000939
3872 FM 350 South
Livingston, Texas 77351

[My Address Redacted]

Dear Mr. Allen

Hello. I hope this letter finds you doing very well, in the best of health and spirits and in the comfort of God's graces and care upon your receipt. At the time of the writing of this letter I am doing as well as can be expected of one considering the unfortunate circumstances and conditions I have been forced to endure for twenty-three years.

My name is Preston Hughes III. I have been provided with some of the information you've posted on The Skeptical Juror website concerning the wrongful conviction against me. I'm writing to you today because I thought you may be interested in reading about a matter concerning the wrongful conviction. Please feel free to post this letter (or the relevant portions of it) and materials enclosed on the website.

I have obtained evidence that proves the police illegally searched my apartment prior to arresting me without a warrant and without probable cause, planted false evidence (taken from the crime scene where the victims were found) between the cushions of one of my couches and created a fabricated consent for search and seizure to justify their illegal searches of my apartment. This evidence could help establish the fact that I am innocent as well as prove wrongdoings by the police and prosecutor. However I need the immediate assistance of an attorney to prepare and file an effective appeal arguing the fact that I was denied, in state court, the opportunity for full and fair examination/review of the "original exhibit" Voluntary Consent for Search and Seizure in evidence that is claimed by the police and prosecutor to be an alleged original consent.

An examination of the original exhibit, by a Forensic Document Examiner, will in fact determine the signature, Preston Hughes III, on the fabricated consent isn't authentic. I NEVER signed a consent for search and seizure. The signature on the fabrication wasn't made from ink in an ink pen. It's "XEROXED." I have determined what document bearing the signature Preston Hughes III was used in the creation of the fabrication but I have unsuccessful in my attempts to obtain a copy of the document.

[Omitted: approximately one entire page detailing evidence of faked Voluntary Consent and Seizure form.]

I have been denied a fair trial, under due process of law, and the opportunity to effectively appeal the wrongful conviction against me. I have been trying to get this matter, along with others, exposed for over two decades but have been unable to do so, due to the fact I have been misrepresented by nothing but court appointed attorneys that have been helping the state to keep these matters covered up.

Thursday, June 21, 2012, I received a letter from the ineffective court appointed attorney that has been misrepresenting me for the past several years. He wrote to tell me that I'll be bench warranted to Houston a week or so from the date of this letter (June 19th) for a hearing in which the trial judge is going to schedule an execution date for sometime in November.

Before I make it back to Houston the attorney will have done something he knows I DON'T want him to do, which is file a successive State Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. I don't want him filing the appeal because he's working to help the state keep the wrongdoings against me covered up and trying to help the state wrongfully kill me. Therefore he'll be filing yet another frivolous appeal.

I must raise $5,000.00 dollars immediately to enable me to finance the services of an investigator to obtain evidence and information that establishes my innocence and further wrongdoings by the police and prosecutor. The evidence and information will have to be used for the purpose of getting a stay of execution, since I was unable to locate an attorney to file effective State Petition for Write of Habeas Corpus on my behalf.

To learn more about the wrongful conviction against me and the wrongdoings of the police, prosecutor and court appointed attorneys, and how donations can be made to help me, please log onto: www.mysterycrimescene.com/preston-hughes-time-recap.html and www.prestonhughes.blogspot.com.

I would like to thank you in advance for your time, cooperation, and any assistance you could give in the above matters. Your assistance would be gratefully appreciated. Thank you.

Sincerely,

[Signed]
Preston Hughes III

-----

Offender : PRESTON III HUGHES, ID: 00000939
Sender : John B Allen
Date : 6/30/2012 3:23:05 PM EST, Letter ID: 36641140
Location : TL

Preston,
   I received your letter today. I realize time is critical. I'll get straight to the point. I'll also be brief and compact in my writing because of cost considerations associated with JPAY.
   I am not an attorney or a licensed investigator, but I have been researching and writing extensively of your case. I have uncovered additional evidence of your innocence.
   First, it is impossible that Shandra Charles gave the police your name in a dying declaration. She died soon after she was stabbed, well before the police arrived. Her carotid was transected (completely severed) according to the autopsy reports, which I have obtained. A person can live for only about 90 seconds with a severed carotid. I wrote a half dozen or so posts about that issue on my blog The Skeptical Juror. I'll provide more information to you via U.S. mail.
   Second, none of the wounds had a blunt edge, again according to the autopsy report. If a single-edged knife made the wounds, the neck wounds would have revealed a blunt edge. For technical reasons, the chest wounds may or may not have revealed a blunt edge. The neck wounds were made with a double-edged knife, not the single-edged knife they took from your apartment and presented in court as the murder weapon.
   Third, I have found additional information that the voluntary consent to search form was fabricated from pieces, as you claim. In addition to the tape lines (visible above your signature AND across the top of the page), the typewriter line spacing is inconsistent between the upper and lower halves of that document. Within the upper half, the line spacing is consistent with a typewriter. Within the lower half, the line spacing is also consistent with a typewritten. Taken together, however, the line spacing is not consistent. It changes somewhere between the upper and lower halves. That document was not created during one pass through a typewriter.
   Fourth, I have reviewed the photographs obtained by Barbara Lunsford. Two of those photographs show your apartment from the outside. They were both taken at night. I assume none of the officers who arrived at your apartment that night had a camera with them. If they did not, then those external, nighttime photos are evidence the police returned to your apartment to search it before they had a warrant or a consent (manufactured or otherwise). Those external, nighttime photos are consistent with the time the items taken from your apartment were logged into the property room, i.e. 2:58 AM. I suspect, as you do, that the glasses were planted there during that warrantless, non-consensual search.
   The evidence against you seems to consist of Shandra's dying declaration (which we now know could not have happened), the knife found in your apartment (which we now know could not have been the murder weapon), the glasses found in your couch (which we have even more evidence may have been planted), the small spots of blood found on your clothes (which are absolutely inconsistent with someone who just severed two carotid arteries), and your confessions (which show you had no idea of what happened in that field that night.)
   In summary, I may be the investigator you've been hoping to find for so long. While I am a writer, rather than a professional investigator, I nonetheless seem to have a knack for finding in the case documents critical evidence that others have missed. And while I might not be exactly what you had in mind, the good news is two-fold: I work pro bono and I have already uncovered additional evidence of your innocence.
   I intend to keep researching and writing about your case, now with an even greater sense of urgency. I also intend to search for a capable, assertive, pro-bono attorney to take on your case. Here's what I need from you, by return U.S. mail as quickly as possible.
   1. Inform me if you in fact wish my help researching your case and seeking an attorney.
   2. Give me permission to tell attorneys I contact that I contact them on your behalf.
   3. Inform me of any legal issues I should be aware of. Is it necessary, proper, and/or wise that I coordinate with your court-appointed counsel. In any case, please provide me with the contact information for your attorney. Please tell me whether or not you wish that I touch base with him.
   4. Inform me of any restrictions regarding what I send you via U.S. mail. Is there a restriction on length? Is there a restriction on attachments, such as printed images?
   5. Understand that I work with case documents. I would like a copy of every document you have. If you have had the document posted online or if you provided the document to Barbara Lunsford, then I already have a copy. If you have any other documents, please copy them (or have them copied) and send them to me as quickly as possible. No telling what I might find in them. I am particularly interested in all the trial transcripts, all the preliminary hearing transcripts, and any police reports. I am currently working with the statements provided by Drew Hartley and Barbara Szekely. They are helpful. If you are aware of police statements provided by anyone else, I would really like a copy.
   6. Please explain your appeals status. As I understand, you are out of all standard appeals, including the federal habeas appeal.
  7. In your letter to me, you claim that you know which document bearing your signature was used to manufacture the composite voluntary consent to search. Please describe that document in detail to me, including the form number (if any) located at the lower left of the document.
   Assuming you are interested in my continued involvement in your case, we will have much to talk about and little time to do so. Respond as quickly as you can. I will use JPAY at least initially to speed up the process on my end. From here on out, please call me John rather than Mr. Allen.
Regards,
John

  <-- Previous                           Table of Contents                              Next --> 

The Case of Preston Hughes III: Prelude to Murder, Act III

This is the sixth and last post related specifically to the Hartley's excellent adventures through the field in which Shandra Charles and Marcell Taylor were found murdered. It is an important post because it provides evidence that Shandra and Marcell were killed by two individuals, and because it helps establish an approximate time of death.  The previous posts in this series within a series were:

Witness To Murder
Meet the Hartleys
Frankenmap
Prelude to Murder, Act I
Prelude to Murder, Act II

In Act I, we learned that the Hartley's walked from Victor's Lakewood Village apartment north through the wooded and weedy area that runs alongside both Lakewood Village and Lakehurst apartment complexes. At some point, Barbara became concerned they were being stalked, and she ran to the Stop N Go. Drew came running after. The employees called the police.

In Act II, we learned that Barbara left the Stop N Go sometime after Drew did, and did so without Drew being aware of (or even expecting) it. Barbara secured a ride back to Victor's apartment, probably with Victor and friends. When Drew returned and could not find Barbara, he hunted for her, eventually became concerned she had been abducted, contacted the police, ran across Barbara and friends at the car wash, and reported to the police that Barbara had been found. By that time, the police had already discovered Shandra and Marcell while searching for Barbara.

In this Act III, we learn of Drew's search for his wife, and the significance of that search.

It seems as if Drew did not completely buy into Barbara's claim that they were being stalked through the field. 

Drew: While I was walking through the woods, we heard movement in the brush. We didnt [sic] see anybody at that point, but think that we were being chased. We ran to a nearby Stop-N-Go where my wife told the employees what had happened. The employees called the police. 

Barbara: I thought that there was someone on the path and I asked Drew if there was someone behind us and he told me that I was hearing things. And we walked a little further and he looked back and he said that there was somebody there. ... I began to speed up and then the footsteps began to get faster behind us. I then began to run and Drew didn't run right away but then he began to run behind me.

Even after Drew returned to the Stop N Go and found Barbara gone, he showed no reluctance about walking alone through the area where Barbara had claimed to see threatening figures. Drew walked from the Stop N Go, south along (or within) the wooded, weedy strip of land, cut through either the small, northern trail (Shandra's Trail) or (more likely) the larger southern trail, and entered the Lakehurst Apartment complex through the now infamous hole in the fence.

Drew: I went on through the fence opening going into Gino's apartment complex.

View from Lakehurst Apartment Complex

View from Trail

I don't know about you, but wouldn't walk alone through there at night, particularly if I believed I had just been chased from that field by shadowy, threatening figures who soon thereafter abducted my wife. It seems pretty clear to me that Drew was not particularly concerned about his wife at that point, or about menacing figures in the brush. He was simply trying to locate Barbara because she left the Stop N Go unexpectedly.

As Drew approached the hole in the fence, however, all hell broke loose. He heard a woman scream. I assume he turned and pointed his flashlight in the direction of the scream. I suggest further that it was then he saw two men dragging a woman into the field. Drew presumed the woman was his wife, and only at that point did he become frantic.

Drew: As I did so, I heard a yell. I thought that it was my wife. I went to Gino's and was frantic. I told Gino, Oscar and Teal somebody took my wife off and she disappeared.

I recognize that the scenario I have just portrayed does not completely accord with the entirety of Drew's report. I suggest no logical story can completely accord with Drew's statement. 

Drew: I went back to the Stop-N-Go to get Barbara. Barbara wouldnt [sic] go past the Stop-N-Go unless she knew that Gino or somebody was home. Anyway, Barbara and I started to walk through the car wash. While walking along, we were walking and she walked on one side of a wall and I walked on the other side. When I got to the end of the car wash, Barbara was gone. I went on through the fence opening going into Gino's apartment complex. As I did so, I heard a yell. I thought that it was my wife. I went to Gino's and was frantic.

This explanation makes no sense whatsoever. Consider first an image of the car wash, from my early post  Geography.

There is a solid wall to the left of the car wash and another to the right. Beyond each wall there was a open ,grassy field. Behind the car wash was another open, grassy field, and then beyond that two rows of trees. (The rows of trees are not visible in the photograph above, having since been replaced by what appear to be commercial storage buildings.)

How could Barbara have been abducted from the car wash if Barbara was not in fact abducted? If Drew thought she had been abducted there, why did he immediately walk casually through the field as if nothing significant had happened? Why did he not become frantic until he heard a woman scream as he neared the opening in the fence? And since Barbara never was abducted, who did Drew see being dragged into the woods?

Cook and Becker: Officers riding Unit 20G40 were flagged down by a person known as Drew Curtis Hartley regarding his wife missing. The time was approx 2330 hrs and the location was the Stop N Go parking lot at 2303 S. Kirkwood. Hartley stated his wife had been walking in a car wash bay located east of the Stop N Go. He stated possibly two black had [sic] abducted her and drug [sic] her into the field located south of the Stop N Go: Hartley had a flashlight in his hand and stated he had been looking for his wife for a while.

I suspect Drew frantically told Cook and Becker a less-than-perfectly-clear story of all that had happened that night. I suspect he told them about Barbara being initially scared earlier as she walked near the car wash, and I suspect he told them about seeing two black males dragging his wife into the field south of the car wash. I think that Cook and Becker's mention of these two events in consecutive sentences does not mean that Drew claimed he witnessed the abduction when he was at the car wash.

It certainly doesn't mean that Barbara was abducted from the car wash, since Barbara was not abducted.

Note also that Drew's claim of witnessing an abduction by two black males did not make it into his report. If it had, his eyewitness evidence would have contradicted the official HPD story that Shandra and Marcell were killed by one black male, specifically Preston Hughes III.

But Drew's police statement is really not Drew's police statement. He refused to sign it. According to Sgt. Gafford, Drew refused to sign the statement because he had somehow become concerned that he might be charged with the murder. (I can't imagine where Drew might have come up with such a silly idea.)

It's just as likely that Drew refused to sign the statement because it wasn't accurate in critical detail. Perhaps the disconnect between what he actually told them and what they wanted him to sign triggered or supplemented his concern about being set up for the crime.

Interestingly, it wasn't simply Drew who didn't sign his statement. Sgt. P.C. Motard didn't sign the statement either, even though there was a signature block for him as the typist, even though Sgt. C.R. Williams signed Barbara's statement as her typist. So we don't have anyone willing to affirm that the words typed on Drew's statement were the ones Drew spoke or even the ones P.C. Motard typed. We just have words on a paper, allegedly being an accurate representation of Drew's interview. Those words somehow leave out the astonishingly significant detail of Drew seeing two men drag a woman into the brush near the point where Shandra and Marcell were found, near the time they were killed.

You won't find Drew's unsigned report in the compilation of police reports provided by the HPD. Instead, you'll find a summary of Drew's unsigned report written by Sgt. Gafford. Not only does Sgt. Gafford exclude Drew's claim about witnessing an abduction, Gafford even excludes Drew's claim he heard a woman scream from the very field where Shandra Charles was murdered.

Gafford: Drew lost track of his wife at one point near the car wash a short time later, and he began searching for her, enlisting the aid of a civilian and also the officers who were responding to the call, they were able to learn that she had caught a ride with some males in a truck to their friends [sic] apt at the Lakewood project, and it was during this time that the officers were flagged down at the Fuddruckers. Sgt. P.C. Motard obtained a written statement from Drew however he [Drew] would not sign this statement because he thought he was being handled as a suspect in the deaths of the compls.

After conveniently excluding Drew's claims of hearing a woman scream and witnessing an abduction, Sgt. Gafford had the temerity to claim that Drew had nothing to offer.

Gafford: The information provided by these witnesses does not appear relevant to this case, with the most important exception being their call was the one which police police in the area at the time of the discovery of the compls in this case.

Instead of ignoring Drew's claims of hearing a scream and witnessing an abduction, I accept them as probably real. Drew did, after all, have the Stop N Go employees call the police and report that his wife had been abducted. When the police arrived, Drew did tell them that he had observed two blacks dragging a woman into the brush. He initially thought that woman was his wife. He later confirmed it was not. It leaves open the question of who Drew saw being dragged into the field. I suggest it was Shandra.

I will therefore use Drew's claim to approximate the time of Shandra's abduction. I will estimate the elapsed time for each event Drew claimed between the scream and the time he met the police. I will total the elapsed times and subtract the total from 11:30 PM, the time when Drew met the responding officers in the parking lot of the Stop N Go.

To estimate the elapsed times, I will rely on my Frankenmap, which I proudly present once again below.

According to Goggle, that map is 5.5 minutes tall and 4.5 minutes wide, assuming you are walking. I'll assume Drew moved at a pace that made the map 4 minutes tall and 3 minutes wide. That's enough to get me started.

Hang on. Here we go. Plain text is from Drew's report. Italic text is my comment. Bold text is my elapsed time estimate.

• As I did so, I heard a yell. I thought that it was my wife. I went to Gino's and was frantic. (Gino lived in the Lakehurst Apartment. I'll assume Gino lived near the top center: 4 minutes)
• I told Gino, Oscar and Teal somebody took my wife off and she disappeared. (2 minutes)
• We didnt [sic] find anything. (I'm not at all clear where he looked, or if he was on foot, or in a car: 20 minutes)
• I went back to Gino's (4 minutes)
• and ran over to Victor's through the complex's [sic] to see if Barbara was there. (3 minutes)
• Barbara was not there. (1 minute)
• When I came back, I went the same way that Barbara and I had previously taken. I was running through here. I ran down the edge that seperates [sic] the woods from the plain field. I was going through the car wash and met this white guy that was parked there. (5 minutes)
• I approached this guy and told him that my wife was missing. (2 minutes)
• He and I then went out into the woods. We could hear the woods and weeds moving while looking for my wife. Barbara didnt [sic] turn up. (15 minutes)
• This white guy then gave me a ride to Victor's. (4 minutes)
• She is not there and Victor is not home. (1 minute)
• I then went out to the bus stop and Barbara is not there. (3 minutes)
• A white boy with a cowboy hat was the security gaurd [sic] gave me a ride over to Gino's. (5 minutes)
• Gino and I went out with the flash light. We didnt [sic] locate Barbara. (20 minutes)
• I sent Gino to the Stop-N-Go to see if the employees knew what happened to Barbara. Gino told me no. (Gino went out and back. That's two times 4 minutes plus 1 minute for checking the Stop N Go. 9 minutes)
• I went to the Stop-N-Go (4 minutes)
• and asked them to call the police that my wife was missing. (2 minutes)
• They called the police and officer came out. (5 minutes)

I get a grand total of 108 minutes. If that estimate is correct and if Drew did indeed meet the police at 11:30 PM, then Drew heard the scream at 9:42 PM.

That time is interesting. Evelyn Brown claims to have last seen Shandra alive and well in a Lakewood Village apartment at 9:30 PM. (See Shandra's Final Day.) The police, however, never attempted to question (or even identify) the friends Shandra and Evelyn had been visiting in Lakewood Village that night. I find it astonishing that the police would not want to speak to the last people to see Shandra alive and safe. They didn't, however, and we have nothing to challenge Evelyn's time estimate.

If Evelyn is correct in her estimate, Shandra left her friends' apartment soon after Evelyn left, to run whatever errand she was going to run. I still suspect that the errand had to do with drugs, even more so now that I see the autopsy report described multiple needle marks in the bends of each arm.

Based on my interpretation of Drew Hartley's statements, I believe Shandra was soon thereafter pulled into the weeds by two black males. At least one of them had an Afro. At least one of them had a knife with a double-edge blade approximately 5/8" wide and over 4" long. At least one of them knew how to use the knife to put a quick end to life of another human.

And Shandra screamed.

  <-- Previous                           Table of Contents                              Next --> 

The Case of Preston Hughes III: Prelude to Murder, Act II

The Hartleys' reports are in general agreement about their fearful trip to the Stop N Go. The two of them left the Lakewood Village apartments, walked around the small trail where Shandra Charles and Marcell Taylor were later found, walked north until they decided they were being followed, ran to the Stop N Go, and there informed the employees that they were being chased. The store employees called the police.

Some other aspects of their reports are also consistent. The two of them did become separated. They did rejoin later at Victor's, whose apartment was the starting point of their great adventure.

Both reports make clear that Barbara wished to avoid any encounter with the police. She declined to take a shortcut through the Lakehurst Apartment complex for fear of being arrested there. She left the Stop N Go before the police arrived in response to the "chased by shadowy figures" call. She avoided the police again when they later appeared at the Stop N Go in response to the "wife abducted by shadowy figures" call.

The reports are also in agreement about the existence of some guys in some type of vehicle at the car wash.

In this post, Act II, we'll discuss those areas of agreement. In the next post, Act III, we'll discuss Drew's efforts to locate Barbara after the two of them became separated. Drew's claims of what happened during his frantic search for her may be the most revealing of all. First things first however.

According to Drew, after he and Barbara arrived together at the Stop N Go, he set off alone for the Lakehurst Apartments.

Drew: My wife stayed at the Stop-N-Go and waited and I left. Barbara wouldnt [sic] go past the Stop-N-Go unless she knew that Gino or somebody was home. I went to the Lakehurst Apartments and visited Gino. I knocked on the door and talked to them briefly and then left. I went back to the Stop-N-Go to get Barbara.

Note that I rearranged the sentences in that paragraph to make it a bit more clear. Note also that to walk from the Stop and Go to the Lakehurst Apartments, they would have had to walk along the north end of the wooded area. Barbara seemed too rattled by her experience to even risk that.

According to Barbara, she left the Stop N Go without Drew.

Barbara: I looked out the window and I saw Drew outside, but nobody else. I then went out of the store and went to the car wash behind the Stop And Go and I talked to some guys there and I asked them if I could hang around there for a few minutes and they said it was O.K. with them. I saw two police cars pull in the Stop And Go. I then asked the guys to give me a ride to the front Stop and Go [a different Stop N Go] on Westheimer. I rode around with the guys for awhile and then they gave me a ride over to a friend of mine, named Victor, who lives in the Lakewood [Village] Apartments.

Given her recent scare, I suspect Barbara would have been cautious about hitching rides with complete strangers. I suspect that Barbara knew the "some guys". I suspect that that she may have called them to pick her up. I suspect one of those "some guys" may have been the aforementioned Victor Alfeiri. That would explain Victor's temporary absence from his apartment when Drew was hunting for Barbara.

Drew: Barbara didnt [sic] turn up. This white guy then gave me a ride to Victor's. She is not there and Victor is not home.

Victor was apparently at home when Drew and Barbara left on their excellent adventure, and Victor was apparently at home when the police later to pick up Barbara, but he was not there when Drew dropped by in search of Barbara. Perhaps he made a quick run out to the Stop N Go.

Though Barbara didn't mention it in her report, Drew spoke with the guys who gave Barbara a ride, and they threatened to beat his ass, because he wanted to get out of their vehicle. To me, that seems unusual behavior for new found friends eager to help out with some transportation issues. Those "some guys" must really take their charitable efforts seriously.

Drew's encounter with these guys (from the Bad Ass chapter of the Good Samaritans) occurred after his frantic search for his loving wife, who it turns out had ditched him.

Drew: I went to the Stop-N-Go and asked them to call the police that my wife was missing. They called the police and an officer came out.

Cook and Beck: Officers riding Unit 20G40 were flagged down by a person known as Drew Curtis Hartley regarding his wife missing. The time was approx 2330 hrs and the location was the Stop N Go parking lot at 2303 S. Kirkwood. ... Hartley had a flashlight in his hand and stated he had been looking for his wife for a while.

Drew: The officers is [sic] looking with a spot light driving down the street. Barbara is riding in a pickup truck with three white guys. Barbara said that she was fine and to get into the truck because I was making a scene. I got into the truck. I decided to tell them to drop us out. The truck pulled over and stops. I get out and Barbara wouldnt [sic] get out. They pulled up into a driveway and turned around and drove at squeling [sic] and I ran. I heard them say that they out [sic] to beat my ass.

Cook and Becker: Officers drove from the Stop N Go and began looking into a field in the 2400 blk of S. Kirkwood ... Officers walked east along the path ... when observing a black female laying face down in the path ... Approx 40 to 50 feet east of the female's location officers found a small boy laying in the brush face down approx 2 to 3 feet north of the path. ... Officer Becker continued to look in the immediate area for any susp(s) or evidence. Becker then went back to the Stop N Go and picked up Hartley from the store ...

Drew: I ran up to where the police officer was at the Stop-N-Go and told him that I had found my wife. The officer told me that there had been some murders out there and he took me to Victors. [sic] I met Barbara there and the officer took me to the scene of the crime.

Barbara: About an hour later Drew came to the door with a policeman and was saying that someone had gotten murdered down the street and the police wanted to talk to us.

Barbara and her friends apparently drove at "squeling speed" from the car wash just as Officer Becker was returning to the Stop N Go to pick up Drew. It seems as if neither Barbara nor her friends wanted Drew to speak with the police. She told him to get in the pickup (already carrying 4 people) because he was making a scene. Her friends soon thereafter discussed the possibility of beating her husband's ass simply because he asked to get back out.

If Drew was being truthful, then Barbara was not. She could not have been at Victor's for an hour before Officer Becker arrived with Drew to pick her up. And it does seem as if Drew is being the more truthful here. If he had not had the encounter with Barbara and her friends at the car wash, he would not have known she would be at Victor's, as he clearly told Officer Becker she was.

It is clear that Barbara really, really, really wanted to avoid the police. After the store employees called the police the first time, she found a way out of the area before the police arrived. She didn't want to walk anywhere near the field, so she conveniently or (more likely) deliberately secured a ride with "some guys."

At some point, Barbara and her friends became uncomfortable with having Drew out there "making a scene", so they decided to pick him up. They found him at the car wash just as Officer Becker was returning to the Stop N Go to pick up Drew and transport him to the scene. Barbara not only wanted to avoid Becker, she (and the others) wanted Drew to not speak with Becker.

Perhaps because Drew had already given his name to Cook and Becker when they arrived in response to the abduction call, Drew felt it best to tell them that his wife had been discovered and that all was well. He did not know at that time about the murders.

He must therefore have been shocked when they told him about those murders in that field he had just criss-crossed. His shock, however, must have been nothing compared to Barbara's when the police arrived at Victor's and wanted to question her, not about drugs or some other low-level offense, but about murder.

  <-- Previous                           Table of Contents                              Next -->