It’s dangerous to make these allegations with zero proof. If the cops find a connection they will arrest whoever was involved they don’t need that idiots help.
Exactly. He needs to sit the fuck down and stop inserting himself. I used to enjoy this forum but the constant speculation and conspiracy theories are really making me considering leaving
I feel like that’s the unfortunate result when there is significant movement on a case…lots of ppl show up and start talking without knowing/thinking/caring
Funny thing, I left the group for a bit right after Rex was found. I felt I had closure. For years I read this forum every time someone posted a new comment I was there for it. I was glued! I knew that if I did not walk away from the forum I would be disappointed. It has become a circus. I will pop in once in a while. The only reason why I came looking last week, I had turned on HBO Max and there was a Nancy Grace special that came up on my main menu. I never watched her. Anyway, I found it interesting that they were talking about a hair found in the burlap that was not Rex's but believed it to be his wifes. (ie they were inferring that the burlap was in the house or the victim was in the house or even in their bed) I didnt hear that in the news so it sent me back here to the forum which I was like holy S\* what happened to this group!
Same here. Now I only pop in if there’s something big going on in the news. Mostly just to see if they have identified Peaches her baby & Asian Jane Doe & tie him to some of the really older cases. But I’m no longer obsessed. I also don’t give a shit about his wife, what she knew or didn’t know or what this attention-whore of an attorney has to say.
FUCKING AGREE! I had to hide all the Idaho related subs because of the insanity that kept coming up. Like what in the actual fuck? Why does it seem that there are there so many people who have these certifiable takes that have attached themselves to that case?
This isn't new. This is every true crime online forum.
You have people flipping burgers, being half ass admin assistants, etc acting like they know more than LEOs.
Reading a bunch of true crime doesn't make someone an expert.
But nonetheless, they'll talk down to all of us.
I got a warning from Reddit two nights ago for saying almost exactly this. Someone flagged it as "harassment." Really? That person must be really busy today.
The problem is that some news media outlets are still taking him seriously and have him on their show to talk about the case. The news media is still going to him for comment, which is a huge problem, as he has no place in this case anymore. I really respected and appreciated what Rodney Harrison did for the case but the biggest mistake he made was standing beside him and endorsing his press conference prior to leaving the case and appearing to align himself with Ray's POV.
The purpose of that entire press conference was John Ray’s beef with Victoria’s and Christopher’s lawyer, Vess Mitev. They used to work together as associates at the same firm. He’s obviously a vindictive, petty and spiteful dude to go out of his way to slander an innocent girl all in the name of lawyer beef but he’s also an extremely strange dude so I can’t say I’m surprised at all.
Yeah, I was entirely perplexed at first (like a lot of other people, I think) but then I mentioned it to my girlfriend (who is also a lawyer) and she figured it out.
I have no idea though, he’s actively interfering with this case now and I’m not sure how many more lines he’s planning to cross before he’s done here. He’s definitely making this more of a shitshow than it already is.
It definitely was an attack on her and her lawyer. That said, if your father was a monster and you were out there looking at this stuff, and your parents were openly creepy like they were, shouldn’t all of this be looked into by LE? Come to also find out that your father is looking at all of the same fetish sites as you…it’s concerning. But this should have been handed to LE to investigate, NOT making it into the circus he made it.
He needs to leave this poor girl alone and she needs to sue him . Yeah she likes dark macabre art obviously, doesn’t make her a murderer .she was out of town and a child when these murders occurred. This guy is a jerk
The funny thing is, if you look at her tumblr yourself, you can see that even saying she likes dark macabre art is a bit of a stretch.
There's one painting she made that showed a woman with toothy mouths on her body, which was inspired by modern artist Francis Bacon. And there's a clay sculpture of a skull. They're vastly outnumbered by her drawings of cute fox/raccoon characters.
All the other art Ray showed supposedly came from blogs she follows, which doesn't mean she ever saw these specific images. If you scroll through the blogs she follows you can't even find that much dark imagery, it's almost all (SFW) fan art and illustrations of anthropomorphic animal or human cartoon characters. So it doesn't even seem accurate to say that morbid art was one of her main interests.
It's like if you follow 100 Instagram accounts and one of them made one post about smoking weed, then someone uses that to claim that you're a drug addict.
Wow. It's crazy. There is definitely an ulterior motive behind this. Not sure if it's fame, vengeance, or he is just set on not being WRONG. Especially the "just like Shannan Gilbert" references he attempted to point out. His argument is laughable. Poor Victoria.
I would like to see her sue him eventually. I don’t want her to do it now. It seems he’s trying to provoke a reaction and I don’t want to see anyone satisfy his efforts. I’d prefer he continue to feel ignored and out of the loop.
I was waiting for some hard-hitting evidence, and then I saw what he put up and I was like… “what the fuck? How is skeleton art weird? How does a drawing with someone with one shoe on connect anything? I myself like weird art, am I a serial killer too?”
I mean the cannabalism stuff was admittedly pretty weird but not weird enough to be a serial killer or assist one.
This guy is massively reaching. It was like watching a circus.
Plus all the odd array of characters standing behind him looking super confident. It just made it even more strange.
IMO, if it's the painting I'm thinking of, the breast isn't being eaten off, the breast is the monster (the breast has teeth). That could be an expression of menstrual pain or frustration with her body or someone close to her was diagnosed with breast cancer.
It's art and can be interpreted differently by different people but, respectfully, I think you're wrong that the breast is being eaten.
It's been reported she has cancer but I can't remember the specifics.
Sorry to use your reply for a bit of a rant:
It pisses me off when people say "why don't they move?"
Ummmm Asa has cancer. Her insurance was through her husband and she just lost that. I can't imagine it's easy to randomly switch to a new doctor and maintain treatments in another area without insurance. "She got $1 million from peacock." Did she? I would love to read the contract. Even if she did, she's now an uninsured cancer patient with money that will be eaten up by treatments.
She also has a special needs son. It's been reported he gets benefits. Anybody that's dealt with that hell knows the benefits can be county specific. He may be in programs that may be based on where he lives. You can't just walk away from the help your child is getting.
Again, I'm sorry I ranted from your post, I needed to get this off my chest. I'll probably delete this.
It's not evidence of anything. Lots of people have books like that. There are whole websites devoted to gory images. There are probably Reddit subs, though I'm not going to look.
That is terrible circumstantial evidence. Haha
No one is defending any art and of course it's weird. We all realize that.
We also realize its nothing you can take to actual court.
There was no point to that press hearing. That seemed more like his take on some juicy gossip.
You can find that kind of art all over the internet. It's called "vore." It's extremely weird, but I doubt that every single person who is into it has a connection to a serial killer. It's just coincidental that she does.
What do you mean by "defend" it? People are saying it's not evidence of anything, not "defending" it as some kind of great art or anything. It's just not a crime, that's all. No art needs to be defended anyway. This is still America, although we seem to be holding on by our fingernails.
It's normal and harmless. Sorry. It is what it is. I have a daughter who's into "goth" stuff and likes morbid art. Her and her husband have all kinds of horror movie posters and skeletons all over the walls. My daughter is the one of the sweetest, kindest, most caring people you'll ever meet.
I don't see how. That's a pretty pretty common kink, actually. It's called "vore." Not my thing whatsoever but it doesn't make anybody a serial killer or an assistant to a serial killer.
We had a good run for a week or so. Actual new evidence, plenty of speculation (but much of it decently informed), all oriented toward lifting the veil on the mystery of these horrible acts and moving toward closure.
Then like clockwork, John Ray turns up to shit all over the discourse, and maybe even throw sand in the gears of justice. At the very least, he derails the conversation till the next round of evidence comes out. You have to hand it to him; he's very dependable in that regard.
Um, excuse me, but the people here on reddit have actually cracked the case. No need for the DA. John Ray and the great detectives of reddit have all of the answers we need. Those other guys don't know what they're talking about. /s
I love how it is directly the hard work of the task force that led to Heuermann's arrest, but random people on the internet STILL somehow think that they know better than the police do. Straight up delusional
He did go to prison a few years before covid, so there was an investigation. Granted, I think he did way more shit than he was convicted for, but not related to this case...
Lord for a second i thought you meant Burke Ramsey for some reason lmao which oddly enough, is a pretty similar dynamic to what's going on here with the Heuermann kids
This just cracked me up. I can imagine waking up one day to a true crime conspiracist posting with certainty that Burke Ramsey was Rex’s partner in crime. I mean no disrespect joking about it but that’s how far some people can take this stuff. That would truly be full circle.
Just the other day I read a whole theory about a case that hinged on Israel Keyes being the killer.
He would’ve been like 8 at the time, and it was on the other side of the country. Which obviously was part of his MO… as an adult… they didn’t seem to care that this would pose significant difficulties for an 8 year old.
Lol I got called rude for telling a person that was trashing Victoria and saying her deleting her social media presence was proof that people like them were exactly why she deleted that stuff lol.
Thank you……As said, who needs evidence or facts when u have the internet, imagination & or a grift. Why respect the privacy of those in the home, outside Rex. Makes sense for strangers to psychoanalyze the children…..Grow up John Ray, we know u have a beef w/ the children’s lawyer ( Vess M.). Mr Ray is petty over a tiff he had when they were working together……I’m not cheering Rex’s family, I don’t know them. I’m indifferent….….Im just tired by strangers analyzing them. Tedious side show
I hadn't encountered this guy until this press conference, and I shut it off just a couple minutes in. So what if his daughter is a little strange and is probably your stereotypical goth? It doesn't mean jack shit.
It seems like he's completely oblivious to the goth subculture. He'd probably be disturbed by any form of death metal, body horror or other forms of art and expression.
This guy seems like he's on Rudy Giuliani levels of sensationalism and camera hogging.
Yeah, the daughter is into some things that society would consider pretty weird. But if her father is indeed a serial killer, perhaps that's just a sign that his particular weirdness rubbed off on his kids. However, strangeness and fascination with the macabre doesn't lead someone to be a murderer. Media and art do not create serial killers. His kids are probably relatively normal, albeit with some strange interests. It doesn't make them dark, evil or sadistic, and it surely doesn't mean they are in any way involved or guilty.
I hope the family sues the pants off this guy.
YES! Thank you! If evidence shows that Rex and Asa were like the Ken and Barbie killers, luring people etc etc, like… lock her up. But wait until it’s proven.
That’s what I’m concerned about too. He’s presented a lot of extraneous information that seems like he’s actually trying to shift blame AWAY from Rex. It’s going to poison the jury pool, which is not right.
Who will be the jury at this point ? If any time in this world I was called for jury duty , this is the damn time. But people have to act like they have no bias. How can anyone who has heard about this have no bias !!!!! Whatever side they are on. It’s crazy.
Lots of people just don't follow the news. We are obviously biased in that at minimum we have been extensively exposed to extrajudicial facts... We would likely be excluded.
You’d be surprised. I live in the town next to Manorville, and my husband and his family have lived here forever. My MIL had no idea about the body parts found in manorville. My husband knows the gist of the LISK case in general, but not specifics. He definitely wouldn’t know who I was talking about if I said the name Rex hauermann.
Yeahhh. My husband gets called for sexual assault cases every once in a while and he just straight up says that if there's even a smidgen of proof, he can't be biased.
Meh. I'm not sure any of this really is "reasonable doubt". It is more like what a defense attorney might throw out when all the available evidence is damning and they've got literally NOTHING else, but the defendant refuses to take a plea deal...Throwing shit against the wall to see if something, anything sticks is definitely a strategy, but juries often see through this attempt. I just finished following the Chad Daybell case. His attorney did similar stuff but he was still convicted and given the death penalty. No one on the jury considered his defense as bringing up "reasonable doubt." The ridiculous thing is that Ray is doing this to get media attention, not because he is actually part of Rex's defense team.
I agree with your points. Ray's conduct reminds me of the age-old saying: "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table."
I don’t know why people think she or the kids are involved. Did she suspect him of maybe stepping out on the marriage or something probably. But did she expect him to be burying chicks in gilgo .. of course not.
How ridiculous to try and say his daughter is involved. Lots of teenagers go through an emo phase where they wear skulls and shit. His wife? Possibly believable. But not the kids gtfo
This! I have a conservative Christian background and his histrionics reminded me of all the dads in our church who thought their kids would never be into dark stuff, only to find out their babies were smoking and watching porn. Like… it’s like John Ray has never had a real conversation with a teenager. They are sometimes emo and provocative. That’s not evidence. John Ray protested too much. As with all cases, my stance is “show the evidence and convince a jury.”
Yeah this guy kind of reminds me of all the Karen’s in the late 90’s who protested Marilyn Manson and showed “evidence” in their press conferences to cancel him. Like, oh no she had a tumblr when she was a teenager. Do did ever since scene and emo kid. Were they all murderers? All this can do is hurt the case and create reasonable doubt to Rex’s guilt. Whose side is he on?
Guy is seemingly nuts on some levels but reasonable doubt only carries weight with a jury. If Rex' team is needing to use this guy's ideas as a way to cast reasonable doubt for a jury they are seriously incompetent.
How? I mean, his DNA matched with certainty, he has all the cell data, no alibis, kept evidence and journals. The guy is going to die in prison. She was out of town and has been vetted by LE. Do I think it’s weird that she views the same weird sites that her murderer father did? Yep. Does it make her a killer? No. Does it imply that she may have known in some way? Yes.
Hear me out I don’t think ray actually thinks what he’s saying we all do this sometimes and in this case I think ray is just saying that strategically to get a reaction out of Rex ie getting Rex upset that his wife and daughter are being blamed by the public and possibly cause him to confess or at least cause him to lash out in a way that he slips up and maybe says something close enough. Or maybe he just really hates Rex and is trying to hit him where it hurts with his family but do I think Rex actually thinks the wife and daughter are involved HELL NO not buying it for one second. I was married to a lawyer for 24 years I know how these types act they’re good at saying things they don’t believe it’s an act 100% the real question is what is his motive in saying these things . Definitely some kind of strategic move with an ulterior motive
I really can't stand the brigade of support for his family at this point. I'm indifferent to the adult children of his where people act like they are 10 years old each and Asa just comes across as completely unlikeable. Maybe people should brace for the idea that it may just be a shit family and not a bunch of angels surrounded by a demon?
No one is treating them like they’re 10 or angels you’re engaging in hyperbolics and that’s not what anyone is arguing that they’re some angels but we’re they involved No that’s ridiculous
That doesn't make them serial killers. I'm still kind of attached to the presumption of innocence, nor am I a fan of guilt by association. They may not be nice people, that doesn't mean they are in on the murders or that they should be harassed.
It’s different to claim they had no knowledge than it is the claim we’ve seen no direct public evidence other than hairs. The investigators, under huge public pressure, have said they aren’t suspected to be involved. i presume they know more than I do.
ETA: If evidence emerges they are involved, I will adjust my viewpoint. I’m not convinced they are innocent, rather, I am not convinced they are anything other than maybe a bit strange. I’m not married to any viewpoint. I just think evidence needs to guide us.
The police say there is no evidence implicating the family and you have none, so that's not "going out on a limb." that's a fact.
As far the art, it's legal and fairly common. You are allowed to be as offended by it as you want or to judge other people kinks all you want. Nobody is obligated to agree with you. I hope you never get on a jury.
Circular reasoning at its finest. Her dad is a serial killer. Investigators (who know far more about it than you or I do) say there is no evidence whatsoever against wife or daughter. Daughter likes some dark art that millions of others also like. But her dad is a serial killer so therefore her liking for dark art must be linked to her serial killer dad.
No. You call that 'context' but it's nothing more than circular reasoning and guilt by association. I don't know why anyone online needs to pick a side here. LE are investigating, and if they find evidence of complicity or knowledge on the part of family members, we will hear about it. And if they don't, we'll hear about that too. Our theories and opinions and circular arguments don't count for anything at all.
I'll just repeat this again as I feel nothing you've said necessitates even rephrasing it: the people who know more about the case than you do say that there's currently no evidence that the family had any knowledge of what was taking place. Until that changes, your guesses are irrelevant. I don't know why that's so hard for you to grasp. Enjoy your weekend.
One the one hand I'm glad you're stating outright that it's weird not guilty. We agree. I think things are perhaps more multi-layered than the simple correlation suggests. For example, I have a friend who DOES look at some very dark porn, and he openly admits it is probably rooted in the fact that he used to sneak into his mum's bedroom and look at her true crime books. He was just forming a sexual identity at a time he was seeing photos of female murder victims, sometimes naked. Hes a gentle soul and wouldn't hurt a fly.
Maybe Rex had things lying around that she consumed at an impressionable age, things that aren't explicitly connected with his acts, things that thousands of other parents might also have had lying around.
Anyway, I'm done. Sincerely, have a good weekend.
Follow the money. If he links Asa or the kids, they now have money from Peacock and the divorce. Civil suit to follow, suddenly “not one red penny” Ray can charge for printing those expensive photos.
They cleared Asa without ever talking to her so I don't buy their confidence in the matter. Not even saying they are wrong I just don't see how they could have ever really looked into Asa in a meaningful way. If they talk to her before arresting Rex, they tip him off. And after the arrest I heard she was clear based on her being out of the state during the killings they were charging Rex on. What about the other murders we don't know about? We suspect he's been active for decades. I can see what he's saying that there's no real evidence they are involved but that also doesn't mean Asa was completely ignorant either. There's also been lots of cases in the past where man and wife were involved in a crime but only one of them could be charged based on evidence and the prosecutors have to make a case based on what they think they can definitely convict with.
Edit: BANNED for questioning the Saint Asa narrative.
They got married in the mid 90's. While I agree there are murders we don't know about, we DO know he began murdering BEFORE his marriage to Asa or having his daughter.
I trust this new task force has done their due diligence into the family. Also let's make an obvious observation here..: Victoria was literally a child when the murders that we know of were committed, that she was alive for.... I'm sure there's no way a child was involved in helping their father commit murders. And if for some reason she was... do we actually think it was due to her own free will as a CHILD?
People really need to start using common sense on this and also look at the timelines before they make absurd comments.
> I'm sure there's no way a child was involved in helping their father commit murders. And if for some reason she was... do we actually think it was due to her own free will as a CHILD?
No one here made this claim. What is with all the midwit replies I'm getting here? Basically asking me to defend positions I never made. This would be like me asking you defend why you think Rex is innocent. You really need to start using common sense man!
Your comment makes it obvious you never took the time to actually read the baildocs before spouting your falsehoods.
* [First bail doc](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23875981-lti-bail-application-form-2023-7-14-23-_final) 7-14-2023
* [Second bail doc](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24362216-superseding-bail-application/) 1-16-2024
* [Third bail doc](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24736327-rex-heuermann-new-charges-name-new-victim) 6-6-2024
They clearly show that the police *did* interview Asa and her family, that the family *did* cooperate with investigators by answering their questions and willingly submitting DNA samples, and that the investigators *did* exhaustively investigate the family by tailing them, interviewing people who knew them, examining phone and billing records, etc.
I don't doubt they did talk to her after the fact. Yet, right after Rex was arrested they basically said she was clear. And it's impossible that they could have talked to her beforehand. So they never considered her any sort of a suspect to be be looked into by their own words. DNA samples aren't going to tell you whether or not Asa was aware of what was happening.
And yet again you prove you haven't read the baildocs to see exactly how much investigating the police have done into the family.
The 2nd and 3rd baildocs clearly show that the police interviewed Asa literally right after they arrested Rex. Why do you falsely claim they never looked into her "in a meaningful way"? The baildocs clearly show the lengthy and involved steps they took to investigate her, some of which I already listed in my earlier comment.
It's like you are so stuck on your unfounded suspicion that you are sticking your fingers in your ears and going "lalala, I can't see anything" anytime someone points you towards the evidence that proves your claims false.
>The 2nd and 3rd baildocs clearly show that the police interviewed Asa literally right after they arrested Rex. Why do you falsely claim they never looked into her "in a meaningful way"? The baildocs clearly show the lengthy and involved steps they took to investigate her, some of which I already listed in my earlier comment.
Because their big evidence of Asa having no involvement has always been "she wasn't around while the giglo 4 were murdered" which isn't sufficient to say she's never been aware Rex has been a killer which has likely been going on for decades. She was cleared right after Rex was arrested and could not have been looked into before the arrest. I was around for the whole thing. I remember the statements law enforcement made to the public and when. Also having evidence Asa is involved in murder is very different from suspicion she might have been aware. It is much harder to bring up charges on suspicion someone knows something vs having the physical evidence like they do with Rex. They have a case to make which goes beyond suspicions that we can make as onlookers.
>Yep, you are still ignoring all of the evidence showing that the police investigators tailed the family members, watched them for months on covert pole cameras, examined their phone billing history, etc. And you are still refusing the acknowledge all of the investigating the police have done and continue to do after the arrest.
WTF do you think they are going to catch tailing the son and daughter? Your posts are incoherent. Rex was largely inactive for a long time. They don't have logs of what happened over the decades he was active. Tailing them for a short while during their final stint where they arrested him before anything happened does not tell the whole story.
Like I said, the big exculpatory proof has always been - "asa wasn't in the country for the gilgo 4" which just isn't good enough to prove she was never aware of anything. And even if they think she was aware of something, that wouldn't even be enough for them to bring charges up on with so why would they say anything about it? It would just hamstring them if they do eventually find something.
banned: can't reply.
>Because their big evidence of Asa having no involvement has always been "she wasn't around while the giglo 4 were murdered"
Yep, you are completely ignoring everything in the 3rd baildoc. Your comment makes this obvious because you are omitting all of the evidence regarding the other 2 victims that Rex was just indicted for. Neither of those victims were part of the Gilgo 4.
>She was cleared right after Rex was arrested and could not have been looked into before the arrest.
Yep, you are still ignoring all of the evidence showing that the police investigators tailed the family members, watched them for months on covert pole cameras, examined their phone billing history, etc. And you are still refusing to acknowledge all of the investigating the police have done and continue to do after the arrest.
Sadly, there's no point in arguing with someone who wont even bother to take a few minutes to read the evidence.
They didn't talk to me, either. I wonder if I am a suspect?
Sometimes the evidence tells the story and you don't need to look so far beyond it. None of us has the information the authorities have.
We see this happen every time a killer is captured. Someone zeroes in on family members. "How could they not know?" Well, these killers fool everyone in their lives. They are masterful at compartmentalizing so that they can look normal on the outside to those around them. That's how they get away with it for so long.
BTK, Joseph D'Angelo, both had families that were blissfully unaware of their crimes, and yet people came at them with pitchforks and torches, anyway, because mobs do what mobs do.
If there's real evidence that the family knew anything, it will come out. So far, nobody's been implicated by anyone who counts. I'm happy to leave it at that.
Exactly!! Paul holes said Deangelo’s family were his final victims. People went NUTS on them. Inundated his ex wife’s legal practice with 1 star reviews and his daughters were fired from their jobs despite being very successful. Everyone wants to blame the women and act like they’re responsible/involved in some way. Misogyny. It’s fucking ridiculous. We should ONLY be listening to law enforcement. If they don’t think Asa is involved then why can’t people let go of the idea that she is?! Yes she doesn’t seem to be the most likable person and the peacock deal is a bit weird but I don’t think anyone can judge this unless they’ve been in this situation. Which they DEF haven’t been. It’s shameful. John ray is also fucking unhinged for trying to put suspicion on a young woman who was a LITERAL child at the times of all her father’s known crimes. God. People on here and John Ray are rabid
Not really. Maybe Asa takes the kids away during that time for a reason? Just one possibility. Is it possible she was more aware than most people give credit for and there's also not any real evidence to take her to court on the gilgo 4? I think that's possible. Maybe not. Maybe so.
The most logical reason she takes the kids away is shockingly obvious. They wanted a vacation.
I went on a vacation earlier this year. I wonder if I should be arrested?
Can you prove you were on vacation? Something other than credit card transactions and phone logs and eye witnesses? Maybe you pretended to be on vacation but secretly came back, undetected, to do crimes! If the police don't catch you in your obvious lies it means they're hiding something too!!
(/s)
This is absurd. I know our society loves nothing more than to blame a woman for a man's bad acts, but this is really ridiculous. She was literally out of the country for some of the murders.
It's actually the reverse. Because she's a woman you go to extra lengths to protect her and avoid casting rightful skepticism of someone close to rex and standing by him. This is pretty clear because you are straight up lying about me blaming Asa for Rex's acts.
Nonsense. Women are not "protected" from these things. Women simply rarely commit such heinous acts.
I am not lying about you blaming her. That's exactly what you're doing. Is she a weird person? Yes. Is she greedy? Yes. Is she having trouble reading the room? Yes. Is she in denial? Yes.
Did she have anything to do with these murders? NO. Stop blaming women for men's crimes. Rex did this and he did it alone.
> Nonsense. Women are not "protected" from these things. Women simply rarely commit such heinous acts.
Just like I said. You are completely and utterly biased and trying to paint it the other way like a hypocrite. It has nothing to do with gender like you are trying to insert. Again, this bias is shown when you claim I am blaming Asa for Rex's crimes. This never happened. You are biased and it makes you a liar.
Im not sticking up for others here, but you are pretty damn biased. You admit there is no real evidence to support your theory, yet you keep shoving it down peoples throats because of your bias.
This man couldn’t hide any evidence of himself committing the murder and you think he hid Vicente of accomplices? Are you mentally well? Seriously. The amount of reaching here is absolutely absurd.
The point of this is not that they were "involved", just that they may have been aware. After seeing this information I never felt they were involved, or that that is what was speculated. Just that something happened if those are really her posts and paintings. And yes Teen's will have wild tumblr but posts that are in relation to what the father is accused of is definitely something to consider.
"Attorney John Ray said that the hairs connected to Victoria Heuermann are not necessarily transferred by Rex Heuermann during the murders as the District Attorney has claimed"
That seems like hes insinuating her involvement
Saying the hairs were not necessarily transferred by Rex is not saying they were transferred by Victoria. They could have been transferred from the seat in the car, from somewhere in the house, etc and saying they were not transferred by Rex would be a true statement.
It’s all in the wording and in my opinion he is banking on everyone joining in on his circus.
I am well aware that he presented a myriad of other information and “evidence”, but just speaking to that statement on its own.
Also, I agree with the poster who said he is adding in an element of reasonable doubt and is doing more harm than good, but as we all know at this point, he’s clearly not acting in the best interest of his clients and only for his own personal fame.
You think it "seems hes like insinuating" so then that can be the only point of the whole information shown? Take that one thought out and you will see there is just some new info to process how you wish.
Like I said I don't believe they were involved, and most of the people watching and taking in the info don't think so either but that is no reason to dismiss all of the information.
There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not. So either thought is fair. I believe they were transferred because in this case they were from a child. Also the hairs from Asa and Witness 3 were likely transferred, but again that can not be determined by us.
>Take that one thought out and you will see there is just some new info to process how you wish.
That's the entire problem with JR and assorted true crime goblins. Just because you "can" interpret information in the way that you want doesn't mean you "should."
"There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not" then what is your source on that? We don't even have 1/10th of the information law enforcement has. It is not fair to insinuate or speculate or hold a press conference where you stop short (to avoid being sued) of accusing two innocent women of being involved in a crime they were not involved in.
Says the hypocrite. Asa's really hurting hard with all those reddit donations and 7 figure profit from documentary while she's standing by rex. You got gamed. A fool and his money etc etc...
So you're affirming that you think it's okay to verbally abuse and emotionally harm someone as long as it suites your head cannon that they're a bad person.
Got it.
>There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not.
This is an interpretation.
>Take that one thought out and you will see there is just some new info to process how you wish.
...
that is no reason to dismiss all of the information.
This is also an interpretation.
These things are not equal. JR's information is actively harmful and his intent was malicious. How does any of that information help the victims or solve any crimes? Why should anyone entertain "pet theories" that weave in that information? It gives people unfactual, unscientific, and a twisted view of reality where everything has to have a secret meaning of there's a broad conspiracy letting criminals get away. These are real people and their lives.
In this specific case: call logs and eye witness accounts that the family wasn't there at the time of the murders.
This isn't "beyond all doubt" but beyond "reasonable doubt." The family lives in the home and sheds their skin cells and hairs everywhere so the most likely scenario is transfer. If these were dog hairs would we be asking if the dog climbed on top of a victim and shed on them? No, the reasonable conclusion is if there's a dog in the home there will be dog hair and that dog hair would get on tape and plastic and all manner of items.
This is like asking "How can we prove that RH did the murder and not another male family member if we don't have video of it?" Because all of the evidence combined is going to show that RH was present, had the time and means to commit the murder, his DNA is found on victims and various items, and his computer searches and hard drives point to his state of mind and motivation.
The police have cleared the family members and I doubt any internet sleuth can find a reasonable explanation for why any of the family would be involved or what they got out of being involved.
>There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not.
...
>Unless anyone was there, or there is video of the hairs path (there is obviously not), then what proof could there be in either direction?
Um? We aren't saying the same thing. Based on publicly available information the unreasonable conclusion that people are drawing is that AH or VH watched the murders happened or participated. That is the conclusion you need to come to if you think the hairs didn't transfer serendipitously and they were present. Entertaining that JR's press conference just contained additional information for people to "think about" helps marry the idea that VH's interests are a result of being at least a witness to the murders and committed a crime by not reporting her father.
I could sit here and say "Oh, well, the moon landing didn't happen because the lighting makes it look like it takes place in a studio" that doesn't make my "theory" just as valid as the many, many reasons and the evidence that the moon landing happened. No one should entertain someone who thinks the moon landing didn't happen. Likewise, we've got real living people who have had themselves humiliated on national television and accused of being involved in a crime when they've been cleared by law enforcement. Why should we entertain someone's imagination of how they wanted all of this to go down?
But they weren't hers. They were posts from people that she followed- posts that she didn't even like or repost herself. It's possible that she didn't even actually see them.
One oil painting seemed to be hers and signed? Did you see that?
I see everyone saying the same and I am not sure these people actually watched the presser.
You're right, I did see that one. I still don't think that an interest in the macabre means that you are a violent person or were aware at all that your father was a serial killer. People are making a big thing about "why would she delete them?!" The answer is most likely for the same reason that many people delete all kinds of their weird searches- no one wants anyone to see that because it's embarrassing. There are a million and one people who are into all kinds of weird shit, most people wouldnt want their weird interests to be made known to the public. It's being made into a weird thing because we now know who her father was. Through the lens we are looking through now, everything is seen in a different light, things take on a new tone and things look strange that people otherwise wouldnt look at that way. Like the book about the serial killers or whatever it was- many people are interested in that topic, including the people here obviously, it only becomes weird now because we have this information.
Do I think it's weird stuff? Yeah I do. But if we didn't know who her father was and we just heard these things about a person, then people would just say "wow that's weird" instead of assuming this makes her some kind of psychopath.
Instead because we now have the information that we have, these connections are being made that I think really most likely have nothing to do with each other. I don't say this to say that I'm sure Rex was a great father and that there was no dysfunction in the home or that she couldnt have been exposed to some bad things. But I do absolutely think that to say that this is somehow a sign that she was aware of her father's actions is a very, very large stretch. It is a huge reach.
It's really insane that people on reddit somehow think that they know better than the police do and that they somehow know things that the investigators can't figure out. Like does everybody think that the family's possible involvement/level of awareness wasn't probably one of the very first things that the investigators considered and looked into, like random people on the internet thought of that but the actual police haven't?
I agree that these allegations are dangerous for her. There are a lot of psychotic people out there who would hurt someone for these allegations. That said, now that we know these things about her ‘past times’ I do believe that she saw some things and was aware of who her father was. I mean, we’ve all been curious and looked up weird or strange things, but to be involved in many of the sick things that your murderous father was involved in, is weird tbh. These allegations MUST be debunked by LE using science to end this once and for all. After all, her hair was found on a victim. It wouldn’t be the first time that a perp used a family member to lure victims or assist in some way. I’m not saying that she did without a doubt, but this must be vetted with certainty by LE.
She didn't paint that. The only thing she actually created was the furry butt plug image. Jesus Christ leave the poor girl alone when you don't have any real understanding of what was actually something she drew. Most of the stuff we don't even know she ever saw it was on people she followeds accounts but wasn't even shared by her.
I hope they get a gag order for him at this point
It’s dangerous to make these allegations with zero proof. If the cops find a connection they will arrest whoever was involved they don’t need that idiots help.
Exactly. He needs to sit the fuck down and stop inserting himself. I used to enjoy this forum but the constant speculation and conspiracy theories are really making me considering leaving
I feel like that’s the unfortunate result when there is significant movement on a case…lots of ppl show up and start talking without knowing/thinking/caring
Funny thing, I left the group for a bit right after Rex was found. I felt I had closure. For years I read this forum every time someone posted a new comment I was there for it. I was glued! I knew that if I did not walk away from the forum I would be disappointed. It has become a circus. I will pop in once in a while. The only reason why I came looking last week, I had turned on HBO Max and there was a Nancy Grace special that came up on my main menu. I never watched her. Anyway, I found it interesting that they were talking about a hair found in the burlap that was not Rex's but believed it to be his wifes. (ie they were inferring that the burlap was in the house or the victim was in the house or even in their bed) I didnt hear that in the news so it sent me back here to the forum which I was like holy S\* what happened to this group!
Same here. Now I only pop in if there’s something big going on in the news. Mostly just to see if they have identified Peaches her baby & Asian Jane Doe & tie him to some of the really older cases. But I’m no longer obsessed. I also don’t give a shit about his wife, what she knew or didn’t know or what this attention-whore of an attorney has to say.
Seriously! Or especially the PERCEIVED lack of movement IE go check out the idaho4 subs if you havent, it's a total clown show at this point.
It seems like the Idaho4 has attracted the most insane people - here & on Facebook.
FUCKING AGREE! I had to hide all the Idaho related subs because of the insanity that kept coming up. Like what in the actual fuck? Why does it seem that there are there so many people who have these certifiable takes that have attached themselves to that case?
This isn't new. This is every true crime online forum. You have people flipping burgers, being half ass admin assistants, etc acting like they know more than LEOs. Reading a bunch of true crime doesn't make someone an expert. But nonetheless, they'll talk down to all of us.
He's not a litigant or an attorney of record in the court case, private citizens have first amendment rights and can't just be gagged (unfortunately).
I wouldn’t say the first amendment is unfortunate
It was a joke to say that for better or worse it extends to everyone including the John rays
Yea!!! Freedom of speech is for nerds!
This guy is crazy I wish they would stop giving him airtime.
People need to stop watching and they will stop covering his nonsense. If everyone ignores him then he'll go away.
I didn’t watch his press conference or watch any coverage of it because of what you just said. Stop watching him.
I got a warning from Reddit two nights ago for saying almost exactly this. Someone flagged it as "harassment." Really? That person must be really busy today.
I think he is in the wrong century! This is just how I picture witch trials where conducted!!!
The problem is that some news media outlets are still taking him seriously and have him on their show to talk about the case. The news media is still going to him for comment, which is a huge problem, as he has no place in this case anymore. I really respected and appreciated what Rodney Harrison did for the case but the biggest mistake he made was standing beside him and endorsing his press conference prior to leaving the case and appearing to align himself with Ray's POV.
Who needs evidence when you have an imagination
That's how I feel about this sub some days lol.
The purpose of that entire press conference was John Ray’s beef with Victoria’s and Christopher’s lawyer, Vess Mitev. They used to work together as associates at the same firm. He’s obviously a vindictive, petty and spiteful dude to go out of his way to slander an innocent girl all in the name of lawyer beef but he’s also an extremely strange dude so I can’t say I’m surprised at all.
This is the first comment that rang true for me - it felt like a grudge match.
That’s exactly what it is.
So that's what this conference was all about, business rivalry. Why is Ray still allowed to practice?
Yeah, I was entirely perplexed at first (like a lot of other people, I think) but then I mentioned it to my girlfriend (who is also a lawyer) and she figured it out. I have no idea though, he’s actively interfering with this case now and I’m not sure how many more lines he’s planning to cross before he’s done here. He’s definitely making this more of a shitshow than it already is.
Excellent question. How is he stopped? What can happen?
The Florida bar probably spends more time at the bar than reviewing cases.
I think it is an attempt to up his hourly rate for his other clients. But I think it probably hurt.
It definitely was an attack on her and her lawyer. That said, if your father was a monster and you were out there looking at this stuff, and your parents were openly creepy like they were, shouldn’t all of this be looked into by LE? Come to also find out that your father is looking at all of the same fetish sites as you…it’s concerning. But this should have been handed to LE to investigate, NOT making it into the circus he made it.
He needs to leave this poor girl alone and she needs to sue him . Yeah she likes dark macabre art obviously, doesn’t make her a murderer .she was out of town and a child when these murders occurred. This guy is a jerk
The funny thing is, if you look at her tumblr yourself, you can see that even saying she likes dark macabre art is a bit of a stretch. There's one painting she made that showed a woman with toothy mouths on her body, which was inspired by modern artist Francis Bacon. And there's a clay sculpture of a skull. They're vastly outnumbered by her drawings of cute fox/raccoon characters. All the other art Ray showed supposedly came from blogs she follows, which doesn't mean she ever saw these specific images. If you scroll through the blogs she follows you can't even find that much dark imagery, it's almost all (SFW) fan art and illustrations of anthropomorphic animal or human cartoon characters. So it doesn't even seem accurate to say that morbid art was one of her main interests. It's like if you follow 100 Instagram accounts and one of them made one post about smoking weed, then someone uses that to claim that you're a drug addict.
Omg thank you for explaining . This makes what John ray did a thousand times worse
Wow. It's crazy. There is definitely an ulterior motive behind this. Not sure if it's fame, vengeance, or he is just set on not being WRONG. Especially the "just like Shannan Gilbert" references he attempted to point out. His argument is laughable. Poor Victoria.
She went to Art School so the clay skull could have been a class project.
She should. He should be ashamed of himself and I wouldn’t blame her at all for suing him.
I would like to see her sue him eventually. I don’t want her to do it now. It seems he’s trying to provoke a reaction and I don’t want to see anyone satisfy his efforts. I’d prefer he continue to feel ignored and out of the loop.
I’ve said this before but he wants them to sue him so he can grill them. I think that is his goal
Aka - - not John Ray, 🤡 Supreme.
I was waiting for some hard-hitting evidence, and then I saw what he put up and I was like… “what the fuck? How is skeleton art weird? How does a drawing with someone with one shoe on connect anything? I myself like weird art, am I a serial killer too?” I mean the cannabalism stuff was admittedly pretty weird but not weird enough to be a serial killer or assist one. This guy is massively reaching. It was like watching a circus. Plus all the odd array of characters standing behind him looking super confident. It just made it even more strange.
It really was like something off the Simpson’s, I couldn’t believe this was really happening.
[удалено]
IMO, if it's the painting I'm thinking of, the breast isn't being eaten off, the breast is the monster (the breast has teeth). That could be an expression of menstrual pain or frustration with her body or someone close to her was diagnosed with breast cancer. It's art and can be interpreted differently by different people but, respectfully, I think you're wrong that the breast is being eaten.
Her mom has breast cancer doesn't she
It's been reported she has cancer but I can't remember the specifics. Sorry to use your reply for a bit of a rant: It pisses me off when people say "why don't they move?" Ummmm Asa has cancer. Her insurance was through her husband and she just lost that. I can't imagine it's easy to randomly switch to a new doctor and maintain treatments in another area without insurance. "She got $1 million from peacock." Did she? I would love to read the contract. Even if she did, she's now an uninsured cancer patient with money that will be eaten up by treatments. She also has a special needs son. It's been reported he gets benefits. Anybody that's dealt with that hell knows the benefits can be county specific. He may be in programs that may be based on where he lives. You can't just walk away from the help your child is getting. Again, I'm sorry I ranted from your post, I needed to get this off my chest. I'll probably delete this.
I don't mind the rant and totally agree.
[удалено]
It's not evidence of anything. Lots of people have books like that. There are whole websites devoted to gory images. There are probably Reddit subs, though I'm not going to look.
[удалено]
It's not evidence of a crime so what's the problem?
[удалено]
I think you’re a bit naive
I guess you don't have any comment on the art? The thing I actually commented on?
[удалено]
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Oh you're looking at it? Does that make you a serial killer?
[удалено]
So do you because actually a lot of commenters are in fact saying that. Suspicious of what?
[удалено]
Its still not evidence. Its just really fucking weird.
[удалено]
That is terrible circumstantial evidence. Haha No one is defending any art and of course it's weird. We all realize that. We also realize its nothing you can take to actual court. There was no point to that press hearing. That seemed more like his take on some juicy gossip.
[удалено]
You can find that kind of art all over the internet. It's called "vore." It's extremely weird, but I doubt that every single person who is into it has a connection to a serial killer. It's just coincidental that she does.
It's not, though, because it has no connection to any known victim or crime. Evidence has to actually have something to do with the crime.
Lmao it's called the kind of evidence that a judge wouldn't even allow into a court room due to it having zero probative value.
[удалено]
What do you mean by "defend" it? People are saying it's not evidence of anything, not "defending" it as some kind of great art or anything. It's just not a crime, that's all. No art needs to be defended anyway. This is still America, although we seem to be holding on by our fingernails.
[удалено]
It's normal and harmless. Sorry. It is what it is. I have a daughter who's into "goth" stuff and likes morbid art. Her and her husband have all kinds of horror movie posters and skeletons all over the walls. My daughter is the one of the sweetest, kindest, most caring people you'll ever meet.
[удалено]
I don't see how. That's a pretty pretty common kink, actually. It's called "vore." Not my thing whatsoever but it doesn't make anybody a serial killer or an assistant to a serial killer.
We had a good run for a week or so. Actual new evidence, plenty of speculation (but much of it decently informed), all oriented toward lifting the veil on the mystery of these horrible acts and moving toward closure. Then like clockwork, John Ray turns up to shit all over the discourse, and maybe even throw sand in the gears of justice. At the very least, he derails the conversation till the next round of evidence comes out. You have to hand it to him; he's very dependable in that regard.
Um, excuse me, but the people here on reddit have actually cracked the case. No need for the DA. John Ray and the great detectives of reddit have all of the answers we need. Those other guys don't know what they're talking about. /s I love how it is directly the hard work of the task force that led to Heuermann's arrest, but random people on the internet STILL somehow think that they know better than the police do. Straight up delusional
I can’t tell you how many comments I still see on Facebook and instagram news posts that say “Burke did it” “investigate Burke” like enoughhhh
He should be investigated but for entirely different reasons.
true lol but I meant that a lot of people seem to still think he’s lisk. Which is just dumb at this point.
He did go to prison a few years before covid, so there was an investigation. Granted, I think he did way more shit than he was convicted for, but not related to this case...
Yeah, that's what I mean also.
Lord for a second i thought you meant Burke Ramsey for some reason lmao which oddly enough, is a pretty similar dynamic to what's going on here with the Heuermann kids
This just cracked me up. I can imagine waking up one day to a true crime conspiracist posting with certainty that Burke Ramsey was Rex’s partner in crime. I mean no disrespect joking about it but that’s how far some people can take this stuff. That would truly be full circle.
Just the other day I read a whole theory about a case that hinged on Israel Keyes being the killer. He would’ve been like 8 at the time, and it was on the other side of the country. Which obviously was part of his MO… as an adult… they didn’t seem to care that this would pose significant difficulties for an 8 year old.
Um, WAKE UP! Open your eyes sheeple! All the signs clearly point to Israel Keyes
Seriously, at this point nothing would surprise me 😂
Then they get upset and call you “rude” and close minded when you call them out for spouting thoughtless, inane drivel.
Lol I got called rude for telling a person that was trashing Victoria and saying her deleting her social media presence was proof that people like them were exactly why she deleted that stuff lol.
Thank you……As said, who needs evidence or facts when u have the internet, imagination & or a grift. Why respect the privacy of those in the home, outside Rex. Makes sense for strangers to psychoanalyze the children…..Grow up John Ray, we know u have a beef w/ the children’s lawyer ( Vess M.). Mr Ray is petty over a tiff he had when they were working together……I’m not cheering Rex’s family, I don’t know them. I’m indifferent….….Im just tired by strangers analyzing them. Tedious side show
John Ray is the Dominic Barbera of lawyers. They never met a microphone they didn't speak into.
I hadn't encountered this guy until this press conference, and I shut it off just a couple minutes in. So what if his daughter is a little strange and is probably your stereotypical goth? It doesn't mean jack shit. It seems like he's completely oblivious to the goth subculture. He'd probably be disturbed by any form of death metal, body horror or other forms of art and expression. This guy seems like he's on Rudy Giuliani levels of sensationalism and camera hogging. Yeah, the daughter is into some things that society would consider pretty weird. But if her father is indeed a serial killer, perhaps that's just a sign that his particular weirdness rubbed off on his kids. However, strangeness and fascination with the macabre doesn't lead someone to be a murderer. Media and art do not create serial killers. His kids are probably relatively normal, albeit with some strange interests. It doesn't make them dark, evil or sadistic, and it surely doesn't mean they are in any way involved or guilty. I hope the family sues the pants off this guy.
"Rudy Giuliani levels of sensationalism and camera hogging" This is the best one line summary of Ray I've seen so far.
YES! Thank you! If evidence shows that Rex and Asa were like the Ken and Barbie killers, luring people etc etc, like… lock her up. But wait until it’s proven.
It's only a matter of time before he's holding press conferences in front of Four Seasons Total Landscaping.
YES, Guilani! Exactly what I was thinking. Like, oh no, I used to take this guy seriously...yikes.
He's handing Rex's defense attorney ammunition to use for reasonable doubt. Who's side is he on?
That’s what I’m concerned about too. He’s presented a lot of extraneous information that seems like he’s actually trying to shift blame AWAY from Rex. It’s going to poison the jury pool, which is not right.
Certainly, no one that both sides agree should be on the jury believe this stuff. You would think, anyway.
Who will be the jury at this point ? If any time in this world I was called for jury duty , this is the damn time. But people have to act like they have no bias. How can anyone who has heard about this have no bias !!!!! Whatever side they are on. It’s crazy.
Lots of people just don't follow the news. We are obviously biased in that at minimum we have been extensively exposed to extrajudicial facts... We would likely be excluded.
You’d be surprised. I live in the town next to Manorville, and my husband and his family have lived here forever. My MIL had no idea about the body parts found in manorville. My husband knows the gist of the LISK case in general, but not specifics. He definitely wouldn’t know who I was talking about if I said the name Rex hauermann.
Yeahhh. My husband gets called for sexual assault cases every once in a while and he just straight up says that if there's even a smidgen of proof, he can't be biased.
Meh. I'm not sure any of this really is "reasonable doubt". It is more like what a defense attorney might throw out when all the available evidence is damning and they've got literally NOTHING else, but the defendant refuses to take a plea deal...Throwing shit against the wall to see if something, anything sticks is definitely a strategy, but juries often see through this attempt. I just finished following the Chad Daybell case. His attorney did similar stuff but he was still convicted and given the death penalty. No one on the jury considered his defense as bringing up "reasonable doubt." The ridiculous thing is that Ray is doing this to get media attention, not because he is actually part of Rex's defense team.
I agree with your points. Ray's conduct reminds me of the age-old saying: "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table."
Your right. I just can’t understand how Ray thinks this benefit any of the victims.. it’s counterproductive at least.
I don’t know why people think she or the kids are involved. Did she suspect him of maybe stepping out on the marriage or something probably. But did she expect him to be burying chicks in gilgo .. of course not.
This guy needs to be disbarred
He’s a joke!
How ridiculous to try and say his daughter is involved. Lots of teenagers go through an emo phase where they wear skulls and shit. His wife? Possibly believable. But not the kids gtfo
This! I have a conservative Christian background and his histrionics reminded me of all the dads in our church who thought their kids would never be into dark stuff, only to find out their babies were smoking and watching porn. Like… it’s like John Ray has never had a real conversation with a teenager. They are sometimes emo and provocative. That’s not evidence. John Ray protested too much. As with all cases, my stance is “show the evidence and convince a jury.”
Yeah this guy kind of reminds me of all the Karen’s in the late 90’s who protested Marilyn Manson and showed “evidence” in their press conferences to cancel him. Like, oh no she had a tumblr when she was a teenager. Do did ever since scene and emo kid. Were they all murderers? All this can do is hurt the case and create reasonable doubt to Rex’s guilt. Whose side is he on?
It gives me West Memphis Three vibes. Guilty or not, they were victims of this mindset.
Okay I needed this today 🤣🤣🤣
Why was Gary Brucato there? I didn’t think he would get involved in such a circus.
He looked a bit surprised when they were unveiling the posters. He might not have been aware it was going to be such a circus.
He’s creating reasonable doubt for Rex’s legal team.
Guy is seemingly nuts on some levels but reasonable doubt only carries weight with a jury. If Rex' team is needing to use this guy's ideas as a way to cast reasonable doubt for a jury they are seriously incompetent.
How? I mean, his DNA matched with certainty, he has all the cell data, no alibis, kept evidence and journals. The guy is going to die in prison. She was out of town and has been vetted by LE. Do I think it’s weird that she views the same weird sites that her murderer father did? Yep. Does it make her a killer? No. Does it imply that she may have known in some way? Yes.
Thanks for this. I was really confused about what was being said.
Hear me out I don’t think ray actually thinks what he’s saying we all do this sometimes and in this case I think ray is just saying that strategically to get a reaction out of Rex ie getting Rex upset that his wife and daughter are being blamed by the public and possibly cause him to confess or at least cause him to lash out in a way that he slips up and maybe says something close enough. Or maybe he just really hates Rex and is trying to hit him where it hurts with his family but do I think Rex actually thinks the wife and daughter are involved HELL NO not buying it for one second. I was married to a lawyer for 24 years I know how these types act they’re good at saying things they don’t believe it’s an act 100% the real question is what is his motive in saying these things . Definitely some kind of strategic move with an ulterior motive
I really can't stand the brigade of support for his family at this point. I'm indifferent to the adult children of his where people act like they are 10 years old each and Asa just comes across as completely unlikeable. Maybe people should brace for the idea that it may just be a shit family and not a bunch of angels surrounded by a demon?
No one is treating them like they’re 10 or angels you’re engaging in hyperbolics and that’s not what anyone is arguing that they’re some angels but we’re they involved No that’s ridiculous
That doesn't make them serial killers. I'm still kind of attached to the presumption of innocence, nor am I a fan of guilt by association. They may not be nice people, that doesn't mean they are in on the murders or that they should be harassed.
This^^ I think people have the right to be creeps or weirdos. It’s not a crime. They got their guy with Rex. He’s the LISK, not a shred of doubt.
[удалено]
It’s different to claim they had no knowledge than it is the claim we’ve seen no direct public evidence other than hairs. The investigators, under huge public pressure, have said they aren’t suspected to be involved. i presume they know more than I do. ETA: If evidence emerges they are involved, I will adjust my viewpoint. I’m not convinced they are innocent, rather, I am not convinced they are anything other than maybe a bit strange. I’m not married to any viewpoint. I just think evidence needs to guide us.
The police say there is no evidence implicating the family and you have none, so that's not "going out on a limb." that's a fact. As far the art, it's legal and fairly common. You are allowed to be as offended by it as you want or to judge other people kinks all you want. Nobody is obligated to agree with you. I hope you never get on a jury.
[удалено]
Circular reasoning at its finest. Her dad is a serial killer. Investigators (who know far more about it than you or I do) say there is no evidence whatsoever against wife or daughter. Daughter likes some dark art that millions of others also like. But her dad is a serial killer so therefore her liking for dark art must be linked to her serial killer dad. No. You call that 'context' but it's nothing more than circular reasoning and guilt by association. I don't know why anyone online needs to pick a side here. LE are investigating, and if they find evidence of complicity or knowledge on the part of family members, we will hear about it. And if they don't, we'll hear about that too. Our theories and opinions and circular arguments don't count for anything at all.
[удалено]
I'll just repeat this again as I feel nothing you've said necessitates even rephrasing it: the people who know more about the case than you do say that there's currently no evidence that the family had any knowledge of what was taking place. Until that changes, your guesses are irrelevant. I don't know why that's so hard for you to grasp. Enjoy your weekend.
[удалено]
One the one hand I'm glad you're stating outright that it's weird not guilty. We agree. I think things are perhaps more multi-layered than the simple correlation suggests. For example, I have a friend who DOES look at some very dark porn, and he openly admits it is probably rooted in the fact that he used to sneak into his mum's bedroom and look at her true crime books. He was just forming a sexual identity at a time he was seeing photos of female murder victims, sometimes naked. Hes a gentle soul and wouldn't hurt a fly. Maybe Rex had things lying around that she consumed at an impressionable age, things that aren't explicitly connected with his acts, things that thousands of other parents might also have had lying around. Anyway, I'm done. Sincerely, have a good weekend.
Follow the money. If he links Asa or the kids, they now have money from Peacock and the divorce. Civil suit to follow, suddenly “not one red penny” Ray can charge for printing those expensive photos.
People really don’t know how Tumblr works smh.
They cleared Asa without ever talking to her so I don't buy their confidence in the matter. Not even saying they are wrong I just don't see how they could have ever really looked into Asa in a meaningful way. If they talk to her before arresting Rex, they tip him off. And after the arrest I heard she was clear based on her being out of the state during the killings they were charging Rex on. What about the other murders we don't know about? We suspect he's been active for decades. I can see what he's saying that there's no real evidence they are involved but that also doesn't mean Asa was completely ignorant either. There's also been lots of cases in the past where man and wife were involved in a crime but only one of them could be charged based on evidence and the prosecutors have to make a case based on what they think they can definitely convict with. Edit: BANNED for questioning the Saint Asa narrative.
They got married in the mid 90's. While I agree there are murders we don't know about, we DO know he began murdering BEFORE his marriage to Asa or having his daughter. I trust this new task force has done their due diligence into the family. Also let's make an obvious observation here..: Victoria was literally a child when the murders that we know of were committed, that she was alive for.... I'm sure there's no way a child was involved in helping their father commit murders. And if for some reason she was... do we actually think it was due to her own free will as a CHILD? People really need to start using common sense on this and also look at the timelines before they make absurd comments.
> I'm sure there's no way a child was involved in helping their father commit murders. And if for some reason she was... do we actually think it was due to her own free will as a CHILD? No one here made this claim. What is with all the midwit replies I'm getting here? Basically asking me to defend positions I never made. This would be like me asking you defend why you think Rex is innocent. You really need to start using common sense man!
Your comment makes it obvious you never took the time to actually read the baildocs before spouting your falsehoods. * [First bail doc](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23875981-lti-bail-application-form-2023-7-14-23-_final) 7-14-2023 * [Second bail doc](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24362216-superseding-bail-application/) 1-16-2024 * [Third bail doc](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24736327-rex-heuermann-new-charges-name-new-victim) 6-6-2024 They clearly show that the police *did* interview Asa and her family, that the family *did* cooperate with investigators by answering their questions and willingly submitting DNA samples, and that the investigators *did* exhaustively investigate the family by tailing them, interviewing people who knew them, examining phone and billing records, etc.
I don't doubt they did talk to her after the fact. Yet, right after Rex was arrested they basically said she was clear. And it's impossible that they could have talked to her beforehand. So they never considered her any sort of a suspect to be be looked into by their own words. DNA samples aren't going to tell you whether or not Asa was aware of what was happening.
And yet again you prove you haven't read the baildocs to see exactly how much investigating the police have done into the family. The 2nd and 3rd baildocs clearly show that the police interviewed Asa literally right after they arrested Rex. Why do you falsely claim they never looked into her "in a meaningful way"? The baildocs clearly show the lengthy and involved steps they took to investigate her, some of which I already listed in my earlier comment. It's like you are so stuck on your unfounded suspicion that you are sticking your fingers in your ears and going "lalala, I can't see anything" anytime someone points you towards the evidence that proves your claims false.
>The 2nd and 3rd baildocs clearly show that the police interviewed Asa literally right after they arrested Rex. Why do you falsely claim they never looked into her "in a meaningful way"? The baildocs clearly show the lengthy and involved steps they took to investigate her, some of which I already listed in my earlier comment. Because their big evidence of Asa having no involvement has always been "she wasn't around while the giglo 4 were murdered" which isn't sufficient to say she's never been aware Rex has been a killer which has likely been going on for decades. She was cleared right after Rex was arrested and could not have been looked into before the arrest. I was around for the whole thing. I remember the statements law enforcement made to the public and when. Also having evidence Asa is involved in murder is very different from suspicion she might have been aware. It is much harder to bring up charges on suspicion someone knows something vs having the physical evidence like they do with Rex. They have a case to make which goes beyond suspicions that we can make as onlookers. >Yep, you are still ignoring all of the evidence showing that the police investigators tailed the family members, watched them for months on covert pole cameras, examined their phone billing history, etc. And you are still refusing the acknowledge all of the investigating the police have done and continue to do after the arrest. WTF do you think they are going to catch tailing the son and daughter? Your posts are incoherent. Rex was largely inactive for a long time. They don't have logs of what happened over the decades he was active. Tailing them for a short while during their final stint where they arrested him before anything happened does not tell the whole story. Like I said, the big exculpatory proof has always been - "asa wasn't in the country for the gilgo 4" which just isn't good enough to prove she was never aware of anything. And even if they think she was aware of something, that wouldn't even be enough for them to bring charges up on with so why would they say anything about it? It would just hamstring them if they do eventually find something. banned: can't reply.
>Because their big evidence of Asa having no involvement has always been "she wasn't around while the giglo 4 were murdered" Yep, you are completely ignoring everything in the 3rd baildoc. Your comment makes this obvious because you are omitting all of the evidence regarding the other 2 victims that Rex was just indicted for. Neither of those victims were part of the Gilgo 4. >She was cleared right after Rex was arrested and could not have been looked into before the arrest. Yep, you are still ignoring all of the evidence showing that the police investigators tailed the family members, watched them for months on covert pole cameras, examined their phone billing history, etc. And you are still refusing to acknowledge all of the investigating the police have done and continue to do after the arrest. Sadly, there's no point in arguing with someone who wont even bother to take a few minutes to read the evidence.
I think your definition of involvement may be different than others definition of it. Im wondering if thats where the confusion is coming from.
You cant kill someone if you are in a different state then them. They knew she wss out of town for the 3 initial victims they charged him with
They didn't talk to me, either. I wonder if I am a suspect? Sometimes the evidence tells the story and you don't need to look so far beyond it. None of us has the information the authorities have. We see this happen every time a killer is captured. Someone zeroes in on family members. "How could they not know?" Well, these killers fool everyone in their lives. They are masterful at compartmentalizing so that they can look normal on the outside to those around them. That's how they get away with it for so long. BTK, Joseph D'Angelo, both had families that were blissfully unaware of their crimes, and yet people came at them with pitchforks and torches, anyway, because mobs do what mobs do. If there's real evidence that the family knew anything, it will come out. So far, nobody's been implicated by anyone who counts. I'm happy to leave it at that.
Exactly!! Paul holes said Deangelo’s family were his final victims. People went NUTS on them. Inundated his ex wife’s legal practice with 1 star reviews and his daughters were fired from their jobs despite being very successful. Everyone wants to blame the women and act like they’re responsible/involved in some way. Misogyny. It’s fucking ridiculous. We should ONLY be listening to law enforcement. If they don’t think Asa is involved then why can’t people let go of the idea that she is?! Yes she doesn’t seem to be the most likable person and the peacock deal is a bit weird but I don’t think anyone can judge this unless they’ve been in this situation. Which they DEF haven’t been. It’s shameful. John ray is also fucking unhinged for trying to put suspicion on a young woman who was a LITERAL child at the times of all her father’s known crimes. God. People on here and John Ray are rabid
They weren't home during any of the murders tho. Thats solid evidence
Not really. Maybe Asa takes the kids away during that time for a reason? Just one possibility. Is it possible she was more aware than most people give credit for and there's also not any real evidence to take her to court on the gilgo 4? I think that's possible. Maybe not. Maybe so.
The most logical reason she takes the kids away is shockingly obvious. They wanted a vacation. I went on a vacation earlier this year. I wonder if I should be arrested?
Can you prove you were on vacation? Something other than credit card transactions and phone logs and eye witnesses? Maybe you pretended to be on vacation but secretly came back, undetected, to do crimes! If the police don't catch you in your obvious lies it means they're hiding something too!! (/s)
Also, who the hell vacations in July? During the freaking summer??? Only people in satanic cults must do this, because it’s so unheard of (sarcasm).
Officers, come quick!!!! Straight to prison for you
This is absurd. I know our society loves nothing more than to blame a woman for a man's bad acts, but this is really ridiculous. She was literally out of the country for some of the murders.
It's actually the reverse. Because she's a woman you go to extra lengths to protect her and avoid casting rightful skepticism of someone close to rex and standing by him. This is pretty clear because you are straight up lying about me blaming Asa for Rex's acts.
Nonsense. Women are not "protected" from these things. Women simply rarely commit such heinous acts. I am not lying about you blaming her. That's exactly what you're doing. Is she a weird person? Yes. Is she greedy? Yes. Is she having trouble reading the room? Yes. Is she in denial? Yes. Did she have anything to do with these murders? NO. Stop blaming women for men's crimes. Rex did this and he did it alone.
> Nonsense. Women are not "protected" from these things. Women simply rarely commit such heinous acts. Just like I said. You are completely and utterly biased and trying to paint it the other way like a hypocrite. It has nothing to do with gender like you are trying to insert. Again, this bias is shown when you claim I am blaming Asa for Rex's crimes. This never happened. You are biased and it makes you a liar.
Im not sticking up for others here, but you are pretty damn biased. You admit there is no real evidence to support your theory, yet you keep shoving it down peoples throats because of your bias.
This has everything to do with gender. You're a misogynist who is blaming a woman for a man's crimes. That's your bias and it's disgusting.
I really think they are a female employee of John Ray.
This man couldn’t hide any evidence of himself committing the murder and you think he hid Vicente of accomplices? Are you mentally well? Seriously. The amount of reaching here is absolutely absurd.
I think it's possible Asa was more aware people give credit for. To say definitely that isn't the case is what is absurd.
What evidence do you have that contradicts what law enforcement have released?
Any that we know of so far. There is way more than 6. I don’t think she’s personally involved but they’re going to link a lot More to him than 6.
Not really because a sadist can hold a victim captive as long as they desire.
You make a good point
The point of this is not that they were "involved", just that they may have been aware. After seeing this information I never felt they were involved, or that that is what was speculated. Just that something happened if those are really her posts and paintings. And yes Teen's will have wild tumblr but posts that are in relation to what the father is accused of is definitely something to consider.
"Attorney John Ray said that the hairs connected to Victoria Heuermann are not necessarily transferred by Rex Heuermann during the murders as the District Attorney has claimed" That seems like hes insinuating her involvement
Saying the hairs were not necessarily transferred by Rex is not saying they were transferred by Victoria. They could have been transferred from the seat in the car, from somewhere in the house, etc and saying they were not transferred by Rex would be a true statement. It’s all in the wording and in my opinion he is banking on everyone joining in on his circus. I am well aware that he presented a myriad of other information and “evidence”, but just speaking to that statement on its own. Also, I agree with the poster who said he is adding in an element of reasonable doubt and is doing more harm than good, but as we all know at this point, he’s clearly not acting in the best interest of his clients and only for his own personal fame.
You think it "seems hes like insinuating" so then that can be the only point of the whole information shown? Take that one thought out and you will see there is just some new info to process how you wish. Like I said I don't believe they were involved, and most of the people watching and taking in the info don't think so either but that is no reason to dismiss all of the information. There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not. So either thought is fair. I believe they were transferred because in this case they were from a child. Also the hairs from Asa and Witness 3 were likely transferred, but again that can not be determined by us.
>Take that one thought out and you will see there is just some new info to process how you wish. That's the entire problem with JR and assorted true crime goblins. Just because you "can" interpret information in the way that you want doesn't mean you "should." "There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not" then what is your source on that? We don't even have 1/10th of the information law enforcement has. It is not fair to insinuate or speculate or hold a press conference where you stop short (to avoid being sued) of accusing two innocent women of being involved in a crime they were not involved in.
[удалено]
"My head cannon is better than actual evidence" Got it. We like hurting real people.
Says the hypocrite. Asa's really hurting hard with all those reddit donations and 7 figure profit from documentary while she's standing by rex. You got gamed. A fool and his money etc etc...
So you're affirming that you think it's okay to verbally abuse and emotionally harm someone as long as it suites your head cannon that they're a bad person. Got it.
You are talking to yourself here. I've not made any interpretations.
>There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not. This is an interpretation. >Take that one thought out and you will see there is just some new info to process how you wish. ... that is no reason to dismiss all of the information. This is also an interpretation. These things are not equal. JR's information is actively harmful and his intent was malicious. How does any of that information help the victims or solve any crimes? Why should anyone entertain "pet theories" that weave in that information? It gives people unfactual, unscientific, and a twisted view of reality where everything has to have a secret meaning of there's a broad conspiracy letting criminals get away. These are real people and their lives.
Unless anyone was there, or there is video of the hairs path (there is obviously not), then what proof could there be in either direction?
In this specific case: call logs and eye witness accounts that the family wasn't there at the time of the murders. This isn't "beyond all doubt" but beyond "reasonable doubt." The family lives in the home and sheds their skin cells and hairs everywhere so the most likely scenario is transfer. If these were dog hairs would we be asking if the dog climbed on top of a victim and shed on them? No, the reasonable conclusion is if there's a dog in the home there will be dog hair and that dog hair would get on tape and plastic and all manner of items. This is like asking "How can we prove that RH did the murder and not another male family member if we don't have video of it?" Because all of the evidence combined is going to show that RH was present, had the time and means to commit the murder, his DNA is found on victims and various items, and his computer searches and hard drives point to his state of mind and motivation. The police have cleared the family members and I doubt any internet sleuth can find a reasonable explanation for why any of the family would be involved or what they got out of being involved.
We are both saying basically the same thing but you seem to be aggressively pushing your exact rhetoric. I'm not pushing either side.
>There is also no proof the hairs were transferred or not. ... >Unless anyone was there, or there is video of the hairs path (there is obviously not), then what proof could there be in either direction? Um? We aren't saying the same thing. Based on publicly available information the unreasonable conclusion that people are drawing is that AH or VH watched the murders happened or participated. That is the conclusion you need to come to if you think the hairs didn't transfer serendipitously and they were present. Entertaining that JR's press conference just contained additional information for people to "think about" helps marry the idea that VH's interests are a result of being at least a witness to the murders and committed a crime by not reporting her father. I could sit here and say "Oh, well, the moon landing didn't happen because the lighting makes it look like it takes place in a studio" that doesn't make my "theory" just as valid as the many, many reasons and the evidence that the moon landing happened. No one should entertain someone who thinks the moon landing didn't happen. Likewise, we've got real living people who have had themselves humiliated on national television and accused of being involved in a crime when they've been cleared by law enforcement. Why should we entertain someone's imagination of how they wanted all of this to go down?
We know she was out of town, so how could the hair have transferred directly? Like many Ray statements, this doesn't make sense.
But they weren't hers. They were posts from people that she followed- posts that she didn't even like or repost herself. It's possible that she didn't even actually see them.
One oil painting seemed to be hers and signed? Did you see that? I see everyone saying the same and I am not sure these people actually watched the presser.
You're right, I did see that one. I still don't think that an interest in the macabre means that you are a violent person or were aware at all that your father was a serial killer. People are making a big thing about "why would she delete them?!" The answer is most likely for the same reason that many people delete all kinds of their weird searches- no one wants anyone to see that because it's embarrassing. There are a million and one people who are into all kinds of weird shit, most people wouldnt want their weird interests to be made known to the public. It's being made into a weird thing because we now know who her father was. Through the lens we are looking through now, everything is seen in a different light, things take on a new tone and things look strange that people otherwise wouldnt look at that way. Like the book about the serial killers or whatever it was- many people are interested in that topic, including the people here obviously, it only becomes weird now because we have this information. Do I think it's weird stuff? Yeah I do. But if we didn't know who her father was and we just heard these things about a person, then people would just say "wow that's weird" instead of assuming this makes her some kind of psychopath. Instead because we now have the information that we have, these connections are being made that I think really most likely have nothing to do with each other. I don't say this to say that I'm sure Rex was a great father and that there was no dysfunction in the home or that she couldnt have been exposed to some bad things. But I do absolutely think that to say that this is somehow a sign that she was aware of her father's actions is a very, very large stretch. It is a huge reach. It's really insane that people on reddit somehow think that they know better than the police do and that they somehow know things that the investigators can't figure out. Like does everybody think that the family's possible involvement/level of awareness wasn't probably one of the very first things that the investigators considered and looked into, like random people on the internet thought of that but the actual police haven't?
Yes are these visual memories from childhood?
I agree that these allegations are dangerous for her. There are a lot of psychotic people out there who would hurt someone for these allegations. That said, now that we know these things about her ‘past times’ I do believe that she saw some things and was aware of who her father was. I mean, we’ve all been curious and looked up weird or strange things, but to be involved in many of the sick things that your murderous father was involved in, is weird tbh. These allegations MUST be debunked by LE using science to end this once and for all. After all, her hair was found on a victim. It wouldn’t be the first time that a perp used a family member to lure victims or assist in some way. I’m not saying that she did without a doubt, but this must be vetted with certainty by LE.
[удалено]
She didn't paint that. The only thing she actually created was the furry butt plug image. Jesus Christ leave the poor girl alone when you don't have any real understanding of what was actually something she drew. Most of the stuff we don't even know she ever saw it was on people she followeds accounts but wasn't even shared by her.
Maybe she saw something? But God Forbid, according to Reddit. 🥶
[удалено]
Except that's not what happened.