Arkansas Blog

Don't think I'd make any more comments either if I'd let one like that fly...

I'm starting to think maybe I should just copy and paste all my comments that I give up on into a word document and save them for when I actually can get logged in, then just copy and paste em all to get it off my chest. I'm betting this one's gonna fly into nowhere land like that last three I've tried...

but here's to faith...

Information schminformation.

Better for us just to assume rapists are on the loose and do all we need to do to protect ourselves.

Why follow information trails, collaborate, share information publicly, when we all know rapists are out there? It's hysteria to think otherwise. Isn't it?

Speaking of Fox 16, its 9 p.m. newscast is, in my opinion, the BEST in the Little Rock market. By far. And, yep, Crime Lab director Kermit Channell has some big-time 'splaining to do.

On several threads discussing this case, it has now been reported that the public commonly knew that Anne Pressly was sexually assaulted before the police released this information, and that media outlets reported this.

To the contrary, as late as Nov. 27 a credible media outlet (see bluename) was reporting, "My source says he believes Pressly was not raped, as has been reported in several places, but others continue to say the attack was part of a sexual assault. Her attacker may have killed her for refusing to submit."

Best way to dispel ugly rumors? Accurate flow of information from those charged with serving the public. Best way to build healthy communities? Let sun shine in.

The State Crime Lab is backed up at least 7 to 8 months and only then do you get something back that is needed on an investigation you would have already closed and since unfounded. The crime lab can get things back inside of 72 hours, I've seen it happen. The only reason they dont do it on every case they get is the "profile level" of the case. High Profile cases get more attention that others. Not to take anything away from the topic at hand but I've seen countless other cases be pushed to the back burner for 7 to 8 months while these rapist run free. Its BS that the Crime Lab doesn't hire more help for cases. The State of Arkansas needs to realize that the 7 to 8 month period can be avoided and we can put more of these dirt bags behind bars with more help at the Crime Lab. Lets tell the Governor to put some more money into the program.

Also, Yes, I agree with the statement above about protecting yourself from these people. LADIES AND GENTALMEN, GET YOUR CONSEALED CARRY PERMIT AND PROTECT YOURSELF. Use Pepper Spray if you dont feel confortable with a weapon. The 2nd Amendment allows this so take advantage of your rights!

I mean seriously, Clint Eastwood always had a gun, except for "Gone Baby Gone", and he probably had one in his boot then. haha

on a happier note...what about kat's baby [ sorry no caps, broken arm]

We know that in the past the state Crime Lab manufactured evidence to suit their employer. Since no wrong doing was ever admitted, how do we know this has changed?

"There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again." -President George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

Excellent point Zatharus especially in light of the blind reliance of this blog to whatever anyone in "authority" says about this case.

I'm not sure what ARBRLF means about this blog's blind reliance on people in authority, but I did want to state that I am disappointed in Max for allowing a vicious rumor to stay up in an earlier thread on this topic.

Blogging carries some responsibility, and this one deserves criticism for not filtering what would be actionable material in the tradition media outlets.

Maybe we need a fairness doctrine for the Internet.

Fat chance.

I agree, Zatharus and ARBRLF.

And I'm reading the "authority" figures on which some bloggers are relying to mean that as long as a select circle of the socially privileged have access to inside information, the rest of the community can go to hell.

I have an aunt, in her late 70s, who lives alone not far from where Anne Pressly lived. She has been in terror for weeks now. She is always vigilant.

But I am convinced she'd have taken extra precautions if the whole story had been made known.

I have a sister-in-law who lives even closer to Anne Pressly's house, and a niece who will be coming home for Christmas to that household. I am naturally concerned that if a heinous crime involving both murder and sexual assault occurs near them, they have access to information.

We have long been a city/state in which the social elite doesn't give a damn about the common good or about anyone outside their privileged circles. The fierce defensive reaction of some of their spokespersons on this blog--and their willingness to slur anyone who asks questions about public disclosure of information in this case--is more of the same old same old that keeps us backwards.

State priorities are reflected in state budgets. Arkansas is hardly the only state with a evidentiary backlog. Seven or eight months is inexcusable. But to make the leap that Anne Pressly might be alive if the Crime Lab was better staffed and the DNA in the Marianna rape had been processed faster assumes a lot of things.

First of all, Marianna has one detective. The rape involved a school teacher, so a student was developed as a prime suspect. When the DNA tests of this suspect were (finally) returned and did not match the victim's DNA, the Marianna detective was just as clueless as to who committed the rape in his investigation as Little Rock detectives were regarding who raped/murdered Pressly.

Because Pressly died (and yes, possibly because of her celebrity), her evidence moved through the crime lab much more quickly. When suspect DNA from the two rapes half-a-state apart matched, Little Rock detectives called over to Lee County and some brainstorming began. A number of suspects were developed and interviewed. Vance didn't pass the smell test, got swabbed, end of story. Vance was probably on the radar because his girlfriend was recently busted trying to pawn stolen goods. Had this not occured, Vance might still be off the radar and walking the streets.

In other words, Vance became a suspect in the Marianna rape AFTER the Pressly murder. He might have developed as a suspect without that occurring, but with one detective and little to go on there is no guarantee. It is just as likely that another innocent man would have been swabbed and another seven or eight months would have passed.

Now state legislators...let's get more funding for the Crime Lab so we don't have to play this "what if" game in the future!

Ooops. I meant to say the Marianna suspect's DNA did not match the DNA left with the victim at the crime scene...not the victim's DNA. Sorry.

Didn't we vote for a new statewide tax a couple of years ago that was specifically for the Crime Lab to staff enough employees to take care of the months long backlog? What happened? More crime or did the the new employees not get hired?

I'm up to reading a long article explaining DNA testing and why in this lightening fast age it would take 7 months to get the results of any DNA test. We have an Arkansas Bomb Squad that can be in your town in minutes or an hour. I don't even want to think how many women can be raped and murdered in a 7 month period. I can find out if my relatives came from Africa for $39.95 and get the results back next week. What's the damn deal with the Arkansas Crime Lab.

Beebe's sitting on a gob of money and every voter in the state would vote to spend it on fixing the Crime Lab. Why the wait? It's like everything else in life, throw enough money at it and all the problems will disappear. Farm some of it out to the U of A Medical School and the new one going up in NW Arkansas. Send me a batch of test tubes to watch over, I can still spot a wiggly with my good eye. Let's not be so 70s about something that might have saved Ms Pressly's life.

24fps, Max took down posts in that thread based on what he refers to as "official" denials. The only "official" denials that were provided by those in authority related who is and is not a suspect in this case as of today. No other denials have been issued related to what are most likely very relevant facts in this crime. I believe prior posts are very accurate regarding the value of information and the view of the common good in Little Rock from those in authority and social elite. I believe that had this woman not been a "celebrity" and lived in a particular neighborhood, the protections being afforded many surrounding this case would not exist.

I don't get all these potshots at the "elite" and their supposed spokespersons on this blog...maybe I'm just thick.

As to the Crime Lab, it's the (Crime Lab) culture, stupid!! It has been thus since the days of the notoriously incompetent Fahmy Malak, who remains at the ADH to this day (I THINK) drawing down the big bucks and so far as I know doing virtually nothing, just being a washed-up "celebrity." From the boys on the tracks in Saline County to Janie Ward to this, with MANY stumbles in between...

While our moronic Ledge twiddles and does Doe's with the fat cats, NOTHING of substance changes. If more money meant effective management, I'd be all for it. What do you think the odds are of THAT??!!!
|

Larry, or somebuddy else, please hep me. Besides Mayor Stodola, UCA board member Rush Harding III, the Hon. Steve Harrelson, and the inimitable Miss Norma Bates of Chenal, what "socially elite" people ever cast an eye toward this blog? And who are the spokespeople defending the privileged and those "in authority?" And who has been slurred for asking questions and filing on the many Pressly threads what might be considered a minority opinion? And, finally, where th' hell is SkyPilot to tell me if I've "who and whomed" correctly?

All I want to know is, if Ms. Pressely bit her attacker and her attacker is in custody, somebody needs to show me some bite marks. Because she was fighting for her life, I don't believe the bite was anything light. Answer me that. I'm not saying who was or wasn't invovled, but show me a bite mark, please

All I want to know is, if Ms. Pressely bit her attacker and her attacker is in custody, somebody needs to show me some bite marks. Because she was fighting for her life, I don't believe the bite was anything light. Answer me that. I'm not saying who was or wasn't invovled, but show me a bite mark, please

CBM - I read the bite mark in the media as though it was left on HER body, not the other way around. And that they got Vance's DNA from that bite mark.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up, Cynthia

Whew - durango, THAT'S what I'm wondering; thought I'd entered a parallel universe or something OR maybe we just don't know who we don't know...and especially the "slurred" part too; I don't remember any of that!!

Also, I thought the report was about her biting HIM too.
|

I went back to search and the only place that dug up a hit about a bite was here on Ark Times blog. Here is the text from that post on Nov 28 @ 8:03am: Little Rock police recovered DNA samples in the investigation of Pressly's beating. I'm told it was from her saliva. She apparently bit her attacker while she struggled furiously with him in her Heights home in the early morning hours Oct. 20. [NOTE FROM MAX: I'm unclear who bit whom, but my source says a bite is believed the key to the DNA sample yielded. I can't immediately reach my source for further clarification.]

Durango, I'm with you on wondering who in the world here represents the "social elite." I suppose they might be talking about me. I've simply said that the purposes of effective law enforcement sometimes, repeat, sometimes require the delay of releasing the details of a crime. I really don't get all this diatribe about "authority" and "social elite's." For gosh sakes, I don't even live in Little Rock, much less have any connections to "power," "authority," or the "upper crust" of the local culture.

If you've been wronged by "authority," then vent as you wish, but I don't see the connection to this particular crime. Maybe you know someone in Little Rock's law enforcement establishment you don't trust? I don't know anyone there and have no ax to grind. You may be right about other crimes or other situations, but there is no denying the fact that sometimes the details of a crime need to be withheld. Maybe to catch the perp, maybe to protect the prosecution of the case, maybe to protect the jury pool.

Acknowledging this view does not make one a mindless, toady to the authoritarian, social elite. It doesn't have anything to do with the prevailing views of Arkansans, redneck or not. The needs of law enforcement are the same across the country.

I still stand by my statement that the most important thing here is a successful prosecution of the right criminal - for the sake of justice, for the sake of the safety of the public, and for the victim's family. Those of us on the outside have neither the perspective nor the training and expertise to know what will produce those results. We've hired people to do that and, if they don't do it to our liking, then we should hire new ones. I can assure you that the public will hold them accountable should they not solve this crime and not convict a killer.

OK. correct me if i am wrong, in the first rape the DNA WAS processed, but with ZERO matches in the system (which would make sense because he wasnt in the system!) hence, the evidence sat in the stack of unsolved, unknown suspects rape cases. for whatever reason, im assuming great detective work led the authorities to Curtis Vance. he AGREED to a DNA test that was processed quickly and later returned a match to the first rape. why does there have to be drama over how long it took to process the evidence in Anne's murder? geez.

Max, are you reporting the evidence in the first rape was not processed for seven months?? i dont think that is accurate. Please advise,

Since you're clearly responding to me re: the social elite, Larry, I'll respond.

Where one person sees potshots, another sees an accurate description of social reality. What we see has a great deal to do with who we are, with our social location, with where we grew up and how we were shaped.

To someone raised in Arkansas (as opposed to someone raised, say, in California), it's obvious that this state has long been dominated by a social elite. And that this social elite hasn't worked for the best interests of the state, from the days of the Conways, Seviers, Crittendens to the days of the current big families who own the majority of wealth in the state.

For folks raised, say, in California, American society may look classless. For those raised in Arkansas, it's not that way at all. We know that the myth of a classless society is a myth. We are aware from the time we are little that information flows to those at the top, and is controlled by them, and is allowed to filter down to the rest of us insofar as they decide that this will happen.

Then when we grow up and study the economic and social structure of our state, we find plenty of evidence to confirm what we saw growing up. And if we care about our state, we take what we learn and try to use it to critique the status quo to make things better--for all of us.

Everything is determined by who we are,by where we stand. A heterosexual male will not see the power and privilege he enjoys, for example, as easily as a gay male will see that social reality, as an outsider to that astonishing power and privilege. So a gay male would react differently, for instance, than a straight one would, to comments like, "You need to get down from your self-righteous female patronizing pedestal" addressed to him by your blogging buddy. Who admits that he knew he was speaking to a male when he wrote that.

Does that help you to understand what's at stake in this discussion?

ontilt says:

"Max, are you reporting the evidence in the first rape was not processed for seven months?? i dont think that is accurate. Please advise, "

max is not reporting that, fox16 is. And from the story online that is exactly what they reported. The crime lab is not refuting that.

ARK. BLOG: We confirmed that with Crime Lab again today.

OK, MT. I know you're talking to me. I sincerely want to thank you for the last post. I get something now I didn't.

1) I left the hyphen out of "female-patronizing." That, of course, greatly changes the meaning of my point and explains why you didn't understand. (At least I hope it does.) My point was that it seemed to me that your position patronized females, not that you were acting like one. I think, as more than one female has stated here, that they were clearly aware that they needed to take even greater precautions after the Pressly attack, regardless of whether the police released the fact of her sexual assault.

2) Explaining one's position is always helpful. When you wrote "social elite," I was thinking in terms of economics while your meaning seems to have been more cultural and related to gender discrimination. While I haven't worked through my own position regarding gay marriage, I'm not in any way supportive of discrimination against gay people related to their legal rights and benefits related to employment, civil unions, rights to adopt, etc. Your position here is much more clear to me, now.

I'm not a part of any of the power groups in this state, excepting that you would say my status as a heterosexual male places me in one of those groups. I think your point is well taken and I'm willing to think on that one for a while.

I agree that what you see depends on where you sit. You are absolutely right on that one and I see now what you're talking about. You and I do sit in different places and I'm always interested in seeing how my filters color my thoughts. We all have our own filters, as your example demonstrates.

But, and this is an honest question, not sarcasm, Do the filters you see life through mean that we should put the legal process at risk by releasing every detail of every single criminal case? Can you envision any exceptions to your blanket admonition for total transparency?

Thanks for clarifying the comment, Perplexed. You're right, a hyphen or double hyphen can make a world of difference.

To answer your question, no, I don't at all think that every detail of every criminal case should be released.

I think each case has individual features and has to be examined on a case-by-case basis.

But there should be some ethical norms or rules of thumb about when and how information is disclosed. I'm arguing that there's a strong obligation of guardians of public safety to disclose information that affects public safety--when they are able to do that.

In this case, I still haven't heard any strong arguments for why the detail that Anne Pressly was both raped and murdered was withheld from the public. It makes a difference. On one of the threads about this, I noted I have an aunt and a sister-in-law who both live near Anne Pressly. I would have preferred for them to know what happened--to know fully--in order to take every precaution possible.

If the information was withheld to avoid prejudicing the trial, then releasing it any point is going to prejudice the trial. Re: the argument that releasing the information would cause the suspect to flee, I'd have to ask why. If the man charged murdered someone, why would he flee only when details about an attempted rape are released? And if that information was as widely known as some bloggers claim, then what would a police statement have added to what the public already said they knew?

I have to assume that the real reasons for withholding this information are not being discussed. I have my suspicions about them, but why add fuel to the fire now by stating them?

I don't ever give the benefit of the doubt to the police, anywhere. I appreciate their work. But I think they do their best work like any other public servants, when they're subjected to public scrutiny and serious questions about their performance--just like any other of the public servants we hire to serve our interests as a society.

I think another thing I've been reminded of here was the post by a female who described what is was like to live in fear 24/7. To not be able to even go out to her car without thinking someone might be there to harm her, etc. As a male I can never fully understand what that feels like. As the father of young adult daughters, I sometimes have to just refuse to think about it. It just frightens me too much. I just try to keep them stocked with pepper spray and tell them to try to be always aware of their surroundings.

I assume that if you believe, "For folks raised, say, in California, American society may look classless," that you not only were not raised there but also have never lived there. Some elements of California "society" or culture may be, or at least sometimes appear to be, more tolerant of some elements of "society" and culture than is the case in Arkansas, but I assure you California neither looks nor is classless. For that matter, neither are any of the other places in the United State that I have lived. Having never lived outside of the United States, I can't speak personally to whether there are societies elsewhere that are classless, but somehow I doubt it. That we should aspire to become less ruled by class I would agree.