A few weeks ago the Advocate released a series of crime scene photos and the police report to the public. Suspiciously absent was any report of testing for gun powder residue that would have been needed to clear of criminal intent the only person reportedly present at the time of the shootings, Maria Edwards.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/258179657/Police-incident-report-for-Scott-Rogers-Mathew-Hodgkinson-murder-suicide-in-St-Gabriel
Why would DNA tests be performed at all? All that would establish is who handled the gun in the past and owner of the blood spatter of those who were shot, and we already know who was shot, so why the DNA tests? Why did investigators forego fingerprint tests on the gun? Investigators either did not release all of the report, or substituted crucial analysis with redundant piecework that could be presented to the public as evidence. Conducting these tests may have thrown the story.....
...... But the story was already thrown. If the Sheriff Stassi's barricade story were true, then there is no way Maria Edwards could have possible been inside that house.
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/suffolk_us_doors_to_murder_victim_scott_rogers_immaculate_home_had_been_barricaded_as_he_prepared_for_the_end_says_sheriff_1_3755012
Now, being sceptical of how that story could have been published so soon just two days after Sheriff Stassi reported a conflicting story, I took It upon myself to contact the East Anglian Daily Times crime editor, Colin Adwent. He did verify that Stassi had called in the addendum to the story by phone.
To further verify the source of the article, I then contact Sheriff Brett Stassi by email. He did confirm that he contacted the East Anglian Daily Times with the story and that the story was true. I was quite surprised at the degree of emotion he expressed in his response. Since the story was only published in Scott Rogers' local paper, I asked him why he did not give this account to the local papers in Louisiana. His response to that question was that he did, but they refused to report it.
This is hard to believe. Not only because it took three emails to get Stassi to give me definitive "yes" or "no" answer, but because he went out of his way to provide a different narrative to be given to those that probably knew Rogers from his past life in England. Through the short correspondence I was not convinced Stassi was telling the truth.
Either way, it plainly lays out that the Iberville Parish Sheriff's Office was engaged in misinforming the public. It is important to discover why.
anniehystamine@gmail.com
Tell Annie H.
Well, they say the case is closed. If you know something, say something. You may know something contrary to official reports in relation to this case, feel free to contact Annie H. You may remain anonymous and no information will be shared publicly, your information will be used as data from which to research. Annie will not give any indications from whom the information was obtained.
anniehystamine@gmail.com
In the next few posts we will look at the newly publicized police report and "handwritten notes' left behind by the deceased.
I
anniehystamine@gmail.com
In the next few posts we will look at the newly publicized police report and "handwritten notes' left behind by the deceased.
I
It's only real estate.
WBRZ has given us some previously unknown information that adds clarity to absolutely nothing at all... but it certainly opens up more angles of perspective. Two of those angles I will separate in two different posts. Today, the focus is on another character on the scene .
For the most part, the article just expounds on iffy information that was provided by the same dubious sources already discussed. Same for the timeline in the link therein. What is interesting in this account is the introduction of the person on the scene when the shooting occurred, Maria Edwards. Not only is Mrs Edwards present at the scene when Hodgkinson is shot, but her name miraculously appears to be the beneficiary:
"Just days before he died, Rogers changed his will and left everything to Edwards, who was inside the Rogers estate when the shooting happened and called 911. At the Edwards' house Friday, Edwards' husband told WBRZ his wife was not interested in discussing the case but was shocked to learn Maria Edwards was listed as the person with the sole power over Rogers' assets.
While Edwards is listed as the beneficiary, court records show no will has been filed and Rogers' daughter, Kimberly, is listed as the administrator of her dad's estate, estimated at $165,000. There will likely be a court battle over the assets."
It's important to note that Mrs Edwards is involved as an associate in a pre-paid legal services company that gives members access to lawyer services such as power of attorney and changing of wills. Behold, somehow, there was a change of will done just days prior to the deaths, but it wasn't completed correctly. According to the article there are also claims that Hodgkinson wanted Edwards to take custody of the children when they died. Why wouldn't Rogers have addressed that instead of Hodgkinson, he was the custodial adult. Nevertheless, that's not how inheritance or adoption laws work in this state, and I don't think Rogers or Hodgkinson were nimrods in regards to these laws.
Why would anyone leave a note for undoable directives? A parent would make damned sure the future of their children was not reliant solely on ink on paper. Were the two children Rogers was adopting also inheritors of the estate? If Mrs Edwards ended up with custody of the two children then maybe if she lost the estate because of inheritance laws, she could still benefit from them as the custodial adult.
A quick search on the Ibervillle Parish Assessor's website reveals the owner of the home is now T.Scott Rogers. I wonder how that will play out in the court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)