I believe she ran away.
The Smarts' have lied since the first minutes of the case and they continue to lie today.
The 3:58 wake up by his daughter is a lie. The police have reported that neighbors were in the home up to 45 minutes before police were called. Ed said he was awakened at 3:58 and called 911 at 4:01 after a 3 minute search of his 6,600 sq. ft. home. The 911 call has been secreted away and the public has never heard it.
But there are things we can determine even without the recording. We can tell that Ed didn't make this call as an armed intruder/ child abduction even though Mary, his nine year old daughter had told him seconds before the call that....." you won't find her a man with a gun took her."
The police response is another indicator, it took them 12 minutes and only two units arrived on the scene. Also Salt Lake dispatch would have kept Ed on the line until a unit arrived, that isn't what happened because Ed has left his wife and other children in the home where this armed intruder has been, and may still be, to check on his neighbors. Ed goes door to door at 4:00 A.M. waking neighbors. In under 10 minutes he has ten of these neighbors in his home when the police arrive.
It took three hours for the police to decide they had a kidnapping on their hands. This was decided after the family had left the scene to hold a family meeting at their father's house. As soon as this meeting was over the police sealed the home and ran 50 to 60 neighbors out of the home. What would take 3 hours for the police to decide they had a napper? Three hours and a family meeting.
The point of entry. First the family, Ed and his brother Tom have lied again. Ed first said it was his son that discovered the cut screen, then he changed that to his wife discovered it just before he called 911. Tom stated that the screen was discovered three hours later after they had returned from the family meeting. Here are a couple of reported quotes:
Lois saw the window screen near the back door had been cut, and became hysterical. Ed called 911.
After meeting with other family members at his father's house around the corner, Tom Smart said he returned with other family members to Elizabeth's home. They found the kitchen window open and the screen cut.
At least twice they have lied and the case is not even three hours old.
The window that is the alleged point of entry is about 7 feet off the ground. It is under 12 inches in width and about five feet in height. It is a crank window. The perp was gloveless as is indicated by the eye witness sister description of hairy hands. Yet this perp was able to pry open this crank window and climb in and leave not one print or other evidence. No scuff marks on the outside wall, no footprints, nothing. Last year this is what the lead investigator said about what is now the official point of entry:
"Whether or not it was cut from the inside wasn't germane," Lyman said. "The crime lab has gone to great lengths to determine what happened to that screen," he added. "They gave us a pretty strong indication that there wasn't anyone that went through that window."
During the three hours that the police didn't know what type of case they had on their hands the family sent people to search for Elizabeth. Another reported quote:
Brent Pack, a neighbor who is in the Smarts' Arlington Hills LDS Ward, organized a group of ward members to search the neighborhood as well as the areas around Memory Grove, Emigration Canyon and the Bonneville Shoreline.
These three areas, Memory Grove, Emigration Canyon and the Bonneville Shoreline Trail are known places that Mitchell would frequent. Why before the police even knew they had a kidnapping would these people be out looking in an area that the now suspect was known to use and camp at? The trail mentioned connects City Creek to Dry Creek where Elizabeth was said to have been taken. The family had to know about this guy on June 5th. They had to.
One more thing and then I'll let this post go. In July 2002 Ed received a letter from someone that was said to be close to the abductor. He didn't take this letter to the police for them to process for DNA, fingerprints, etc.
He took the letter and called his own press conference. He was ask if the police had seen the letter and he said no that he was going to fax them a copy when he got time. The next day Ed went on Good Morning America and this is what he said:
Smart declined to go into detail about the letter on Wednesday, but today on Good Morning America he agreed to describe what it said.
"It specifically said it was a person who received a phone call supposedly from the captor saying that he wanted to release Elizabeth, saying that he wanted a way out," Smart said.
However, there were details in the letter that made Smart immediately believe it was not real, such as its description of what the missing girl was wearing.
"The thing that probably made me feel that it was less credible was there were issues with what she was wearing that I know she wouldn't be wearing," he said.
--
That took place one month after Liz went missing. Tell me how Ed would know what a napper would be dressing his daughter in? As we know now, Liz was tramping all over Salt Lake in robes. My guess is that Ed was speaking to the cops subliminally trying to get them to look for robed people. I believe he or a family member wrote the letter.
The Smarts' manufactured this abduction story in the family meeting before the police even knew anything about a kidnapping.
I believe they knew Liz had run off with Mitchell and they manufactured the kidnapping story to bring media and police attention to their run away daughter.
This is of course brief, I have a ton more information that I'll be happy to offer when time allows.
Thanks.
The Smarts' have lied since the first minutes of the case and they continue to lie today.
The 3:58 wake up by his daughter is a lie. The police have reported that neighbors were in the home up to 45 minutes before police were called. Ed said he was awakened at 3:58 and called 911 at 4:01 after a 3 minute search of his 6,600 sq. ft. home. The 911 call has been secreted away and the public has never heard it.
But there are things we can determine even without the recording. We can tell that Ed didn't make this call as an armed intruder/ child abduction even though Mary, his nine year old daughter had told him seconds before the call that....." you won't find her a man with a gun took her."
The police response is another indicator, it took them 12 minutes and only two units arrived on the scene. Also Salt Lake dispatch would have kept Ed on the line until a unit arrived, that isn't what happened because Ed has left his wife and other children in the home where this armed intruder has been, and may still be, to check on his neighbors. Ed goes door to door at 4:00 A.M. waking neighbors. In under 10 minutes he has ten of these neighbors in his home when the police arrive.
It took three hours for the police to decide they had a kidnapping on their hands. This was decided after the family had left the scene to hold a family meeting at their father's house. As soon as this meeting was over the police sealed the home and ran 50 to 60 neighbors out of the home. What would take 3 hours for the police to decide they had a napper? Three hours and a family meeting.
The point of entry. First the family, Ed and his brother Tom have lied again. Ed first said it was his son that discovered the cut screen, then he changed that to his wife discovered it just before he called 911. Tom stated that the screen was discovered three hours later after they had returned from the family meeting. Here are a couple of reported quotes:
Lois saw the window screen near the back door had been cut, and became hysterical. Ed called 911.
After meeting with other family members at his father's house around the corner, Tom Smart said he returned with other family members to Elizabeth's home. They found the kitchen window open and the screen cut.
At least twice they have lied and the case is not even three hours old.
The window that is the alleged point of entry is about 7 feet off the ground. It is under 12 inches in width and about five feet in height. It is a crank window. The perp was gloveless as is indicated by the eye witness sister description of hairy hands. Yet this perp was able to pry open this crank window and climb in and leave not one print or other evidence. No scuff marks on the outside wall, no footprints, nothing. Last year this is what the lead investigator said about what is now the official point of entry:
"Whether or not it was cut from the inside wasn't germane," Lyman said. "The crime lab has gone to great lengths to determine what happened to that screen," he added. "They gave us a pretty strong indication that there wasn't anyone that went through that window."
During the three hours that the police didn't know what type of case they had on their hands the family sent people to search for Elizabeth. Another reported quote:
Brent Pack, a neighbor who is in the Smarts' Arlington Hills LDS Ward, organized a group of ward members to search the neighborhood as well as the areas around Memory Grove, Emigration Canyon and the Bonneville Shoreline.
These three areas, Memory Grove, Emigration Canyon and the Bonneville Shoreline Trail are known places that Mitchell would frequent. Why before the police even knew they had a kidnapping would these people be out looking in an area that the now suspect was known to use and camp at? The trail mentioned connects City Creek to Dry Creek where Elizabeth was said to have been taken. The family had to know about this guy on June 5th. They had to.
One more thing and then I'll let this post go. In July 2002 Ed received a letter from someone that was said to be close to the abductor. He didn't take this letter to the police for them to process for DNA, fingerprints, etc.
He took the letter and called his own press conference. He was ask if the police had seen the letter and he said no that he was going to fax them a copy when he got time. The next day Ed went on Good Morning America and this is what he said:
Smart declined to go into detail about the letter on Wednesday, but today on Good Morning America he agreed to describe what it said.
"It specifically said it was a person who received a phone call supposedly from the captor saying that he wanted to release Elizabeth, saying that he wanted a way out," Smart said.
However, there were details in the letter that made Smart immediately believe it was not real, such as its description of what the missing girl was wearing.
"The thing that probably made me feel that it was less credible was there were issues with what she was wearing that I know she wouldn't be wearing," he said.
--
That took place one month after Liz went missing. Tell me how Ed would know what a napper would be dressing his daughter in? As we know now, Liz was tramping all over Salt Lake in robes. My guess is that Ed was speaking to the cops subliminally trying to get them to look for robed people. I believe he or a family member wrote the letter.
The Smarts' manufactured this abduction story in the family meeting before the police even knew anything about a kidnapping.
I believe they knew Liz had run off with Mitchell and they manufactured the kidnapping story to bring media and police attention to their run away daughter.
This is of course brief, I have a ton more information that I'll be happy to offer when time allows.
Thanks.
