Diligence Due in Any Death

We know 17-year-old Timothy Stone wasn't a CEO, nor was he a crackhead. He was just a kid. He was a kid who had been in trouble and had gang associations, but not yet an adult.

(PRWEB) January 30, 2005 -- It seems that in Arkansas, all deaths are natural. If you get shot off of your porch, you naturally die. Same thing happens if someone pounds your head flat. When an unnatural death does occur, it is the duty of various officials to do due diligence to quantify the causes, whether the victim is a corporate CEO or a crackhead. Death is the great equalizer and knowing who, what, why, how when can help us to prevent further untimely death, be it the result of medical, accidental or intentional causes. This knowledge also removes clouds of doubt from the innocent, points out the guilty, and provides closure for survivors.

We know 17-year-old Timothy Stone wasn't a CEO, nor was he a crackhead. He was just a kid. He was a kid who had been in trouble and had gang associations, but not yet an adult. This alone should flag his untimely demise for closer examination. On face value, the case looks open and shut. An uninsured kid sucks down some brews and flips his car. Case closed.

Experience tells us that very few cases are ever so cut and dried, even the "simple" spur of the moment murder. You know the type. "I loved her so much I killed her," or "He made me mad, so I shot him." Even in those cases that look so simple, a forensic autopsy, victim/actor profile and thorough background investigation is necessary to quantify the motive. A wife may kill an abusive husband and admit to a simple murder, only to be exonerated when investigators doing due diligence discover it was really a self-defense homicide and not a murder at all.

Nomenclature is the first problem. There is no such thing as an accident. There is always a cause and effect relationship. A guy rolls his car. It is not an accident. He may have been drunk, he may have been dodging a deer, or he may have fallen asleep.

These are the direct causes of the misadventure, but in fact due diligence will always expose the underlying cause.

A guy rolls his car because he got drunk. Okay, this is no accident. He wouldn't have rolled the car if he was sober, so why did he get drunk? Was he an alcoholic? Was he depressed? Cause and effect. If he rolled the car dodging a deer, was the deer trapped between the fences? Was he distracted by changing a CD? Or was he a PETA supporter willing to have a wreck rather than injure an animal? Again, no accident, just inept driving with mitigating circumstances. The same goes for asleep at the wheel. Had he worked all night? Did he have narcolepsy?

Or did he have some other compelling motivation to travel while he was in an unsafe condition to drive? There are no accidents, merely circumstances, that taken in aggregate, result in a wreck. Generally cops in the trenches do a quick look-see to determine if a case is an "accident" or a criminal offense. Remember, accident = more donuts sooner, crime = real work. In actuality, due diligence is the only way to tell, so every case should bear equal weight. Bad cop, no donut. This is a poor analogy. It should read Good cop, no donut because you're busy doing due diligence.

Various other old saws apply in investigation work: "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck..." or " Where there's smoke, there's fire" come to mind.

Back to the Tim Stone woodpile with the old saw:

1. Tim was gang associated. 2. Tim snitched off some of his banger buddies. 3. Tim was allegedly threatened with death by these same guys. 4. Tim reported this to the authorities. 5. Tim winds up dead. 6. Tim had property stolen from the death scene by at least one of the threateners.

Quack!

When these circumstances are coupled with:

1. The death car with suspicious impact marks is "misplaced." 2. The deputy coroner says the position of the body is inconsistent with ejection from the vehicle. 3. The deputy coroner request for autopsy is denied. 4. The family's request for a private paid autopsy is denied. 5. The family home is shot up when pleas for continued investigation are made. 6. The impact marks are mechanically removed before the car is released to the family.

Quack, Quack!

And suspicions naturally mount when:

1. The death site is listed in two different locations. 2. The official "accident" report diagram does not reflect the narrative. 3. The official death scene investigation photographic evidence has "disappeared." 4. The alleged issuer of death threats bragged to witnesses that he beat Timothy to death. 5. The deputy coroner indicates this would be consistent with the observed head injury. 6. The items stolen from the scene prior to official interdiction are recovered from one of the parties to the death threats, who is not even charged in the theft.

Quack, Quack, Quack!

Any application of scientific logic yields mathematical odds that strongly indicate this was not just an accident, but a duck, or a killing. A reasonable person must wonder, given the mishandled evidence and the lack of competent investigation on behalf of local authorities, if this is the result of lack of proper training or if it reflects a reluctance to uncover something more sinister. Remember, where there's smoke, there's fire. The next blaze could consume one or your kids.

The family of Timothy Stone was denied an autopsy at the time of Timothy's death. They were told they could not pay for a private autopsy. They have since learned that a private autopsy could not have been denied to them under Arkansas law, so now they are faced with the expense and emotional trauma of a private exhumation and autopsy. They need help. Anyone who would like to donate to this effort should do so at [URL=http://www.timothystonefamily.com/html/timothy_stone.htm]The Timothy Stone Family[/URL]

John Tarsikes is a retired police Criminal Investigator and a licensed private eye.

Copyright 2005 The Sierra Times
[URL=http://www.sierratimes.com/05/01/27/tarsikes01272005.htm]The Sierra Times[/URL]

# # #