3DSM -- undercover agents?

[marlene]

3DSM = three dark-skinned males seen by Diane Jackson at 11:40 a.m. on December 24, 2002, in front of the Medina residence with a van. One report, by Sgt. Steele, is that Jackson saw a safe on the lawn.

I was looking for something else on the internet and found a forum on which the 3DSM were discussed, and I was pleasantly surprised to find someone seriously questioning who they were, why haven't they been identified, why does most everybody focus on Todd and Pearce instead of the 3DSM.

Well the answer to the last question is because the 3DSM haven't been identified -- the MPD dropped the ball in the Medina burglary investigation. Once they got Todd and Pearce to admit they did the burglary on any day EXCEPT December 24, they dismissed the 3DSM as irrelevant.

Or did they just cover-up for the 3DSM? A member of that forum named higharm seems to think that the 3DSM are the key to solving this murder and they were working undercover. But who were they watching? And what became of their efforts? And why was the safe out in the yard at the same time they were there? Did they know a burglary was in progress, and just did nothing about it because that wasn't their assignment? And who were they working undercover for?

Higharm also suggests that Todd may have stolen the safe from the real burglars and lied about committing the burglary because that was a better option than ratting on the real burglars and going to jail with them. So are the real burglars the 3DSM? Does that mean they were undercover agents sent to burglarize the Medina home?

Unfortunately, higharm stopped participating in the discussion before he/she could give enough information to straighten me out on this. It definitely is an avenue worth pursuing.

So, if you are out there reading this, higharm, you can finish the discussion here. I'd really like to develop this further, but also am very curious why you think we would be able to find out who the 3DSM are. We only have what's on the public record, and there's pitifully little in that. So if you have some ideas on who they are, I'd love to hear about it, because I am not 100% convinced that Todd and Pearce had anything to do with Laci's disappearance -- it's just that the most of the public information points to them.

I've read quite a few stories where undercover agents ignore other crimes so they aren't disturbed in their work. After all, if they were sent to spy on someone in the neighborhood, and they reported a burglary, that would blow their cover, right? So, they're cool with the burglary going down, so long as the burglars don't mention that they saw them or their van. And why would the burglars do that? Well, like higharm said, who would want to go to jail with the very people you snitched on - jail is not exactly a protected environment? Better yet, what would keep those "honorable" undercover agents from pinning it on you? Who do you think jurors would believe? Better to just admit the burglary and let the 3DSM go their own way.

As higharm pointed out, obviously Tenbrink was afraid of someone -- and I agree, it's pretty laughable that he would be afraid of Todd and Pearce. So who was Shawn referring to when he told Adam, you don't know who you are dealing with?

So, we have 3 possibilities:

1. the 3DSM were working with Todd and Pearce, but Todd and Pearce didn't rat on them because they were afraid of their retalliation.

2. the 3DSM were working undercover, saw Todd and Pearce commit the burglary, but "looked the other way" on condition Todd and Pearce did the same thing. Since it wasn't the 3DSM who ratted on Todd and Pearce, they kept their part of the bargain.

3. the 3DSM were working undercover, saw someone else, currently unknown, commit the burglary, and subsequent to that, Todd stole the safe from those burglars, so Todd doesn't have any knowledge about the 3DSM. Todd took the rap for the burglary rather than face the wrath of the person(s) he stole the safe from in the unprotected jail environment. However, Todd does know who the real burglars are, and he/she/they know who the 3DSM are.

Anyone else think of any other possibilities?

BTW, higharm, you needn't worry that any harm is going to come to Todd and Pearce because we still suspect them. It's not like they had sterling reputations that we ruined? We don't have any authority to get search warrants, or subpoena records, or issue arrest warrants. Who listens to us, anyway? You think the MPD pays any attention to what we say? You think Scott's attorneys or investigators are paying any attention to what we say? So, it's not us they need to fear. No matter which of the 3 possibilities you choose, Todd and Pearce are smack-dab in the middle of one big mess, and the only way they are going to be able to clear themselves is to give up some names.

They didn't have to rat anyone out the first time because the MPD was already determined to convict Scott. But will they be so lucky the next time?

[Kyle]

"As higharm pointed out, obviously Tenbrink was afraid of someone -- and I agree, it's pretty laughable that he would be afraid of Todd and Pearce. So who was Shawn referring to when he told Adam, you don't know who you are dealing with?"


Marlene, this may be the clue that has been so long overlooked. "You don't know who you are dealing with." Obviously, Shawn did. Maybe higharm will register, now that the appeal has been filed.

[marlene]

Kyle, I don't think higharm will register as I subsequently found out that she is the same person as Solve and a few other internet identities. She loves to go around the internet and throw out these theories.

However, the 3DSM have never been identified, and that is indeed troubling. Jackson was a very reputable eye-witness. Neither Todd nor Pearce fit the description of the 3DSM. From Jackson's description, there were the 3 men by the van, and the safe being removed from the house -- so the 3 men were there in addition to Todd, who I presume was the one removing the safe.

My theory is that the 3DSM were part of the Medina burglary. CA has the felony murder law where if you are involved in a felony in which a murder occurs, you are held to be just as guilty as the person(s) who committed the murder. We know Todd verbally threatened Laci - so he certainly was present on the scene when she was abducted and the felony murder would get him, too, whether he had anything to do with the abduction or not. I think Todd didn't rat anyone out because he got a pretty good deal -- 6-7 years for burglary instead of DR for capital murder.

As far as who Tenbrink's should be afraid of, IIRC, Aponte said that phone call was made after the visit from the MPD. So maybe it's a cop on the MPD that Shawn was warning Adam about. If you look at the criminal records for these people, they never seem to do much time for their many crimes, and most of the time they do is at NORCO, which is nothing more than a drug rehab place. Maybe that would change significantly if someone made the MPD look bad.

[Lsmith510]

I agree Marlene.....I think Shawn Tenbrink was referring to whoever it was from the MPD who interviewed him when he told his brother "you don't know who you're dealing with". We know that at least one detective on that police force had a reputation for intimidating and threatening witnesses into saying what he wanted them to say. Threats like taking their children away from them. Those types of threats are persuasive to even the most hardened criminals.

[Kyle]

Marlene, LSmith 510, I never thought of that. Wasn't the 'lead' detective supposedly the one who interviewed Tenbrink?

[Lsmith510]

Marlene, LSmith 510, I never thought of that. Wasn't the 'lead' detective supposedly the one who interviewed Tenbrink?

Grogan, the lead detective claimed to have no knowledge of an interview with Shawn Tenbrink. When Aponte was given a few names - he did say that Grogan sounded familiar.

Grogan said this in his declaration:

I sent an e-mail to detectives, officers and supervisors involved in the Peterson investigation requesting information about an interview between an officer or detective and Shawn Tenbrink. I have not received any information from any investigator as a result of that e-mail.

As Jane pointed out to me in a different discussion, why didn't he also ask the officers involved in the investigation of the Medina burglary?

And if he REALLY didn't know about it - one would think he would have wanted to know WHY he wasn't made aware of it. The fact that he claimed ignorance and had no interest in what Aponte had to say stinks to high heaven and in my opinion clearly shows there was a cover up going on. At the very least he was more interested in covering his own butt than he was in getting to the truth.

And Shawn Tenbrink's reaction to that interview tells me that whoever talked to him wanted his brother to stop talking about it. If that's true, then you have to wonder why? This was early on - January 2003. Scott hadn't been arrested - so no harm done yet? Why did someone with the MPD not want the truth to come out in January 2003? Were they that convinced that Scott did it? Or were they trying to hide something?

Aponte was NOT lying. He would have had no reason to lie. Not to mention how could he have known Tenbrink knew Todd unless he actually heard him talking about it?

[marlene]

lsmith -- I do believe the detectives were absolutely certain that Scott did it in Jan 03 -- well before that -- and they didn't want something like the medina burglary to muddy the waters for the media, as they needed the media to keep Scott in the hot seat. Some say the media drove this conviction -- IMHO, the media were tools used by the MPD to ensure a public conviction well before it was necessary to summons a jury to decide the matter. That doesn't excuse the media, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was the MPD that drove the media coverage, not the other way around.

[LACurry]

Grogan said this in his declaration:

I sent an e-mail to detectives, officers and supervisors involved in the Peterson investigation requesting information about an interview between an officer or detective and Shawn Tenbrink. I have not received any information from any investigator as a result of that e-mail.

If we take this exactly as stated, it is true that he may not have perjured himself with this statement. Perhaps he did not receive any information as a result of that email, but he certainly could have received it by other means.

[LACurry]

lsmith -- I do believe the detectives were absolutely certain that Scott did it in Jan 03 -- well before that -- and they didn't want something like the medina burglary to muddy the waters for the media, as they needed the media to keep Scott in the hot seat. Some say the media drove this conviction -- IMHO, the media were tools used by the MPD to ensure a public conviction well before it was necessary to summons a jury to decide the matter. That doesn't excuse the media, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was the MPD that drove the media coverage, not the other way around.

I totally agree with this....and the false information that the media spewed was intentional and deliberate on the part of MPD and that is what makes this case much much more relevant than the Sheppard case ever was.