Boy, 10, Died From Homicide, Not Hypothermia, Experts Say

Thanks, LvsNH. I posted the text of the article in the other Patric McCarthy thread.

(where, I might point out, I was promptly told I was full of it.)

FireCat wrote:

(where, I might point out, I was promptly told I was full of it.)

Sorry I didn't see where you were told that. Full of what??

Saw the News earlier. I just felt bad for the family..must have been a long sad trip home after being denied.

Shack wrote:

Saw the News earlier. I just felt bad for the family..must have been a long sad trip home after being denied.

Agreed. It would be much healthier for the family if they were helped to grieve properly and come to grips with unfortunate accidental passing of a young son rather then some people attempting to make a name for themselves and make this something that it's not.

Bill

I have always believed this young boy was murdered by one of his family members..(I cant remember if he had half or step brothers)

A lot of us up here thought the death was definitely suspicious.

I forgot to mention that I hope justice will be served for this child and his family..thoughts and prayers are with them all

Curiousity wrote:

I have always believed this young boy was murdered by one of his family members..(I cant remember if he had half or step brothers)
A lot of us up here thought the death was definitely suspicious.

He had step brothers aged 12 and 7 at that time if I remember.

A lot of up here, where? I have talked to relatives and know people involved with the search and was actually camping in the area so I know what the weather was like and what the terrain is like.

Are you the other person that believes that these two children killed and carried Patrics’ 85 pound body up 1400 feet and 2 miles including off trail bushwacking and got home in time for dinner? This was one of the original theories that I remember hearing. That’s some pretty impressive navigation skills, raw hiking skills, and strength for a 12 and 9 year old. I’d sign them up to be SEAL team members. The absurdity of that seems to have quieted some of the people involved. Now they refuse to say who they think are involved, they just want to get a determination of murder by people who haven’t done the autopsy, or actually been on the scene regardless of conclusions of the actual investigators and the medical examiner that has actually done the autopsy.

Bill

WTF-the-original wrote:

<quoted text>
He had step brothers aged 12 and 7 at that time if I remember.
A lot of up here, where? I have talked to relatives and know people involved with the search and was actually camping in the area so I know what the weather was like and what the terrain is like.
Are you the other person that believes that these two children killed and carried Patrics’ 85 pound body up 1400 feet and 2 miles including off trail bushwacking and got home in time for dinner? This was one of the original theories that I remember hearing. That’s some pretty impressive navigation skills, raw hiking skills, and strength for a 12 and 9 year old. I’d sign them up to be SEAL team members. The absurdity of that seems to have quieted some of the people involved. Now they refuse to say who they think are involved, they just want to get a determination of murder by people who haven’t done the autopsy, or actually been on the scene regardless of conclusions of the actual investigators and the medical examiner that has actually done the autopsy.
Bill

How do you suppose the 10 year old got there. He walked 1400 feet in the night?

Sara wrote:

<quoted text>How do you suppose the 10 year old got there. He walked 1400 feet in the night?

This is a two part questions Sara.

First, do you think it is possible to do it the way some people have claimed. I don’t.

So the likely alternative is, that he got lost, and this started in the late afternoon, not night, and had that first afternoon and night to run terrified and cold up the mountain to get to the area that he was found to die exhausted at the location from hypothermia.

Could someone have carried him two miles distance with a change of elevation of 1400 feet. Maybe, but anyone who has carried a backpack knows that carrying 85 pounds up the side of a mountain is no small feat even for an adult in very good shape. And he was no backpack. He would have been a very heavy, unwieldy, weight. A forty pound pack is a substantial pack for most adults. Especially going up the side of a mountain in this kind of terrain. Most people who haven’t hiked the area doesn’t understand the type of effort it would have taken to carry 85 pounds up the side of the mountain and the amount of time to do it. This was not a paved road. This was a very rough path. Someone trying to carry Patric on his/her back would risk very serious injury in that attempt. Not to mention that this was a public area. Sight lines can be very far the risks that someone might see someone else carrying a body up the side of the mountain would be a tremendous risk for him/her/them. Also, he would have been dropped, scraped. These post mortem injuries would have been very apparent. There is no mention of them in the autopsy that I have heard from the family or their representative.

Put this theory in front of a jury, that this is the way Patric died, being hauled up that mountain on the back of some 12 and/or 9 year old. That they planned and executed this “perfect plan” and got back home in time for dinner and I promise you even a first time attorney would have the jury laughing the prosecution out of the court.

What the evidence during autopsy showed, and the evidence on scene showed was that Patric died from hypothermia after he got lost in the woods. I know two of the experts, one personally/professionally and the other by his professional reputation. Both are experts in their field and I have a great deal of respect for both. Neither (the two I know) is a Medical examiner and neither actually did the autopsy.

All of this evidence has been sent for review to the FBI is my understanding. Let’s wait and see what they come up with, if they actually make a determination. If they want to launch a federal investigation then we can see what that comes up with. Even if by some chance they come to the conclusion of non-accidental death. It doesn’t mean murder and the scenario put forth that I have heard is entirely laughable.

Bill

The FBI speaks:

http://boston.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/...

From the FBI press release:

"Early today members of the McCarthy family held a press conference during which Patric’s death was characterized as a homicide. This characterization is not supported by the facts currently known by the Attorney General’s Office, the Major Crime Unit, and the FBI. However, should additional, credible information come to light, the authorities would certainly reconsider further review of this matter. Although the McCarthy family has cited to experts who concluded that Patric’s death was a murder, none of those experts examined Patric’s body as Dr. Andrew did during his thorough autopsy."

Bill

Read in context, the paragraph comes out slightly differently. These are the two preceding paragraphs.

"Beginning in August 2008, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts and the FBI undertook an investigation into Patric’s death. This matter was reviewed by the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Hampshire. Based on the facts, there is insufficient current evidence to suggest that a prosecution is warranted. Thus, the FBI has closed their case at this time.

Members of the Attorney General’s Office met with an Assistant United States Attorney from Massachusetts and members of the FBI on July 7, 2009. At the conclusion of that meeting, the Attorney General’s Office and the FBI concluded that there was insufficient, credible evidence to warrant a murder investigation based on the evidence gathered at this juncture. The Attorney General’s Office has been scheduled to meet with Patric’s family on July 28, 2009, to discuss the information that was learned during the New Hampshire State Police’s and the FBI’s investigation."

It clearly says, several times, that it has been investigated, by multiple agencies, over several years. And in all that time, and all those agencies, with all those resources, they have never found anything to warrant a criminal investigation.

Also, clearly the same press release that was given by the FBI office was the one that was also released by the NH AG's office. So as far as there being some kind of dispute between the two, it sure doesn't appear so.

No one who has done any investigations, real investigators that is, who has handled all the evidence, has ever come to the conclusion that there was foul play, BUT, if at any time, new evidence arises and it appears to indicate foul play, they will investigate it. All of this evidence appears to be a rehash of the same evidence that has been around for years.

Will this be the end of it? Will the PI try to help the family heal and say. You know, it looked like it could have been foul play and we did the right thing by investigating farther, but I think it’s time to admit that we made a mistake and he died of accidental causes. He should, as a way to help the family heal. But it isn’t likely that will happen because too many people have invested too much of their reputation in this rather, than investigating it without passion or prejudice like the actual investigators did.

They clearly are running out of agencies, federal, state and local to appeal their case to. When you go through the state AG’s office, The FBI, the NH state major crimes unit, the Fish and Game office, The United states forest service, the US AG office and the Mass State police I think you have had about as much investigation as you could hope for.

Since they seem to have run out of agencies to start a criminal prosecution, the next step would be to try a civil lawsuit (ala OJ). If there is any real evidence to show someone has guilt in this, that would be the next logical step. You have a much lower standard to prove it in civil court than in a criminal court. That is where you might stand a chance if the evidence has any merit at all. Of course the first thing someone (the defendants lawyer) will do is to bring in the findings of death by hypothermia and accidental cause. Something they will have to overcome and they haven’t been able to convince anyone else with knowledge of all the facts.

Bill

Bill from Connecticut repeatedly maintains that it's absurd to think someone would/could carry Patric's 85-pound body 1400 feet up a steep, rocky elevation. I find it equally absurd to claim that a 10-year-old boy who was 200 yards from his condo would climb more than a third of a mile up that same rocky hill, thinking he was going in the right direction.

Jack wrote:

Bill from Connecticut repeatedly maintains that it's absurd to think someone would/could carry Patric's 85-pound body 1400 feet up a steep, rocky elevation. I find it equally absurd to claim that a 10-year-old boy who was 200 yards from his condo would climb more than a third of a mile up that same rocky hill, thinking he was going in the right direction.

And Jack from Massachusetts is clearly someone who has never seen what blind panic can do. Especially to a lost child, who attempts a short cut and then finds himself in thoroughly unfamiliar surroundings. The reason NASAR adopted the hug-a-tree program.

I will have more to add later tonight.

Bill

I think they enticed him and promised him a treat or something to get him close to where he was found.

I have some knowledge of things I won't share on a public forum from people who were involved/recovered the body etc. and will let the new investigation hopefully come to a better conclusion.

By the way I'm very familiar with Clearbrook and the area there because I was an owner there for years and still own in the area and spend lots of time there.

Curiousity wrote:

I think they enticed him and promised him a treat or something to get him close to where he was found.

Now there is a real picture. Coaxing a 10 year old boy up 1400 feet and 2 miles distance. Having tried to do that with my boys I'd love to know their secret.

So they, is the 12 year old and 7 year old? They coaxed the 10 year old up the mountain? Got him there, killed him there and made their way back down this mountain and back in time for dinner? And these master criminals knew that it would be considered accidental death, that they would be able to get back before dinner. That they would not be seen by anyone? And even more interesting is that neither when questioned would talk and blame the other.

Is that the story you want to stick with or do you want to try another spin on the wheel?

Bill

Now for a few facts from Lost person behavior by Robert Koester. This is the latest bible when it comes to lost person behavior analysis.

For a child 10 to 12 years old in mountain area with temperate climate.

Children of this age frequently get lost because of taking short cuts which may represent a longer route. Does anyone remember what Patric told the step brother the last time they saw them???

He said he was going to take a short cut back to the condo. I suppose the two brothers knew this tidbit about lost person behavior and it was also part of their master plan.

A 2 mile distance is right in there with the 75th percentile of children lost in this category. Based upon this behavior anaylsis Patric probably was comfortable with walking a mile or little more. I’d be interested in knowing if he walked to school or how far he was allowed to range at home.

He is in the 95th percentile in the elevation change that he was able to achieve. It is evenly split one third for people in this age category to go uphill. One third go downhill and one third stay a the same elevation.

Oh, it also states that children this age are drawn to wilderness areas and he has a 10% chance of being found in a drainage and the scenario for the search is 70% because they are lost.

What is this proof of? Probably proof of nothing, but nothing in this search is out of the norm in a search of this type and much of it matches what has been researched in 372 searches of children of this age category. 72 of which were very close matches to Patrics’ situation.

Bill

Isn't it great when 'experts' say it was homicide and bill says it 'aint. Bill are you covering for any cops in particular?

Joe Mama wrote:

Isn't it great when 'experts' say it was homicide and bill says it 'aint. Bill are you covering for any cops in particular?

I love the spin. The experts, the people that actually have done the investigation and autopsy, and then the other experts that reviewed all the information, not once but at least twice. And the expert in the FBI, NH Major crime unit, Mass State police, US Attorney’s office, NH Attorney’s office all agreed and put out a press release stating that there was no crime here.

The sideline experts that I assume you are talking about. Their information was taken into account in this latest review. All the other experts, the FBI etc. All said that there is no reason to believe that a criminal investigation is warranted. And then the family came out and said that there was disagreement with the FBI and others. A joint press release comes out saying that is false and that they do agree.

And for the record, Yo Mama, I don’t know a single policeman involved in this case. Not even in passing. Never got a ticket from one or saw one in a bar. I am interested in the truth and despise spin. I would also like to see the family with some form of respite from the bullshit. They have been lead to believe something that isn’t true by people with a vested interest in this case. I suspect that their lives will never have any peace at this point because of this. The saddest part of this is that if some people had approached this in an “alternate investigation” method, with a let’s just look it over to see where it leads instead of a “this was a murder” approach right from the start. They may have been able to say that this had some earmarks of a possible homicide but now there is no turning this machine off. It’s on autopilot and it will continue because reputations are on the line. The most interesting part is that the people that did this latest review are probably NOT the same people that did most of the original investigation from what I can tell. They have no vested interest in this one way or the other. Yet they all, again, came to the same conclusion. This case will stay “opened” because of the PI forever so there will never be any closure for the parents because it will never be “solved” because it was never a murder. Not six years ago and still not today. But those private agencies involved “will keep working on it”

And JoeMama, your address looks awful familiar. What are there 6 people in Mt Pleasant, SC?

Bill