any1 know any info on the pikeville g...
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#186 Jun 27, 2012
why would they keep those things, why they take the time to pick up those things and keep them... they were keepsakes. trophies. like going to newyork and getting ya some shotglass with the statue of liberty on it or something... natasha's supporters will go to any length to deny her guilt but it's obvious she was a cold blooded baby killer.
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#187 Jun 27, 2012
dosen't matter who said they were trophies or if they had a vested interest in claiming so. the fact they kept those items speaks for itself.

it's just good to know that karen and natasha and sturggill are locked up like dogs just like the male baby killers in a cage with NO HOPE of getting free.
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#188 Jun 27, 2012
not to mention, who brought one of the GUNS. karen did. see I ve did plenty of researching myself... including their appeals.

one of the guns and the 500 dollars was stolen by karen. I quess she just grabbed a gun and stole it by accident.lol
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#189 Jun 27, 2012
it's not even a punishment for karen and natasha to be in prsion anyways I bet if you know what I mean.

lickalotpus lol
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#190 Jun 27, 2012
chrysal pike or kristal or whatever who is the female in a differant case from this one in the same prison as natasha and is friends with nastasha killed a girl and kept a piece of her skull and was showing it off.

that's a trophy too. totally differant case but same kind of stuff. keeping a part of the victim or some of their belongings to relive and remember the murders by.

DUH!

I laugh when people that karen and natasha's guilt act like theyre the only ones that know much about the case or the only ones smart enough to put "everything togeher"... as if anyone that doesn't agree is some uninformed dumb redneck that is void of logic or intelligence. lol
Roman

Sun Valley, CA

#191 Jun 27, 2012
yep they had trophies wrote:
sturgille was found was the family's house keys. karen had the little girls hello kitty locket on her chain that she carried around.
natasha had the a piece of the dad's belt that she had to take the time to cut off, his picture of his daughter and a social security card. those are trophies dumbass.
and they ALL had gunshot residue on their hands which means they all took a turn.
You still haven't made the case that these were "trophies". Karen and the others all said that they got those items on the floor of the van. Where did you read that Karen had the locket on her chain? From all I've read it was just in her pocket. Where did you read that the belt that was on Vidar Lillelid's body had a strip cut out of it? She said she found it on the floor. Do you have some sort of proof that it was cut from the belt that was on his body? Because the investigation doesn't show this to be true. Mr. Lillelid was covered in blood, yet no blood or DNA was found on Natasha. Surely if she jostled the body around he would have gotten some on her. And why were no traces of blood found on the piece of belt? The body was covered in it, so surely the belt would be too, right? The evidence doesn't support what you're saying.
They did not all have gunshot residue on their "hands". You only have to read the reports to see that. Do you know about ballistics or gunshot powder residue? Do you know that you can get it on you even from a distance? Are you aware that only Jason Bryant had PRIMARY shot residue on him? Do you know that he accidentally shot himself in the leg while in Mexico and that if you, me or anyone else was in the van with him that we would ALL have residue on us?
Roman

Sun Valley, CA

#192 Jun 27, 2012
yep they had trophies wrote:
why would they keep those things, why they take the time to pick up those things and keep them... they were keepsakes. trophies. like going to newyork and getting ya some shotglass with the statue of liberty on it or something... natasha's supporters will go to any length to deny her guilt but it's obvious she was a cold blooded baby killer.
I really don't know why they had them. Do you? What makes you think they were trophys? Because the prosecution said so? That isn't enough. Why jump to some wild conclusion? In a court of law none of what you're saying would hold up. And what do you mean "go to the trouble of"? What trouble? The stuff was on the floor of the van. There's no evidence anywhere that suggests anything else. Or maybe you have some somewhere?
Roman

Temple City, CA

#193 Jun 27, 2012
Let me correct myself. Here is what Crystal Sturgill had to say regarding the keys she had on her:

"The van had a messed-up battery. Every time it was turned-off we had to use jumper cables to get it going again; something that was difficult considering that if one needed to use the bathroom then all 6 had to go in. Joe told me to carry the extra set of keys so we could leave the van running and still lock the doors or in case we needed them. I had forgotten they were in my pocket when the border patrol officers were searching me. It seemed inconsequential at the time."

Those are Crystal's words. So why should we doubt them? Is there proof that points a different direction? No. Should we doubt her words because the PROSECUTION insists that these were "Satanic trophies"(the same prosecution, mind you, that spread the outright lie that the bodies were "arranged in the form of a cross")?
Roman

Temple City, CA

#194 Jun 27, 2012
yep they had trophies wrote:
dosen't matter who said they were trophies or if they had a vested interest in claiming so.
It does if you're trying to prove a case in a court of law. You can be sure that the prosecution knew this and that they weren't going to try and pursue that angle very aggressively. It would get shot down as pure conjecture. It's pretty hard to make wild accusations and make them stick.
Roman

Temple City, CA

#195 Jun 27, 2012
yep they had trophies wrote:
not to mention, who brought one of the GUNS. karen did. see I ve did plenty of researching myself... including their appeals.
one of the guns and the 500 dollars was stolen by karen. I quess she just grabbed a gun and stole it by accident.lol
Yes. Do you know why Karen got the gun?

And are you aware that Karen did not "steal" the $500? It was HER money. It's in the record, my friend. Look it up.
Roman

Temple City, CA

#196 Jun 27, 2012
yep they had trophies wrote:
not to mention, who brought one of the GUNS. karen did. see I ve did plenty of researching myself... including their appeals.
one of the guns and the 500 dollars was stolen by karen. I quess she just grabbed a gun and stole it by accident.lol
Actually, in reading your posts and looking at how much misinformation you've posted it becomes more and more obvious that you in fact DIDN'T do "plenty of researching". So far you've said:

"natasha had the a piece of the dad's belt that she had to take the time to cut off" (she had a piece, but didn't take it off of him)

"they ALL had gunshot residue on their hands" (wrong, as I've stated earlier. Don't take my word for it. You can look it up yourself)

"500 dollars was stolen by karen" (wrong again. It was her babysitting money that she had been saving up for some time to get a car)
Roman

Temple City, CA

#197 Jun 27, 2012
yep they had trophies wrote:
I laugh when people that karen and natasha's guilt act like theyre the only ones that know much about the case or the only ones smart enough to put "everything togeher"... as if anyone that doesn't agree is some uninformed dumb redneck that is void of logic or intelligence. lol
Let the readers look at my posts and then yours and let them judge for themselves which are the more logical, intelligent, etc.

Personally, I'm not here to insult people or make anyone feel "dumb". I'm only interested in having people get all the information(not just the medias or the prosecutions) and think for themselves.

I despise murderers as much as the next person and if I felt for even one second that Dean, Crystal or Karen had murdered anyone then I would want them to go down as hard as anyone. But know what I also hate? Innocent people going down for crimes they didn't commit.
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#198 Jun 28, 2012
here's what the court had to say about karen howell, I think I believe the stuff the court says over you. first it talked about allt he reasons to feel sorry for karen such as being sexually abused by an uncle and her low IQ and depression and bipolar then it goes on to say that it's not enough to mitigate the crime. according to everything I have read she stole the gun from h er family and the 500 dollars. if I am correct the other gun was "borrowed by either risner or mullins from a friend. by the way even you admit that she had the hello kitty thingy in her "pocket" instead of being on her chain. I quess that hello kitty thingy just jumped into her pocket. why would she have kept such an item, you admit she kept it. you only nitpick about where she kept it at. I quess she kept it because she felt sorry for tabitha. just like I quess natasha kept a piece of belt , the social security card and ect... because she must have felt sorry for the victims too. lol you can't explain why they kept these items. it's obvious, the items for keepsakes. how else did the piece of belt come into nastahsa 's possession. did it just fall off and land in her hand? of course she had to have taken the time to cut off a piece. common sense.

the mitigating evidence is overcome by and rebutted by the credible facts of the case, that for a long time before this occurred, you had been doing drugs and [participating in things of an] occult nature, and the occult mark continued on this case throughout the events that transpired.   Its signature is throughout this case.   You participated in everything in Kentucky.   You helped steal guns and money.   You helped initiate the plans for the trip with Ms. Cornett.   You were at the picnic table at the rest area with the Lillelids when they were kidnapped, when they were crying.   You were outside the van watching the Lillelids be murdered.   You did nothing to stop, when a weapon was available.   You deliberately and knowingly participated in every aspect of the killings and the things that led to them, including the getaway and cover
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#199 Jun 28, 2012
the only thing I "Might" have been wrong about was the gunshot residue... MIGHT have been that is.
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#200 Jun 28, 2012
I think all six were guilty to a degree but it's pretty obvious who were the MOST guilty.

risner, howell, natasha and bryant.

they were the ones at the pinic table and the ones that got in the van. karen stole the gun. if I am correct natasha was doing the whole killing people talk before they even left kentucky. risner ran them over after they were dead and pulled out the first gun. bryants was the one telling the family to shut up and just happened to have a gunshot wound in his hand which I bet was some ploy to cast blame on the others and make himself appear to be a victim.

the reason I say mullins is guilty to a degree is he chose to follow them in his car. he could have drove off with sturgill and left but he decided to follow them anyways. sturgill might have just went along with the whole thing because she didn't even have family back in kentucky that wanted her considering her step dad molested her and the family took his side instead of hers. she's about the least guilty but she's guilty enough for going knowing natasha was talking about killing people before they even left kentucky and becoming infamous.
yep they had trophies

Pikeville, KY

#201 Jun 28, 2012
and by the way I actually knew karen howell personally and always liked her before she did this. one of my buddies were also one of her close buddies. I v'e hung out with her a bunch of times and talked to her more than my fair share. I always thought she was a little wierd but nice. goes to show you don't ever truly know someone I quess.
Roman

Temple City, CA

#202 Jun 28, 2012
"yep they had trophies"]"according to everything I have read she stole the gun from h er family and the 500 dollars."
And herein lies the problem. Most of what you've read is part of the exaggerations, fabrications and outright lies that are out there. So in all fairness to you, it's really no fault of yours. Karen testified (and her family concurred) that it was HER money. Not stolen.
"by the way even you admit that she had the hello kitty thingy in her "pocket" instead of being on her chain. I quess that hello kitty thingy just jumped into her pocket. why would she have kept such an item, you admit she kept it. you only nitpick about where she kept it at. I quess she kept it because she felt sorry for tabitha"
No, she said she picked it up from the floor of the van. Why? I don't know. And frankly, neither do you. You're just buying into the prosecution's story that it was a "trophy". Maybe she did feel sorry for Tabitha. You don't know what the reason was, so until you do why jump to conclusions?
"lol you can't explain why they kept these items."
Neither can you. All you're doing is speculating. Try and make that stick in a court of law. You couldn't. Neither could I or anyone else.
"it's obvious, the items for keepsakes"
Is it? Again, you're just buying into the prosecution's theory. How about taking the time to find out what the people who had the objects had to say. I did it in the case of Crystal(haven't found any testimoney from Howell or Cornett about it yet. But until I do I won't be jumping to conclusions). Crystal's answer seems much more plausible to me than some silly "trophies" theory.
"how else did the piece of belt come into nastahsa 's possession. did it just fall off and land in her hand? of course she had to have taken the time to cut off a piece. common sense."
I agree with you. They drove across the country in that van for several days. Plenty of idle time to whiddle away at a belt found on the floor of the van. I don't get your point here. Because she carved a piece of a belt she found in the van automatically means that there's some sinister intent there?
Roman

Temple City, CA

#203 Jun 28, 2012
"the mitigating evidence is overcome by and rebutted by the credible facts of the case, that for a long time before this occurred, you had been doing drugs and [participating in things of an] occult nature, and the occult mark continued on this case throughout the events that transpired.; Its signature is throughout this case.; You participated in everything in Kentucky.You helped steal guns and money. You helped initiate the plans for the trip with Ms. Cornett."

Only a single paragraph in and the court is already in error! It says she stole the money, which is PROVABLY UNTRUE. It was HER MONEY. Everything this judge says from here on out should be scrutinized with suspicion in light of this error. If he can't get his simple facts straight then why shouldn't we be skeptical of him and his judgement?

"Helped initiate the plans for the trip"?? What plans? He tries to make it sound like there was some big, evil plan here. The plan was basically "let's pack up and get the hell out of here. New Orleans". The heat from the Colley Hotel incident was going to come down on them and that's why they left. Unless you also bought into the prosecutions big "Natural Born Killers" scenario??

"You were outside the van watching the Lillelids be murdered.You did nothing to stop, when a weapon was available."

So what exactly could we have expected from Karen Howell in this scenario? This is a troubled teen who cuts on herself and takes drugs in order to deal with her basic problems and stresses. In short, someone with a long record of poor coping skills with even the most normal everyday problems (school, grades, home/family, etc). Now she witnesses a horrific murder right in front of her, something that would put any one of us in shock(ever seen someone murdered? It's pretty shocking, even for an adult to witness). What should we expect from a person with the type of coping skills that Karen Howell displayed throughout her life? Can you honestly expect her to know what to do? What, does she suddenly make like Wyatt Earp, grab a gun and have a shootout with a murderous little maniac like Jason Bryant? That's a pretty fanciful picture (and an absurd one).

You knew Karen. Think about it. Does that even remotely seem like something she would have been capable of doing? Be honest here.

"You deliberately and knowingly participated in every aspect of the killings",

Oh? Really? Including the shooting? For the record: NOT ONE PERSON has come forward and accused Karen Howell (or Crystal Sturgill) of firing a weapon. NO ONE. So once again this judge is creating his own facts and ignoring the actual facts. In light of this why should you or I or anyone else respect his adjudication?

"including the getaway and cover"

Right. Jason Bryant just shot an entire family right in front of her and is waving the gun around, yelling at everyone to get everything in the van and "let's get the fuck out of here!" and also "Shut the fuck up or you'll end up like them!"(his words to Crystal)and Karen was supposed to...? What? Tell him "no"?

In that scenario most troubled teens I've known would have just kept their mouth shut and do as their told.
Roman

Temple City, CA

#204 Jun 28, 2012
="yep they had trophies":"according to everything I have read she stole the gun from h er family and the 500 dollars."

And herein lies the problem. Most of what you've read is part of the exaggerations, fabrications and outright lies that are out there. So in all fairness to you, it's really no fault of yours. Karen testified (and her family concurred) that it was HER money. Not stolen.

"by the way even you admit that she had the hello kitty thingy in her "pocket" instead of being on her chain. I quess that hello kitty thingy just jumped into her pocket. why would she have kept such an item, you admit she kept it. you only nitpick about where she kept it at. I quess she kept it because she felt sorry for tabitha"

No, she said she picked it up from the floor of the van. Why? I don't know. And frankly, neither do you. You're just buying into the prosecution's story that it was a "trophy". Maybe she did feel sorry for Tabitha. You don't know what the reason was, so until you do why jump to conclusions?

"lol you can't explain why they kept these items."

Neither can you. All you're doing is speculating. Try and make that stick in a court of law. You couldn't. Neither could I or anyone else.

"it's obvious, the items for keepsakes"

Is it? Again, you're just buying into the prosecution's theory. How about taking the time to find out what the people who had the objects had to say. I did it in the case of Crystal(haven't found any testimoney from Howell or Cornett about it yet. But until I do I won't be jumping to conclusions). Crystal's answer seems much more plausible to me than some silly "trophies" theory.

"how else did the piece of belt come into nastahsa 's possession. did it just fall off and land in her hand? of course she had to have taken the time to cut off a piece. common sense."

I agree with you. They drove across the country in that van for several days. Plenty of idle time to whiddle away at a belt found on the floor of the van. I don't get your point here. Because she carved a piece of a belt she found in the van automatically means that there's some sinister intent there?
Roman

Temple City, CA

#205 Jun 28, 2012
="yep they had trophies":the only thing I "Might" have been wrong about was the gunshot residue... MIGHT have been that is."

No "might" about it. Anyone who says that they all had gunshot residue on their hands is wrong. Furthermore anyone who thinks that having gunshot residue on a person means that that person shot a gun doesn't understand the nature of gunshot residue. I forget the exact distance, but you can have gunshot residue from a gun fired from several feet away from you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pikeville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What's mitch McConnell done for coal, when ther... (Jul '14) 3 min Paris 32,656
nugent not selling 51 min Paris 55
Need Apartment Here 59 min Redundancy 8
Glen Hammond Ray Jones Round 2 1 hr Strong Arm 37
Ford Hemp Project 1 hr One Hundred Jobs 12
Buffalo Wild Wings is open 1 hr Yay 42
Hillary Clinton OUR next President (Jun '15) 1 hr Paris 2,523

Pikeville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pikeville Mortgages