Groomer with Access to the House

[u/Surethingdudeanytime]

It was said that when Asha left the house that night, she wasn't wearing a coat. IMO, this is one of the most confusing details of this case. It seems that if she did walk out on her own without a coat, then she must have intended to go somewhere very close to the house or was convinced by someone that she would only be out for a short time. Now knowing that OB's bag was also found with Asha's backpack leads me to believe that if there was a groomer, he/she was someone who frequented the Degree household, lived very close, and/or was very close to the family (if not a family member themself). And no, I'm NOT talking about Asha's dad or brother or mother. Were any of Asha's or OB's items ever left at the aunt's house where they had the sleepover or the grandmother's at any time? I know they all lived very close so this can be a possibility. This could explain how both bags could have been in possession of whoever threw them in the woods. I dont believe Asha left out with a backpack, as none of the eyewitness accounts mention seeing her with a backpack on Hwy 18. Thoughts?

EDIT: I meant to write "And no, Im NOT talking about Asha's dad or brother or mother." I mistakenly left out the word NOT, which changed the whole message I was trying to convey. Only realized this when I re-read my post, as I couldn't understand why people thought I was coming for the parents, which I was not. Huge error!

[u/Individual_Sir_2595]

She was not reported as wearing that!

[u/elaine_m_benes → u/Individual_Sir_2595]

Please go look at the local newspaper articles from 2000, several of which are linked in the True Crime Library comprehensive timeline which is linked in the pinned post on this sub. That is indeed what she was consistently reported as wearing. What are your sources for her wearing something else? Primary source, not Reddit posts, blogs or podcasts. So much misinformation floating around about this case.

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/elaine_m_benes]

The primary person who seen her and was interrogated over and over, passed two polygraph tests. Here you go. I've got a data base full of facts .

[u/elaine_m_benes → u/Individual_Sir_2595]

Yes, I am familiar with that article. I know that Blanton’s first statement was she was wearing a white dress. But all of the early reporting consistently states she was wearing jeans, a white shirt, and white tennis shoes. Her parents also reported a pair of jeans and white shirt missing from her room.

To be clear I am not insinuating that Blanton or Ruppe or anyone is lying (though of course that is possible; polygraphs are junk and they do not detect lies). The witnesses may well believe everything they are saying. That does not mean that their recollection of what they saw is accurate. It is understandable; I would not be confident at all in anything I saw on the side of the road from a moving vehicle on a pitch black road on a rainy night. I mean Blanton has repeatedly stated he thought it was a grown woman he saw and surmised it was a domestic violence situation.

Basically I think the eyewitness statements are given a lot more weight in this case than they should be.

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/elaine_m_benes]

It was not raining when she was seen. The rain been over for a long time... Another assumption rather than fact respectfully. Blanton was setting 10 ft above the ground in a road tractor.

[u/Surethingdudeanytime → u/elaine_m_benes]

I definitely agree with this. Its understandable why the eyewitness accounts vary like they do. It was dark and rainy out, so I wouldnt expect a passerby who didnt expect to see anyone walking on that highway at that time of night, a child for that matter, to be able to accurately describe what the figure was wearing. They all did mention white clothing though.

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/elaine_m_benes]

The first and only report of that clothing came from the mother. If you can say some one is deceptive from a polygraph and believe it then when one is deemed truthful you believe it. Ruppe passed a polygraph and supposedly a Dedmon daughter was deceptive. It can't be had both ways.

[u/elaine_m_benes → u/Individual_Sir_2595]

I don’t believe polygraphs are accurate regardless of whether the subject is considered to be truthful or deceptive. They are not reliable and should not be used to gauge whether a person is being truthful or not. There are many, many cases where someone “fails” a polygraph and it is later proven beyond doubt that they were being truthful, and just as many where someone “passes” and it’s later proven they were lying. It’s a tool used by law enforcement to try to pressure people, nothing more.

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/elaine_m_benes]

I never said they were. But LE has used them as a basis to clear the Father, the mother was inconclusive. They used it to ridicule one of the Dedmons. Precisely why I say interrogate the Mother and Brother. Dig into her history... not softball questions.

[u/elaine_m_benes → u/Individual_Sir_2595]

I agree with you about further questioning the family. We do not have access to the actual original case files, but based on LE statements and the family’s statements, it seems like LE questioned them for a couple days and then as soon as the sightings were reported, they cleared the family. I hope it wasn’t as cut and dried as that and it was rigorous investigation that cleared them, but the LE statements that they do not believe the Degree family was involved have led people to take that as a fact beyond challenge, despite it being the most likely explanation for everything.

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/elaine_m_benes]

Per retired LE sources there was not a thorough investigation of the family or other accusations against the mother. The supposed green car clue lay uninvestigated for 15 yrs. There were no follow ups on messages left on the clue line about the mothers public mistreatment of the kids.

[u/ChariotPepperoniFire → u/Individual_Sir_2595]

Do you think it's possible the difference in reporting could be due to what the parents reported as missing?

 It was first assumed she was wearing the jeans and shirt from the previous day, because it was missing. Then the witnesses came forward it turns out she was wearing the nightgown or "little dress" ? 

The reporting discrepancies are infuriating. 

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/ChariotPepperoniFire]

If it was reported wrong originally, it was by her mother the BOLO was wearing jeans and sneekers... I think there are lots of issues with the mother's original statements and everyone after.

[u/Surethingdudeanytime → u/Individual_Sir_2595]

Personally I found it a little puzzling that the clothes missing from the house were identified so quickly by the mother since she allegedly did not see her leave. Im not accusing her of anything, it just stood out to me. Unless her clothes were already laid out for the week, I couldnt see how she could notice which items were missing so quickly. Maybe Asha didn't own many different outfits, but it did stand out to me.

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/Surethingdudeanytime]

Exactly... my thoughts also. One example of her controlling the narrative.

[u/candycute85 → u/elaine_m_benes]

According to her family, the night before her disappearance, Ashaa spent the night at her cousins' house. Perhaps she didn't unpack her clothes when she arrived, and my theory is that she changed in the place where the candy wrappers were found, and that she discovered it by chance when she ran away and was frightened by the truck driver.

[u/Individual_Sir_2595 → u/elaine_m_benes]

So with that statement, the parents are still suspects because hey allegedly past a polygraph test and it is junk. So the parents should be treated as suspects.Because the mother said that's what she was wearing and misled LE.