Image from Drew Heinkel's Facebook page, blog post by John HoffTonight at the "Dessert With Don (Samuels)" forum at UROC, Fourth Precinct Commander Mike Martin spoke about the homicide of Drew Heinkel, saying things were still "preliminary" but at this point it appeared to be a case of self-defense, and therefore charges were not likely.
The self-defense conclusion was apparently based upon the statements of witnesses who were present at the house, judging by inferences which could be reasonably draw from Martin's remarks.
The self-defense conclusion was apparently based upon the statements of witnesses who were present at the house, judging by inferences which could be reasonably draw from Martin's remarks.
11 comments:
To whomever questioned whether they should be evicted and I said wait until the facts are in. TOLD YOU SO! You shouldn't lose your home for defending it.
I don't know if the landlord is going to make this distinction.
johnny...will there be a report on here if and when one is provided to the public?
If there's a report like that, I'm sure the mainstream media will get it and publish it all over. I usually don't bother to reproduce stuff available in the rest of the media, though I might put a link in a comment just for the completeness of the blog post.
And speaking of things I like to publish here which aren't in the mainstream media...
NAME OF THE KILLER? Anybody? Anybody?
I thought this was taking a long time for the cops to solve. Especially considering how quickly they seem to have been moving on the other homicides in the city this year, seemingly to make up for the dramatic uptick we've had compared to 2009. I doubt we'll ever know the name of the person who did the stabbing if it was actually self defense.
This reminds me of that stabbing on the greenway last year on the South side. There was a huge media blitz about the wholesome college-bound young man who was stabbed to death, what promise lost, cut down in his prime etc. etc... then suddenly nothing but a little blip about how it turned out the kid was out with a buddy robbing people and happened to rob somebody who defended himself with a knife. I think I only ever saw one article about the self defense outcome, and the only thing that was said of the person who did the stabbing by way of identification was initials.
If it's the same type of thing here, and I'm not saying it is, then I'm curious; Whose knife was used? Did the knife come from the house or did the guy bring it, or was it Drew's? Was it an evening of hanging out that ended in a fight or was it a fight from the moment the victim met the ...err what do you call it if it was self defense? the other victim maybe? And who called the cops, was it Nicole or somebody else who was there? For that matter, how many people were there? Can anybody who was there or has any more info fill in these blanks?
Wouldn't we all love to know?
I also would like to know the answers to many of Trudrud's questions. Johnny has been asking for the the other person's name since the very beginning. it seems as if its a 'secret' not even Nicole will reveal the information for some reason,even after she claimed she would reveal all the details.it all looks a little 'shady' to me. I have no idea why the other person's name is being so protected.
I still say evict them for the following reasons:
1. the overall portrait these folks have painted (of themselves, I might add) is one of immaturity and irresponsibility.
2. these people are a liability, to the homeowner, to their neighbors, and to the neighborhood.
Evict them.
OK, I'll say this too...
I find it a little odd there would be all this proclaiming of love, but somehow that wouldn't involve coughing up the name of the guy who killed him.
I must say, though, that writing up a first person account is difficult and painful and could take time, plus I haven't yet had an opportunity to check my email today to see if that first person account has arrived.
Bottom line: whether the police think this is self-defense or not, I want a name.
An outside perspective, but if this Nicole person was a witness, it sounds like she (and the other witnesses) reported self-defense, which is just the opposite of what she's claiming on this site -> "I promise I will make sure that piece of shit good for nothing bitch who took you from me n everyone who loved you so very much pays for what he did...". My guess is either it REALLY WAS self-defense, OR she's covering for her sister's BF (or whoever did it) with everyone else. If she's covering for someone, than all these declarations of love are to avoid the family's anger at her. Also she clearly loves the attention and status this gives her. Kids...
I want to know WHY the police have been stalling on this investigation? Obviously they know who did it. We all know its the Mike guy. I believe its an issue of 2 different witness accounts, but am not sure. There must be a reason why they haven't closed it yet. Johnny you should be looking into what the holdup is here!
Post a Comment