The odd thing is that even if Jens had NOT left the bloody footprint(s) and they had gone on a longer trip on Sunday, say over to the Eastern Shore, and brought the car in late with many more miles added to the odometer, there was still the problem of fingerprints. He could not be sure he had not left a fingerprint, or even a fingerprint in blood. It had been a chaotic melee. He couldn't take the chance. And sooner or later police would have found out from interviews with their fellow students at UVA that Jens was definitely in the picture. Therefore, a routine request for fingerprints from him was inevitable. Automatic, really. He should have known that. There were quite a few people who were asked for prints. Jens prided himself on his intellect. But he actually didn't think the whole thing through. Should have been some other way. Goes to his state of mind. Magical thinking?
What Jens definitely didn't leave are the bloody sneakers imprints. I am convinced that both had planned the killings into detail as good as they could. You can read about it in their December codings which brought up the idea of Voodoo staging. Staging was important for them to point to another killer profile. As Soering was sleeping in February in 1985 in LC they could easily make a plan how to overwhelm the Haysoms to be sure they will be dead and not be able to flea with a minimum of resistance. To wear gloves is the most effective way to prevent fingerprints. Come on. Why all those readings of murder stories before the killings? Haysom shoot the pistol for start as she said "we can get rid off them now" as planning process had been finished.
Soering and Haysom had been integrated in the details of the investigating process from the beginning. I bet they knew that Mary had to go through fingerprints, footprints, blood and even a lie detector! So they didn't know when a lie detector will also be part of their interviews. A lie detector would have stopped their staging and storytelling very quick as you can see that Haysom and Soering had been visually very responsive towards sensitive questions!
I don't agree that staging a single killer version with Haysom in DC is too complicated. They loved acting roles, drama and storytelling. They had studied it! And both had been a deep psychological affinity to get stuck in their roles making them real. Haysom also with drugs, Soering without.
There must be a reason for leaving shoe and foot prints (panic, did they forget something in the house?)
Why had Haysom picked up the letter from the Haysoms and what story did she have in mind that the letter could function as an alibi? But there is no story!
What is the reason for the fact that Haysom had offered Soering's rival in love Greenberg one week before the killings to drive to DC with him?Sounds like an ultimatum for the killings to keep high pressure on Soering...
Frank: They had no idea that their daughter had become a homicidal psychopath.
You need to explain who signed for room service. The alibi was actually quite elaborate, was it not?
"Elizabeth makes things happen" was one assessment of her from a fellow prisoner at Bedford jail who went to Death Row. He had spent hours talking to her, studying her, essentially sitting on the floor talking through a wall, 'on the vent.' But Elizabeth's MO would be NOT to be there when it does happen. This would include framing a fellow student at Wycombe Abbey, for example, and either ruining or nearly ruining that girl's educational career.
xxxxxxxxx
Hi Frank, concerning the murders I do not believe one word that either Soering or Haysom have said/are saying. It is all mixed up by shifting blame to the other and muddying the water. The most kernel of truth is in what they had written to each other.
Concerning the matter of the manilla envelope stamped on the 1st of April 1985 in DC, I find it quite convincing what Richard had said to the press about his half-sister and her freaking reaction towards the letter matter. He is absolutely right in pointing out that the person who brought it to the post office took part in the killing. Haysom's reaction showed guilt.
In the meanwhile, I am absolutely convinced that the finesse part of their killing weekend was to establish an alibi which only looked like somebody had being stayed in DC. This would be very easy to arrange. For example: going to the movies and see porkies on Friday and connecting with the ticket seller after the movies e.g. inventing a story for getting two tickets with following numbers upfront (for the movie on Saturday at 10 pm). The movie on about 5 pm they bought 30 minutes before. Now the CONCLUSION: Both made false excuses for just buying one ticket for rocky horror picture. (Haysom no money ->wrong (sold jewels)/Soering angry ->wrong, he should be worried about her that the drug deal went wrong). The next connect is the room service which they had for breakfast on Saturday morning. So they arranged a delivery for the evening, based on a story (e.g. whole day trip, return in the evening) and signed upfront. They should bring it in according to their absence! Well that's all! Haysom did nothing to enable a credible alibi in an active way. The opposite was the case. No corroborating evidence for her statements (calling Beth or Kim, in real seeing no movies, buying and using drugs, ordering and drinking Jack Daniels in the hotel room, showering and signing room service and paying with credit card). NOT ONE. On the other side Soering who was telling bullshit in the murderplot of a single killer without premiditation, as they had planned and murdered the Haysoms by overwhelming them. You can clearly see the traces of blood way to the outside hall from the kitchen. This is where the attack of Nancy had started. Not in the dining room. The fact that Nancy's glas is in the kitchen, shows that she had been there. Perhaps she was gooing there for the can of Dr Pepper. There is no glas in the dining room at her seat. So this had been the best moment to attack her from the outside while Soering used the front door. This goes also together with the shoe traces and her cigarette butts!
If they had disabled the odometer while driving to LC and return to DC they would have shown the extra portion of finesse.
Dear Mr. Hammel, thank you very much for posting the whole interview with J.Söring. Now I can see
where the information about the envelope is coming. And also one can see, that there were people who witnessed, that the Haysoms expected E. and J. that weekend.
Everything that concernes the envelope is really mysterious, I think. But also Read and Gardner bring up annother possibility, that E. might have received it before the weekend, even by mail. I ask myself, if she might already have taken it with her on the weekend of her father's birthday, or is that
I confess I'm also confused by the letter issue. However, Frank M. has posted many comments about it here and on my old blog. I'll keep looking into it!
I was told by someone who knew a lot about the case, and who was a friend of the family, that the Haysoms wanted both Elizabeth and Jens to come by and have lunch. The parents wanted to discuss the whole situation with the two of them, I think. There had been a question all along since her return as to whether Elizabeth would bolt again, run away and give up her education or worse. And then there must have been another new concern--that E&J might run away and get married. The lunch was planned simply to be an occasion where a lot of sensitive family matters could be clarified, and it did not have to be hostile if, say, it turned out that E&J were planning marriage, if the couple was willing to wait until graduation, or so I am speculating. After all, Jens was eighteen.
So Derek simply requested that Elizabeth and Jens swing by for lunch on the way up to Washington. The large manilla envelope with the tax returns was simply a gimmick, a reason to make it possible for the four of them to talk.
When Jens showed up alone, the disappointed, angry, concerned, and upset parents must have been alarmed, at first, that Elizabeth was not there. Where was she!? Jens then explained that she had sent him to talk with them alone. He may have put the envelope in the car and then walked back and said that Elizabeth really wanted them to have this conversation.
Remember that after the Macado incident it had been agreed among the few family members who knew about it after discussion with the parents that Jens Soering should never again be allowed anywhere near Derek Haysom, in particular. This is why there was a group of close friends and family who were convinced that Elizabeth had to have been there as well, to get Jens inside the house.
Hi Frank, version gives the whole dramatic we need. But I don't believe this.
a) if marriage was a strong concern for this meeting Howard would know about it and Gardner should follow.
b) you really think Soering with his blood smeared hands had to remember to pick up the yellow envelope with sensitive documents for Veryan as it stands on Elizabeth Haysom's wish list?
c) you think that Derek would have ever think of giving sensitive documents to Soering alone. A guy he would like to bann from his daughter.
I please you to make a list what a single murder like Soering all had done at the scene or to do according your murder plot/his confessions keeping the time frame in mind.
->impossible.
xxxxxxxxxxx
For background read here...
So no gimmick reported by friends of the family
In a Roanoke article 8y after Haysom had been sentenced the Haysom brothers are still strong convinced to the murder role of their half sister...and I bet till to this day.
Though Elizabeth Haysom claims she was in Washington, D.C., while Soering confronted and killed her parents, Richard Haysom thinks she lied.
``I find it impossible to believe Jens acted alone'' in the murder of Haysom's parents, he said.
Derek Haysom, his stepfather, ``would never have let his guard down with Jens in the house,'' Richard Haysom said. ``He hated Jens, despised him.''
Haysom said he believed his half-sister had to be at the murder scene for Soering to get into the house. He cites his parents' Canadian income tax return, which was mailed to his stepbrother, Veryan Haysom. The letter was postmarked in Washington, D.C., a couple of days after the murders.
Richard Haysom believes that Elizabeth Haysom must have taken it from her parents in person because, he says, they wouldn't have trusted Soering to mail the form for them.
Soering testified during his trial that he falsely confessed to protect his lover. Now seeking an appeal, he claims he was in Washington, D.C., while she killed her parents.
Richard Haysom said he suspected his half-sister's involvement in the murders when he came to Virginia for his parents' funeral.
``I was in the hotel room with Elizabeth, and I said whoever mailed that [income tax form] killed our parents ... and she just freaked. She was noticeably shaken. She paced up and down the hallway. It just told me then and there that she knew what was going on.''
Richard Haysom said he thinks she should own up to her role in the killings, if that's what really happened. She refuses to answer his questions about the murders when they correspond, he said.
xxxxxxxxxx
I looked up the evidence list by Burton yesterday, cause there is also a yellow manila envelope on the kitchen counter plate. But this is one should be brought in by the forensic nvestigators.
Burton's list included also a feather which was found in the kitchen. I missed that so far as this adding further proof of a staged Voodoo scene.
I think you are right that Derek Haysom would not have handed over the manilla envelope to Jens Soering. Soering must have taken it with him after cleaning himself up. We know that he took a shower.
My speculation that the parents' fears now had to include an inappropriate runaway marriage is simple common sense. Whether or not Derek and Nancy Haysom seriously disliked Jens Soering, they did not truly fear him. He was, after all, a Jefferson Scholar! And the parents believed that they needed to talk. They were trying to understand what was happening.
They had no idea that their daughter had become a homicidal psychopath.
You need to explain who signed for room service. The alibi was actually quite elaborate, was it not?
"Elizabeth makes things happen" was one assessment of her from a fellow prisoner at Bedford jail who went to Death Row. He had spent hours talking to her, studying her, essentially sitting on the floor talking through a wall, 'on the vent.' But Elizabeth's MO would be NOT to be there when it does happen. This would include framing a fellow student at Wycombe Abbey, for example, and either ruining or nearly ruining that girl's educational career.
Yeah, mysterious is exact the right term. The possibility that E. Haysom has received the letter by mail is logical impossible. Why?
Cause the point of expecting both for the upcoming weekend came up during the week before the murders. Howard knew about this and gave statements about it to the police. He had phoned with Nancy during the week. So it is very close to pretty sure that Massie is another witness for this matter and she would also be one of the 3/4 persons who Reid and Gardner had talked to.. Massie is another witness of the trials who was convinced about Haysom had being in the house, during the murders. Maybe the point came up on Derek's birthday the first time but Haysom didn't took the documents with her. Then the call to Howard by Nancy would not make any sense. The destination of the documents was Veryan in Nova Scotia. I hope Small town big crime will say something about it, as they have the statements of the investigation files. But that would end up only in what the 3/4 person had said and who they were.
Elizabeth in her testimony of her guilty plea which meant to diminish her own guilt an put the maximum blame on her ex boyfriend:
AH: Elizabeth described the aftermath of this interview in her 1987 trial testimony:
Q Why did you and Jens leave in October of '85?
A Because Investigator Gardner and Investigator Reid had requested blood samples from Jens.
Q He was getting scared.
A Yes. And as I say, his attitude towards what happened changed as outside--as the investigation was progressing. And when he discovered that Investigator Gardner wasn't as stupid as he thought he was and that he couldn't just talk his way out of a situation as serious as this.
xxxxxxxxxxx
Well Andrew this is so cute and you don't miss any event to let her shine....
In a 1989 interview Haysom stated that her brother had a tone of being suspicious on her. And that her brother forced her hand, and she made a pure act of cowardice.
One year later at the Soering trial she got her punishment and was more free to speak. She knew that the fullfillment of her wish, that she came back to the US to plea guilty only if Soering will get the same punishment is becoming real.
So in cross examination with Neaton she had to admit the following:
Q: Well you knew you were suspected of some complicity in your parents' deaths in September of 1985 when you were asked to give blood and footprint samples, right?
A: Of course, I knew I would be a suspect, and I knew I was considered a suspect, and so was Jens.
Q: At that time, though, you didn't know the test results of the blood or the footprint analysis, did you?
A: Well in September they had just been given, so –
Q: And when you left the country in October of 1985, you did not know the results of those tests, did you?
A: No, I did not, sir.
Q: Now also in October of 1985, you said that You had received a telephone call from your brother, is that right?
A: That is correct.
Q: And it was after the telephone call from your brother that you decided that you're going to go and Join Jens, is that right?
A: That's correct.
Q: I call your attention to the diary, which is Commonwealth's Exhibit 44, and I call your attention to the October 12th entry that you made in this diary, I'll point to it right there. Now in your diary, the part that You wrote, you said that you began packing to leave before your brother called you, right?
A: That's correct.
Q: So you had already decided to leave before he called you, correct?
A: No, sir.
Q: Oh, you were packing Just in case you might decide to leave?
A: No, sir. If you recall, this diary was written in retrospect with Jens, and at that time Jens did not know the reason why I had stayed behind was to think things out for myself.
And so of course I had to write in here that I had begun packing before I considered packing.
Q: So that was a lie in the diary?
A: There are a great many lies in many of these diaries.
Q: And they were deliberately put in there by you in that October 12th entry?
A: I don't understand.
Q: You intentionally wrote what you did in the October 12th entry to deceive Jens, right?
A: It was a continuance of a deception, yes.
So funfact...this sounds very different from being a suspect which is not a supect as given everything in free will cause she was not at the scene....but having an attourney 😀
Bruno,
The odd thing is that even if Jens had NOT left the bloody footprint(s) and they had gone on a longer trip on Sunday, say over to the Eastern Shore, and brought the car in late with many more miles added to the odometer, there was still the problem of fingerprints. He could not be sure he had not left a fingerprint, or even a fingerprint in blood. It had been a chaotic melee. He couldn't take the chance. And sooner or later police would have found out from interviews with their fellow students at UVA that Jens was definitely in the picture. Therefore, a routine request for fingerprints from him was inevitable. Automatic, really. He should have known that. There were quite a few people who were asked for prints. Jens prided himself on his intellect. But he actually didn't think the whole thing through. Should have been some other way. Goes to his state of mind. Magical thinking?
What Jens definitely didn't leave are the bloody sneakers imprints. I am convinced that both had planned the killings into detail as good as they could. You can read about it in their December codings which brought up the idea of Voodoo staging. Staging was important for them to point to another killer profile. As Soering was sleeping in February in 1985 in LC they could easily make a plan how to overwhelm the Haysoms to be sure they will be dead and not be able to flea with a minimum of resistance. To wear gloves is the most effective way to prevent fingerprints. Come on. Why all those readings of murder stories before the killings? Haysom shoot the pistol for start as she said "we can get rid off them now" as planning process had been finished.
Soering and Haysom had been integrated in the details of the investigating process from the beginning. I bet they knew that Mary had to go through fingerprints, footprints, blood and even a lie detector! So they didn't know when a lie detector will also be part of their interviews. A lie detector would have stopped their staging and storytelling very quick as you can see that Haysom and Soering had been visually very responsive towards sensitive questions!
I don't agree that staging a single killer version with Haysom in DC is too complicated. They loved acting roles, drama and storytelling. They had studied it! And both had been a deep psychological affinity to get stuck in their roles making them real. Haysom also with drugs, Soering without.
There must be a reason for leaving shoe and foot prints (panic, did they forget something in the house?)
Why had Haysom picked up the letter from the Haysoms and what story did she have in mind that the letter could function as an alibi? But there is no story!
What is the reason for the fact that Haysom had offered Soering's rival in love Greenberg one week before the killings to drive to DC with him?Sounds like an ultimatum for the killings to keep high pressure on Soering...
Frank: They had no idea that their daughter had become a homicidal psychopath.
You need to explain who signed for room service. The alibi was actually quite elaborate, was it not?
"Elizabeth makes things happen" was one assessment of her from a fellow prisoner at Bedford jail who went to Death Row. He had spent hours talking to her, studying her, essentially sitting on the floor talking through a wall, 'on the vent.' But Elizabeth's MO would be NOT to be there when it does happen. This would include framing a fellow student at Wycombe Abbey, for example, and either ruining or nearly ruining that girl's educational career.
xxxxxxxxx
Hi Frank, concerning the murders I do not believe one word that either Soering or Haysom have said/are saying. It is all mixed up by shifting blame to the other and muddying the water. The most kernel of truth is in what they had written to each other.
Concerning the matter of the manilla envelope stamped on the 1st of April 1985 in DC, I find it quite convincing what Richard had said to the press about his half-sister and her freaking reaction towards the letter matter. He is absolutely right in pointing out that the person who brought it to the post office took part in the killing. Haysom's reaction showed guilt.
In the meanwhile, I am absolutely convinced that the finesse part of their killing weekend was to establish an alibi which only looked like somebody had being stayed in DC. This would be very easy to arrange. For example: going to the movies and see porkies on Friday and connecting with the ticket seller after the movies e.g. inventing a story for getting two tickets with following numbers upfront (for the movie on Saturday at 10 pm). The movie on about 5 pm they bought 30 minutes before. Now the CONCLUSION: Both made false excuses for just buying one ticket for rocky horror picture. (Haysom no money ->wrong (sold jewels)/Soering angry ->wrong, he should be worried about her that the drug deal went wrong). The next connect is the room service which they had for breakfast on Saturday morning. So they arranged a delivery for the evening, based on a story (e.g. whole day trip, return in the evening) and signed upfront. They should bring it in according to their absence! Well that's all! Haysom did nothing to enable a credible alibi in an active way. The opposite was the case. No corroborating evidence for her statements (calling Beth or Kim, in real seeing no movies, buying and using drugs, ordering and drinking Jack Daniels in the hotel room, showering and signing room service and paying with credit card). NOT ONE. On the other side Soering who was telling bullshit in the murderplot of a single killer without premiditation, as they had planned and murdered the Haysoms by overwhelming them. You can clearly see the traces of blood way to the outside hall from the kitchen. This is where the attack of Nancy had started. Not in the dining room. The fact that Nancy's glas is in the kitchen, shows that she had been there. Perhaps she was gooing there for the can of Dr Pepper. There is no glas in the dining room at her seat. So this had been the best moment to attack her from the outside while Soering used the front door. This goes also together with the shoe traces and her cigarette butts!
If they had disabled the odometer while driving to LC and return to DC they would have shown the extra portion of finesse.
Bruno,
Too complicated.
Bruno,
As long as you're on this tack, why not a third party?
Bruno,
We don't know how they handled the envelope. A post box? But, of course she knew. And she was not stable. Not stable at all!
Dear Mr. Hammel, thank you very much for posting the whole interview with J.Söring. Now I can see
where the information about the envelope is coming. And also one can see, that there were people who witnessed, that the Haysoms expected E. and J. that weekend.
Everything that concernes the envelope is really mysterious, I think. But also Read and Gardner bring up annother possibility, that E. might have received it before the weekend, even by mail. I ask myself, if she might already have taken it with her on the weekend of her father's birthday, or is that
impossible? There maybe an explananation for it.
Hi Murmel,
I confess I'm also confused by the letter issue. However, Frank M. has posted many comments about it here and on my old blog. I'll keep looking into it!
Hi Mr.Hammel,
Thank you very much.
Hey, Andrew,
I was told by someone who knew a lot about the case, and who was a friend of the family, that the Haysoms wanted both Elizabeth and Jens to come by and have lunch. The parents wanted to discuss the whole situation with the two of them, I think. There had been a question all along since her return as to whether Elizabeth would bolt again, run away and give up her education or worse. And then there must have been another new concern--that E&J might run away and get married. The lunch was planned simply to be an occasion where a lot of sensitive family matters could be clarified, and it did not have to be hostile if, say, it turned out that E&J were planning marriage, if the couple was willing to wait until graduation, or so I am speculating. After all, Jens was eighteen.
So Derek simply requested that Elizabeth and Jens swing by for lunch on the way up to Washington. The large manilla envelope with the tax returns was simply a gimmick, a reason to make it possible for the four of them to talk.
When Jens showed up alone, the disappointed, angry, concerned, and upset parents must have been alarmed, at first, that Elizabeth was not there. Where was she!? Jens then explained that she had sent him to talk with them alone. He may have put the envelope in the car and then walked back and said that Elizabeth really wanted them to have this conversation.
Remember that after the Macado incident it had been agreed among the few family members who knew about it after discussion with the parents that Jens Soering should never again be allowed anywhere near Derek Haysom, in particular. This is why there was a group of close friends and family who were convinced that Elizabeth had to have been there as well, to get Jens inside the house.
The envelope was the way Jens got into the house.
Diabolique.
Hi Frank, version gives the whole dramatic we need. But I don't believe this.
a) if marriage was a strong concern for this meeting Howard would know about it and Gardner should follow.
b) you really think Soering with his blood smeared hands had to remember to pick up the yellow envelope with sensitive documents for Veryan as it stands on Elizabeth Haysom's wish list?
c) you think that Derek would have ever think of giving sensitive documents to Soering alone. A guy he would like to bann from his daughter.
I please you to make a list what a single murder like Soering all had done at the scene or to do according your murder plot/his confessions keeping the time frame in mind.
->impossible.
xxxxxxxxxxx
For background read here...
So no gimmick reported by friends of the family
In a Roanoke article 8y after Haysom had been sentenced the Haysom brothers are still strong convinced to the murder role of their half sister...and I bet till to this day.
Though Elizabeth Haysom claims she was in Washington, D.C., while Soering confronted and killed her parents, Richard Haysom thinks she lied.
``I find it impossible to believe Jens acted alone'' in the murder of Haysom's parents, he said.
Derek Haysom, his stepfather, ``would never have let his guard down with Jens in the house,'' Richard Haysom said. ``He hated Jens, despised him.''
Haysom said he believed his half-sister had to be at the murder scene for Soering to get into the house. He cites his parents' Canadian income tax return, which was mailed to his stepbrother, Veryan Haysom. The letter was postmarked in Washington, D.C., a couple of days after the murders.
Richard Haysom believes that Elizabeth Haysom must have taken it from her parents in person because, he says, they wouldn't have trusted Soering to mail the form for them.
Soering testified during his trial that he falsely confessed to protect his lover. Now seeking an appeal, he claims he was in Washington, D.C., while she killed her parents.
Richard Haysom said he suspected his half-sister's involvement in the murders when he came to Virginia for his parents' funeral.
``I was in the hotel room with Elizabeth, and I said whoever mailed that [income tax form] killed our parents ... and she just freaked. She was noticeably shaken. She paced up and down the hallway. It just told me then and there that she knew what was going on.''
Richard Haysom said he thinks she should own up to her role in the killings, if that's what really happened. She refuses to answer his questions about the murders when they correspond, he said.
xxxxxxxxxx
I looked up the evidence list by Burton yesterday, cause there is also a yellow manila envelope on the kitchen counter plate. But this is one should be brought in by the forensic nvestigators.
Burton's list included also a feather which was found in the kitchen. I missed that so far as this adding further proof of a staged Voodoo scene.
Bruno,
I think you are right that Derek Haysom would not have handed over the manilla envelope to Jens Soering. Soering must have taken it with him after cleaning himself up. We know that he took a shower.
My speculation that the parents' fears now had to include an inappropriate runaway marriage is simple common sense. Whether or not Derek and Nancy Haysom seriously disliked Jens Soering, they did not truly fear him. He was, after all, a Jefferson Scholar! And the parents believed that they needed to talk. They were trying to understand what was happening.
They had no idea that their daughter had become a homicidal psychopath.
You need to explain who signed for room service. The alibi was actually quite elaborate, was it not?
"Elizabeth makes things happen" was one assessment of her from a fellow prisoner at Bedford jail who went to Death Row. He had spent hours talking to her, studying her, essentially sitting on the floor talking through a wall, 'on the vent.' But Elizabeth's MO would be NOT to be there when it does happen. This would include framing a fellow student at Wycombe Abbey, for example, and either ruining or nearly ruining that girl's educational career.
Yeah, mysterious is exact the right term. The possibility that E. Haysom has received the letter by mail is logical impossible. Why?
Cause the point of expecting both for the upcoming weekend came up during the week before the murders. Howard knew about this and gave statements about it to the police. He had phoned with Nancy during the week. So it is very close to pretty sure that Massie is another witness for this matter and she would also be one of the 3/4 persons who Reid and Gardner had talked to.. Massie is another witness of the trials who was convinced about Haysom had being in the house, during the murders. Maybe the point came up on Derek's birthday the first time but Haysom didn't took the documents with her. Then the call to Howard by Nancy would not make any sense. The destination of the documents was Veryan in Nova Scotia. I hope Small town big crime will say something about it, as they have the statements of the investigation files. But that would end up only in what the 3/4 person had said and who they were.
Elizabeth in her testimony of her guilty plea which meant to diminish her own guilt an put the maximum blame on her ex boyfriend:
AH: Elizabeth described the aftermath of this interview in her 1987 trial testimony:
Q Why did you and Jens leave in October of '85?
A Because Investigator Gardner and Investigator Reid had requested blood samples from Jens.
Q He was getting scared.
A Yes. And as I say, his attitude towards what happened changed as outside--as the investigation was progressing. And when he discovered that Investigator Gardner wasn't as stupid as he thought he was and that he couldn't just talk his way out of a situation as serious as this.
xxxxxxxxxxx
Well Andrew this is so cute and you don't miss any event to let her shine....
In a 1989 interview Haysom stated that her brother had a tone of being suspicious on her. And that her brother forced her hand, and she made a pure act of cowardice.
One year later at the Soering trial she got her punishment and was more free to speak. She knew that the fullfillment of her wish, that she came back to the US to plea guilty only if Soering will get the same punishment is becoming real.
So in cross examination with Neaton she had to admit the following:
Q: Well you knew you were suspected of some complicity in your parents' deaths in September of 1985 when you were asked to give blood and footprint samples, right?
A: Of course, I knew I would be a suspect, and I knew I was considered a suspect, and so was Jens.
Q: At that time, though, you didn't know the test results of the blood or the footprint analysis, did you?
A: Well in September they had just been given, so –
Q: And when you left the country in October of 1985, you did not know the results of those tests, did you?
A: No, I did not, sir.
Q: Now also in October of 1985, you said that You had received a telephone call from your brother, is that right?
A: That is correct.
Q: And it was after the telephone call from your brother that you decided that you're going to go and Join Jens, is that right?
A: That's correct.
Q: I call your attention to the diary, which is Commonwealth's Exhibit 44, and I call your attention to the October 12th entry that you made in this diary, I'll point to it right there. Now in your diary, the part that You wrote, you said that you began packing to leave before your brother called you, right?
A: That's correct.
Q: So you had already decided to leave before he called you, correct?
A: No, sir.
Q: Oh, you were packing Just in case you might decide to leave?
A: No, sir. If you recall, this diary was written in retrospect with Jens, and at that time Jens did not know the reason why I had stayed behind was to think things out for myself.
And so of course I had to write in here that I had begun packing before I considered packing.
Q: So that was a lie in the diary?
A: There are a great many lies in many of these diaries.
Q: And they were deliberately put in there by you in that October 12th entry?
A: I don't understand.
Q: You intentionally wrote what you did in the October 12th entry to deceive Jens, right?
A: It was a continuance of a deception, yes.
So funfact...this sounds very different from being a suspect which is not a supect as given everything in free will cause she was not at the scene....but having an attourney 😀