Ruth.

We have concluded through a week-long investigation into Ruth that she was not Amy’s primary babysitter in October of 1989. In fact, we still do not know much about this mystery woman. We believe we have located her in Geauga County. Was Ruth being referenced in the Ziccardi letter? Was Ruth one of the housekeepers at the motel mentioned on Brookpark rd? What was Ruth’s relationship to Margaret?Where did Margaret and Ruth hang out together? How did they meet? 

Ruth, We would love to sit down with you and have a chat. If you read our blog, please reach out to us. You may be extremely important to solving this case. We know you cared for Amy and now she needs you. Please reach out to us!

Geography: Throughout our investigations, many of the names we look into plug into the following areas

1) Ashland 2) Amherst 3) Louisville Kentucky 4) Somerset Kentucky 5) Southern Indiana 6)  Westlake 7) Sheffield Lake 8) Vermillion 9) Rocky River. We are wondering how so many people we look at have addresses in many of the same areas. It’s one thing to search Amherst and get other people from Lorain. It’s another thing to link multiple individuals from Amherst, Somerset Kentucky and Ashland.

 

Mark and Margaret’s seemingly separate lives:

Many of you know that Mark and Margaret were divorcing and the decision was made prior to Amy’s abduction. We are asking ourselves just how little we factually know of Margaret’s life outside of 628 Lindford Dr. We have said since day one, that this case would already be solved if Margaret was still alive. We have also stated that one of the missing links in this case came from Margaret’s life outside of her family at home. Margaret’s address book suspiciously disappears after Margaret’s mother allegedly hands it over to a visitor at her apartment who claimed to be a member of the Bay Village police department. This is all fine and dandy but this happened in Las Vegas! To us this is significant and if this holds water could point in a direction very close to her original home in Bay Village. Why are the people who hung out with Margaret not talking? Surely they could give some basic information. Suddenly the woman ” everybody knows” is now unknown? We are not buying that. Not one bit. Do the right thing and speak up people, a little girl had her life stolen and its way past time to give the information you may have over to authorities. Don’t want to go to them directly? Send it to us through the contact form here on the blog and we will pass your information on to them for you with complete anonymity. You do not have to disclose who you are. Know matter how you slice it, Somehow, someway Margaret and Amy both knew who the abductor was as they likely met while all 3 were together. Where that somewhere is, we are working on. Amy simply would not have gone with an absolute stranger. The family even had a security word between them and Amy was spoken to about strangers and advised what to do.

Amy In Ashland:

First the rumor, Margaret had been to Ruggles Twp to a home for undisclosed purposes. The woman at this home had a guest visiting at the time when Margaret was knocking on the door. She was let in and introduced to the visitor as Margaret Mihaljevic. The visitor leaves and the next time she sees Margaret is on the news.

Now the fact. Amy was a Brownie and a member of the Girl Scouts. Mark Mihaljevic confirmed that they were together as a group in Ashland on Girl Scout functions at camp. Mark does not recall if there were any overnight trips.  Could these trips to Ashland be the one simple key to all of this?  We are currently investigating.

Rick Burns

As it stands currently, we believe the BVPD’ s discount of Rick’s witness report was a huge mistake. Rick was not only much closer to what is now known as a suspect’s vehicle but also seen through adult eyes. Burn’s shop would have also made a great location to park the vehicle as it is around the corner and out of view of those within the shopping complex. This case has had new information come forward that in our opinion should include another interview with Rick. Rick had a solid reputation in the community and no real reason to give a faulty statement. Sans a mistake in the date we don’t understand at all why the statements from two ten 10yr olds from 60ft away are given more credence than Rick’s statement. We are currently trying to talk with Rick Burns. Rick, if you read our blog, please reach out to us. We would love to hear your full story.

 

Missing Links. We are one link away from getting into the nucleus of this case.  Our whole team has been putting in very long hours and we refuse to give up. Soon everybody. Soon

Our team is growing. We now have people from every branch of civil service (Fire, EMS, police) P.I’s and even a former Navy Seal and retired Navy Intel officer. We will find that missing link we wrote of here today. We aren’t here for profit and do not seek to do anything but solve this case. And we will. Last week alone our 7 groups operating within our team transmitted over 15 gigabytes of data. It is only a matter of time that the link is established that pulls this whole thing together.

 

 

The Pictures are worth a thousand words. Many of these photos you have not seen before. These memories, this pain, and ending of a beautiful child’s life are why we are here.

Tough Guy Killer, Your days are numbered. Every time our team looks at photos like these, we get stronger. We are close to knowing you. I believe you might have some earrings that don’t belong to you. We expect the calculator to still be in the Buick binder. The boots coward, Amy’s boots, she never got to ride her favorite horse “Razzle” with those boots. If you you feel the need to be so close to someone else’s boots why don’t you bend over and we’ll kindly shove our boots straight up your ass. Should’ve left it a fantasy coward.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

We are going to the public once more. This time we want to hear from you why Runkle shouldn’t be the primary guy to look at after the most recent discoveries in this case. We will list a few things already brought up amongst the team when we tried to debunk the Runk. 

Cruze: If he did sewing in a previous job why wasn’t the green curtain sewed better

Team conclusion: We don’t know what his capacity was at said place of employment. He very well could have done very little sewing but the green curtain might also be an early work of his. Cruze has hinted that the green curtain appears to be a learning piece. This theory could very well be true

Blaze: Margaret had a Buick with what appears to be a beige interior. Isn’t is possible the fibers found on Amy  belong to Margaret’s car?

Team Conclusion: Chief Spaetzle has said the fibers are exclusive to a GM vehicle made from mid 70’s through 1978. Margaret’s Buick was a mid 80’s vehicle. Source: Dateline video

Kai: Runkle might have been working the day Amy was abducted?

Team Conclusion: As of right this moment we do not factually know of Runkle’s whereabouts on Oct 27th 1989. It appears that different sources reveal Runkle was not teaching from 1987 to 1989. We do know his teaching credentials and licensure to do so were current and valid at that time. We also know Amy waited for her abductor. Giving the abduction day was a Friday it is possible he did make the drive from Amherst to Bay Village which is possibly why Amy had to wait.

Cruze: The curtain seen in Runkle’s classroom was a standard 32″ width popular size.

Team Conclusion: It may have been a popular size but the tabs up top are too close to the green curtain to just overlook. Also we see these curtains in varying photos and they appear to change for holidays and different times of the year. One photo shows a Christmas pattern which screams Joanne Fabrics material bought and made into a curtain. The commonality of these curtains is the tabs and the non store-bought look of the construction near the top. They are uneven on several of the classroom curtain photos upon blow up of the image using corrective image technology. Very similar to the green curtain found on Co Rd 1181.

Avery: Wasn’t Runkle a homosexual? Why would he be interested in Amy?

Team Conclusion: He could very well be bi-sexual. The alleged comment made about a pregnant teen student doesn’t look good if he really said it. The alleged statement took place while Runkle and another teacher were talking about who the father of a pregnant teen student was. Allegedly Runkle responded with ” I wish it was me” which are obviously not the words of a devout homosexual.

When you read our blog ladies and gentlemen don’t think for a moment that we all agree on everything because we don’t and that is perfectly ok. We dig deep on every little detail because you just never know when that one little connection blows the case wide open. We also go through periods where we may write something, then facts surface that make it null and void. We will not pull posts that we were wrong about. We will leave them so other private investigators do not waste time on something we’ve already been wrong about. We question ourselves constantly!

We do however all agree on one thing. We will find Amy’s killer. We believe the case will be solved very soon based on all internal knowledge we have

Now it’s your turn. Why isn’t this Dean Runkle’s crime?

Truth be told there are quite a few of us who don’t want it to be Runkle. If it is, he has been free an extra 12 years after authorities were made aware of him. At least he’s alive. We don’t want a dead guy to be the guy. If it’s Runkle, charge him already. If it’s not? eliminate him completely already! There are many circumstantial things going against the Runk but we understand also that he is not guilty till it is proven in a court of law or admitted to by Runkle himself. As of this moment many things point to him but we are certainly not implying or stating he is guilty yet.

Let us know by commenting below why it’s not Runkle.

Thanks

All of us at We R Amy Army

Although we are not fans of speculating or locking our sights on one suspect with tunnel vision the following photos simply cannot be ignored. In recent days I have been made aware of a few things that inspired this blog posting. I have to admit that our team prior to this information largely did not like Dean Runkle as the guy. Letting the facts guide the investigation is surely the best approach. Here are the non specifics of information shared with us off the record from a source we will not name at this time.

1) An odd recently discovered message left in something of Runkle’s that very well sounds to be an encrypted message. The message is profound and to the point. It is a message that must be taken seriously and of course we are.

2) A photo verifying the interior color of Runkle’s car as a possible source of the gold fibers found on Amy’s body.

3) Rumor has it Runkle held a job prior to teaching doing some type of sewing

This is when speculation starts to turn more serious. Facts must be investigated. 

---

The Curtain tabs

You be the judge when comparing. The tabs are nearly identical in size and shape. The photos also show nearly the same curtain dimensions. It is too coincidental to overlook so we are not.

The curtain found at the scene

The curtain covering what appears to be a closet door in Runkle’s classroom. The tabs are what is interesting to us. The color of the curtain at this point doesn’t matter. This isn’t the actual curtain but sewing is a bit like art. Each seamstress’ work usually holds tell tale signatures in repeatable construction methods. This closet door covering holds key signatures to the photo above. Torsney states this curtain was made for a specific purpose and we see that here in this application. Does this incriminate Runkle? Nope, but speculation on him just got a whole lot more serious. We are currently digging deep into this subject and will post further findings in due time.

 

If you were acquaintances with Margaret we would like to speak with you. If you were friend’s of Margaret or close to her, outside of her family life, we need to speak with you immediately please. Please use the drop down button and click on contact. Thank You very much.

Now, we have seen BVPD Police Chief Mark Spaetzel interviewed hundreds of times. The FBI has even had many themselves. One group of people seem to go under the radar and are seemingly not of importance to either the other private investigators or even the media. The most interaction we’ve seen in years came in the crime watch special with Spaetzel and Torsney. In that presentation, Chief Deputy Carl Richert II made a cameo to say the body was identified as “Amy Mihaljevic from Bay Village”. That has been it. Ashland County media is even quiet on the subject of Amy Mihaljevic.

WE ARE WONDERING WHY?

The apparent power struggle between the 3 law enforcement agencies in this case has been well documented but is this the reason we hear next to nothing regarding Amy’s case from Ashland’s Sheriffs Office? Here are a few of the questions we have in regards to the Ashland County authorities.

1) Why did Renner have to fight to view Amy’s autopsy documents? Why was he watched over when doing so? Why was Dr Emery’s office haters of James Renner? Didn’t Emery go as far as to show up at a Renner book event with a few choice words for him? That’s the story we are hearing.

2) Is there any truth to the rumor that a guest was allowed to be present during the Ashland Coroners body examination? From what we have gathered there was such a person and that person was not qualified to even be there.

3) Al Matlock’s Jacket: Why would Ashland County Deputies return this jacket to Matlock when it was suspiciously found in the ditch on Co Rd 1181 within 20 feet of the curtain and blanket?

4) Was the jacket thoroughly examined and checked for evidence before it was returned to Al Matlock?

5) Why did The Sheriffs Office get so agitated with the FBI when they came in and took over the investigation when this is standard protocol when a involved federal agency arrives on scene?

6) Why do so many people seem to think the crime scene was botched with cross contamination of the scene on Co Rd 1181 prior to the FBI’s arrival?

7) Why so quiet? Why are there reports that multiple members of the Sheriffs Office in 1989 were known to be freemasons? One of which died unexpectedly at home in November of 2000. His father also died at the same address midway into 1989 in an apparent farming accident. The freemason compass is on both grave monuments. Is the Sheriffs Office ok with their members being involved in what many consider to be a branch of secret society?

8) Who really ordered the house on CR.500 to be burnt down? Why was a county employee there just minutes before it began to burn?

We aren’t pointing fingers. Just asking questions. We hope you have the answers.

29 Years is enough. We tried to contact both the FBI and BVPD with long winded letters of intent. We did not hear a single peep back. We wanted to establish a relationship with them to work along side them. We wanted to share pertinent information but apparently they have it all under control. We proposed a fundraiser to up the reward money substantially. Ok Fellas, In 29 years you’ve spoken to 16,000 people, have a list of possible suspects a mile long, shared a curtain 27 years too late and the only solid information shared with the very public, you yourself, admit will solve the case is “its a white male in a tan jacket approximately 5’8″ to 5’10″”. We now have a team working this case nearly 24/7 and all involved are working without pay. If you don’t wish to be part of our initiative we will go it alone. This blog will be going back live very soon. We set it to private to make sure we were all on the same page with the authorities. So fellas. You are right, The public will solve this case. The hour glass is being flipped and  the Mihaljevic family will not wait another 29 years for closure. While you wait for DNA science to catch up or the info fairy to deliver the killers name, we are out there flipping stones. We are the public. Want to know where our hearts are? When we solve this, the reward money is going straight to the Mihaljevic family. That should send a profound message to the coward or cowards that killed Amy as well. We exist only to put your miserable yellow ass behind bars. We are many, we are motivated and we don’t like you much. Your best days are behind you as is your shadow coward. The foot steps you hear are us and we are coming to put a boot in your ass. Imagine that, a whole bunch of young people kicking your old ass around like a rag doll. Kinda like how you treated an innocent 10 yr old girl. Sounds like Karma isn’t your friend. You should’ve left it as a fantasy in 1989 you scum. We said we would not hold back emotion, we said we’d be raw and have no fear. We said we would find the scum who took Amy and we will.

Our team listens to every podcast and up until Episode 5 we just kinda sat back and said , Uh huh, same old same old. Episode 5 however  had my phone blowing up with angry feedback from our members. Comments like, what the hell is this utter crap being told to listeners? How can they sit here with such desperate speculation and speak them as fact? In this blog posting we will attempt to clear up these speculative blatant errors.

Runkle’s car: First the cold hard truth. No one saw Amy enter ANY vehicle, let alone a gold Pontiac Grand Prix. Everything said in regards to Runkle’s car should be discounted to speculation at best. Renner went as far as to claim the VIN number was wrong because the actual VIN number returned to a Grand Am and not a Grand Prix. Ever try getting license plates on a car that has a VIN that returns to a different vehicle? It doesn’t work out too well. They then bantered back and forward about if the car was even a Grand Prix. Lets clear this up for them since they can’t even get these speculative theories correct. The Grand Ams and the Grand Prix of the suspected late 1970’s, specifically are the same sized car and built on the same G  chassis platform. No night and day difference as Huffman stated. The two are different enough to immediately discern which is which but can be confused with each other to non car people. Point is this. Renner stated a judge saw the car in Rick Burns lot,  and I quote ” saw the car that took Amy” Sorry James but it is total bullshit. It is absolute speculation as the fact remains that NO ONE SAW AMY GET INTO A CAR! The car or vehicle is now irrelevant because no facts exist about this vehicle. But we will make it really simple for Renner since he’s not really sure of his own top suspects vehicle. IF IT IS A 4 DOOR, IT’S NOT A GRAND PRIX. THE GRAND AM WAS MADE IN BOTH TWO DOOR COUPE AND FOUR DOOR SEDAN. The carpet on the contrary was not exclusive to the Grand Prix. The carpet mill ran that nutmeg colored carpet for GM vehicles, not just the Grand Prix. It just doesn’t work like that. In other words, that carpet could be found in any GM product line from Chevrolet to Pontiac. It doesn’t matter though because speculating on a vehicle not positively identified as being seen with Amy getting into it or riding in it is an absolute moot point. End of story, quit clouding up the abduction with irrelevant not factual “facts” 

1978 Pontiac Grand Am

1978 Pontiac Grand Prix

---

The field on 1181:  Here they really angered our team . Renner states there were these areas that a car could’ve gotten up on the knoll and dumped Amy’s body. Ok so let’s get this straight. He just told people that a car could’ve driven up there to dump Amy’s body? They don’t want to get caught so they drive a vehicle up onto softer ground which loves to accept definitive tire tracks as evidence all the while driving through nearly 3 foot vegetation on someone’s crop field and at the risk of getting stuck? This is fiction not only based in a far-fetched theory but also lacking any sort of sensible thought. Furthermore we do not see these entry points to that field anywhere in any of the photos from 1990. That ditch appears to go the full length of that field. Would be investigators are listening to this hoopla and letting it guide their investigations. It’s bullcrap. If you are researching this case please use your own mind and findings to form your own conclusions because this case-complicating fiction isn’t doing anything but adding complication to an already complex case.This complete discount of joggers and hunters is also bullcrap. This seedling that was spoken about is also bullcrap. That vegetation type is stiff and hard to bend. It is absolutely possible that this so-called seedling penetrated Amy’s clothing upon set down of her body.Go stand in a wheat field with no shoes on in an in-between harvest season field like the one on 1181 and you likely will penetrate your feet like nails. That body shows no signs of being in a field for close to 4 months. NONE!!!! Her body would’ve fed so much wildlife that there would’ve been a near skeleton laying there when she was found and absolutely infested with maggots. That body was kept in a sealed cold but not frozen state as we mentioned in a previous blog. The only seedlings in that moment of journalistic  stupidity were the seedlings of clouding an investigation. What was said in that podcast should be considered theoretical fiction at best.

The phone calls: Above the preceding rants about the car and field, the section we find the most important errors in, are the phone calls. We can only assume the call to Amy as factual. With no audio or actual evidence, we are taking the phone call to Amy as possible but not factual. There are no guarantees that this ruse actually occurred. Team member Cruze is quick to point out that multiple calls may have been made in North Olmsted but the calls were made to both boys and girls of several age brackets. An innocent sales call with the salesman saying “Hello, is your Mom or Dad home?”could have been enough to freak out the kids into thinking that they were the targets of an abduction attempt. We said it before and we will say it again. The alleged ruse call to Amy may have never occurred. If it did Amy could’ve lied to her friends about it to cover up why she was really meeting this person. Only Amy and the caller know the truth but it is possible that the call didn’t have anything to do with a gift for Margaret.. Now since everyone in the mainstream Amy media seems to believe this story, anything studied beyond that point would be studied based on non factual hear say. They even went as far as to say Runkle and Hartenburg surely knew each other from the Science Center implying they could be a team. This is a classic case of fact bending to reach a preconceived conclusion in one persons favor to get their guy. The science center is also not important unless you buy into the ruse in the first place. If it’s not fact that it occurred then it is more speculation that the number of girls receiving phone calls had anything to do with Amy. Even if Amy did receive the call as the official story states, anything could have been said to lure Amy not just Margaret’s promotion! No one really knows. Here is the full hour of speculation. 60 plus minutes of our lives we won’t get back. Fact is, Amy could’ve easily been lured to Bay Square in a number of ways.

You tell us? It is our opinion that stating all these speculative things in this episode as the one and only set of facts further clouded up the case. Renner should be commended on one thing and that is keeping this case in the forefront of people’s minds but this irresponsible trying to “prove his guy is the one” based on speculation and opinion may kill good leads before they are documented. None of the things stated in this episode will ever help solve this case. We are not fans of Runkle, Hartenburg or any of the suspects. We are fans of facts and truth. Episode 5 showcased very few of those 2 things. Speculation like this would make a fine blog post that was prefaced with “A possible theory” Please read our previous blogs to get a better understanding of how we view the subjects covered in episode 5 and if you investigate this case, please draw your own conclusions. We will leave this posting on a positive note. Although we clearly view what was said on Huffman’s podcast from a totally different point of view we appreciate them trying to bring attention to the case.

In closing:

If leads are generated from this podcast they will be leads based on the non factual content of this opionionary podcast. Fictional and non functional in helping solve this case. If you desire to chase around the last remaining 1978 Pontiac Grand Prixs, be our guest, but don’t be surprised if that journey lasts 29 years with an unhappy ending.

 

As with anything in this world, everything has a good side and a bad side. Enter Investigative Journalism. While it is definitely directly responsible for bringing attention to this case it is the quintessential catch 22. For us, we see a case that probably started relatively simple and was turned into a giant pile of mangled up wires. Lets say within that ball of wires you spot the cell phone charger you want but when you pull the cord its wrapped around so many others that it takes you 10 times as long. That is what has happened to this case. Where is that line between trying to help and creating a tougher case than was there to start with? Let us explain: You’re a journalist, you spend gobs of time on this case and it brings you to someone that becomes interesting enough to you that you become excited. Then as a writer you feel compelled to share a little of your hard work. You put a name out there and plead your case. The next thing you know you have generated interest. All of a sudden people are crawling out of the woodwork to get involved and that is a beautiful thing. One problem with that is you’ve now tainted the minds of would be investigators to buy into why your theories are right. Everyone wants to be part of a victory and no one wants to be part of a loss. Well, we lost already. We lost a 10yr old girl. The Mihaljevics lost their daughter. There is no grand victory after all this is said and done. Nothing brings Amy back! With that in mind and with closure as the goal, why the hell are some of these people leading other people in the wrong direction and making the case harder to solve? At some point you do have to trust the FBI and BVPD. If you are writing books, putting on podcasts, it should be done from an informational standpoint from facts only. By facts? I’m talking things that are proven to be facts. Is what was said allegedly to Amy proven to be fact? Nope. Amy easily could have known something different than what she told her friends.

The Runkle Effect:

A once open mind is now vested in a guy who had no factual proof of being involved. Just speculation and finger pointing. But since a compelling non factual case was built against this guy, not reality,  now hundreds of people follow only this theory and make it their own. Some quick statements to demonstrate what we are saying here

“Runkle drove a gold car!” That’s great, IF anyone saw Amy get into a gold car. That simply didn’t happen though. No one saw Amy get into any vehicle. Now investigators in the private sector say I thought I had a good guy to look into but he doesn’t drive a gold car so they will just pass over the person because they were certain of some journalists conclusions.

This approach brings some leads but all to this point are leads in the wrong direction.

This group is in the process of unraveling the giant mess of cables and wires to get back to square one minus all this fiction and story telling. This case has become a wild goose chase. We will add to this thought process in the next day or two.

I’m listening to episode 5 of the Huffman podcast as I wrote the latter part of this entry. Look for a blow up blog in a few days.  All I can say is episode 5 just clouded things up even more.

Good Intent. Horrible speculation and not understanding the repercussions of its effect on investigating this case

 

Speculation, hear say and ooo ooo ooo me toos

” I saw Runkle there!”

” I got calls too!”

” I signed a log book”

” I saw this creepy guy there that matched the composite sketch”

Is it possible tbe same ruse was used on other young girls? of course. To these sick bastards it is like telemarketing, make a hundred calls to finally get one to buy what you’re selling. 

---

As investigators: Of course we looked into the Science and Nature Center. That investigation lasted till we were told by them that the log book is unable to be found. We will look into it again if the log book is found because until that happens there is no factual substance to pull a thread on.

One of the things we see researchers do in most cases like Amy’s is pre determine their end conclusion by lining up the facts they want to see to reach their conclusions on their person of interest.

That is not gonna cut it. It becomes an I see Jesus in the clouds wild goose chase. 

“My person rode a horse once, Amy loved horses”

“My person had a beige interior in their car”

An example is this:

“Runkle always drove 4 door  Grand Prixs.” We hate to burst any bubbles here but if you go back and look at the GM G Body vehicles from the late 70’s you will see that Pontiac never made a 4 door Grand Prix. Those were only made as 2 door coupes. The only 4 door G body Pontiacs made for those years were the Grand Am and LeMans. Same basic styling for the time period but definitely not a Grand Prix.

But Rick Burns said he saw a little girl in the backseat of a car when a man asked him for directions to 480. Ok?

Nope, not ok.

1) Key word there is “backseat”. Who puts a kid in the backseat of a 2 DOOR CAR in 1989? which in itself looks conspicuous in 1989 , then stops and asks for directions?  Runkle nor the real abductor is that stupid. They were smart enough to avoid being caught for 29 freaking years! Remember, this was before the airbag and children riding in the backseat for safety time frame that started in the mid to late 90’s.

2) Amy was a smart kid, lets start treating her as such. The “we are going shopping”, you don’t know me but get in the backseat of my car story doesn’t fly with us. Amy knew this man. She simply wouldn’t have gone with him unless there are unknown facts. She felt it was ok. She was smart, that is a fact, not hear say. Lets always keep in mind who Amy was. It is important

The main point is this:

Hear say and speculation have created so many “suspects” that it has clouded up the case. No one will ever know why people do what they do. Maybe Dean Runkle got the hell out of dodge because he was a weirdo being questioned about Amy and felt his other classroom antics would surface. Do you really think he took off because he didn’t want to give fingerprints? His fingerprints could have and probably were collected by the FBI. His DNA was also likely attained quickly after becoming a suspect. It all just doesn’t fit with Runkle. From our investigations with Runkle he was more than likely into young boys anyway. He just doesn’t fit. It is our opinion that if Runkle is involved it is not directly, only by association. He would be behind bars already if otherwise. No one saw a vehicle. That is a fact. Cases are built on facts