Trial on hold for boy charged in shotgun death

RIGHT HERE wrote:

<quoted text>
Are you sure there isn't evidence???

I think if there was concrete, undeniable evidence against him, it never would've made it this far without trial. And I agree, by the time things get hammered out, they'll let him off with time served. If found not guilty, I see a huge lawsuit on their hands... He is 14ish now, best they can keep him is for another 7 years even if found guilty... He will have spent most of his childhood behind bars, and get out when he is old enough to walk into a bar and order a beer. Either way, this won't end good for anybody...

intheknow wrote:

<quoted text>
I think if there was concrete, undeniable evidence against him, it never would've made it this far without trial. And I agree, by the time things get hammered out, they'll let him off with time served. If found not guilty, I see a huge lawsuit on their hands... He is 14ish now, best they can keep him is for another 7 years even if found guilty... He will have spent most of his childhood behind bars, and get out when he is old enough to walk into a bar and order a beer. Either way, this won't end good for anybody...

Of course there is evidence--without it, he would never have been held this long. what has kept him from the justice he so deserves up until now is the defense grasping at straws trying to find SOME technicality, etc. to let him go free, because there is so much evidence. the evidence that has been submitted so far is all online for anyone to check out--just do a google search and you will come up with all kinds of info. much has not been made public yet, hopefully SOON, but the public may never get the "rest of the story" now that it has been turned over to the juv. system. scary for all, if it isn't published, and no one will know what they are in for when he skips out free and clear at age 21.

wow wrote:

what are the fathers comments

shortly after the arrest, and prior to so many other facts becoming known, he (the father) had said at one point that "it was an accident".

wants justice wrote:

<quoted text>Of course there is evidence--without it, he would never have been held this long. what has kept him from the justice he so deserves up until now is the defense grasping at straws trying to find SOME technicality, etc. to let him go free, because there is so much evidence. the evidence that has been submitted so far is all online for anyone to check out--just do a google search and you will come up with all kinds of info. much has not been made public yet, hopefully SOON, but the public may never get the "rest of the story" now that it has been turned over to the juv. system. scary for all, if it isn't published, and no one will know what they are in for when he skips out free and clear at age 21.

The DA and police do make mistakes too. Look at the Dryfuse murders in Pulaski. They tried, convicted, and sentenced that guy to death. He appealed and won, he walks around free as a turkey on Sunday, the evidence just wasn't there... Everyone still thinks that her husband killed her and their daughters and the cousin, but nothing can be proven, the husband was never charged... But still, they wanted to blame the easiest person available. They put him in prison on death row from 1994 to 2002 I believe...

Being a small community, where everyone knows or knows of everyone else, it's hard to see past that. I don't think he did it, but I could be wrong. Who knows? He might've done it and when he gets released at 21 writes a book entitled how I killed my step-mom for all we know...

wants justice wrote:

<quoted text>shortly after the arrest, and prior to so many other facts becoming known, he (the father) had said at one point that "it was an accident".

I remember reading that he said it was accidental. Wonder if poor little Jordan just meant to fire a shot into the air, to wake Kenzie up? I can understand how the father could have been numb with disbelief, that his boy could have done that...but surely he could have thought of something that made a little sense, anyway.

intheknow wrote:

<quoted text>
The DA and police do make mistakes too. Look at the Dryfuse murders in Pulaski. They tried, convicted, and sentenced that guy to death. He appealed and won, he walks around free as a turkey on Sunday, the evidence just wasn't there... Everyone still thinks that her husband killed her and their daughters and the cousin, but nothing can be proven, the husband was never charged... But still, they wanted to blame the easiest person available. They put him in prison on death row from 1994 to 2002 I believe...
Being a small community, where everyone knows or knows of everyone else, it's hard to see past that. I don't think he did it, but I could be wrong. Who knows? He might've done it and when he gets released at 21 writes a book entitled how I killed my step-mom for all we know...

I agree with you about mistakes--but with the dryfuse murders, it was a very difficult case--no evidence, etc. and the accused pretty much walked right into it. i have always had doubts that the husband/father did it--first of all, he doesn't appear all that bright, and whoever did this horrific crime had some degree of intelligence to leave almost NO evidence behind-also, i don't think anyone that has ever had a child could have done this to any child, let alone his own. but back to the current topic--the evidence in this case is almost overwhelming! The police had every opportunity to let the ex-boyfriend take the fall and wrap it up quickly and with no controversy if that was all they wanted. i'm sure they sure would much rather avoided the incredible drama, etc. of accusing an 11 year old kid if at all possible--but it just wasn't possible to pawn it off on anyone other than the obvious killer--little jordan. if they wanted to "take the easy way out", they could have just waited til the ex jumped in his vehicle, removed the snow and made some tracks and it would have been case closed, but jordan was just too quick to name the "ex-boyfriends truck" and in doing so, gave him an airtight alibi.

wants justice wrote:

<quoted text>I agree with you about mistakes--but with the dryfuse murders, it was a very difficult case--no evidence, etc. and the accused pretty much walked right into it. i have always had doubts that the husband/father did it--first of all, he doesn't appear all that bright, and whoever did this horrific crime had some degree of intelligence to leave almost NO evidence behind-also, i don't think anyone that has ever had a child could have done this to any child, let alone his own. but back to the current topic--the evidence in this case is almost overwhelming! The police had every opportunity to let the ex-boyfriend take the fall and wrap it up quickly and with no controversy if that was all they wanted. i'm sure they sure would much rather avoided the incredible drama, etc. of accusing an 11 year old kid if at all possible--but it just wasn't possible to pawn it off on anyone other than the obvious killer--little jordan. if they wanted to "take the easy way out", they could have just waited til the ex jumped in his vehicle, removed the snow and made some tracks and it would have been case closed, but jordan was just too quick to name the "ex-boyfriends truck" and in doing so, gave him an airtight alibi.

"pawn" it off on this boy.... wow !!!! thats all I have to say about that.


"they could have just waited til the ex jumped in his vehicle, removed the snow and made some tracks and it would have been case closed"........ so you are saying the investigators could have framed the ex-boyfriend if they wanted, but they would never ever think of framing an 11 year old child, because he was so quick to name this pick up truck that he saw??

I haven't found any court documents(googling this case)that said Mr. Harvey had an airtight alibi. I did find however that the PFA's that were filed against him said he would kill Ms Houk or hire someone to kill her. Do you think it was possible that he did hire someone? Maybe he hired this little boy to do his dirty work.

The point here is-so many have said that this was a big conspiracy (encompassing everyone from the marines on down) so the police could "wrap it up quickly and make themselves look good". Maybe you are only following this one post, but there are many on here. I don't think ANYONE was framed, i only said that IF that was the goal, it could have been wrapped up quickly if the police wanted to be dishonest to put a quick ending to the whole tragedy.(as so many have claimed) And perhaps you never saw the words "airtight alibi", also possible you are from the south and have never seen snow, but it is pretty much a no-brainer to us northern folks that if there are no tracks in a fresh snow, then no one or nothing could have been there. There was only 2 sets of tracks leading out of the house and down the driveway-both, child-sized. The larger set of tracks, which matched jordans, lead right up to where the freshly shot shell casing was found. If AH had cleaned the snow off of his vehicle, and had TRACKS leading to said vehicle, or even out of his home to the road, then he could have been a suspect, but tracks in snow are pretty much "airtight". and even if he had "hired the little boy to do his dirty work" (i can only hope this is an attempt at humor, it is so bizarre), then the end result would still be the same--that jordan killed kenzie and christopher as alledged all along.

I will offer this up one more time. There is no way her daughter screaming could be heard next door by tree cutters (silent chainsaws?), but a gun shot from a 20 gauge shotgun IN the house, can go unnoticed by people inside of the house... I've shot guns in a "house" before, it had no roof, the sound was considerably louder than shooting in open air. I can only assume that adding a roof would hold in the sound even more, making it even louder.

A 20 gauge shotgun with a 22" barrel produces around 150 decibels of sound. Thunder is around 120 decibels. Just think about that... I know at night time, the sound of my pistol can be heard a long distance away...

wants justice wrote:

The point here is-so many have said that this was a big conspiracy (encompassing everyone from the marines on down) so the police could "wrap it up quickly and make themselves look good". Maybe you are only following this one post, but there are many on here. I don't think ANYONE was framed, i only said that IF that was the goal, it could have been wrapped up quickly if the police wanted to be dishonest to put a quick ending to the whole tragedy.(as so many have claimed) And perhaps you never saw the words "airtight alibi", also possible you are from the south and have never seen snow, but it is pretty much a no-brainer to us northern folks that if there are no tracks in a fresh snow, then no one or nothing could have been there. There was only 2 sets of tracks leading out of the house and down the driveway-both, child-sized. The larger set of tracks, which matched jordans, lead right up to where the freshly shot shell casing was found. If AH had cleaned the snow off of his vehicle, and had TRACKS leading to said vehicle, or even out of his home to the road, then he could have been a suspect, but tracks in snow are pretty much "airtight". and even if he had "hired the little boy to do his dirty work" (i can only hope this is an attempt at humor, it is so bizarre), then the end result would still be the same--that jordan killed kenzie and christopher as alledged all along.

What happened to the tree trimmers tracks? If there was snow, then surely the investigators would have found more tracks other than the childrens.

intheknow wrote:

I will offer this up one more time. There is no way her daughter screaming could be heard next door by tree cutters (silent chainsaws?), but a gun shot from a 20 gauge shotgun IN the house, can go unnoticed by people inside of the house... I've shot guns in a "house" before, it had no roof, the sound was considerably louder than shooting in open air. I can only assume that adding a roof would hold in the sound even more, making it even louder.
A 20 gauge shotgun with a 22" barrel produces around 150 decibels of sound. Thunder is around 120 decibels. Just think about that... I know at night time, the sound of my pistol can be heard a long distance away...

I agree. I would have thought also that this boy would have been covered in blood . I believe I read a report where the coroner said that beings Ms. Houk had long hair, is the reason there wasn't blood everywhere. That in itself flew up a red flag.

I agree. Also, being that only 1 particle of gun shot residue was found on his entire body throws up a red flag... Again, I can't say if he did it or didn't do it, but some things just don't add up... I think there are some people that only want to concentrate on some evidence. I am however willing to go along with the shotshell pistol round theory. They are made in most every caliber and can be made at home very easily, I used to do it myself because buying them is incredibly expensive...

10 rounds of shotshells for my .45 (which are loaded with #9 shot) from CCI runs about 20 bucks. However I can cut open a shotgun shell, take the pellets out, and just buy the plastic cups and it comes out to about 60 cents a shell. All you need is a bullet puller which is really just a plastic hammer. Put the round in, give it a few good whacks, bullet and powder come out. Put the powder back in, load the plastic shell with the lead shot, and it just slips right in...

I carry them while hiking for snakes, I've met the business end of a timber rattlesnake once and that was good enough for me, he came within maybe 6 inches of hittin me... There aren't a lot of pellets in them, but for close distances they work good...

intheknow wrote:

I agree. Also, being that only 1 particle of gun shot residue was found on his entire body throws up a red flag... Again, I can't say if he did it or didn't do it, but some things just don't add up... I think there are some people that only want to concentrate on some evidence. I am however willing to go along with the shotshell pistol round theory. They are made in most every caliber and can be made at home very easily, I used to do it myself because buying them is incredibly expensive...
10 rounds of shotshells for my .45 (which are loaded with #9 shot) from CCI runs about 20 bucks. However I can cut open a shotgun shell, take the pellets out, and just buy the plastic cups and it comes out to about 60 cents a shell. All you need is a bullet puller which is really just a plastic hammer. Put the round in, give it a few good whacks, bullet and powder come out. Put the powder back in, load the plastic shell with the lead shot, and it just slips right in...
I carry them while hiking for snakes, I've met the business end of a timber rattlesnake once and that was good enough for me, he came within maybe 6 inches of hittin me... There aren't a lot of pellets in them, but for close distances they work good...

I have enclosed a few items from the facebook page "Kenzie Houk Murder truth" Check it out, it is material that has all been entered into COURT, and provides answers by expert witnesses, etc.
"forensic science proves the accused was covered in gun shot residue with a concentration on his right shoulder." (re:preliminary hearing.)"The defense was asked by the judge if they dispute that the murder weapon was the 20 gauge shotgun bought for the accused by his father. Their answer was "no"." (re:decertification hearing)"No blood evidence has been entered yet. Experts say it is possible because of Kenzie's thick hair that was half way down her back that her killer would not have got blood on him. the hair would have absorbed the blood splatter." (re:decertification hearing)I have also seen articles from reloading magazines, etc. that give some proven facts on the effectiveness of shotshells at contact range from a 20 gauge that will disprove the "handgun/shotshell" theory, but will have to look for them now to post. Also, little Adalynn was not heard "screaming from inside", but had gone outside crying to find help. and the footprints of rescue personnel, tree cutters, were accounted for (which may not have been stated as most felt it not necessary to state the OBVIOUS).

Sometimes, especially in cases like this one, the obvious is the things that need to be accounted for most. Everything, no matter what it is, needs to be brought to the attn of the jury, and the public. We have the father, who is noted as saying it was accidental. I'd like to hear what his basis for that is. It's the most insane thing I've heard used as an excuse...er 'scuse me...reason, for a long long time.

Politically Incorrect wrote:

Sometimes, especially in cases like this one, the obvious is the things that need to be accounted for most. Everything, no matter what it is, needs to be brought to the attn of the jury, and the public. We have the father, who is noted as saying it was accidental. I'd like to hear what his basis for that is. It's the most insane thing I've heard used as an excuse...er 'scuse me...reason, for a long long time.

You're right--in the courts and the EVIDENCE files, all are accounted for. I was referring to all of the public blogs, commentaries, etc. by saying that it was just common sense--but i guess if anything is left to common sense, too many that have none will just insert the first thing that pops into their biased little minds! THREE YEARS TODAY that Kenzie and her precious little son have been gone--3 yrs today since the little girls have had a mommy--I sure hope to see this kid get the JUSTICE he so deserves soon--even if only for a few short years, and bring the family some closure.

3 years without a trial, how would any of you feel? On the off chance he is found innocent that is 3 years of his life, at age 14, that he will never get back. How many of you would be ok with your friends and family members locked up for 3 years without a trial? I say they should send him home.

-Chaz

Some of the so called EVIDENCE may be thrown out who knows? The defense hasn't had a chance to defend the evidence or the boy yet. You only hear the prosecuting {or Houks} side of the story in the very "biased" media. They didn't report how the pre-meditated theory Mr. Bongi was trying to paint with the whole blanket theory was not entered into evidence, because forensics showed it was a cigarette burn not a shotgun hole. So who is to say other evidence won't fly either. The defense attorneys may prove something very different.
It is ashame that the little girls are without their mother for three years now. I sincerely feel sympathy for all that is involved in this tragedy. It also is ashame they have no daddy in their life.
I agree Chazman send him home if you aren't going to give him his day in court. No adult has had to wait this long for a trial.

wouldnt want to be ya wrote:

Some of the so called EVIDENCE may be thrown out who knows? The defense hasn't had a chance to defend the evidence or the boy yet. You only hear the prosecuting {or Houks} side of the story in the very "biased" media. They didn't report how the pre-meditated theory Mr. Bongi was trying to paint with the whole blanket theory was not entered into evidence, because forensics showed it was a cigarette burn not a shotgun hole. So who is to say other evidence won't fly either. The defense attorneys may prove something very different.
It is ashame that the little girls are without their mother for three years now. I sincerely feel sympathy for all that is involved in this tragedy. It also is ashame they have no daddy in their life.
I agree Chazman send him home if you aren't going to give him his day in court. No adult has had to wait this long for a trial.

Nice try--I have been in the courtroom when the blanket was discussed and no one ever objected to it's use as evidence--I'm sure if it were a "cigarette burn", one might have objected to that. You are quoting the lies that Daly has spread with his "slandervogel site" and accepting them as gospel truth--check out the page mentioned by another poster, everything on it has been entered into court and ACCEPTED by the defense. Now for those that are concerned with the 3 years he has been in custody--that is all the fault of the defense, prosecution has been good to go for years, defense is holding everything up in hopes of some technicality that might throw it out, as this is the ONLY chance this kid will walk before he is 21.

Try Research wrote:

<quoted text>Nice try--I have been in the courtroom when the blanket was discussed and no one ever objected to it's use as evidence--I'm sure if it were a "cigarette burn", one might have objected to that. You are quoting the lies that Daly has spread with his "slandervogel site" and accepting them as gospel truth--check out the page mentioned by another poster, everything on it has been entered into court and ACCEPTED by the defense. Now for those that are concerned with the 3 years he has been in custody--that is all the fault of the defense, prosecution has been good to go for years, defense is holding everything up in hopes of some technicality that might throw it out, as this is the ONLY chance this kid will walk before he is 21.

It was entered into evidence, that doesnt mean the defense won't argue the fact that it was used to muffle the sound. Did you hear the forensics on it? Did you hear why it was brought in for evidence? Was blood found on it or the shotgun? Being the coroner said Ms. Houk was shot at close range you would think the blood was everywhere. Oh wait .....the prosecutors have much more evidence yet to be seen.

IMO the defense didn't purposely hold this hearing up. They didnt want this 11 yr old tried as an adult. I happen to agree he shouldn't have been tried as an adult. I am not personally involved on neither side of this, but am just curious why this boy was so quickly accused of this crime.

I am not quoting anybody this is my opinion on what I was able to research. There is two sides to every story, and I do believe there is more than meets the eye in this case. I have talked to plenty of others ( family, friends, etc) and alot of them even feel the same way. To each his own.

Footprints get covered when other people walk on them.

Murder for hire hits, know how to cover their tracks.

Shot gun blasts in a home wake sleeping children.

PFA's were not intended as "Protection for A'holes".

Shot gun blasts at close range burn hair around it.

Kids that say "pop her" are fond of Snoop Dog.

Questioning minor children without an adult, is like asking for inconsistent information.

Children like ice cream, better than lunch.

Elections begets favors.

Understanding the Fifth Amendment is a good Motto.

Following leads of minor children instead of investigating.....Weally?