According to at least one family friend, Susan Powell’s husband Josh was a very controlling individual, even more so after they had filed for bankruptcy two years ago when they were upwards of a quarter of a million dollars in debt. Josh allegedly fought with his wife and put her down on many occasions, making her so unhappy she discussed fleeing her marriage by divorcing Josh. On Sunday, December 6, Josh decided to go camping with his wife and their two sons, ages 4 and 2, even though both parents were scheduled to work the next day and a check of the weather report that day indicated temperatures below freezing and a snowstorm were expected that evening. As the husband’s story goes, Susan was ill so Josh took the two young boys in the family van and headed off after midnight to camp in a park somewhere west of Salt Lake City.
When Susan and Josh failed to report to work, concerned friends and co-workers notified police who had to break into the Powell’s home in the course of a well-being investigation. Upon entering the residence police found Susan’s cell phone, purse, and her keys. Two electric fans had been set up to dry a wet spot on the living room carpet. Returning home later that day, Josh denied any knowledge of his wife’s disappearance and was unable to tell authorities the exact spot where he camped the night before with his two boys. After initially being evasive with detectives concerning his wife’s disappearance, he has now hired a lawyer, stopped talking to police, and left Utah and returned to Washington State to be with his parents, allegedly not even talking to his wife’s worried parents.
The above story, one about an allegedly controlling, dominating husband faced with a possible separation or divorce who suddenly “loses” his wife, is, unfortunately, not new. Utah resident Lori Hacking was 27-years-old when she confronted her husband Mark after learning he had lied to her about his being accepted into medical school. Mark shot her to death in July 2004 as she lay in their bed, and then disposed of her body in a landfill while claiming she had disappeared while jogging. He later confessed and was sentenced to six years to life.
Lisa Stebic was the 28-year-old Chicago area resident and married mother of two who disappeared from her home on April 30, 2007. Stebic and her husband Craig were allegedly sharing the same house with their children, but were heading for a divorce. On the day Lisa disappeared she had filed papers to seek her husband’s eviction from their home. Craig Stebic, like Josh Powell, was described as a very controlling and angry individual who told authorities that his wife simply disappeared from their home shortly after he decided to take their children out for desert. Police, after being notified of Lisa’s disappearance by her friends, found all of her worldly possessions in the home. They were unable, however, to find any evidence of forced entry by an intruder. While Craig continues to be the only person of interest or suspect in the case, his wife remains missing over two years later.
Few do not know the story of missing mother of two Stacy Peterson, the wife of former Bolingbrook, IL police sergeant Drew Peterson. Peterson was accused of controlling and abusing at least three of his four former wives and has been charged with the death of wife number three, Kathleen Salvo. Stacy was the teenager he dated while still married to Salvo, and the woman who said she complied with his request to provide him an alibi for the time of Salvo’s death. Stacy, like those wives before her, eventually grew tired of his controlling ways and had announced her intent to seek a divorce. On October 23, 2007, shortly after her announcement, she disappeared and has not been seen since. Who better, say some, than a veteran police officer to make a body disappear.
While Lori Hacking was murdered, the fates of Lisa Stebic, Stacy Peterson, and now Susan Powell are all mysteries. In each case the story told by the non-grieving husbands did not fit what most expected from a man faced with the loss of his wife, and in the case of the last three, the mother of their children. Each of these men either blamed their missing wife for her possible fate or otherwise appeared less than concerned for her loss, with some not even reporting their spouse missing at all.
Craig Stebic, Drew Peterson and Josh Powell also have something else in common: all are, of course, presumed innocent by the criminal justice system until proven otherwise. The court of public opinion, however, can convict with a standard far less than that demanded in a U.S. courtroom. This lower standard of proof may have also been evidenced in another high profile murder case, that of American college student Amanda Knox, recently convicted by an Italian jury for the murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher. While physical evidence was lacking or challenged in that case, it was the behavior of Knox that caused many to suspect her guilt. It is the behavior of the above three spouses that has also caused many to suspect their possible role in their spouse’s disappearance.
For many of us, the expected standard of behavior for someone like the men indicated above would be to aid in the search for their missing wife; answering any and all questions posed by police and, perhaps, voluntarily submitting to a polygraph examination (see http://www.livesecure.org/do-lie-detectors-lie/ regarding polygraphs). Most know that investigators immediately turn to the significant other, the husband or the boyfriend of a missing or murdered person, knowing that most homicides are between individuals with some knowledge of each other. Such, thankfully, is not sufficient “evidence” to convict in this country, no matter what public opinion might say about someone like, “O.J.” for example.
Returning to the case of missing Susan Powell, investigators are forced to work with certain logical theories, in the worst case she may have been murdered with her body disposed of by persons unknown. In their consideration of a victim’s husband, one theory might, like in the other cases discussed above, consider the status of the marriage and the relationship between husband and wife. If, for example, investigators thought some type of unplanned altercation or fight had occurred between the couple, one in which the wife may have died, then short of calling police and confessing, what might the assailant do? Perhaps blaming the victim for her own demise, he would need to dispose of the victim’s body, probably under the cover of darkness to hide his act. If there were young children in the home, the assailant would need to prepare the victim’s body for transportation to a body disposal or burial site, while at the same time caring for the children, all, perhaps done at night. But were the assailant to be seen or were he to need a cover story for his actions, he would need to be able to explain why he was away from his home, with his children, in the middle of the night, and at a location that could not easily be identified with him. This as such a location could also provide the place for authorities to search for a dead body.
All of the above, as this theory continues, could be rolled into a midnight camping trip into the wilderness on a freezing and snowy night. There is no wonder Josh Powell is at least a person of interest in his wife’s disappearance as his story, like many husbands before him who quickly became a suspect in their spouse’s disappearance, just doesn’t pass the “sniff test.” But, as their attorney’s will say, “prove it,” as otherwise all you have is a theory without proof. If, for example, the fans set up to dry a wet spot on the Powell’s carpet were there as part of an effort to conceal evidence, noting police have served multiple search warrants on the home, the working theory could find some physical evidence, like blood for example, to support the investigator’s case.
The reality is that when someone tells a story, no matter how seemingly unlikely, and sticks to their story, and in the absence of evidence to support the commission of crime and, in the case of murder, identify the assailant, well, then a murder may remain a free man. There are about 16,000 + murders in the U.S. every year, only about 50% of which are resolved, and homicide is one of the easier crimes to solve. This suggests that at least one of every two murders will not be charged with that crime, at least on that occasion, but as Drew Peterson and O.J. Simpson and others have found, justice is served many times long after the fact. Let’s hope it doesn’t take as long to determine the fate of Susan Powell and those many women who have disappeared under similar circumstances before her.
For a free copy of our DVD, “Protecting Children from Predators,” go to www.LiveSecure.org. We’ve given away thousands and the information contained in the DVD can help save lives!








National Sex Offender Registry
Van Zandt Associates, Inc.
Do Not Call Registry
Twitter
Facebook
How feasible would it be parents to intervene in an abusive relationship involving grown children before it becomes violent or deadly? If parental protection can help protect against child predators, then why couldn’t different types of intervention save a family from losing a grown child to a killer son (or daughter)-in-law?
Why can’t parents be allowed to simply go to their local court and file a restraining order on behalf of their grown child under certain conditions?
The stats for woman abuse are horrendous. A fourth of women will be abused by a “boyfriend” or husband. 10 to 14% of married women will be raped in the marriage. This means that an eighth of parents will see their grown daughters raped by a sexual predator who calls himself their son-in-law!
The difference between a sexual predator within a “relationship” or marriage and other types of sex predators are the age of the victim and how he grooms his victim prior to the assault. A predator who rapes his 30 year old wife belongs in the same prison and on the same sex offender list as the one who rapes a 10 year old.
It seems like when it comes to domestic violence in this country, unless a child is involved or the woman is hospitalized or killed, no one wants to do anything about it. Protective orders have no teeth, and because the direct victim is an adult, people assume that she can handle herself.
In my opinion, if there is a history of domestic violence against a woman (or man), then her parents (or other relatives) should have the right to protect their grown daughter (and minor grandchildren) from the abusive husband. Restraining orders should automatically cover the victim, her parents, her siblings, and her kids (even if the kids are grown).