ID ID - Lonnie Jones, 13, Orofino, September 1951

New Posts

Peter Brendt said:
Now I get it! Not enough coffee, I guess. Cunningham was local enough to could have known the place. And looking for work at the fair doesn't mean Lonnie got work but he could have come in contact. Or, given as near places were to each other, Cunningham, working at the fair, got himself a coffee break where Lonnie had his burger ... or my thoughts circle too much about coffee.

About contact to LE: It has sometimes advantages to be a published writer, even most books are not in English. One can hint to work on a book and then "... it's the decision of you, my dear LE officer to look like a knee jerk or a good upright sheriff in this book. And now lets talk ..." And seriously, there is always a certain danger, I write a book or use the story as part in one, so feel free to refer to me and our (Diane and mine) website, if you want to apply a little pressure with that.

Peter
Click to expand...

BBM It was my thought, as well, that presenting to LE in the guise of writing a book might make for an easier intro and be a way to get more information. Have advertisements/personal ads been placed in the areas surrounding where Lonnie was killed to gather information?
 
Jacie Estes said:
BBM It was my thought, as well, that presenting to LE in the guise of writing a book might make for an easier intro and be a way to get more information. Have advertisements/personal ads been placed in the areas surrounding where Lonnie was killed to gather information?
Click to expand...

I rarely do, what you had quoted in your post, but yes, it sometimes helps. However, I will definitively write no book about that case. And the ad-operation wouldn't help this time either because the few people still alive are spread out over all the nation and it's finding them one by one. Which is obviously very time consuming. So I beg for more patience, we, my friends and I (some here, some not) do what we can.

Peter
 
Holy cow. There's a real suspect now?

Hi, everyone, great to catch up on all the good work you guys have been doing here - wonderful to see Lonnie as the featured case, too -- and WOW, excellent work on the suspects.

I want to see this solved, so badly. Or at least given some investigation time, with modern technology and all. For Lonnie's sake, and at this point ours, as well, I think.. I feel weirdly connected to this poor little guy.

I've had a lot going on this year, but thankfully I have some time to turn back toward these cold cases now. I'll sppend tonight reading through all these pages of new info, thoughts and links and get back to it tomorrow, I hope.

Now.. why are the names 'Walter and Elsie' tripping my wires here? I really need to find all my notes on this case..

Good work, anyway, everyone.
 
This is FANTASTIC news.

I find myself gravitating towards the old, cold cases because it really bothers me that there are so many unsolved cases out there, so many people still missing, 50, 100 years later. I don't want them to be forgotten.

If it takes 5 years to do it right, then I think Lonnie can wait another 5. He's already been waiting for 60 years. I hope everything works out and that his murderer is brought to justice!
 
Relax, please. Most things happen outside of Websleuths currently and things are not mellowed enough yet to go in details in a public accessible forum. However, if someone feels the urge to volunteer, I take it my pm is known.

PB
 
Cheers, PB -- but I'm plenty relaxed, thanks all the same. Just glad to be back here and catching up on what-all has been going on.

Not sure what you mean by "most things happen outside of Websleuths" - you mean, regarding Lonnie's case?

And volunteer .. for what? I am happy to donate time, if I can be of use to something like this.
 
Yes, I don't think we're getting overly excited, I think we are all realistic here with how long these types of things can take. Just happy to see something happen in a cold case.
 
Being as it may that people are working the case outside of WS, I don't want this thread to die off for lack of discussion.

Someone out there might read this, and remember something. Someone might read this and have a direct way to help in identifying the perp.

So, I'll still be posting my thoughts on those aspects we have already discussed, as well as any new info I stumble on.. Reviewing all of what has been posted here, there's two things that stick out very clearly in my mind right now:

-- The killer was done with Lonnie by the time he took his victim to that roadside area.

He cut Lonnie a few feet off the road (says the massive blood patch there), then took him down the slope where Lonnie bled out (says the other patch of blood, maybe his throat was cut there, but it seems to me there'd be another, initial injury, perhaps a smaller cut that shed the blood further up the slope) and then was found. Lonnie was alive when he got out of the killer's vehicle. He was alive, and received a wound not far from the car. This says to me that Lonnie was not taken there to be abused or molested, he was taken there to die, to be executed and disposed of - because whatever the reason this person took Lonnie off the road, the killer was with done him by the time he pulled over into that area.

I don't think the fatal attack came from a struggle, or the killer fearing Lonnie would get away. His victim was a small, tired and scared boy who was possibly in restraints. Lonnie had signs of struggle on him - his hands, raw at the fingertips. Lonnie struggled, and I think he was then restrained, and it seems to me this wasn't done by the side of the road - why let a boy out of your vehicle, if there was a chance he'd run away? How did the killer deal with a boy who would struggle, and manage to drive at the same time?

Because he was killed just a few feet from the road, I find it more logical to think of this as the 'execution site' than a place to molest Lonnie (and seeing as there's a hunk of 'missing time' for Lonnie, this seems even more likely IMO). The placement of his body is something I'd like to put more thought to, in general.

The killer didn't care about the body being found. He made little to no attempt to conceal the body, in a wooded area where at least he could have easily and in no time at all dragged a ton of branches over it if he wanted it concealed. He didn't care if someone happened on Lonnie's remains, and it seems to me that smacks of confidence in not being caught (which he wasn't), and no remorse at all for his crime. Maybe, he -wanted- the body found...

--- Lonnie's hands were in that 'grotesque position' that seems like his hands were tied behind his back at some stage prior to death but then were untied some hours after he died. It's hard to see a limp body staying in that position very long. Gravity, lax muscle.. his hands would not have retained that position if they were left to dangle free. Or at least, it's so unlikely as to seem impossible.

So why did they stay that way? My speculation is that Lonnie was bound, killed.. and the killer thought later that the bindings might ID him in some way, so came back for them -- after Lonnie went into rigor mortis, so his hands retained the position in which they were tied, which would indeed look 'grotesque' without any bindings there to provide a reason as to how and why they were all bent up like that.

So I think the killer was either local, or had a reason to be staying in the area for a while. A transient would probably not spare the time to come all the way back to untie those bindings, and maybe wouldn't care if what he left behind was something that might be recognised as belonging specifically (or by close association) to -him-.
 
Ausgirl said:
Being as it may that people are working the case outside of WS, I don't want this thread to die off for lack of discussion.

Someone out there might read this, and remember something. Someone might read this and have a direct way to help in identifying the perp.

So, I'll still be posting my thoughts on those aspects we have already discussed, as well as any new info I stumble on.. Reviewing all of what has been posted here, there's two things that stick out very clearly in my mind right now:

-- The killer was done with Lonnie by the time he took his victim to that roadside area.

He cut Lonnie a few feet off the road (says the massive blood patch there), then took him down the slope where Lonnie bled out (says the other patch of blood, maybe his throat was cut there, but it seems to me there'd be another, initial injury, perhaps a smaller cut that shed the blood further up the slope) and then was found. Lonnie was alive when he got out of the killer's vehicle. He was alive, and received a wound not far from the car. This says to me that Lonnie was not taken there to be abused or molested, he was taken there to die, to be executed and disposed of - because whatever the reason this person took Lonnie off the road, the killer was with done him by the time he pulled over into that area.

I don't think the fatal attack came from a struggle, or the killer fearing Lonnie would get away. His victim was a small, tired and scared boy who was possibly in restraints. Lonnie had signs of struggle on him - his hands, raw at the fingertips. Lonnie struggled, and I think he was then restrained, and it seems to me this wasn't done by the side of the road - why let a boy out of your vehicle, if there was a chance he'd run away? How did the killer deal with a boy who would struggle, and manage to drive at the same time?

Because he was killed just a few feet from the road, I find it more logical to think of this as the 'execution site' than a place to molest Lonnie (and seeing as there's a hunk of 'missing time' for Lonnie, this seems even more likely IMO). The placement of his body is something I'd like to put more thought to, in general.

The killer didn't care about the body being found. He made little to no attempt to conceal the body, in a wooded area where at least he could have easily and in no time at all dragged a ton of branches over it if he wanted it concealed. He didn't care if someone happened on Lonnie's remains, and it seems to me that smacks of confidence in not being caught (which he wasn't), and no remorse at all for his crime. Maybe, he -wanted- the body found...

--- Lonnie's hands were in that 'grotesque position' that seems like his hands were tied behind his back at some stage prior to death but then were untied some hours after he died. It's hard to see a limp body staying in that position very long. Gravity, lax muscle.. his hands would not have retained that position if they were left to dangle free. Or at least, it's so unlikely as to seem impossible.

So why did they stay that way? My speculation is that Lonnie was bound, killed.. and the killer thought later that the bindings might ID him in some way, so came back for them -- after Lonnie went into rigor mortis, so his hands retained the position in which they were tied, which would indeed look 'grotesque' without any bindings there to provide a reason as to how and why they were all bent up like that.

So I think the killer was either local, or had a reason to be staying in the area for a while. A transient would probably not spare the time to come all the way back to untie those bindings, and maybe wouldn't care if what he left behind was something that might be recognised as belonging specifically (or by close association) to -him-.
Click to expand...

EXCELLENT POST. Very well thought out and explained.

I agree that he was probably molested and tortured earlier. But when? Because didnt the high school boys drop him off at midnight? I have to go back and look.
I posted the timeline below.

So that would mean he was picked up after 12:30 and taken somewhere else to be molested/bound/tortured until he was taken to the dump site. I wonder where he was taken?

eta:

Later Two teenagers from the small town of Kamiah 30 miles east of Orofino testified that they picked Lonnie up at about 12:30 that night standing at the end of the bridge that connects Orofino to Highway 12 on the other side of the Clearwater River and gave him a ride seven miles east to the tiny sleeping community of Greer that sits at the very bottom of the steep and winding Greer Grade leading to his home in Weippe.
There they left him.
He was never seen alive again.
 
You're right there, katydid, about Lonnie being dropped off at 12.30-ish, which is the last time anyone saw him alive. The boys (with their girlfriends in the car) said he looked shaken up, but that he calmed down after a while.

Lonnie left the fair late, as far as we can tell. He was picked up, looking 'shaken'.. there's a chance he had some contact with the killer prior to being abducted. Maybe he was just panicking about being out that late, worried about walking in the dark -- but I somehow think a kid who had to do for himself, who was allowed to stay at the fair without supervision to that hour, whose carers weren't caring enough to go looking for him that night.. somehow I think Lonnie was hardly an overly protected, easily frightened sort of child and was used to getting around by himself and being alone at all hours. So I'm inclined to believe that -someone- shook him up, so much so that a bunch of teenagers would notice right away that he was in a bad way when they picked him up.

He didn't look like he'd been tortured or beaten or anything.. just scared. So I am thinking, whatever injuries he had happened after he got out of the teenager's car.

Now, his body still had undigested food in it when he was discovered. This tells me he wasn't kept for all that long before he was killed.

But -- and this is what doesn't make sense to me -- why pick up a child and take him directly to the kill site, and then kill him right away? If this monster WAS a sexual predator, he'd likely have kept Lonnie for a time (in his vehicle, or another site) before killing him. However, if he -did- keep Lonnie, it was not for very long.

Food doesn't take long to pass through the stomach - all the hard digestive work is done in the intestines, which takes a few more hours. If food was found in Lonnie's stomach, and it's fair-type food, then Lonnie ate it not long before his death. Lonnie died soon after he left the fairgrounds, or that fairground type food he ate would have been more than partially digested.

And here, I have to wonder -- if the killer had attacked Lonnie in any truly horrible way prior to his being picked up by those teens, would Lonnie have been somewhat more than just 'shaken up'? Would he have become more relaxed at all, once he was in that carful of teenagers? I kind of doubt it. And the teens would have noticed something like bloody fingertips, surely. So I am thinking, Lonnie was visibly scared but not totally terrified at 12.30

Forgive this personal interjection -- but this part gives me total chills, having been myself picked up hitchhiking by the brother of a well known serial killer who was suspected of being an accessory. I had the wits scared out of me before he let me out of his car (which had no inside door handles, except his own) - making sure I knew this was 'special treatment' and he was doing me a huge favour , letting me go like that .. the next ride I took - and keep in mind that I was 18, and that I was not molested or harmed in any way, only scared stupid, and that I did not know at the time that this guy was the brother of a serial killer - the next ride I took, I was visibly a bit more than "shaken", I was near hysterical. The teens who picked me up let me out at their turn-off (like Lonnie was let out) and there I was .. back on the road, not knowing if that car had been followed, no rides in sight, only open road and cane fields.. I say all this because it would have been so easy for that guy to follow and find me, if he changed his mind and wanted a victim. And because I think if Lonnie had been molested already, he would not have 'calmed down' so much that the teens would notice it.

It's possible Lonnie spent time with a molester at the fair or shortly after he left the fairground (this time before 12.30 is the missing hunk of time I was talking about), got scared, took off, got away from him, and tried to hitch-hike home .. and was caught again?

Or the killer wasn't a child molester at all, and had another motive for executing Lonnie like that .. and took the time to make it look like Lonnie was the victim of a transient pedo.

I think the police were very cagey about announcing the actual state of Lonnie's body. One examiner said for sure he was not raped. But the papers make it very clear the police considered this a 'sexual crime'. It's really important, this issue of whether or not Lonnie was molested sexually - keeping in mind that of course, anal penetration is not the only way to molest a child. If he was molested at all, there might have been other signs.

If not, then things take a whole different slant, here...
 
Ausgirl said:
You're right there, katydid, about Lonnie being dropped off at 12.30-ish, which is the last time anyone saw him alive. The boys (with their girlfriends in the car) said he looked shaken up, but that he calmed down after a while.

Lonnie left the fair late, as far as we can tell. He was picked up, looking 'shaken'.. there's a chance he had some contact with the killer prior to being abducted. Maybe he was just panicking about being out that late, worried about walking in the dark -- but I somehow think a kid who had to do for himself, who was allowed to stay at the fair without supervision to that hour, whose carers weren't caring enough to go looking for him that night.. somehow I think Lonnie was hardly an overly protected, easily frightened sort of child and was used to getting around by himself and being alone at all hours. So I'm inclined to believe that -someone- shook him up, so much so that a bunch of teenagers would notice right away that he was in a bad way when they picked him up.

He didn't look like he'd been tortured or beaten or anything.. just scared. So I am thinking, whatever injuries he had happened after he got out of the teenager's car.

Now, his body still had undigested food in it when he was discovered. This tells me he wasn't kept for all that long before he was killed.

But -- and this is what doesn't make sense to me -- why pick up a child and take him directly to the kill site, and then kill him right away? If this monster WAS a sexual predator, he'd likely have kept Lonnie for a time (in his vehicle, or another site) before killing him. However, if he -did- keep Lonnie, it was not for very long.

Food doesn't take long to pass through the stomach - all the hard digestive work is done in the intestines, which takes a few more hours. If food was found in Lonnie's stomach, and it's fair-type food, then Lonnie ate it not long before his death. Lonnie died soon after he left the fairgrounds, or that fairground type food he ate would have been more than partially digested.

And here, I have to wonder -- if the killer had attacked Lonnie in any truly horrible way prior to his being picked up by those teens, would Lonnie have been somewhat more than just 'shaken up'? Would he have become more relaxed at all, once he was in that carful of teenagers? I kind of doubt it. And the teens would have noticed something like bloody fingertips, surely. So I am thinking, Lonnie was visibly scared but not totally terrified at 12.30

Forgive this personal interjection -- but this part gives me total chills, having been myself picked up hitchhiking by the brother of a well known serial killer who was suspected of being an accessory. I had the wits scared out of me before he let me out of his car (which had no inside door handles, except his own) - making sure I knew this was 'special treatment' and he was doing me a huge favour , letting me go like that .. the next ride I took - and keep in mind that I was 18, and that I was not molested or harmed in any way, only scared stupid, and that I did not know at the time that this guy was the brother of a serial killer - the next ride I took, I was visibly a bit more than "shaken", I was near hysterical. The teens who picked me up let me out at their turn-off (like Lonnie was let out) and there I was .. back on the road, not knowing if that car had been followed, no rides in sight, only open road and cane fields.. I say all this because it would have been so easy for that guy to follow and find me, if he changed his mind and wanted a victim. And because I think if Lonnie had been molested already, he would not have 'calmed down' so much that the teens would notice it.

It's possible Lonnie spent time with a molester at the fair or shortly after he left the fairground (this time before 12.30 is the missing hunk of time I was talking about), got scared, took off, got away from him, and tried to hitch-hike home .. and was caught again?

Or the killer wasn't a child molester at all, and had another motive for executing Lonnie like that .. and took the time to make it look like Lonnie was the victim of a transient pedo.

I think the police were very cagey about announcing the actual state of Lonnie's body. One examiner said for sure he was not raped. But the papers make it very clear the police considered this a 'sexual crime'. It's really important, this issue of whether or not Lonnie was molested sexually - keeping in mind that of course, anal penetration is not the only way to molest a child. If he was molested at all, there might have been other signs.

If not, then things take a whole different slant, here...
Click to expand...


Was Lonnie found naked or clothed ? The second coroner,the more experienced one, made an unusual inference,IIRC. He stated that,in his opinion, Lonnie had not been sexually violated that night, or words to that effect. He kind of made it sound that there were indications that Lonnie had been penetrated at a prior,or prior time{s}

* SPECULATION *

I wonder if Lonnie was being sexually abused by a person or persons in the village ? They might have picked him up at the fair,intending to abuse him when they got home. Perhaps Lonnie threatened to tell what was going on ...and so...
 
katydid23 said:
EXCELLENT POST. Very well thought out and explained.

I agree that he was probably molested and tortured earlier. But when? Because didnt the high school boys drop him off at midnight? I have to go back and look.
I posted the timeline below.

So that would mean he was picked up after 12:30 and taken somewhere else to be molested/bound/tortured until he was taken to the dump site. I wonder where he was taken?

eta:

Later Two teenagers from the small town of Kamiah 30 miles east of Orofino testified that they picked Lonnie up at about 12:30 that night standing at the end of the bridge that connects Orofino to Highway 12 on the other side of the Clearwater River and gave him a ride seven miles east to the tiny sleeping community of Greer that sits at the very bottom of the steep and winding Greer Grade leading to his home in Weippe.
There they left him.
He was never seen alive again.
Click to expand...

If you look the place up, you will find, the place where his body was found is nearer to Orofino than to Greer. Means, the killer has to have picked him up in Greer but drove then direction Orofino. Just a little food for thoughts.
 
liz b. said:
Was Lonnie found naked or clothed ? The second coroner,the more experienced one, made an unusual inference,IIRC. He stated that,in his opinion, Lonnie had not been sexually violated that night, or words to that effect. He kind of made it sound that there were indications that Lonnie had been penetrated at a prior,or prior time{s}

* SPECULATION *

I wonder if Lonnie was being sexually abused by a person or persons in the village ? They might have picked him up at the fair,intending to abuse him when they got home. Perhaps Lonnie threatened to tell what was going on ...and so...
Click to expand...

He was found wearing his clothes, on his belly, both knees pulled up under his stomach. The hands were still cramped together on the back as if restrained, but no restraints were found there. However, as it looks, there were nor restraint marks on the wrists.
 
Interesting.. I cannot see Lonnie's hands 'falling' into that position naturally, can you? So how'd his hands a/ get into that 'grotesque' position, and b/ stay there? The only options I can think of are:

1. Binding that was left until rigor mortis, then later removed

2. Posing the body very carefully indeed, so that the position was retained

The apparent absence of ligature marks (is this 100% confirmed?) is a point of vast interest, as a result - but I'd like to look up the science regarding those... in what circumstances those marks exist, whether they can fade after ligature removal or not, etc..
 
Hi,

okay, this is a longer one, so I have to split it in several posts. The situation is the following:

Some, WS members and non-WS-members have tried to solve this case. The situation is a little difficult there. LE has over the 60 years lost most of the evidence. It seems, a lot of persons, involved directly and indirectly with the case had access and used it.

Another "hampering" factor is, that the extended family of the victims, at the same time involved with LE positions after Sheriff Holloway, had made up the mind early, who in their opinion would be the killer. The man, who found Lonnie, OW. A lot of that was not based on facts but an older hostility they had against OW. There are two problems however with that theory:

a.) OW was at that night at the movies with a girl. The girl was young, but OW had the permission of her dad to date her. In fact, OW and that girl, ran into Lonnie at the movies, Lonnie teased the girl a little, but stopped, when OW stopped him (verbally). The real problem is, that OW brought that girl home after the movies. Which places him in a car leaving Orofino about 10-15 minutes before Lonnie met the Kamiah teenager at the bridge. The time to drive up to Weippe, bringing the girl home is about 40-45 minutes, a bit longer at night due to darkness and since a part of the road is pretty winded. So OW had no possibility to be back at Orofino before ab. 1:30 and no way to be at Greer, where Lonnie was dropped by the Kamiah teenagers, before 1:15. At this time, Lonnie would have stood there already far over an hour. Even more OW couldn't have known that, so why would he drive back and look for Lonnie? And at this time Lonnie was already in the hands of his killer, probably already dead.
The girl, I don't think, I can post her name here, is still alive. She corroborates that story.

b.) OW underwent not once lie detector test but several ones. LE treated him even with truth serum, which was even back then on the edge what the law allowed. All of those "tests" came up empty. However, OW was a little "incoherent" when he was interrogated. As a matter of fact, he was always a little "incoherent" when he came under extreme stress. The brave people of Weippe/ID interpreted that as a mean streak. He also refused to sit too much in the local waterholes with "the guys" and he, never a drug user, was a bit upset about other members of this happy community, who introduced his son to pot and as it looks other recreational drugs (I got this part from two sources, who are both still alive). However, the issue, those brave Weippe inhabitants will probably never forgive him is that he was good at what he did. He was a hard worker, who saved his money instead of drinking it away and he had a sense for business and numbers. From the guy, who came once to Weippe with nothing, was a millionaire arising, just by hard work, extreme focus and business sense. When Lonnie was murdered, OW had already piled up a little fortune and drawn the ire of other, older inhabitants, who already years before Lonnie's murder spread all kinds of libel against him.
Point is, OW wasn't like others. And given, that in his later family two cases of Autism popped up, that his son showed the same symptoms, OW appears, from today's point of view, as someone with a milder form of Autism/asperger's. And what happens if you set such a patient under stress and drugs? He gets incoherent. And even then, under truth serum and at lie detectors, nobody got anything out of him, that could be, even with the worst stretch and re-interpretation be used against him.

There is more supporting evidence against the OW theory, but those are the two main points. Additional, there has to be mentioned, that OW was always interested in girls. Also, Lonnie knew him, he wouldn't have seen OW as thread and thus, Lonnie's nervousness when he appeared at the Orofino bridge couldn't have been caused by OW.

... to be continued
 
Hi,

second part ...

Another detail is, that, according to a family member, but one, that didn't know Lonnie (born to late), Lonnie was sexually assaulted already weeks before the fair. The injuries were serious enough, according to that family member, that Lonnie's grandma went with him to the hospital. I have of course no access to the old files and I doubt, they still exist after that time, but what we do know is, that someone was actually treated in this time in a hospital under the name of the grandma. So, this explains, why the MEs weren't sure whether Lonnie was sexually abused the night of the murder. Older injuries, no semen (it had rained before Lonnie was found).
Only, that information changed the profile of the perpetrator. What we're looking here is someone, who decides to rape boys, threaten them to stay silent and when he feared, they would tell someone, felt the need to kill them. That is a variant of general psychopathic-paranoid behavior and it is in this timing quite rare because normally the time between rape and kill is in such cases a lot shorter.
A few weeks after Lonnie was murdered, police arrested a man, who had raped another boy. The boy was still alive, he had been threatened to stay silent and tell nobody. Only the boy told and thus, the perpetrator was apprehended. Same area, same MO, same victimology. WC (not sure whether I'm allowed to write the full name) got for that crime a back then mandatory life sentence. He died decades later in prison.
WC was a carpenter. At the night of the fair, he had earned some money there, helping to break down stuff. He was last seen at the fair at ab. 12:10-12:15. That places him, by time and location about 150 yards from Lonnie minutes before Lonnie spoke to the Kamiah teenagers at the bridge. Remember, Lonnie was upset about something or someone he had seen minutes before, but calmed down, when he got the ride with those teenagers.
Well, WC was a carpenter, and he had tools in his vehicle. His business was to make cabinets and closets using a softer wood used back in the days as a prevention against moths (I'm no carpenter and no expert for wood, so I would have to look the details up). But he used typical carpenter tools, also vices. The injuries on Lonnie's fingertips could be from such a vice (unfortunately local LE isn't willing to give out those photos not willing to take a real look at them or send them to expert labs). The interesting detail is, that a carpenter wouldn't have need to have rope in his vehicle. We know, the perpetrator had no rope, he used other means of restraint.
WC knew Lonnie by sight! He bought wood from a lumber mill just cross the street from where Lonnie lived (another a bit shady operation. His wife's family would be later pretty known for committing the biggest string of thefts in the area too). Unfortunately, LE denies any cooperation into even asking for old bills or IRS records.
A man was watched already in the afternoon by at least two witnesses, offering boys in ab. Lonnie's ages rides at the fair. The rough description could fit. But no photo identification yet. However, LE denies any look in what kind of vehicle WC was driving back then which would be the easiest way to figure whether that man was WC.
So, no forensic evidence accessible for me, LE denies any cooperation (the Sheriff was voted in with the votes from the "OW did it" fraction, the Sergeant lives right next to that fraction. But we have a man there, we can place inside 150 yards to Lonnie at exactly the same time, the perpetrator had to start to follow him, a perpetrator that is, who would have driven back direction Orofino after snatching Lonnie. And Lonnie was found nearer to Orofino, near to the creek, so that is exactly, what Lonnie's killer did. And that man was caught some weeks later for the same kind of crime against a victim in the same age bracket, same gender with the same MO.

... to be continued
 
... and part three

any further investigation from my side is at the moment on ice. I just can't find any possibilities to nail WC without the help of the Clearwater Sheriff's department. But that Sheriff's department has not only lost over the years most of the evidence, they are also connected by dozens of personal connections not only with the case but also with the people for who the idea, OW was the killer has become an almost religious belief and who show an almost paranoid fear, someone could prove that this is only based on old small town feuds (I phoned with some of them, so I have some impression, how far that paranoia goes).
Bottom line is, LE has all this information. I took care to provide them even with the phone numbers and whereabouts of the few surviving witnesses. The ball is in the Clearwater Sheriff's department's court and it would be about time, they would do at least a little support work, like pulling old files and compare old pictures to old tools. However, since the responsible officer was always happy, when I called to feed him, he became pretty disinterested when things reached the point, he had actually to do work. So, I guess, that is as far as LE goes in this case and this blocking attitude makes any further progress virtually impossible.

Peter
 
Wow, awesome work Peter. Frustrating that the police won't step up and do a little work after all that you have unfolded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 155 more.
Total: 3,480 (members: 156, guests: 3,324)

Online statistics

Members online
156
Guests online
3,324
Total visitors
3,480
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,205
Messages
17,964,956
Members
228,714
Latest member
galesr
Back
Top