Page 22 of 31 FirstFirst ... 1213141516171819202122232425262728293031 LastLast
Results 526 to 550 of 752

Thread: The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #5

  1. #526
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Some good comments here. As we flesh out the possible scenarios we find there are problems with all of them. I hadn't thought too much about the dog but having owned numerous dogs throughout my life I can vouch for the fact they will start going wild when strangers are in the home. It would seem highly unlikely the dog was outside the house when the girls arrived home; in fact I believe it was reported to have been heard at about 1:30 AM which would make sense if Sherrill had let it out to do its "business." Which begs the question if the intruders grabbed the dog and then used it to gain entry to the house. Yet the dog was found in the home, nervous but otherwise unharmed. So if the dog was in the home, calmed down prior to the girls arriving home at approximately 2:45 AM, how was that accomplished? It seems more probable that the dog recognized the intruder(s) but that is purely a personal opinion. If the dog was locked away in the sewing room I would think the door and door jam would reflect the dog trying to claw its way out of the room. Presumably the forensics people should have looked into that. Being nervous the dog may also have shed hair which should have been obvious. Again we don't know since nothing has been written about it.

    Having said this, if this was a burglary gone bad, it is noteworthy that, as I recall, all of the GJ3 had records of such activity. I have no idea what prompted the police to believe they may have been involved.

    If I had a gun held to my head and asked to provide the most logical scenario, it would be that sometime after the girls were made ready for bed which would have been approximately 3:15 AM, assuming no long discussions were held between Suzie and Sherrill, and they went to bed, at least for a short time, that someone known to one or more of the women came to the door; possibly the side door, knocked on the door, probably pecking with a key on the door glass so as to be not so obvious and was let in voluntarily. Someone who wanted to talk to Suzie and they probably went into the living room, and something went awry, voices were raised, Sherrill heard the commotion, came out to investigate, probably ordered the person or persons to leave and Suzie or Sherrill was slapped about. Hearing this, Stacy decided it was to her benefit to get out of the house which is why she left only in her underwear. Obviously she felt it required immediate action. Someone else outside the house, possibly in the mystery van, spotted her, grabbed her and dragged her back into the house where they were all subdued, hogtied, and each then carried out to the van where they were never seen again.

    The $64 million question, is who had motive to want to harm any of these women? Who had the means and the opportunity to carry out this crime? If we go down the list of possible suspects I think we can narrow it down to a very small group of people. And we have one reported person who was said not to have passed the polygraph.

    As this gun is being held to my head, I see about three suspects who may have had motive. I also see one person in particular who had the muscle to carry out this crime. And that one person refused the polygraph along with providing a phony alibi.

    What we don't know is if the published reports are entirely correct. We are told there was no forced entry. If that is really true and positively ruled out, then the intruders had to have been let in the house by one of the women.

    Now there are some issues to be dealt with. It has been asserted that this was a crime of "sexual assault." We don't know what this is based on. It was also asserted that Sherrill was the probable victim, but why wait so late in the night?

    For now, I would like to see some discussion about the dog. Specifically, how do the girls get into the house without the dog going completely bonkers and obviously waking Sherrill? In my opinion, she had to have known they had arrived home. If all three were in the home, doors secured, how did entry occur? It just seems like it had to have been someone one of the women knew. That's my opinion for what is worth. As another poster said, I am rambling on. Pick it apart as you wish.

    P.S. We know Suzie had an overnight bag. What happened to Stacy's overnight bag? We have never heard anything about it to my knowledge. Does that strike anyone as unusual?
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Missouri Mule For This Useful Post:


  3. #527
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    For now, I would like to see some discussion about the dog. Specifically, how do the girls get into the house without the dog going completely bonkers and obviously waking Sherrill? In my opinion, she had to have known they had arrived home. If all three were in the home, doors secured, how did entry occur? It just seems like it had to have been someone one of the women knew. That's my opinion for what is worth. As another poster said, I am rambling on. Pick it apart as you wish.

    P.S. We know Suzie had an overnight bag. What happened to Stacy's overnight bag? We have never heard anything about it to my knowledge. Does that strike anyone as unusual?
    Okay, I'll bite. In terms of how the girls got home without the dog going nuts, as a dog owner I can tell you for a fact that dogs learn the sounds of different cars. I currently have 2 dogs, and my husband often gets home from work several hours after I have gone to bed. It is very rare that they bark and wake me up, because they know from the sound of the car that it is him and just greet him at the door. All of the dogs I have ever had have been this way (maybe I have just been blessed with really well behaved dogs?), even when I was a kid and my dad would get home from work late at night. It could be that Sherrill's dog was not "barky" and just went to greet Suzie at the door.

    The other option is that the perp(s) were already in the house with Sherrill subdued when the girls arrived. If they were in her bedroom and had her restrained with a weapon, they could have told her to keep the dog quiet and they would leave after the girls went to bed and no one would get hurt. That could be another possible explanation for how everything could have started, if Suzie thought that her mom had fallen asleep with the dog locked in her bedroom and was going to let the dog out, and then obviously stumbled upon the situation at hand.

    You mentioned that all the doors were secure, but don't forget about the varnish. If the girls decided that they were going to go to bed but not to sleep (watch a movie, sit and talk), they could have decided to have the bedroom door cracked to help filter out the smell. As anyone who has ever lived in Missouri knows, June evenings are typically very pleasant and perfect "windows open" weather.

    And yes, to address your last item, I have always found it VERY suspicious that Stacy's bag wasn't found. There is no way she didn't have an overnight bag of some sort, considering they were planning on spending the day in Branson at a waterpark. At the very minimal, she would have to have had a purse large enough to hold a swimsuit, clean underwear, toothbrush, and clean shirt (it wouldn't be unreasonable for her to plan to wear the same pair of shorts, I guess). I might lean towards the idea that she had everything in a large purse, because if Janelle entered the house and saw that Stacy had an overnight bag still in the house, that would have immediately taken care of the idea that the girls had gone without her. The problem with that is that if Janelle and Mike were forward enough to listen to the messages on the answering machine, I can't image why she wouldn't look through Stacy's purse if it was sitting right on the stairs to try to figure out where she might be (i.e., was her wallet gone, medicine, sunglasses, etc). On the other hand, it doesn't make sense to me that the perp(s) would instruct her to grab her bag, because the only purpose in that would be to make it appear that everyone had left for the day and extend the length of time before anyone realized something was wrong, in which case the purses would have been taken, too.

    I do have a theory about the bag, but I know a lot of people won't agree with it or like it (I'm not very keen on it either, but it's the best I've got). The primary reason the George's citing has been discounted is because the description of the clothing didn't match what the girls had been wearing that evening. There is also the issue of the time cutting it close, but I know lots of people who work overnight shifts and I'm not willing to dismiss that on the assumption that an overnight waitress was able to accurately remember what time she had seen someone several days later. I have experienced first hand how easy it is for people to lose track of time on those shifts. Anyway, if they had gone to George's, Stacy might have changed clothes into the outfit she was saving for the next day before they left. They get back, she takes that outfit off and puts it back in her bag (or lays it on top) for the next day, puts her t-shirt back on, and gets into bed. Or, she might have had pajamas with her. If the perp(s) had been watching them throughout the evening (i.e., this was planned) and knew that these clothes would be significant for LE to establish a timeline (or if they had been parked outside of George's waiting for the women to leave and were afraid that line of questioning could lead to someone who had seen them), they might have had the foresight to grab Stacy's bag. This could also establish a method of entry: with it being so late, someone thought they would let the dog out one last time before going to bed, and they were either overpowered when the door was opened or someone used the dog as a ruse.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Jaya For This Useful Post:


  5. #528
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    31

    One more thing...

    Also keep in mind that Janelle mentioned she and Stacy had gone on a "shopping spree" the day before. Even if Janice had said that Stacy didn't own anything that fit the description the waitress gave (do we know if she has ever said anything like that?), that doesn't necessarily mean anything if she had bought lots of new stuff the day before. In a similar vein, if I had just gone on a shopping spree as a teenager and was planning a day out with a group of friends, I guarantee you I would have been wearing one of my new outfits.

    Yes, the waitress described it as "western" wear, but does everyone really not remember the style for teen girls in 1992? Shirts with plaid patterns, sleeveless button up shirts with collars, lighter washed tapered jeans, and western styled belts. I was a teenager living in Springfield at this time, and I can show you pictures of myself (and of my sister, for that matter) in outfits that I would think of now as "western" but were on trend at the time. And Stacy had started modeling, so I think it is a pretty good assumption that if she were going to go on a shopping spree she would buy whatever was trendy.

    I've said it before, but I am not willing to dismiss anything based on the assumption that an 18 year old girl who had just gone on a shopping spree didn't have an extra change of clothes with her. Especially one who was an aspiring model.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Jaya For This Useful Post:


  7. #529
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaya View Post
    Also keep in mind that Janelle mentioned she and Stacy had gone on a "shopping spree" the day before. Even if Janice had said that Stacy didn't own anything that fit the description the waitress gave (do we know if she has ever said anything like that?), that doesn't necessarily mean anything if she had bought lots of new stuff the day before. In a similar vein, if I had just gone on a shopping spree as a teenager and was planning a day out with a group of friends, I guarantee you I would have been wearing one of my new outfits.

    Yes, the waitress described it as "western" wear, but does everyone really not remember the style for teen girls in 1992? Shirts with plaid patterns, sleeveless button up shirts with collars, lighter washed tapered jeans, and western styled belts. I was a teenager living in Springfield at this time, and I can show you pictures of myself (and of my sister, for that matter) in outfits that I would think of now as "western" but were on trend at the time. And Stacy had started modeling, so I think it is a pretty good assumption that if she were going to go on a shopping spree she would buy whatever was trendy.

    I've said it before, but I am not willing to dismiss anything based on the assumption that an 18 year old girl who had just gone on a shopping spree didn't have an extra change of clothes with her. Especially one who was an aspiring model.
    I agree with everything you have said. I can add nothing. Thank you.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Missouri Mule For This Useful Post:


  9. #530
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    I'd like to talk about the dog My mom has had yorkies and lapso apsos and they bark at the slightest noise and even noises that humans can't hear outside of the home. They are high strung little doggies. If there was someone around the outside of the house trying to get in, I really do think the dog would have barked and woken up anyone that was sleeping. I also think the dog would have barked at Stacy.

    I didn't know that someone heard the dog outside at 1:30. I do remember that the house had a doggie door, but I can't find any of those pictures anymore. They used to be in the links above the forum. I am not sure about everyone else, but I would lock the doggie door at night so that other animals can't come in and so that my doggie wouldn't go outside and get lost. If someone heard the dog at 1:30, that means that Sherrill was awake at that time, letting the dog in and out.

    If Sherrill was up letting the dog in and out at 1:30, then it is possible that she did expect Suzie home that night and she was waiting up for her. If she was still awake for whatever reason at 1:30, then it is possible that the perps were waiting for her to turn out all the lights and go to bed (and actually be asleep and vulnerable) before going inside the house.

    Here's where I don't know if Sherrill did wait up until the girls got there or ended up just getting in bed and turning out the lights to wait for them...

    I know Suzie had a bag packed, but maybe she packed it after she got home for the next day.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CaliMama For This Useful Post:


  11. #531
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    793
    Let's stick to the known facts and not take them out of context:

    A dog that was outside somewhere was heard to bark around 1:30 am by a neighbor somewhere. That neighbor would most likely have lived either on N. Kentwood or even farther to the west in the area of the estate type homes. There is no way to know if that dog was Suzie's dog or some other dog. At 1:30 am in all likelyhood everything was fine at 1717.

    Sherrill did have a doggie door installed. I don't know if it had a lock or not (I don't understand the purpose of a doggie door that you have to unlock everytime the dog wants out. You might as well open the man door and let them out). The dog normally slept with Suzie but with her expected to be gone for the night, and with a freshly varnished piece of furniture in the house, it is most likely that Sherrill had the dog with her in her bedroom with the door closed. There may have been a fan running because of the fumes. It is quite possible that the dogs normal sense of hearing and smell were effected by being confined to the bedroom, the varnish fumes, and the possibility of a fan running.

    All doors and windows were not secure. Some did not have locks installed on them but were only cheap lumber yard type aluminum doors and windows.

    There was a dog thought to be similar in appearance to Suzie's dog seen by a neighbor several blocks away closer to daybreak and around the time or definitely after the time of the abduction. It is possible that Suzie's dog got out during the abduction or possibly thru the doggie door after the women were abducted and the house was empty. It's for certain that he was able to get back inside since he was found inside the next day by Janelle, establishing as fact that the doggie door was not locked. There is no way to determine if the dog seen by the distant neighbor was Cinnamin or not.

    Sherrill was not waiting up expecting Suzie to return home. When either Janis McCall or Janelle's mother (forgot which one it was but I could look it up) said to Sherrill at the end of graduation ceremonies that she was trying to talk the girls out of driving to Branson that night, Sherrill's reply was something to the effect, Good luck with that! I think their minds are pretty well made up. I do think that plans to drive to Branson were fluid and had pretty well fell apart before the girls left their homes close to 8:00 pm. That is why Suzie left her bag which she had previously packed at home, and Stacy didn't have one. That is also why by 8:30 pm they were looking for a place to spend the night and asking Brian Joy if they could stay at his house since he was already having guests stay over for the night.

    Upon arriving back at 1717 the two girls didn't stay up for any length of time snacking or talking, creating this time that the perps would have to wait for them to go to bed. Suzie was sick.

    If there were missing clothes that Stacy bought on this trendy shopping trip they took wouldn't Janelle know that and be able to identify what was missing from what new things Stacy had purchased?

    It is more than just the clothing worn as described by the George's waitress that nullifies her sighting. It is the fact that she didn't come forward until several days later after thinking about it, and the fact that none of the other 4 - 5 co-workers at Georges or any of the other customers could collaborate her story. If she did see three women and three men together it was obviously not that night.
    “Finding the occasional straw of truth awash in a great ocean of confusion and bamboozle requires intelligence, vigilance, dedication and courage. But if we don’t practice these tough habits of thought, we cannot hope to solve the truly serious problems that face us – and we risk becoming a nation of suckers, up for grabs by the next charlatan who comes along.” – Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

  12. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hurricane For This Useful Post:


  13. #532
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    I agree with everything you have said. I can add nothing. Thank you.
    Regarding the George's sighting. I also think it is a possibility that Stacy could have been wearing something of Suzies. I know it has been stated that they were not the same size, but back in the early 90s there was small, medium, large and extra large (and sometimes extra small, but I can vouch that those were very hard to find). My best friend(and room mate in college)was 6 inches taller than me, but we both could wear a size small shirt and often borrowed each other's clothes.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to CaliMama For This Useful Post:


  15. #533
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
    Let's stick to the known facts and not take them out of context:

    A dog that was outside somewhere was heard to bark around 1:30 am by a neighbor somewhere. That neighbor would most likely have lived either on N. Kentwood or even farther to the west in the area of the estate type homes. There is no way to know if that dog was Suzie's dog or some other dog. At 1:30 am in all likelyhood everything was fine at 1717.

    Sherrill did have a doggie door installed. I don't know if it had a lock or not (I don't understand the purpose of a doggie door that you have to unlock everytime the dog wants out. You might as well open the man door and let them out). The dog normally slept with Suzie but with her expected to be gone for the night, and with a freshly varnished piece of furniture in the house, it is most likely that Sherrill had the dog with her in her bedroom with the door closed. There may have been a fan running because of the fumes. It is quite possible that the dogs normal sense of hearing and smell were effected by being confined to the bedroom, the varnish fumes, and the possibility of a fan running.

    All doors and windows were not secure. Some did not have locks installed on them but were only cheap lumber yard type aluminum doors and windows.

    There was a dog thought to be similar in appearance to Suzie's dog seen by a neighbor several blocks away closer to daybreak and around the time or definitely after the time of the abduction. It is possible that Suzie's dog got out during the abduction or possibly thru the doggie door after the women were abducted and the house was empty. It's for certain that he was able to get back inside since he was found inside the next day by Janelle, establishing as fact that the doggie door was not locked. There is no way to determine if the dog seen by the distant neighbor was Cinnamin or not.

    Sherrill was not waiting up expecting Suzie to return home. When either Janis McCall or Janelle's mother (forgot which one it was but I could look it up) said to Sherrill at the end of graduation ceremonies that she was trying to talk the girls out of driving to Branson that night, Sherrill's reply was something to the effect, Good luck with that! I think their minds are pretty well made up. I do think that plans to drive to Branson were fluid and had pretty well fell apart before the girls left their homes close to 8:00 pm. That is why Suzie left her bag which she had previously packed at home, and Stacy didn't have one. That is also why by 8:30 pm they were looking for a place to spend the night and asking Brian Joy if they could stay at his house since he was already having guests stay over for the night.

    Upon arriving back at 1717 the two girls didn't stay up for any length of time snacking or talking, creating this time that the perps would have to wait for them to go to bed. Suzie was sick.

    If there were missing clothes that Stacy bought on this trendy shopping trip they took wouldn't Janelle know that and be able to identify what was missing from what new things Stacy had purchased?

    It is more than just the clothing worn as described by the George's waitress that nullifies her sighting. It is the fact that she didn't come forward until several days later after thinking about it, and the fact that none of the other 4 - 5 co-workers at Georges or any of the other customers could collaborate her story. If she did see three women and three men together it was obviously not that night.
    I appreciate your well thought out response and all of the research that you have put into this case and am in no way trying to discount anything or not stick to facts.

    No one knows if the girls stayed up for a bit or not. Just because Suzie had a stomach ache earlier in the evening (I don't remember the time) doesn't mean that she went straight to bed. We don't know the cause of the stomach ache or how long it lasted. Having a stomach ache could be from eating something that didn't agree with her, cramps from pms (which she probably had medication for) or just from being nervous about going to a party. I was really shy growing up and would get stomach aches when being introduced to new people and new situations that I didn't feel comfortable with...being home always made me feel better. Suzie was able to attend three parties and was going to spend the night at other people's homes, so it seems as though she ended up feeling better at some point or else she would have just gone home.

    As far as doggie doors, I have known of raccoons and other animals coming through at night, so we always locked ours at night when we would be in bed asleep...not all day, just at night. I know of other people who had dogs who have done the same especially if they didn't have a fenced in yard.

    We don't know if the dog got out and was running around the neighborhood so that means we don't know if the doggie door was locked or not...

    All I am saying is that if it was locked for the reasons that I stated, it is a possibility that Cinnamon needed to go to the bathroom and someone let him out (and back in) after the girls got home. Obviously, there were other points of entry into the house, but it seems as though LE doesn't believe that intruders gained access through the windows, so that is why I was curious about the dog being let out and probably barking at some point when a stranger (known or unknown) entered the home.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to CaliMama For This Useful Post:


  17. #534
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    snip...."That is why Suzie left her bag which she had previously packed at home, and Stacy didn't have one."....snip

    So it has been confirmed that Stacy didn't have one because she was going to get it on the way out of town? Am I given to understand that correctly? I don't believe this has ever been revealed previously. It would explain why no overnight bag was found belonging to Stacy.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Missouri Mule For This Useful Post:


  19. #535
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    snip...."That is why Suzie left her bag which she had previously packed at home, and Stacy didn't have one."....snip

    So it has been confirmed that Stacy didn't have one because she was going to get it on the way out of town? Am I given to understand that correctly? I don't believe this has ever been revealed previously. It would explain why no overnight bag was found belonging to Stacy.
    If they had already decided that they were not going to Branson that night before they left home, then Suzie might have told Sherrill that she would probably be home and if not, she would call her to let her know that she wasn't coming home. If there was no call, then Sherrill might have waited up. A lot of moms would have.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to CaliMama For This Useful Post:


  21. #536
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Little house on the hill
    Posts
    409
    I have a little min poodle if I were locked in a room away from him he would be hysterical my boyfriend can't get in the bed at night sometimes without him growling and barking so I rule out that cheryl was in the room subdued. The way the dog was acting the next day the dog probably witnessed the event. I still can't help but think that Gerald Carnahan may have been involved maybe that was who was doing the obscene phone calls a couple of weeks prior. Does anyone know if he was buddies with anyone in the Gallooping Goose motorcycle club?
    My grandson Lucas born 12-31-09

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Hippy Chick For This Useful Post:


  23. #537
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    793
    n
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliMama View Post
    I appreciate your well thought out response and all of the research that you have put into this case and am in no way trying to discount anything or not stick to facts.

    No one knows if the girls stayed up for a bit or not. Just because Suzie had a stomach ache earlier in the evening (I don't remember the time) doesn't mean that she went straight to bed. We don't know the cause of the stomach ache or how long it lasted. Having a stomach ache could be from eating something that didn't agree with her, cramps from pms (which she probably had medication for) or just from being nervous about going to a party. I was really shy growing up and would get stomach aches when being introduced to new people and new situations that I didn't feel comfortable with...being home always made me feel better. Suzie was able to attend three parties and was going to spend the night at other people's homes, so it seems as though she ended up feeling better at some point or else she would have just gone home.

    As far as doggie doors, I have known of raccoons and other animals coming through at night, so we always locked ours at night when we would be in bed asleep...not all day, just at night. I know of other people who had dogs who have done the same especially if they didn't have a fenced in yard.

    We don't know if the dog got out and was running around the neighborhood so that means we don't know if the doggie door was locked or not...

    All I am saying is that if it was locked for the reasons that I stated, it is a possibility that Cinnamon needed to go to the bathroom and someone let him out (and back in) after the girls got home. Obviously, there were other points of entry into the house, but it seems as though LE doesn't believe that intruders gained access through the windows, so that is why I was curious about the dog being let out and probably barking at some point when a stranger (known or unknown) entered the home.

    I wasn't responding specifically to your post but rather to point out things often speculated on without any evidence to support the speculation, which then become "facts" and posted in a sticky somewhere. As an example in post #526 it is stated that Suzie's dog was heard to bark at ~1:30 am, and that is simply not true and pure speculation. Even the witness reporting hearing a bark could not state as fact that the dog could be Suzie's dog. We don't know that Suzie's dog was out either time that night and was the one reported to have been seen later that morning. But you would agree that if it was seen then the doggie door was not locked because it had to get back inside the house where it was found by Janelle that day?

    You are correct in that we don't know how long Suzie suffered a stomach ache that night. What we can know for certain is that she had it when she left home at ~8:00 pm and that she had it long enough that all of her friends knew she had it, especially Shane Appleby who she spent the most time with. It may be that she tolerated it because it was a night we all only get to have once in our lives, but probably was a deciding factor in her returning to 1717 to sleep instead of staying anywhere else.

    What we don't have is any evidence that the girls stayed up snacking at 1717 once they got there. We don't have the proverbial bowl of pineapple & ice tea glass as we do in the JonBenet Ramsey case. There is no evidence that the girls stayed up eating anything. To speculate on that without evidence of support is to alter the timeline on what possibly could have happened.

    And unless you know what SPD may be holding back you are simply speculating when you say that they aren't interested in possible points of entry other than the front door?

    All I am saying is that we should be careful about speculating about what might have happened without evidence to support it because those speculations have a way of becoming fact and misused by others.
    “Finding the occasional straw of truth awash in a great ocean of confusion and bamboozle requires intelligence, vigilance, dedication and courage. But if we don’t practice these tough habits of thought, we cannot hope to solve the truly serious problems that face us – and we risk becoming a nation of suckers, up for grabs by the next charlatan who comes along.” – Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hurricane For This Useful Post:


  25. #538
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    793
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    snip...."That is why Suzie left her bag which she had previously packed at home, and Stacy didn't have one."....snip

    So it has been confirmed that Stacy didn't have one because she was going to get it on the way out of town? Am I given to understand that correctly? I don't believe this has ever been revealed previously. It would explain why no overnight bag was found belonging to Stacy.
    If it had already been decided by 8:00 pm when the two girls left their respective homes that they were not going to Branson that night why would Stacy take a bag with her? It would certainly explain why Suzie's was found at home. The original plans were to drive to Branson as early as 6:30 pm when graduation ceremonies were over. That obviously didn't happen so plans could have changed as early as 6:15 when the ceremonies were over. I think Stacy planned and expected to return to her own home to sleep that night but did not tell her mom because she didn't want Janis to set a curfew for her.

    All of these plans were the plans of teenagers and were fluid and constantly changing. Nothing was so regimental that it had to happen with military precision.
    “Finding the occasional straw of truth awash in a great ocean of confusion and bamboozle requires intelligence, vigilance, dedication and courage. But if we don’t practice these tough habits of thought, we cannot hope to solve the truly serious problems that face us – and we risk becoming a nation of suckers, up for grabs by the next charlatan who comes along.” – Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

  26. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hurricane For This Useful Post:


  27. #539
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Hippy Chick View Post
    I have a little min poodle if I were locked in a room away from him he would be hysterical my boyfriend can't get in the bed at night sometimes without him growling and barking so I rule out that cheryl was in the room subdued. The way the dog was acting the next day the dog probably witnessed the event. I still can't help but think that Gerald Carnahan may have been involved maybe that was who was doing the obscene phone calls a couple of weeks prior. Does anyone know if he was buddies with anyone in the Galloping Goose motorcycle club?
    Such a connection has been alleged at another website. Of some interest is that he is reported to have had a nickname while in prison as "Godfather Carnahan" among others. Doesn't prove anything of course. Personally, I am skeptical. However, I will tell you that where I worked there was widespread speculation among several people that he played a part in this crime especially since he had been in our office many times. His notoriety was well known. Having said this I wouldn't bet the farm on it. I wouldn't rule it out either.

    On a side note, my reference in post #526 was to Sherrill's dog. I was unaware that there was apparently another similar dog in the neighborhood which also barked. So it is accurate to say that I was speculating. My recollection is that it had been attributed to Sherrill's dog. Now that we know there was a doggy door it probably doesn't mean all that much but it was given some prominence at the time of the early reports from my recollection of news reports.

    I feel that I need to make note of something I may not have mentioned before. When this crime became the news of the day back in 1992, I devoured every news article I could find. I saw all the television reports and at the time had a good grounding on all the facts. I cut out all the news reports and compiled them to refer to when necessary. About 1995 I thought the case had ground to a halt and in an effort to jump start the case I was in contact with a nationally syndicated reporter who expressed interest in the case. I foolishly bundled up all these news reports, tapes, etc., and sent to her believing she was going to write about it. Nothing came of it. I have subsequently asked for these items to be returned but she couldn't find them. Some of the facts have become clouded over the years such as the dog barking.

    Fortunately some new information came to my attention such as the account of the Garrison trial and his reaction. This would have been from 1995 and he was on the police radar big time in those days. Some other information also came to me in the form of the names of the Sherrill's clients from her rolodex file. For many years I thought the police had failed to interview all of her clients as I worked with two of them and asked repeatedly if they had ever been contacted and they had not. When I received the list, I was surprised to find their names were not on the list. So I don't know if these people were interviewed or not. It would be speculation on my part. I will say there were 221 names on the list, mostly women and women I did not know. I did recognize one name of a lady I had worked not too far from. Other than this I didn't know any.

    Unfortunately the Springfield News-Leader did not archive their newspapers (as reported to my be a former N/L employee) until about 1999. If one wants to read all the news accounts they would have no choice but to go to the library or another source which might still have the original write-ups. This is unfortunate and I had hoped this would all be microfilmed for reference. When I was in St. Louis back in 1982, I had to look up some birth records and could find such records at the city library dating back to 1943 which was greatly useful. Now it is possible, I suppose that the library has gone back and microfilmed these newspapers by now as they are surely getting shopworn by now. One hopes so anyway.
    Last edited by Missouri Mule; 01-29-2012 at 10:31 AM.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Missouri Mule For This Useful Post:


  29. #540
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
    n

    What we don't have is any evidence that the girls stayed up snacking at 1717 once they got there. We don't have the proverbial bowl of pineapple & ice tea glass as we do in the JonBenet Ramsey case. There is no evidence that the girls stayed up eating anything. To speculate on that without evidence of support is to alter the timeline on what possibly could have happened.
    I know snacking was mentioned as one option for why they would have stayed up for a bit, which I would agree there is no evidence for, but it is logical that they didn't walk through the front door, get undressed, and get into bed in a matter of 10 minutes. That is just not what teen girls do when they are spending the night with a friend, especially if it was the first time one had been in the other's home. We know that both girls took the time to wash their faces, and at some point the TV in that room got turned on.

    The point that I was trying to make with this line of thinking is the problem with the theory that the perp(s) were already in the house with Sherrill and waited for the girls to get into bed and settled. To operate on the assumption that you had two teen girls come home from a night of partying and from front door to bed took just a few minutes has a good chance of being fallacious.

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jaya For This Useful Post:


  31. #541
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaya View Post
    I know snacking was mentioned as one option for why they would have stayed up for a bit, which I would agree there is no evidence for, but it is logical that they didn't walk through the front door, get undressed, and get into bed in a matter of 10 minutes. That is just not what teen girls do when they are spending the night with a friend, especially if it was the first time one had been in the others home. We know that both girls took the time to wash their faces, and at some point the TV in that room got turned on.

    The point that I was trying to make with this line of thinking is the problem with the theory that the perp(s) were already in the house with Sherrill and waited for the girls to get into bed and settled. To operate on the assumption that you had two teen girls come home from a night of partying and from front door to bed took just a few minutes has a good chance of being fallacious.
    That is the part that has always troubled me about the scenario of Sherrill not coming out or making her presence known after the girls arrived home. It would have taken them considerable time to make ready for bed. I would estimate between 20 and 30 minutes. It was for this reason I discarded this theory as probable.

    One other point that was previously discussed was Suzie's upset stomach. As I recall she ate pizza about 8:30 PM. Did she still have an upset stomach some six hours later and meanwhile went out partying during this time? Speaking for myself, I'm not in much of a partying mood when I have a stomach upset. Usually, I just want to lay still until it passes.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  32. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Missouri Mule For This Useful Post:


  33. #542
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaya View Post
    I know snacking was mentioned as one option for why they would have stayed up for a bit, which I would agree there is no evidence for, but it is logical that they didn't walk through the front door, get undressed, and get into bed in a matter of 10 minutes. That is just not what teen girls do when they are spending the night with a friend, especially if it was the first time one had been in the other's home. We know that both girls took the time to wash their faces, and at some point the TV in that room got turned on.

    The point that I was trying to make with this line of thinking is the problem with the theory that the perp(s) were already in the house with Sherrill and waited for the girls to get into bed and settled. To operate on the assumption that you had two teen girls come home from a night of partying and from front door to bed took just a few minutes has a good chance of being fallacious.
    Thank you. I mentioned getting a snack in addition to several other things that girls would typically do after being out all night at parties and getting a snack and something to drink is only one of those things. Everyone knows that it is only the polite thing to do to offer your guest something to eat or drink upon arrival at your house. I was speculating that this could have been many things that the girls would have done before getting into bed for the night after going to parties. I know I would have offered my friend something to eat or drink and I definitely would not have gone in my house and immediately have gone to bed having a guest in my house I was just saying that they would have been up for 20 - 30 minutes before actually turning out the lights and going to bed and getting a snack might have been one of the things that they did...

  34. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CaliMama For This Useful Post:


  35. #543
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane View Post
    n


    I wasn't responding specifically to your post but rather to point out things often speculated on without any evidence to support the speculation, which then become "facts" and posted in a sticky somewhere. As an example in post #526 it is stated that Suzie's dog was heard to bark at ~1:30 am, and that is simply not true and pure speculation. Even the witness reporting hearing a bark could not state as fact that the dog could be Suzie's dog. We don't know that Suzie's dog was out either time that night and was the one reported to have been seen later that morning. But you would agree that if it was seen then the doggie door was not locked because it had to get back inside the house where it was found by Janelle that day?

    You are correct in that we don't know how long Suzie suffered a stomach ache that night. What we can know for certain is that she had it when she left home at ~8:00 pm and that she had it long enough that all of her friends knew she had it, especially Shane Appleby who she spent the most time with. It may be that she tolerated it because it was a night we all only get to have once in our lives, but probably was a deciding factor in her returning to 1717 to sleep instead of staying anywhere else.

    What we don't have is any evidence that the girls stayed up snacking at 1717 once they got there. We don't have the proverbial bowl of pineapple & ice tea glass as we do in the JonBenet Ramsey case. There is no evidence that the girls stayed up eating anything. To speculate on that without evidence of support is to alter the timeline on what possibly could have happened.

    And unless you know what SPD may be holding back you are simply speculating when you say that they aren't interested in possible points of entry other than the front door?

    All I am saying is that we should be careful about speculating about what might have happened without evidence to support it because those speculations have a way of becoming fact and misused by others.
    Thank you, I appreciate being reminded of the facts and I totally understand what you mean by speculation becoming "facts". Yes, I do agree if the dog running around the neighborhood was Cinnamon, the doggie door would had to have been unlocked. But conversely, if the dog wasn't Cinnamon, it still could have been locked and the reason why the girls might have opened the door to Suzie's room to let the dog out and back in and this could have been how the perps got in (this is speculation).

    I apologize for making things murky. I just feel like the facts have led people nowhere for 20 years and at some point people should take a step back to see what they have forgotten to notice like the aspects of human nature (girls getting ready to go to bed and hanging out for a bit beforehand) and canine nature

  36. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CaliMama For This Useful Post:


  37. #544
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    793
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliMama View Post
    Thank you, I appreciate being reminded of the facts and I totally understand what you mean by speculation becoming "facts". Yes, I do agree if the dog running around the neighborhood was Cinnamon, the doggie door would had to have been unlocked. But conversely, if the dog wasn't Cinnamon, it still could have been locked and the reason why the girls might have opened the door to Suzie's room to let the dog out and back in and this could have been how the perps got in (this is speculation).

    I apologize for making things murky. I just feel like the facts have led people nowhere for 20 years and at some point people should take a step back to see what they have forgotten to notice like the aspects of human nature (girls getting ready to go to bed and hanging out for a bit beforehand) and canine nature
    I don't agree with your feeling that the facts have led people nowhere for 20 yrs. I believe this crime is essentially solved but lacks a couple of pieces of evidence to get a conviction in a court of law. It really is a very simple case and not some big, dark conspiracy. Whether the case is ever brought into a court of law remains to be seen; perhaps not. There are lots of crimes that are solved but never get a conviction. But if you don't follow the evidence those who are still around will still be discussing the same old things over and over. Might as well take posts from this thread and just change the date.
    “Finding the occasional straw of truth awash in a great ocean of confusion and bamboozle requires intelligence, vigilance, dedication and courage. But if we don’t practice these tough habits of thought, we cannot hope to solve the truly serious problems that face us – and we risk becoming a nation of suckers, up for grabs by the next charlatan who comes along.” – Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection

  38. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hurricane For This Useful Post:


  39. #545
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    96
    Is there anything at all that links Garrison and the women? Anything at all that is a hard connection?

  40. The Following User Says Thank You to HmmWhoKnows For This Useful Post:


  41. #546
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    96
    Honestly, can I get a head count of who actually believes an ounce of the GGMC/Ricky Dykes route of the case?

    Please stand up

  42. The Following User Says Thank You to HmmWhoKnows For This Useful Post:


  43. #547
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by HmmWhoKnows View Post
    Is there anything at all that links Garrison and the women? Anything at all that is a hard connection?
    Not in my opinion. I am more persuaded by the comments in Thread #1, post #20. I think that is as close to the truth as one is likely to get regarding this individual. As a general rule of thumb, if a person is to be believed, at least something that they reveal has to be true even if 99% is false. In his case, so far as I know, nothing he has ever said came to anything. Bottom line: 100% of nothing is still nothing.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  44. The Following User Says Thank You to Missouri Mule For This Useful Post:


  45. #548
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    Not in my opinion. I am more persuaded by the comments in Thread #1, post #20. I think that is as close to the truth as one is likely to get regarding this individual. As a general rule of thumb, if a person is to be believed, at least something that they reveal has to be true even if 99% is false. In his case, so far as I know, nothing he has ever said came to anything. Bottom line: 100% of nothing is still nothing.
    Thing is his actions may speak louder than anything he ever said, we know for a fact that he is a rapist. We know what type of rapist he is, he has tied himself to a story, and there is far more to Garrison than burglary.

  46. The Following User Says Thank You to Trooogrit For This Useful Post:


  47. #549
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Trooogrit View Post
    Thing is his actions may speak louder than anything he ever said, we know for a fact that he is a rapist. We know what type of rapist he is, he has tied himself to a story, and there is far more to Garrison than burglary.
    That may be true, but so far as you know, has anything he has ever told the police ever proven to be accurate? Speaking for myself, I'm unaware of anything. I am aware that he is a convicted rapist but based on his behavior not a particularly bright one. I think I am aware of your working theory (perhaps not) but I really can't see how these individuals could pull off the perfect crime. I'm just saying....
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  48. The Following User Says Thank You to Missouri Mule For This Useful Post:


  49. #550
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    That may be true, but so far as you know, has anything he has ever told the police ever proven to be accurate? Speaking for myself, I'm unaware of anything. I am aware that he is a convicted rapist but based on his behavior not a particularly bright one. I think I am aware of your working theory (perhaps not) but I really can't see how these individuals could pull off the perfect crime. I'm just saying....
    Well we do not really know if it was the perfect crime, I mean the forensics could be telling. I also think that there are areas that have been rumored that leave it as not such a perfect situation. What about the results of fingerprinting? We do not have those, we do not know how entrance was gained either. We have what we believe to be the exit, but not the entrance. How much has been held back?

  50. The Following User Says Thank You to Trooogrit For This Useful Post:


Page 22 of 31 FirstFirst ... 1213141516171819202122232425262728293031 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #4
    By christine2448 in forum The Springfield Three
    Replies: 1035
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 09:02 PM
  2. The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 /Possible locations.
    By :+:MrTT:+: in forum The Springfield Three
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-09-2009, 10:02 PM
  3. The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #1
    By englishleigh in forum The Springfield Three
    Replies: 630
    Last Post: 02-05-2008, 10:56 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •