Page 24 of 31 FirstFirst ... 141516171819202122232425262728293031 LastLast
Results 576 to 600 of 752

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

  1. #576
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliMama View Post
    The scenario that the perp or perps never even went into the house kept me awake for most of the night because I do think this makes sense.

    As I was tossing this around in my head, I decided that there were probably two guys involved and maybe it did happen the way it was suggested in post #562. I think it is possible that Suzie opened the door after hearing the glass break on the front porch and she was subdued either by force or by using a weapon. Could Stacy see from the open doorway of the bedroom to where the front door was (I have seen the pics, but they weren't where they used to be the last time I looked)? Anyway, if she could get a glimpse of what was happening from the bedroom (or could hear what was going on), I think this would have caused her to immediately escape out of the back door as it has been suggested. Of course, all of this commotion most definitely caused the Yorkie to bark like crazy. This in addition to also hearing the glass break may have made Sherrill jump out of bed, grab shoes as fast as she can so she can go outside to check on what is going on. I think there would need to have been two guys to get Suzie and to also catch Stacy after she ran outside. Sherrill, at this point, would not have to be forced into the van at all after knowing that her daughter is in there and in harm's way. A mother will do anything to protect her child.

    My thoughts on the reason why Suzie was driving the van (if the porch lady sighting is true) is that the one perp was busy committing a crime in the van and the other one wasn't from the area and didn't know his way around town well enough to get on the interstate from that neighborhood. I think they might have chosen Suzie to be the driver because it was her neighborhood, but not Sherrill because she was older, wiser and clever enough to drive them to safety.

    This is all just speculation, not fact.
    I think that is plausible, but let me suggest an alternate scenario.

    Here is another possible way to gain access. The van was said to have been parked over on the corner of Kentwood and Delmar, right around the corner from the Levitt home. It has also been stated there was some unusual activity going on in the neighborhood that suggested possible burglary activity. It has been argued that Sherrill was the "target" but for reasons I have never understood.

    Let's suppose that the burglars (or whoever) saw the girls drive up, park and go into the house. They carefully and quietly drove around the block across from the Levitt home and observed for about 1/2 hour until the lights were turned out. At this point, one of the (three?) suggested they have some "fun" and decided to get the women out of the house into their van. They had probably been drinking, talking up their exploits in and out of prison (if they were the GJ3), and the ringleader wants some "action." They pull the van up the driveway and park it, possibly backwards) and then run the engine or perhaps honk the horn. Suzie hears this thinking it is someone from the party and alerts her mother as she doesn't recognize the vehicle. Sherrill gets up, goes to the door and asks them what they want. One is standing to the side, grabs Sherrill, tries to muffle her but her cries are heard by Suzie who quickly gets out of bed and rushes to her mother's aid. She too is subdued. It is possible at this point where the globe is knocked loose. Stacy, hearing this going on becomes terrified and leaving the bed, clad only in her underpants, quietly opens the door on Suzie's bedroom and slides out the door and tries to escape from the rear of the house. One of the three sees her attempt, grabs her and drags her around to the front of the house where the women are being held. Stacy, being barefoot, cuts her foot, and struggles, plants her foot on the front of the house and leaves her blood/DNA. At this point all three are bundled off into the van. The door is left unlocked, the light left on, the purses left behind and the the TV on. At no time do any of the abductors enter the home. This makes it purely a sexual assault case. Tear it apart. Why wouldn't this work?
    Last edited by Missouri Mule; 02-01-2012 at 09:08 PM.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  2. #577
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    I think that is plausible, but let me suggest an alternate scenario.

    Here is another possible way to gain access. The van was said to have been parked over on the corner of Kentwood and Delmar, right around the corner from the Levitt home. It has also been stated there was some unusual activity going on in the neighborhood that suggested possible burglary activity. It has been argued that Sherrill was the "target" but for reasons I have never understood.

    Let's suppose that the burglars (or whoever) saw the girls drive up, park and go into the house. They carefully and quietly drove around the block across from the Levitt home and observed for about 1/2 hour until the lights were turned out. At this point, one of the (three?) suggested they have some "fun" and decided to get the women out of the house into their van. They had probably been drinking, talking up their exploits in and out of prison (if they were the GJ3), and the ringleader wants some "action." They pull the van up the driveway and park it, possibly backwards) and then run the engine or perhaps honk the horn. Suzie hears this thinking it is someone from the party and alerts her mother as she doesn't recognize the vehicle. Sherrill gets up, goes to the door and asks them what they want. One is standing to the side, grabs Sherrill, tries to muffle her but her cries are heard by Suzie who quickly gets out of bed and rushes to her mother's aid. She too is subdued. It is possible at this point where the globe is knocked loose. Stacy, hearing this going on becomes terrified and leaving the bed, clad only in her underpants, quietly opens the door on Suzie's bedroom and slides out the door and tries to escape from the rear of the house. One of the three sees her attempt, grabs her and drags her around to the front of the house where the women are being held. Stacy, being barefoot, cuts her foot, and struggles, plants her foot on the front of the house and leaves her blood/DNA. At this point all three are bundled off into the van. The door is left unlocked, the light left on, the purses left behind and the the TV on. At no time do any of the abductors enter the home. This makes it purely a sexual assault case. Tear it apart. Why wouldn't this work?
    Yes, I think this works also. The only thing is that in this very thread I think I have read that the footprint was in the house going toward the front door. Then I read that the footprint was on the front of the house and then then I read that the footprint was at the back of the house. Maybe I am confusing the placement of this footprint and since it isn't in thread of the basic facts of the case, so I am not sure where this info came from.

    If it is a rumor, I have been scolded a couple of times just for giving my opinion based on speculation, so I am not sure that I should even comment on the footprint. I am not sure what the rules are here for commenting on anything at this point.

    Aside from that, I have wondered about the placement of the porch light. I have read that it was mounted above the mailbox, but I am unable to view the pics to see how high up it was compared to the height of Sherrill, Suzie and Stacy. If I recall, they were all petite women. Were any of them over 5 ft 4 inches tall? I am just wondering about the placement of the light fixture in comparison to their height and if a struggle on the front porch with any petite woman could cause the globe to be broken (I am only 5 feet tall myself so this is something that has really caught my attention).

    I think this is why I keep thinking that the globe fell off when one of the men reached up to unscrew the lightbulb and the glass breaking alarmed the dog, the girls and Sherrill.

    But it could have happened the other way too. However, the more I think about the perps never entering the home, the more it makes sense to me.

    This is just speculation and not fact.
    Last edited by CaliMama; 02-03-2012 at 05:39 AM.

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


  4. #578
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliMama View Post
    Yes, I think this works also. The only thing is that in this very thread I think I have read that the footprint was in the house going toward the front door. Then I read that the footprint was on the front of the house and then then I read that the footprint was at the back of the house. Maybe I am confusing the placement of this footprint and since it isn't in thread of the basic facts of the case, so I am not sure where this info came from.

    If it is a rumor, I have been scolded a couple of times just for giving my opinion based on speculation, so I am not sure that I should even comment on the footprint. I am not sure what the rules are here for commenting on anything at this point.

    Aside from that, I have wondered about the placement of the porch light. I have read that it was mounted above the mailbox, but I am unable to view the pics to see how high up it was compared to the height of Sherrill, Suzie and Stacy. If I recall, they were all petite women. Were any of them over 5 ft 4 inches tall? I am just wondering about the placement of the light fixture in comparison to their height and if a struggle on the front porch with any petite woman could cause the globe to be broken (I am only 5 feet tall myself so this is something that has really caught my attention).

    I think this is why I keep thinking that the globe fell off when one of the men reached up to unscrew the lightbulb and the glass breaking alarmed the dog, the girls and Sherrill.

    But it could have happened the other way too. However, the more I think about the perps never entering the home, the more it makes sense to me.

    This is just speculation and not fact.
    As you say, this is also speculation and not fact.

    On the globe first, I THINK it would have fallen free of the lightbulb as it had a clearance of about 1/8 -1/4". That is to say, if it fell straight down it could have cleared the bulb without breaking it. As you know an incandescent bulb can be broken fairly easily and if the globe were at an angle I think the weight of the globe would likely have also broken the bulb. But that is purely a guess. I obtained what I believe is similar if not identical to what the globe was. I measured both and there was adequate clearance. One would place the closed end globe over the light fixture, and then tighten the thumb screws. Alternatively, if the bottom was open then it wouldn't have been necessary to have remove the globe to replace the bulb. With the closed end it would have been. If the bottom was open then it would have been almost impossible for the globe to have fallen free of the bulb, even if it had been rendered inoperable. That might support the theory that the globe was broken on purpose in order to get someone to come to the door. I tend to doubt that, however.

    If I were the police I would have wanted to have tried to simulate how the globe would break even if they didn't see the original pieces in place on the porch. That would explain why they believed it would have been helpful to have seen the pieces before being picked up. I do believe they actually have the pieces but because the crime scene was disturbed it didn't tell them anything. I would guess there was no blood evidence indicating anything other than Stacy stepping on a piece which left the DNA evidence indicating this is where she was captured.

    I say all this long winded explanation to further explain. If her footprint was on the rear of the house how would they have identified it? Did they have her footprints on file somewhere? I doubt it. And if there was DNA evidence that was used, how would she have cut her foot? Was there some evidence of a struggle in the back and she cut her foot there? We don't know. But if there was a struggle, then they knew where she was captured if on the back of the house.

    If she saw the abductor on the rear of the house she probably ran quickly to the front. Photos show that there was clearance between Sherrill's car and the house which would have left adequate room. We don't know the placement of the van but the driveway indicates about two feet of clearance so she should have been able to run to the front of the property and onto the street except, as has been postulated, the van was backed up to the rear of Sherrill's van and the van door prevented her. She probably pushed it aside and jumped up on the porch and it was somewhere there that the globe fell and broke or it could already have been broken. She was grabbed. She lashed out in all directions and her foot, bleeding, brushed the side the house leaving a small trace of blood on the front which was later recovered. I cannot see how a bare footprint would have left anything of value.

    Having said all of this, I don't even know if this account is remotely true. I have been told by someone who I no longer have contact with that her footprint was found on the front of the house. I think it was because this person who is not from the area had someone they trusted to look into this case and this information came forward. In any event it was stated as a fact. It may like the bogus report of the convenience store be nothing of any consequence. But taken in its totality, it would make sense. Both Sherrill and Suzie taken from the front of the house, subdued and defenseless; Stacy hearing this, fearing for her life, flees from the side and to the rear, is confronted and runs to the front, is blocked by the van door, jumps up on the porch where a struggle ensues and evidence of this left on the front of the house.

    That is my best guess of what MIGHT have happened if such a footprint actually existed. Otherwise, this is speculation amounting to nothing.

    The reason I find this scenario the most compelling is if there was no evidence found within the home but only the DNA evidence linking only the known friends and relatives to that home, we would have to believe that the perps committed the perfect crime or alternatively one of the 18-20 people in the house. (an unlikely scenario) Yet, we know they left five specific items undone. There is an obvious conflict here. If up to three people (such as the GJ3) did this, it seems more likely to me that time was of the essence and all rationality went out the window. I do not see adequate time to have scrubbed the house down of all prints and DNA material yet leave these other matters unfinished; not the least of which was leaving all the money and purses behind. So, in essence, I would say it would almost of necessity have had to have taken place outside the residence. Then we have no loose ends that I can see.

    Pardon my verbosity but I wanted to be crystal clear where I am coming from and why I reached these conclusions. I have no information on the height of the light bulb. I do believe that a struggle could account for this regardless.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  5. #579
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    96
    Re-posting this until I get it answered:


    Trooogrit, Hurricane, Kathee, anyone!

    Do you guys know of any males who had access to Sherill's house or had been invited over since she moved in to 1717 E Delmar?

    Bartt?
    Waterbed delivery guys?
    Movers?
    Ex boyfriends?
    Suzie's boyfriends?
    Lawn service? Did they mow their own lawn?
    Handymen?

  6. #580
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    952
    A few points:
    1) We know that there was no sign of forced entry but do we (sleuthers) know if any means of entry to the house (doors, windows etc) were unlocked other than the front door? I would assume that if any means of entry or exit were used during the "event", no effort would have been made to lock it again. I would think that if the front door was the only means of entry that was unlocked the next day that would have been the only one used. The Case File would certainly have this information.

    2) My understanding is that the "globe" was broken but the light bulb was still intact and was "on" the next morning. What we do not know (because the glass had been cleaned up) is whether it had been broken by someone trying to get at the light bulb to turn if off by unscrewing it or if it was broken during a struggle or by someone carrying something out of the house.

    3) There have been several references to a bare footprint, believed to be Stacy’s that either was in the living room pointing towards the front door or the porch pointing away from the door. (I believe the former but I may be wrong). Either way, the significance of it was that it seemed to indicate that Stacy left the house through the front door on her own volition while barefoot. I am not aware that there was any evidence that she had cut her foot on glass from the light.

    4) I am not aware that any DNA was ever tested. At the time (1992) only bodily fluid type samples would have been used. Apparently there were no suspicious fingerprints but we don’t know what they found. If there were lots of useable prints but none belong to any "unknowns". It would suggest that the perps spent very little time there while evidence of selective "wiping" would tell us something else again. It is possible that so many people in and out during the day hopelessly corrupted the scene.

    5) Any serious struggle between three woman and one or more men would leave some sort of evidence. (Whether it was inside the house or outside) The fact that there was no indication of any struggle suggests that the perp(s) was able to establish control very quickly and easily. This would suggest confidence, planning or criminal sophistication and very likely a firearm. (I suppose any "mess" could have been cleaned up, but why?)

    If anyone can correct or elaborate on the above, please do. We all need to get our facts straight.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to kemo For This Useful Post:


  8. #581
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by kemo View Post
    A few points:
    1) We know that there was no sign of forced entry but do we (sleuthers) know if any means of entry to the house (doors, windows etc) were unlocked other than the front door? I would assume that if any means of entry or exit were used during the "event", no effort would have been made to lock it again. I would think that if the front door was the only means of entry that was unlocked the next day that would have been the only one used. The Case File would certainly have this information.

    2) My understanding is that the "globe" was broken but the light bulb was still intact and was "on" the next morning. What we do not know (because the glass had been cleaned up) is whether it had been broken by someone trying to get at the light bulb to turn if off by unscrewing it or if it was broken during a struggle or by someone carrying something out of the house.

    3) There have been several references to a bare footprint, believed to be Stacy’s that either was in the living room pointing towards the front door or the porch pointing away from the door. (I believe the former but I may be wrong). Either way, the significance of it was that it seemed to indicate that Stacy left the house through the front door on her own volition while barefoot. I am not aware that there was any evidence that she had cut her foot on glass from the light.

    4) I am not aware that any DNA was ever tested. At the time (1992) only bodily fluid type samples would have been used. Apparently there were no suspicious fingerprints but we don’t know what they found. If there were lots of useable prints but none belong to any "unknowns". It would suggest that the perps spent very little time there while evidence of selective "wiping" would tell us something else again. It is possible that so many people in and out during the day hopelessly corrupted the scene.

    5) Any serious struggle between three woman and one or more men would leave some sort of evidence. (Whether it was inside the house or outside) The fact that there was no indication of any struggle suggests that the perp(s) was able to establish control very quickly and easily. This would suggest confidence, planning or criminal sophistication and very likely a firearm. (I suppose any "mess" could have been cleaned up, but why?)

    If anyone can correct or elaborate on the above, please do. We all need to get our facts straight.
    I will comment on one aspect of your post. If the intruders got inside the house, they had to have had contact with the door jams, the windows, house, something that would have left evidence behind. Now it is possible that they were wearing gloves or were so careful that they scrubbed everything clean of forensic evidence. That's entirely possible but unlikely in my view for one simple fact. They left all the other important things undone. I think we are looking at more luck than planning and believe me I have had to do a 180 on this myself. I have always been concerned that nothing could be found in that house to link to anyone other than the known people who were in there that day. As I have said, no credible argument could possibly be made why any DNA or other forensic evidence would be in that house by such people as the GJ3, Cox, Carnahan or any other possible suspect.

    So in essence, we are left with two possibilities in my opinion. We are left to wonder if any of the 18-20 people known to be in the house were involved or someone unknown to the women committed the crime outside the house where it would be nearly impossible to find DNA or other forensic evidence in view of the fact the porch was cleaned. Even if prints were found on any of the cars these unknown people could not possibly explain what they were doing there. I now deduce that everything that took place happened entirely outside the house. And there are no loose ends. All that is required is to get just one of the women to open the door and be grabbed, which brings the second victim (Suzie or Sherrill) outside and then Stacy leaving via the back way. Is it reasonable to believe she came to the front door clad only in her underpants knowing all the while that both Suzie and Sherrill were in great peril and put herself in danger? If I were in her shoes I would have wanted out of that house as quickly and as quietly as possible. BTW, if she went out the side door, perhaps she left the lock in the locked position and it was locked when the house was found. Do we even know if any of the people on the scene opened and closed that door? I don't think we can conclude she had to have gone out the front door. I think that is an unknowable unknown without seeing the actual interviews and polygraphs of the people to the house. I think it would be pure speculation.

    Even if the footprint is a figment of someone's imagination, it still works. The globe could have been broken any number of ways. I now see why it was deemed important that the police to have seen it where it fell. I used to believe that was a tempest in a teapot but now see it as potentially critical and could have steered the investigation where it should have gone much earlier on. It also does not get the grave robbers off the hook if someone further up the food chain had a vested interest in keeping Suzie off the witness stand.

    P.S. We have never been told if the side entrance was open or locked. I stand to be corrected.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  9. #582
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Little house on the hill
    Posts
    409
    Has it ever been established if Carnahan was one of Sherrils's hair clients. If not him maybe a family member of his that he took there or picked up. Did either of the girls have a part time job in the summer or evening or weekends thru the school year?
    My grandson Lucas born 12-31-09

  10. #583
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by kemo View Post
    A few points:
    1) We know that there was no sign of forced entry but do we (sleuthers) know if any means of entry to the house (doors, windows etc) were unlocked other than the front door? I would assume that if any means of entry or exit were used during the "event", no effort would have been made to lock it again. I would think that if the front door was the only means of entry that was unlocked the next day that would have been the only one used. The Case File would certainly have this information.

    2) My understanding is that the "globe" was broken but the light bulb was still intact and was "on" the next morning. What we do not know (because the glass had been cleaned up) is whether it had been broken by someone trying to get at the light bulb to turn if off by unscrewing it or if it was broken during a struggle or by someone carrying something out of the house.

    3) There have been several references to a bare footprint, believed to be Stacy’s that either was in the living room pointing towards the front door or the porch pointing away from the door. (I believe the former but I may be wrong). Either way, the significance of it was that it seemed to indicate that Stacy left the house through the front door on her own volition while barefoot. I am not aware that there was any evidence that she had cut her foot on glass from the light.

    4) I am not aware that any DNA was ever tested. At the time (1992) only bodily fluid type samples would have been used. Apparently there were no suspicious fingerprints but we don’t know what they found. If there were lots of useable prints but none belong to any "unknowns". It would suggest that the perps spent very little time there while evidence of selective "wiping" would tell us something else again. It is possible that so many people in and out during the day hopelessly corrupted the scene.

    5) Any serious struggle between three woman and one or more men would leave some sort of evidence. (Whether it was inside the house or outside) The fact that there was no indication of any struggle suggests that the perp(s) was able to establish control very quickly and easily. This would suggest confidence, planning or criminal sophistication and very likely a firearm. (I suppose any "mess" could have been cleaned up, but why?)

    If anyone can correct or elaborate on the above, please do. We all need to get our facts straight.
    For #3: I think that it has been assumed the footprint was a bloody footprint because the footprint was attributed to Stacy and the only way to verify that it was her footprint would be through DNA. But we still don't know if this is true or not, so I am not sure about any of it. I suppose there could have been a dirty or muddy footprint from someone being in the yard (I am not sure when the last rain event had happened so I don't know if this could even be the case) and there was enough of a print to be able to size the foot (like in the O.J. case). If each of the three women wore a different size shoe, it would be evident whose footprint it was. I'd also like to add that if it was a muddy footprint, then it means that we still don't know if Stacy ever exited the front door where the broken glass was...

    These are just my thoughts and opinions and not fact.

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


  12. #584
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    270
    While we're on the topic of forensic evidence, here's something I've always wondered about......Did police do any ferensic tests looking for various tire tracks, and shoe or bare foot prints in the area where the van would have been up by or under the carport....as well as the rest of the driveway? I also wonder if they did tests on the seat placement of all off the women's cars to varifly that they were the last ones to have been driving their cars. I've also wondered how deep they searched in the yard and behind and under the buses looking for discarded cigerettes, poss. not easliy seen blood trace evidence that may have gone unnoticed if they didn't look at the yard closely. Just some thoughts. I've always thought at th very least they would be able to have pulled all the tire prints off the driveway and compaired them to all the known vehicles that had been at the house prior to the police being called, and seen if there were any that didn't fit that criteria, thus creating a suspect tire track that can me investigated or at least logged as evidence, and possibley used later if a vehicle in quistion ever surfaces for comparison. I know that the retrival of tire prints off of pavements couldn't have been a miricle of ferensics for that time period, they shouldn't have had any problems acoomplishing this. The MSHP and FBI were involved......Im sure they had to have thought of checking for the tire prints in the driveway, as well as shoe prints on the conceret. It would just be nice to beable to know what the findings of those tests were.

  13. #585
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    7
    Hummmwhoknows, I have asked the waterbed delivery question for over a year and no one has answered it, I would like to know the answers to these questions too, anyone? I have often wondered if the van was a work van used in such things as deliveries, lawn service? Its worth looking into.

  14. #586
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    7
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sprin...01775683255010 I have created a new facebook page where all the missing of the springfield area can be listed talked about or whatever is needed. I know we really dont need another page about this but fb has far more users than any other social media.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to badbob55 For This Useful Post:


  16. #587
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5

    Suspects and Motives

    I’d like to know if I have the following straight.

    1) Robert Cox, Gerald Carnahan, and Stephen Garrison served at the same time in the same prison facility? and were also out and living in Springfield at the time of the 3MW crime? If they did not already know each other and this is true, what is the first thing you talk about when you meet someone for the first time? Where you’re from, your age…They would have a lot in common to quickly become buddies.

    2) In letters to the News-Leader, Cox references someone believed to be Garrison? I have not read these letters and would like to. The links to the letters in the media links post send me to the News-Leader’s home page. Can someone please help me access the letters?

    3) Cox worked for City Utilities at that time and was a utility locater in south-central Springfield—the same neighborhood as 1717 Delmar? Also, did he work outside this specific house?

    4) Robert Cox’s parents with whom he visited or lived (not sure about this either) were in the same neighborhood or less than a mile away? I understand Cox has said he knows the women were killed and buried within a mile from where they were abducted.

    5) An eye witness sketch of a man seen near the house that prior week looks very similar to Garrison?

    6) Sheryl had recently dated Carnahan? Even if this is a rumor, did it come from a relative, friend or coworker who would likely know? And Carnahan was at least one of Sheryl’s customers at her hair salon? This has been asked about recently, but has been mentioned in older posts as well.

    7) Garrison or someone with ties to Carnahan was a security officer at Cox Hospital? I’m not finding that in my notes now and cannot remember where I read this. I understand there have been tips leading to this property as a possible burial site and they have not all come from psychics.

    I still think it’s likely the girls with or without Sheryl stopped by George’s Steakhouse after the parties and were noticed and stalked by someone. Georges was the only open 24hrs restaurant in the area and right up the street from 1717. Not so much anymore, but at the time, George’s was a major social hub for up-all-night college students and the after bar closings crowd. I too graduated in 1992 and lived in that neighborhood. I remember the Springfield culture of that time and age group.

    I appreciate any clarification on the above. I feel so badly for these women and their families and wish we had answers and justice.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Esperanza For This Useful Post:


  18. #588
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Pittsburgh (of course)
    Posts
    2,354
    Hi, Esperanza, For a long time, the letters were on the News-Leader website,mwhich were available on our media links thread. Don't be surprised if the links don't work, though. You might also check Bartt's blog.

    Hi, MM. You guys are having a great discussion. I want to think it is unlikely that any of the women would have opened a door in the middle of the night to someone they don't know, but then I ask myself what I would do if someone kno ked on the door and said something plausible. I've thought about the dog; LE suggested that the perps might have claimed to have found the dog, but all it would take would be to see Suzie let the dog out before she went to bed and then wait until she let the dog back in--or just walk in the unlocked door. Same deal if Stacy walks out to her car (barefoot) for something. It's a great observation about the forensic evidence--either there was evidence and the herd of people obliterated it, or the perps were either lucky or good, or they were never in e house. I've always thought that the piled up purses pointed to the abductors being inside, especially since Stacy was likely to keep her purse with her because of her meds. But who knows They could have been moved my anyone who walked in the open door.

  19. #589
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Unfortunately, I believe Bartt pulled down all his blog sites and the links probably are broken. It is possible that a google search might turn them up and readable in the cached section.

    Cox, Garrison, and Carnahan were not in the same facility. It appears to me that Cox was referring to Garrison. At some point, the words used by both Cox and Garrison were nearly identical. I suspect they knew one another. I have hard copies of his letters.

    I believe that it has been asserted that Carnahan and Sherrill were on the same cruise together but there is no evidence I have seen that links them in any manner.

    Since we learned recently that the dog had a "doggy door" to come and go I am wondering if it led to a fenced yard in the back and to the side of the house. It seems unlikely the dog would have been allowed to run loose in the neighborhood. Perhaps someone who has been to the house can speak to the subject.

    On the purses, I wonder if they weren't moved by the people who came later. There seems to be some question about this since I have read somewhere that items were "rolling" out of the purses. Perhaps the purses were searched prior to the police arrived and simply stacked up. I'm thinking the perps didn't go into the house at any time.

    I'm thinking that if the van were pulled into the driveway and just had its motor idling and perhaps a "beep" on the horn, it led to Suzie cracking the blinds. She is wondering and goes to ask Sherrill who in turn goes to the door, opens it to inquire and then she and in turn Suzie are taken. That is where I think Stacy believes there is danger and attempts to escape to the side and rear of the house explaining her lack of clothing. Unfortunately I don't believe there was an exit to the rear of the property so she had no choice but to come back to the front of the house to attempt to escape but was also taken.

    We need someone to tell us exactly what the layout of the house, yard and fences were. At this point I think it is pure speculation.

    I think the George's sighting is unlikely due to timeline constraints and lack of corroboration by others in the restaurant.

    Carnahan was not a security officer at Cox. SPD officers were allowed to work off-duty to supplement their income. I doubt any connection.

    Garrison with a full beard does not appear to my eye to resemble the sketch of the mystery man seen prior to the abduction.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  20. #590
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    96
    Kathee, please if you could answer one more thing for me for the rest of your life, can you please answer my question:

    Were there any males that were known to have been at the 1717 house since Sherrill bought it to the abduction? And who were they?

    Also do you know if they hired anyone to do lawn service? Waterbed delivery guys? Moving men?

  21. #591
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    Unfortunately, I believe Bartt pulled down all his blog sites and the links probably are broken. It is possible that a google search might turn them up and readable in the cached section.

    Cox, Garrison, and Carnahan were not in the same facility. It appears to me that Cox was referring to Garrison. At some point, the words used by both Cox and Garrison were nearly identical. I suspect they knew one another. I have hard copies of his letters.

    I believe that it has been asserted that Carnahan and Sherrill were on the same cruise together but there is no evidence I have seen that links them in any manner.

    Since we learned recently that the dog had a "doggy door" to come and go I am wondering if it led to a fenced yard in the back and to the side of the house. It seems unlikely the dog would have been allowed to run loose in the neighborhood. Perhaps someone who has been to the house can speak to the subject.

    On the purses, I wonder if they weren't moved by the people who came later. There seems to be some question about this since I have read somewhere that items were "rolling" out of the purses. Perhaps the purses were searched prior to the police arrived and simply stacked up. I'm thinking the perps didn't go into the house at any time.

    I'm thinking that if the van were pulled into the driveway and just had its motor idling and perhaps a "beep" on the horn, it led to Suzie cracking the blinds. She is wondering and goes to ask Sherrill who in turn goes to the door, opens it to inquire and then she and in turn Suzie are taken. That is where I think Stacy believes there is danger and attempts to escape to the side and rear of the house explaining her lack of clothing. Unfortunately I don't believe there was an exit to the rear of the property so she had no choice but to come back to the front of the house to attempt to escape but was also taken.

    We need someone to tell us exactly what the layout of the house, yard and fences were. At this point I think it is pure speculation.

    I think the George's sighting is unlikely due to timeline constraints and lack of corroboration by others in the restaurant.

    Carnahan was not a security officer at Cox. SPD officers were allowed to work off-duty to supplement their income. I doubt any connection.

    Garrison with a full beard does not appear to my eye to resemble the sketch of the mystery man seen prior to the abduction.
    I also want to add that I think it is highly probable that Sherrill knew that she would be going outside. I think this is why the shoes were messed up in her closet. It shows that she quickly grabbed some shoes to put on to go outside.

    Stacy didn't have time to do that, and I believe that Suzie also didn't have time to do that. So this makes me wonder if Sherrill went outside first to investigate a noise.

    Most of us wouldn't put our shoes on to answer the front door, but we would if we thought we needed to go outside. I also don't think Sherrill would have taken the time to find her shoes and put them on if she knew that one of the girls was being attacked.

    I am not sure where I am going with this, but it has been a nagging thought of mine for a couple of days now.

    Just my thoughts and speculation (again).

  22. #592
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliMama View Post
    I also want to add that I think it is highly probable that Sherrill knew that she would be going outside. I think this is why the shoes were messed up in her closet. It shows that she quickly grabbed some shoes to put on to go outside.

    Stacy didn't have time to do that, and I believe that Suzie also didn't have time to do that. So this makes me wonder if Sherrill went outside first to investigate a noise.

    Most of us wouldn't put our shoes on to answer the front door, but we would if we thought we needed to go outside. I also don't think Sherrill would have taken the time to find her shoes and put them on if she knew that one of the girls was being attacked.

    I am not sure where I am going with this, but it has been a nagging thought of mine for a couple of days now.

    Just my thoughts and speculation (again).
    Makes perfect sense to me. Good thoughts! That would tie up the loose end about the shoes. Sherrill was likely the person to open the door first. She could have been annoyed that some "kids" were over there to get Suzie to come on out (or so she thought) and she was going to give them a piece of her mind. Unfortunately it appears possible she fell into their trap not realizing they were not her classmates and had nefarious things in mind she couldn't have imagined at the time.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  23. #593
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    Makes perfect sense to me. Good thoughts! That would tie up the loose end about the shoes. Sherrill was likely the person to open the door first. She could have been annoyed that some "kids" were over there to get Suzie to come on out (or so she thought) and she was going to give them a piece of her mind. Unfortunately it appears possible she fell into their trap not realizing they were not her classmates and had nefarious things in mind she couldn't have imagined at the time.
    The only problem with that theory is that, do you really think that Sherrills closet would have become that noticeably discombobulated/disorganized due to one random event of her quickly searching for a pair of shoes.

    And, wouldn't you think that she would have reached for the shoes or house slippers she had been wearing last, prior to her climbing into bed, where it is assumed that Sherrill had been at the time of the start of the abduction.

    I'd say it is more likely that:

    1.) Sherrills closet was just naturally cluttered.

    2.) Someone had gone through the closet looking for something.

    -OR_

    3.) Someone had hidden in the closet at some point....either Perp. or Victim.

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to monkeymann For This Useful Post:


  25. #594
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by monkeymann View Post
    The only problem with that theory is that, do you really think that Sherrills closet would have become that noticeably discombobulated/disorganized due to one random event of her quickly searching for a pair of shoes.

    And, wouldn't you think that she would have reached for the shoes or house slippers she had been wearing last, prior to her climbing into bed, where it is assumed that Sherrill had been at the time of the start of the abduction.

    I'd say it is more likely that:

    1.) Sherrills closet was just naturally cluttered.

    2.) Someone had gone through the closet looking for something.

    -OR_

    3.) Someone had hidden in the closet at some point....either Perp. or Victim.
    I suppose that anything is possible but I go back to the lack of forensic evidence from people known not to have had a legitimate reason to have been in the home at any time. The alternative is that the forensic folks did not do a very good job because of all of the places in the home that was the least likely to have been disturbed by those known to be in the home especially being her bedroom. The forensic folks spoke upon leaving that they hoped Sherrill would be upset with them for doing such a thorough job. I'll take them at their word.

    We don't really know the condition of her closet as we have never seen any photographic evidence of the condition of the closet. If the shoes were scattered everywhere, then I would surmise that someone was going through her shoes. But as speaking as someone whose home was burgled in Springfield, burglars do not normally straighten up after they have been there. For all we know a couple of pair of shoes were not in their regular place and that was the extent of it. Perhaps she was looking for a specific pair of shoes to go outside as she merely had her house slippers by her bed and she wanted something more substantial. There is no further information given by the police that I am aware. I go back to the lack of forensic evidence. Absence of any leads me to believe any disorganization of her shoes was by her own hand. But that is just my personal opinion. I don't know.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  26. #595
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    952
    Accounts I have read describe the house as basically neat except for Sherrill's closet where the shoes were described as "scattered". Pictures of the house suggest that it was basically neat and orderly but evidence of having been lived in (as one might expect if 18 people had been in and out that day). The specific reference to the closet being an exception to the rest of the house suggests that the "scatter" might have been connected to the abduction. This raises all kinds of questions but, since we don't have pictures or any description of this scatter, it is hard to speculate.

    If the “scatter” indicated either the possibility that someone had been hiding in the closet OR someone was looking for something in the closet, it would tell us a lot.

    My ex-wife kept the house looking “perfect” but threw things into the closet (and drawers and cupboards) pretty much at random. That was her housekeeping “style”. Maybe that was Sherrill’s as well.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to kemo For This Useful Post:


  28. #596
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    Quote Originally Posted by kemo View Post
    Accounts I have read describe the house as basically neat except for Sherrill's closet where the shoes were described as "scattered". Pictures of the house suggest that it was basically neat and orderly but evidence of having been lived in (as one might expect if 18 people had been in and out that day). The specific reference to the closet being an exception to the rest of the house suggests that the "scatter" might have been connected to the abduction. This raises all kinds of questions but, since we don't have pictures or any description of this scatter, it is hard to speculate.

    If the “scatter” indicated either the possibility that someone had been hiding in the closet OR someone was looking for something in the closet, it would tell us a lot.

    My ex-wife kept the house looking “perfect” but threw things into the closet (and drawers and cupboards) pretty much at random. That was her housekeeping “style”. Maybe that was Sherrill’s as well.
    I certainly would agree that if someone had been hiding in the closet or looking for something in the closet it would tell us a lot in that it would show someone unfriendly was up to no good. But the problem as I see it is that there was no forensic evidence we have ever been told of that anyone else other than those known to be in the house that day (or previously known to be in the house) was found in the home.

    Let me put it differently. If the forensic crew was totally competent and complete, the previous occupant should have left some of her DNA or other material behind as would be expected. For example, we moved into this house about three months or so ago. I would bet my life that the previous owner would have something left behind to link to that person even though we have vacuumed as thoroughly as we could and cleaned every nook and cranny. If the previous occupant of Sherrill Levitt's home could be identified, as I believe she was (likely), then certainly more recent DNA, hair, prints, etc., would certainly have been found on the shoes and around the shoes. If it were someone unknown to that house they could not possibly and credibly argue that their DNA, etc., was in that home, except by illegal means. They would have immediately been suspect #1, 2, etc., especially if it were linked to the GJ3.

    Now it is not impossible that this is what did link them to the home. And perhaps this is why they were the subjects of the grand jury. But it begs the question. Why weren't they indicted? It seems to me that would have been a slam dunk. Would you disagree?
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  29. #597
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    952
    In 1992 DNA was only beginning to be used. There was no way to test for "touch" (or "trace")DNA which has only been used in the last 5 years or so. If no "bodily fluids" such as blood, semen, or saliva was found, probably no DNA testing was done.

    The existence of fingerprints proves someone was there; the lack of prints doesn't prove the opposite. It is quite common for no useable prints to be found at a crime scene. There are many reasons why touching a particular surface does not leave a useable print. Overlapping prints, smeared prints, rough surfaces, oil or soap or other contaminates on surface are just a few.

    Hair comparison is pretty much "junk" science. Everyone has multiple "types" of hair; different colors, different thicknesses, etc and it is very common for two people to have strands of hair that are "indistinguishable". Finding a hair that is "indistinguishable"from that of a particular suspect is comprable to having a witness who saw someone "about the same height".


  30. The Following User Says Thank You to kemo For This Useful Post:


  31. #598
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,573
    I wish to amend my post #572 where I said the "porch lady's" account could only be true if just one perp was involved. I was simply wrong. What could have explained more than one perp was involved is if we go on the GJ3 theory, it helps to understand that they were just out of prison, convicted felons, and the mere possession of a handgun would have sent them immediately back to prison since they would have broken their parole. Being caught on abduction and assault would undoubtedly have sent them back as well but not until after a new trial was held. The gun charges were a go directly to jail and do not collect $200 certainty. They would have had to physically restrain the women and that would have required two additional people.

    Therefore they may have been unarmed and in the back subduing both Sherrill and Suzie. So I was wrong to make the assumption it required a single perpetrator. Alternatively it might have been. Neither scenario can be ruled out.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  32. #599
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    96
    Going to post this YET AGAIN.

    Kathee, TG, Hurricane, anyone, Do you guys have a list of all of the males that had access or came to the house from when the home was purchased to the abduction?

    Moving men? (Who moved Mama and Daughter's stuff???)
    Waterbed delivery guys?
    Lawn service men?
    Cleaning men?

  33. #600
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by kemo View Post
    Accounts I have read describe the house as basically neat except for Sherrill's closet where the shoes were described as "scattered". Pictures of the house suggest that it was basically neat and orderly but evidence of having been lived in (as one might expect if 18 people had been in and out that day). The specific reference to the closet being an exception to the rest of the house suggests that the "scatter" might have been connected to the abduction. This raises all kinds of questions but, since we don't have pictures or any description of this scatter, it is hard to speculate.

    If the “scatter” indicated either the possibility that someone had been hiding in the closet OR someone was looking for something in the closet, it would tell us a lot.

    My ex-wife kept the house looking “perfect” but threw things into the closet (and drawers and cupboards) pretty much at random. That was her housekeeping “style”. Maybe that was Sherrill’s as well.
    Just going on the theory that the perps did not enter the house, I feel as though Sherrill most likely rummaged through her shoes quickly to find
    slip-ons that she could wear outside.

    I understand that people have their own ways of staying neat and tidy (my closets look horrible, but the rest of my house is pretty much kept neat and tidy even with two sons), but Sherrill was a cosmetologist, right? All of my friends who were big (and by big I mean that it was their #1 priority) on fashion and make up made sure that their clothes and especially their shoes were in perfect order I think that Sherrill might have been the same way, but that is just conjecture of course.

    If the perps did not enter the house, I don't think anyone was hiding in that closet because they wouldn't need to hide in the closet. If the perps did come into the house, that is a different story...but there was no sign of struggle IN the house and the only sign of anything happening is outside the house.

    Just speculation, not facts.

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


Page 24 of 31 FirstFirst ... 141516171819202122232425262728293031 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
  •