593 users online (84 members and 509 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 196
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the backwoods of Virginia
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by siriunsun View Post
    Lets look at this from a police officer's point of view or from a prosecutor's point of view. There had recently been a tip concerning two murders, specifically where to find remains. Investigators look around at the site and find and informal grave yard containing an unknown number of graves, but only one marked grave. Most of the graves are marked with stones. Next, in order to clarify, they ask current and former property owners to shed some light on the exact number of graves, and to identify the people who were interred. They either get no information in return, or conflicting information. This kind of stuff never makes a homicide detective feel that he is hearing the truth. But then, knowing that it is, indeed, possible for a site to have been in use as a graveyard before the current property owner was even born, investigators take their time and ask neighbors about it, as well. Still, no real answers. After a search involving no shovels or radar equipment, they actually find bones and personal effects, belonging to one of the Lyon girls. OF COURSE THEY WANTED TO KNOW MORE! Wouldn't you?

    I find it strange that despite the lies they heard from LLW, they still came up with an area to search that yielded forensic results. If RAW did not want to be destroyed, he should have discussed the unmarked graves on his property more intelligently with police. It's never a good idea to misrepresent or guess about the truth during grand jury proceedings when you own property with unidentified graves.

    Where do you get the idea that nothing was found? They found quite a bit.
    This cemetery is an old family cemetery named the Charles Arthur "Pomp" Overstreet Cemetery. To get to the cemetery, you drive up the lower driveway in the map then veer to the right and cross a small stream and then up the hill to the cemetery. The 30 possible graves in this cemetery are our ancestors and relatives...probably Jones, Overstreet, Newman family members. This cemetery has been documented at least twice and the oldest living family members on the mountain will only know who is buried there because they were told about them by their family members and by attending funerals at that cemetery. Some of the graves could possibly date back to the 1800s and these families could not afford headstones. It was common practice to use field stones to mark where graves are located. I do not believe investigator Steve Smith made the statement to mean that people were giving conflicting statements about the cemetery deliberately because they didn't want to cooperate. Nobody knows exactly who and how many of our Taylor's Mountain relatives are buried in this cemetery. The cemetery books and information I have show different names, too but the information was also gathered by different people at different times. And for what it's worth, I do know Steve Smith...we went to school together.
    When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.

    Mark Twain

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    336
    The "family cemetery" dates back to England and Ireland from prehistoric times, and it does not surprise me that there are family cemeteries on Taylor's Mountain, but when I looked at the return on the search warrant, it looked as if law enforcement would have been happier if someone could have told them, for double triple sure, who was buried there, and how many people had been buried there! If I were looking for two murder victims, and was also dealing with law enforcement from another state, I might feel the same way!

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the backwoods of Virginia
    Posts
    1,444
    Quote Originally Posted by siriunsun View Post
    The "family cemetery" dates back to England and Ireland from prehistoric times, and it does not surprise me that there are family cemeteries on Taylor's Mountain, but when I looked at the return on the search warrant, it looked as if law enforcement would have been happier if someone could have told them, for double triple sure, who was buried there, and how many people had been buried there! If I were looking for two murder victims, and was also dealing with law enforcement from another state, I might feel the same way!
    There won't be anybody to tell law enforcement or anybody else, for double triple sure, who is buried there unless some old relative just happens to find a list or 5 different family Bibles in an old trunk somewhere and that's highly doubtful because a lot of the mountain people didn't know how read and write back in those days. As many of us who do family genealogy here, somebody would have known somebody who would have known. Only the good Lord in Heaven knows exactly who is buried there.
    When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.

    Mark Twain

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Rochester, New York
    Posts
    30,563
    Quote Originally Posted by steveP120 View Post
    Here are the relevant paragraphs from the Washington Post:

    "Relatives of the couple in Bedford County later told detectives that after the news conference, Richard and his wife, Patricia, made several unannounced trips to the area. “Richard and Patricia Welch have also been extremely interested in whether these relatives were contacted by investigators,” detectives wrote, “and what information they provided to the investigators.”

    On Dec. 5, Patricia Welch testified before the Bedford grand jury. What she said remains confidential. But afterward, she was charged with perjury.

    Her attorney, Emmette Pilgreen of Roanoke, declined to comment on that charge. But he said his client wants to help: “She absolutely feels bad about the situation with these kids. It’s a horrible situation.” "
    ================================================== =====
    I think it's poorly worded, and I may have at first read it wrong because decent circumstantial evidence, which I assume the police made every effort to find, would be:
    - In 1975, days or weeks after the disappearance, a person of interest (and/or wife) showed up unexpectedly to visit Taylor's Mountain, presumably to bury bodies, which the police may or may not have found.

    But the newspaper article, I think, means that in 2014, after the news conference and grand jury, Richard and his wife dropped by unexpectedly to visit relatives.

    Showing up at friends or relatives unexpectedly might be rude, but not illegal.
    Asking about confidential grand jury investigations or police investigations could be illegal. Trying to intimidate witnesses by saying thing like, "Don't share dirty laundry," would be illegal. If this is all they have on Patricia Welch, it's nothing directly to do with the disappearance of the Lyon sisters. It's an angry old lady not making the best judgement.

    With spousal privilege, I don't see how Patrica could be made to testify against her husband Richard? She could be made to testify against her nephew, Lloyd.

    If one of Lloyd's stories, the most unbelievable one in my opinion, Lloyd walked in on Richard abusing one of the Lyon sisters at the house he shared with Patricia. If the police think this story is true, Patricia could not be compelled to testify against herself or her husband, so what is she doing at the grand jury?

    I can only see a legal reason for making Patricia testify is if she and her husband are given immunity or not considered suspects? The remaining suspect would be Lloyd.



    I
    BBM

    I think spousal privilege is a very nuanced legal thing. IIRC, if a crime occurs before the couple is married then spousal privilege doesn't apply. I think there is more too, but maybe one of our legal eagles could clarify.

    I will have to look into this case sometime. I know very little about it now.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    336
    And that's why a homicide detective from another state would have a very hard time! I don't think Suburban Maryland was prepared for that, at all!

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
    BBM

    I think spousal privilege is a very nuanced legal thing. IIRC, if a crime occurs before the couple is married then spousal privilege doesn't apply. I think there is more too, but maybe one of our legal eagles could clarify.

    I will have to look into this case sometime. I know very little about it now.
    I think you are correct that spousal privilege is not absolute and a very nuanced thing. In some situations a wife could be made to testify against a husband, especially if it's a public event, such as the wife being there at a gunfight at a night club, and not private event such as the husband being or not being home the night of the shooting. Obviously, in either case, wives often are not truthful when it comes to implicating husbands.

    Since I last posted on this thred, the search warrant attachment has been released
    http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wset/...5022314160.pdf
    which on the top of page two describes a conversation at home between Richard, his wife, and nephew Thomas, which the police asked about and obtained "conflicting" descriptions of. These conflicting descriptions could be what someone was lying about.

    Or a tricky prosecutor could have tripped up an old lady as new member Writable suggests.
    Or there are a number of other things, such as kinky sex or drugs in the 70s, that people might lie or omit to police or grand jury.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    398

    Is Richard clever enough to lead cops on a wild goose chase or just curious?

    In the second paragraph on the second page of search warrant attachment:

    http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wset/...5022314160.pdf
    Richard states that he believes his phones are being tapped which shows he thinks the police are on to him.
    Yet he is blabbing to relatives and visiting a potential burial site area in the same conversations he is asking if the police contacted them and what they told the police.

    A clever and guilty party who thinks the police are on to him, might try to lead police on a wild goose chase.

    The police claim that Richard knew nonpublic information about the crime, also in the second paragraph on second page, is not that convincing to me since Richard worked in Wheaton, if not at the Wheaton Plaza Giant at the time (day?), and must have heard every rumor about the crime, a handful of rumor being true by chance alone if not actually observation of the girls at the mall.

    Again, it's possible that Richard's involvement, if any, is covering up the crime, knowingly or unknowingly, such as lending his nephew a car or $50 or just not turning his nephew in, which may not even be a crime.
    Last edited by steveP120; 02-26-2015 at 09:45 AM. Reason: typo

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,076

    Maryland Judiciary searches

    Quote Originally Posted by WaynezWorld View Post
    Richard, I am totally lost on the connection between Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. and Leonard W. Kraisel.

    Can you elaborate or link, please? Thanks.
    Summaries of Maryland Judiciary Court proceedings can be viewed on - line. Here is a link to that website.

    LINK:

    http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us...uiry-index.jsp

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,076
    Quote Originally Posted by siriunsun View Post
    Where are you noting that he lost custody of his children? And what does his history of petty crime have to do with the Lyon sisters and their disappearance? His upbringing and youth experiences have nothing to do with Sheila and Katherine, and focusing on Jr. will probably result in distracting precious time and attention from the case. Hopefully, actual investigators are not doing that, as it's beginning to look like Thomas Jr. is yet another victim in the midst of all this. Can you imagine having to live with an experience like that? Especially if no one listens when you try to testify, and everyone calls you a liar? Not that those things provide anyone with an excuse to turn to addictive behavior, but it is certainly a conflict in life!

    Look to relatives who own property in Florida for Thomas Jr.'s connection to Kraisel. He met Kraisel through other family members. He also did the right thing when Kraisel overstepped his boundaries, one last time, and went to court over it. But once again, his children are NOT part of this (Lyon sisters) equation! Out of curiosity, I looked all over for a recent picture of Kraisel, but couldn't find one, and after Kraisel's conviction about a year and a half ago, or so.....I find it a bit strange that Kraisel is not in the sex offender registry. Is he rich enough to buy his way out of it?

    There's no way an eleven yr old kidnapped and killed two people, then transported them, magically.......(with a skateboard or a wagon?) two hundred + miles to a mountain burial site! We have to look at the adults here. Impugning Jr.'s testimony, should he offer any, could result in a murderer walking free. Would anyone want that?

    Here is what my post stated:
    (Quote) As with his cousin, Lloyd Lee Welch, Jr. his criminal history after 1975 is not legally germane to the case of the Lyon sisters, but it certainly makes one wonder about his upbringing, his youth experiences, and his later life choices. (Unquote).

    Thank you for restating my point.

    While Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. has not been named by MCP as a "Person of Interest", it is quite obvious from their case summary documents to the judge that he was "named" by none other than his cousin Lloyd Welch as being an eyewitness to the abduction of the Lyon Sisters.

    Lloyd might be full of feces up to his eyeballs and lying about everything - or he might be telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth for the first time in his life - but you cannot pick and choose items from his statements like ordering ala carte at a restaurant and then interpret them in a forum such as this to determine guilt or innocence of anyone.

    On the same token, consider the task before any prosecutor trying to present evidence obtained as a result of anything Lloyd told police. They cannot say, "here are the facts" and ignore that Lloyd named Thomas as being present that fateful day.

    The fact is that if ANYONE is going to be prosecuted for any crimes involving the Lyon sisters - based on anything originating from Lloyd's statements - little Thomas is going to be considered a crucial witness. His reliability and veracity as a witness will be questioned very closely and his criminal and civil court record will most certainly be brought into it.

    No matter what Thomas might or might not have done personally on 25 March 1975 (when he was eleven years old) it is highly doubtful that as a young boy, he would be charged with anything. As I stated in my earlier post, NOTHING that he did AFTER that date is germane to what happened to the Lyon sisters.

    Take this discussion one step further and consider that in our legal system, NOTHING that Lloyd Welch has done SINCE 25 March 1975 could be considered as germane to the case at hand or introduced in court if Lloyd is to be charged with abduction of the Lyon sisters.

    However, if Lloyd is to be brought in to court as a WITNESS against another (like his uncle Dick Welch), then Lloyd's life of crime and problems with truth telling will be questioned very closely.

    It is indeed a sad reality that violent criminals walk free so often because of the constraints of our judicial system.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,076
    Old Cemeteries...

    Burial practices today are quite different from earlier times. The usual practice from Colonial times into the 20th century was for people to be buried in family cemeteries located on private land. In many places, even though more recent legislation had been enacted to regulate cemeteries, older existing cemeteries were exempted from newer laws.

    A common practice was to mark graves with wooden headboards or just field stones, which over the years have rotted away or been removed. Cemetery records usually do not exist for such family burying grounds. Also, it was common practice for slaves or free black persons to be buried in ground closely adjacent to where the white landowner's family was buried. Again, those graves are very often unmarked and not recorded anywhere.

    Consider also, that a large majority of casualties in our Civil War (1861-1865) occurred in Virginia. Those soldiers were buried on battlefields, in existing small cemeteries, and in the yards of houses used as tempory field hospitals. There were more casualties during the Civil War that in all of our other conflicts and wars combined.

    With all of the above considerations, it is no wonder that nobody knows all who were buried in those old cemeteries - unless it was someone they knew personally, or a relative that they were aware of.

    All that said, one might consider that if someone wanted to bury a murder victim where he/she wouldn't be found, an old cemetery might be such a place. OR ... If someone wanted to lead LE on a fruitless search to direct them away from the real burial place, mentioning such a cemetery might be a devious ploy.


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Rochester, New York
    Posts
    30,563
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Here is what my post stated:
    (Quote) As with his cousin, Lloyd Lee Welch, Jr. his criminal history after 1975 is not legally germane to the case of the Lyon sisters, but it certainly makes one wonder about his upbringing, his youth experiences, and his later life choices. (Unquote).

    Thank you for restating my point.

    While Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. has not been named by MCP as a "Person of Interest", it is quite obvious from their case summary documents to the judge that he was "named" by none other than his cousin Lloyd Welch as being an eyewitness to the abduction of the Lyon Sisters.

    Lloyd might be full of feces up to his eyeballs and lying about everything - or he might be telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth for the first time in his life - but you cannot pick and choose items from his statements like ordering ala carte at a restaurant and then interpret them in a forum such as this to determine guilt or innocence of anyone.

    On the same token, consider the task before any prosecutor trying to present evidence obtained as a result of anything Lloyd told police. They cannot say, "here are the facts" and ignore that Lloyd named Thomas as being present that fateful day.

    The fact is that if ANYONE is going to be prosecuted for any crimes involving the Lyon sisters - based on anything originating from Lloyd's statements - little Thomas is going to be considered a crucial witness. His reliability and veracity as a witness will be questioned very closely and his criminal and civil court record will most certainly be brought into it.

    No matter what Thomas might or might not have done personally on 25 March 1975 (when he was eleven years old) it is highly doubtful that as a young boy, he would be charged with anything. As I stated in my earlier post, NOTHING that he did AFTER that date is germane to what happened to the Lyon sisters.

    Take this discussion one step further and consider that in our legal system, NOTHING that Lloyd Welch has done SINCE 25 March 1975 could be considered as germane to the case at hand or introduced in court if Lloyd is to be charged with abduction of the Lyon sisters.

    However, if Lloyd is to be brought in to court as a WITNESS against another (like his uncle Dick Welch), then Lloyd's life of crime and problems with truth telling will be questioned very closely.

    It is indeed a sad reality that violent criminals walk free so often because of the constraints of our judicial system.
    BBM

    I respectfully disagree. Criminals will often mix in truths with their lies. So it's incumbent on people to separate the chaff from the wheat. This forum is set up to discuss the information on the crime and to speculate on what may or may not have happened. JMO

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Here is what my post stated:
    (Quote) As with his cousin, Lloyd Lee Welch, Jr. his criminal history after 1975 is not legally germane to the case of the Lyon sisters, but it certainly makes one wonder about his upbringing, his youth experiences, and his later life choices. (Unquote).

    Thank you for restating my point.

    While Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. has not been named by MCP as a "Person of Interest", it is quite obvious from their case summary documents to the judge that he was "named" by none other than his cousin Lloyd Welch as being an eyewitness to the abduction of the Lyon Sisters.

    Lloyd might be full of feces up to his eyeballs and lying about everything - or he might be telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth for the first time in his life - but you cannot pick and choose items from his statements like ordering ala carte at a restaurant and then interpret them in a forum such as this to determine guilt or innocence of anyone.

    On the same token, consider the task before any prosecutor trying to present evidence obtained as a result of anything Lloyd told police. They cannot say, "here are the facts" and ignore that Lloyd named Thomas as being present that fateful day.

    The fact is that if ANYONE is going to be prosecuted for any crimes involving the Lyon sisters - based on anything originating from Lloyd's statements - little Thomas is going to be considered a crucial witness. His reliability and veracity as a witness will be questioned very closely and his criminal and civil court record will most certainly be brought into it.

    No matter what Thomas might or might not have done personally on 25 March 1975 (when he was eleven years old) it is highly doubtful that as a young boy, he would be charged with anything. As I stated in my earlier post, NOTHING that he did AFTER that date is germane to what happened to the Lyon sisters.

    Take this discussion one step further and consider that in our legal system, NOTHING that Lloyd Welch has done SINCE 25 March 1975 could be considered as germane to the case at hand or introduced in court if Lloyd is to be charged with abduction of the Lyon sisters.

    However, if Lloyd is to be brought in to court as a WITNESS against another (like his uncle Dick Welch), then Lloyd's life of crime and problems with truth telling will be questioned very closely.

    It is indeed a sad reality that violent criminals walk free so often because of the constraints of our judicial system.
    I doubt it's the "first" time Lloyd ever told the truth, but in the unusual case where Lloyd is telling the truth, the obvious question is why hasn't Thomas come forward to confirm Lloyd's (unlikely) true story. Here, Thomas's background could be useful in my opinion.

    The most innocent explanation would be that Thomas forgot the car ride with the two girls within a week or forgot what the girls looked like enough to connect them to the Lyon sisters in the news.

    A less innocent explanation would be that Thomas remembered the car ride, but when he brought it up to his parents or relatives, as a 10-year-old would before calling the police, they told him the girls were some friends' daughters; many kids look alike.

    Other explanations would be that like inner-city youth today or the counter-culture of the 70's, cooperating with the police was discouraged. Thomas, after turning 18, does seem to have some, minor?, problems with the law.

    The worst case, for Thomas, would be if even if not a serious criminal at age 10, turned into one at 18 and his uncle knew this and held this over him to keep quite. Of course by now, the statute of limitations would have long since expired on all but the most serious crimes.
    Last edited by steveP120; 02-26-2015 at 11:36 AM. Reason: typo

  13. #43
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Here is what my post stated:
    (Quote) As with his cousin, Lloyd Lee Welch, Jr. his criminal history after 1975 is not legally germane to the case of the Lyon sisters, but it certainly makes one wonder about his upbringing, his youth experiences, and his later life choices. (Unquote).

    Thank you for restating my point.

    While Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. has not been named by MCP as a "Person of Interest", it is quite obvious from their case summary documents to the judge that he was "named" by none other than his cousin Lloyd Welch as being an eyewitness to the abduction of the Lyon Sisters.

    Lloyd might be full of feces up to his eyeballs and lying about everything - or he might be telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth for the first time in his life - but you cannot pick and choose items from his statements like ordering ala carte at a restaurant and then interpret them in a forum such as this to determine guilt or innocence of anyone.

    On the same token, consider the task before any prosecutor trying to present evidence obtained as a result of anything Lloyd told police. They cannot say, "here are the facts" and ignore that Lloyd named Thomas as being present that fateful day.

    The fact is that if ANYONE is going to be prosecuted for any crimes involving the Lyon sisters - based on anything originating from Lloyd's statements - little Thomas is going to be considered a crucial witness. His reliability and veracity as a witness will be questioned very closely and his criminal and civil court record will most certainly be brought into it.

    No matter what Thomas might or might not have done personally on 25 March 1975 (when he was eleven years old) it is highly doubtful that as a young boy, he would be charged with anything. As I stated in my earlier post, NOTHING that he did AFTER that date is germane to what happened to the Lyon sisters.

    Take this discussion one step further and consider that in our legal system, NOTHING that Lloyd Welch has done SINCE 25 March 1975 could be considered as germane to the case at hand or introduced in court if Lloyd is to be charged with abduction of the Lyon sisters.

    However, if Lloyd is to be brought in to court as a WITNESS against another (like his uncle Dick Welch), then Lloyd's life of crime and problems with truth telling will be questioned very closely.

    It is indeed a sad reality that violent criminals walk free so often because of the constraints of our judicial system.
    Did it ever occur to you that Thomas Jr. MIGHT have tried to come forward? Did it ever occur to you that authorities might have blown off every word he said, because.....perchance......he only knew part of the story, but not all? If that's the case, there will be enough character assassination in court and on other websites, not to mention in person. Don't you think testifying, and doing the right thing, will be easier if he is NOT tried in the media, along with any ADULT who becomes an actual DEFENDENT? How would you like to grow up in a family of insane people with criminal tendencies?

    And.....to make matters even more heartbreaking, Maryland had a tendency at that point in history to side with parents or other grownups in a family and against children, making it even harder to testify against parents. Maryland courts also had policies against family members testifying against each other; I don't know if that's still the case, but I do know it was in 1975.

    In your experience, are family criminals generally nice about children who want to testify? Or do children who have already witnessed murders tend to believe uncles and older cousins when they are told that the same thing will happen to them if they "open their mouths"? Think about it.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by WaynezWorld View Post

    Richard, I am totally lost on the connection between Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. and Leonard W. Kraisel.

    Can you elaborate or link, please? Thanks.
    Summaries of Maryland Judiciary Court proceedings can be viewed on - line. Here is a link to that website.

    LINK:





    There's nothing there to suggest that Jr. "lost custody" of his kids.

    The biggest reference to Kraisel actually involves Jr. testifying AGAINST Kraisel. Looks to me like Jr. was trying to do the right thing, and make the world a safer, better place for his children, not the reverse.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
    BBM

    I respectfully disagree. Criminals will often mix in truths with their lies. So it's incumbent on people to separate the chaff from the wheat. This forum is set up to discuss the information on the crime and to speculate on what may or may not have happened. JMO

    I so agree with you! And if you look at Thomas Jr.'s criminal history, it's really nothing special, and there are no felonies. I don't think a jury is going to care if he smoked pot in the past. I do think a jury will care about an eleven year old forced to keep horrible family secrets for forty years. Could his family have threatened him with the same crap that's starting to go on right here: "We'll bring ALL your dirty laundry out and air it publicly! We'll make sure you get accused of something and go to jail!" Do you suppose anyone, over the years, said things like that to him? What happens to someone who wants to go straight on a crooked family?

Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Lloyd Welch is Person of Interest
    By hollye in forum Sheila and Katherine Lyon
    Replies: 1101
    Last Post: 09-12-2017, 11:45 PM
  2. Another Person of interest - HOW?
    By Camper in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 09-04-2008, 09:16 AM

Tags for this Thread