1419 users online (247 members and 1172 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 49
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Pittsburgh (of course)
    Posts
    2,490
    Then the case become far less mysterious in a way. It's all about abduction, rape and murder. The "outside" scenario might also explain why the TV was left on. The girls turned it on when the came home, washed their makeup off, and then decided to sit outside. Suzie might have wanted a cigarette before bed, or maybe one or both of them was too keyed up (or a little drunk) too sleep. Maybe Stacy borrowed some sweatpants to wear outside.

    The only thing I can't figure is how Sherrill's purse would have gotten into the pile with the others and Suzie's overnight bag.

    This scenario takes a hit if there was bleach or some other stuff in the drains, but wouldn't we know if there was SOME "signs of foul play" at the scene? That would have tipped the investigation toward abduction/murder from the get-go.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by pittsburghgirl View Post
    Then the case become far less mysterious in a way. It's all about abduction, rape and murder. The "outside" scenario might also explain why the TV was left on. The girls turned it on when the came home, washed their makeup off, and then decided to sit outside. Suzie might have wanted a cigarette before bed, or maybe one or both of them was too keyed up (or a little drunk) too sleep. Maybe Stacy borrowed some sweatpants to wear outside.

    The only thing I can't figure is how Sherrill's purse would have gotten into the pile with the others and Suzie's overnight bag.

    This scenario takes a hit if there was bleach or some other stuff in the drains, but wouldn't we know if there was SOME "signs of foul play" at the scene? That would have tipped the investigation toward abduction/murder from the get-go.
    Excellent point. This plays into "Hurricane's" scenario where all the women were rounded up in Suzie's bedroom and promised or enticed to leave the premises unharmed, although I can't imagine what that might be. We have the matter of her vehicle all the way into the carport and the keys in her purse.

    Perhaps this could be explained by examining two factors. One would be the matter of the answering machine. What do we really know about that and was there an attempt at obscuring the time line? Secondly it might be explained if one or more of the perp(s) were among the group that went to the home that fateful day. Someone may have placed the purses there deliberately for some unknown reason; dare I say "undoing" the crime?

    I really don't have a good explanation about the stacking of the purses. I've always believed it was more likely than not the process of staging the crime scene. But if it was not done by any of the known people who entered the home that day, how did outsiders manage not to leave any DNA, fingerprints or other identifying material behind? Somehow I'm having trouble imagining bumbling burglers and chronic jailbirds being that careful. We know the purses didn't move themselves and we know the keys didn't return themselves to Sherrill's purse. Beats the heck out of me.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    Excellent point. This plays into "Hurricane's" scenario where all the women were rounded up in Suzie's bedroom and promised or enticed to leave the premises unharmed, although I can't imagine what that might be. We have the matter of her vehicle all the way into the carport and the keys in her purse.

    Perhaps this could be explained by examining two factors. One would be the matter of the answering machine. What do we really know about that and was there an attempt at obscuring the time line? Secondly it might be explained if one or more of the perp(s) were among the group that went to the home that fateful day. Someone may have placed the purses there deliberately for some unknown reason; dare I say "undoing" the crime?

    I really don't have a good explanation about the stacking of the purses. I've always believed it was more likely than not the process of staging the crime scene. But if it was not done by any of the known people who entered the home that day, how did outsiders manage not to leave any DNA, fingerprints or other identifying material behind? Somehow I'm having trouble imagining bumbling burglers and chronic jailbirds being that careful. We know the purses didn't move themselves and we know the keys didn't return themselves to Sherrill's purse. Beats the heck out of me.
    How in the world does Cox being your primary suspect tie in with a perp being in the house the next day? Maybe I'm reading your post the wrong way, but this seems wildly inconsistent.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by odyssey1492 View Post
    How in the world does Cox being your primary suspect tie in with a perp being in the house the next day? Maybe I'm reading your post the wrong way, but this seems wildly inconsistent.
    I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that if Cox were to be eliminated, it narrows the suspect list down. Logically, an investigator checks out the alibis of those who last had contact with the victims. knew them or may have some unknown motive. Since we can't say with absolute certainty that Cox did it, and if there is no forensic evidence showing he was in the home, we have to go back to those who we do know were in the home as a first option, should he be eliminated.

    In the absence of forensic evidence that Cox was in the home, who had the opportunity to place the purses on the steps? Obviously any of those in the home that day could have done that. Why would they do that? I'd say that would be suspicious; wouldn't you?
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that if Cox were to be eliminated, it narrows the suspect list down. Logically, an investigator checks out the alibis of those who last had contact with the victims. knew them or may have some unknown motive. Since we can't say with absolute certainty that Cox did it, and if there is no forensic evidence showing he was in the home, we have to go back to those who we do know were in the home as a first option, should he be eliminated.

    In the absence of forensic evidence that Cox was in the home, who had the opportunity to place the purses on the steps? Obviously any of those in the home that day could have done that. Why would they do that? I'd say that would be suspicious; wouldn't you?
    The 18 people who entered the home that day have been cleared as suspects. I understand you don't feel this was done to your satisfaction, but they were investigated and cleared so you shouldn't post as if that didn't happen.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by odyssey1492 View Post
    The 18 people who entered the home that day have been cleared as suspects. I understand you don't feel this was done to your satisfaction, but they were investigated and cleared so you shouldn't post as if that didn't happen.
    You're entitled to your opinion as am I. I'm not satisfied with the time line nor the explanations given. We'll have to agree to disagree.

    I don't really understand the "faith" that says the police are incorruptible or incapable of incompetence. It happens all the time. What makes this case any different than numerous other cases? The prisons are full of ex cops who had their palms greased or were on someone's payroll.

    Does this sound like an investigation to you? Oh, and BTW, I rechecked this today. I believe this is a highly reliable report.

    "AROUND THE TIME OF THE CRIME, SCREAMS WERE HEARD IN EASTERN GREENE COUNTY. IT WAS REPORTED IN THE MEDIA IN THE EARLY DAYS OF THE INVESTIGATION. WE APPEALED FOR INFORMATION ABOUT IT AND RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM A PROPERTY OWNER WHO TOLD US THEY SAW HEADLIGHTS AND HEARD A WOMAN SCREAMING ON THEIR PROPERTY. THEIR HOUSE IS 1/2 MILE FROM THE ROAD, SO IT WAS TOO FAR TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON. THEY CALLED THE COPS BACK THEN,
    WITH NO RESPONSE OR VISIT FROM AN INVESTIGATOR.
    A DISPATCHER TOLD HER THERE WERE A LOT OF PARTIES GOING ON, AND THE HOMEOWNER RE-EMPHASIZED THAT THE SCREAMS WERE BLOOD-CURDLING.
    AFTER SPEAKING WITH US, THE PROPERTY OWNERS WALKED OUT TO THE SPOT AND THERE THEY FOUND A 5 x 5 FOOT SQUARISH-SHAPED DUG HOLE, WITH SOME DIRT IN A PILE TO ONE SIDE. RECOVERED FROM THE AREA WERE FRAGMENTS OF DENIM-TYPE CLOTH, AND DUCT TAPE. THE DIRT REMAINING IN THE HOLE LOOKS LIKE THE HOLE WAS DUG AND SOMETHING WAS BURIED. THEN, SOME OF THE DIRT WAS DUG OUT AGAIN, AND SOMETHING WAS REMOVED.
    THE HOLE IS WELL WEATHERED AND FULL OF LEAVES ETC FROM THESE MANY YEARS.
    LAST WE HEARD, THEY ARE STILL WAITING FOR THE COPS."

    http://www.airalex.com/PETITION.html

    Cox reportedly had a "kill kit" in his vehicle and surprise, surprise, it included duct tape. Why wasn't this investigated?

    Someone please construct an argument how so obvious a clue as duct tape in the middle of a field would be ignored. I can't think of one.

    Last edited by Missouri Mule; 06-18-2009 at 11:20 PM.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    You're entitled to your opinion as am I. I'm not satisfied with the time line nor the explanations given. We'll have to agree to disagree.
    You are absolutely entitled to your opinion.
    The problem is you are never satisfied with any explanation of anything, but you don't offer up any evidence to back it up or you support it with irrelevant quotes or facts.

    Case in point:
    Your quote about screams in Greene County is totally unrelated to the investigation into the 18 people that entered the house. Cherry picking quotes, and applying them to another aspect of the case altogether isn't proof of anything. All that quote says is that a police dispatcher didn't handle a call very well before anyone even knew a crime of this magnitude occurred.
    Implying that somehow proves the police didn't properly investigate the 18 people that entered the crime scene is superfluous and irresponsible. And someone with your background in investigation ought to know better than that.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by odyssey1492 View Post
    You are absolutely entitled to your opinion.
    The problem is you are never satisfied with any explanation of anything, but you don't offer up any evidence to back it up or you support it with irrelevant quotes or facts.

    Case in point:
    Your quote about screams in Greene County is totally unrelated to the investigation into the 18 people that entered the house. Cherry picking quotes, and applying them to another aspect of the case altogether isn't proof of anything. All that quote says is that a police dispatcher didn't handle a call very well before anyone even knew a crime of this magnitude occurred.

    Implying that somehow proves the police didn't properly investigate the 18 people that entered the crime scene is superfluous and irresponsible. And someone with your background in investigation ought to know better than that.
    Let me say this. I followed this case from early in the investigation to the current time. That scream on the outskirts of the Springfield was reported very early in the investigation but according to the actual property owners was never even investigated with so much as a telephone call.

    As to the 18 people, we ALREADY know that the Chief of Police took it upon himself to exonerate viable suspects on his own judgment without proper vetting. Why should I or anyone believe anything they have to say? How many times do I have to repeat that when I reported an identical van to the department that NO interest was given it? Does that sound like an investigation to you? Explain that to me please.

    Yes, I do have 30 years of investigative experience. The ONE thing I learned in those 30 years and which I practice even today is never to take anything for granted. Assuming anything is a very dangerous and highly costly practice to fall into. Ask anyone who invested with Bernie Madoff.

    BTW, I'm not under any obligation to offer up any evidence. I'm not with the police department. And I'm not in a position to find any as I have no police powers to investigate. I am just an ordinary American citizen who expects professionals in the police departments to honor their pledges to "protect and serve." I don't believe that is too much to ask. And just like "Joe Friday" used to say, "Just the facts." I'm looking at the facts and when facts are obviously ignored anyone should be equally concerned.

    What we have here is analogous to a baseball manager who has managed for 17 years without a success. At what point does the manager get fired and new management be brought in, like a proven crime organization, the Missouri Highway Patrol. It took them but one month to solve a 20 year old crime in the Ozarks. It may take them less time to solve this case if only given the chance.

    And let me add one other thing since you have chosen to make this personal. It is not irresponsible to ask questions or expect the police department to act professionally. They are not to be put on some pedestal as though they are beyond reproach. If they can't handle the heat they should get out of the kitchen to quote Harry Truman.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    Let me say this. I followed this case from early in the investigation to the current time. That scream on the outskirts of the Springfield was reported very early in the investigation but according to the actual property owners was never even investigated with so much as a telephone call.

    As to the 18 people, we ALREADY know that the Chief of Police took it upon himself to exonerate viable suspects on his own judgment without proper vetting. Why should I or anyone believe anything they have to say? How many times do I have to repeat that when I reported an identical van to the department that NO interest was given it? Does that sound like an investigation to you? Explain that to me please.

    Yes, I do have 30 years of investigative experience. The ONE thing I learned in those 30 years and which I practice even today is never to take anything for granted. Assuming anything is a very dangerous and highly costly practice to fall into. Ask anyone who invested with Bernie Madoff.

    BTW, I'm not under any obligation to offer up any evidence. I'm not with the police department. And I'm not in a position to find any as I have no police powers to investigate. I am just an ordinary American citizen who expects professionals in the police departments to honor their pledges to "protect and serve." I don't believe that is too much to ask. And just like "Joe Friday" used to say, "Just the facts." I'm looking at the facts and when facts are obviously ignored anyone should be equally concerned.

    What we have here is analogous to a baseball manager who has managed for 17 years without a success. At what point does the manager get fired and new management be brought in, like a proven crime organization, the Missouri Highway Patrol. It took them but one month to solve a 20 year old crime in the Ozarks. It may take them less time to solve this case if only given the chance.
    We are getting off topic here.
    If you want to quote Joe Friday, then you should be more accepting of the facts that we do have.
    And the fact is that those 18 people were investigated and cleared. To imply they weren't is irresponsible.
    If you think they somehow tie to Cox, I'd like to know what points to that.
    If not and it's just a matter of you thinking some one or more of those 18 might be involved I'd be curious to know who and why, but that would be a discussion for the main board.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    And let me add one other thing since you have chosen to make this personal. It is not irresponsible to ask questions or expect the police department to act professionally. They are not to be put on some pedestal as though they are beyond reproach. If they can't handle the heat they should get out of the kitchen to quote Harry Truman.
    I'm sorry if you feel this is personal, it's not. But you spend so much time tooting your own horn about being an investigator and you have all this experience and inside knowledge of which you can't share or divulge so that when you play fast and loose with the facts it has to be noted.
    If you are going to talk so much about yourself and experience you too should be able to handle the heat.

    Nobody is putting the police on a pedestal. You have intermittently accused them of ineptitude and corruption without any real proof of that.
    I completely disagree, and am just as free to offer a defense of that as you are to say it in the first place.
    If you take that as personal maybe you are placing too much emphasis on yourself, and I'm sorry you feel that way.


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by odyssey1492 View Post
    We are getting off topic here.
    If you want to quote Joe Friday, then you should be more accepting of the facts that we do have.
    And the fact is that those 18 people were investigated and cleared. To imply they weren't is irresponsible.
    If you think they somehow tie to Cox, I'd like to know what points to that.
    If not and it's just a matter of you thinking some one or more of those 18 might be involved I'd be curious to know who and why, but that would be a discussion for the main board.
    When did I say they were tied to Cox?

    What I SAID what that they should be eliminated as suspects (so we can focus on Cox). After all he may be innocent.

    I have two specific problems. The time lines and the answering machine. Bluntly stated, I find the explanations not credible. I also don't find the actions of those on that day as credible.

    It is possible to chew gum and walk at the same time. I have several suspects and several scenarios. Although I put Cox at the top of my list, I am not satisfied with others and what seems to be inexplicable actions. I have NEVER heard of anyone walking into someone's home as was done on that day. Springfield is not some backwater town where everyone knows everyone else and walks into people's homes uninvited. It is the third largest city in Missouri. People don't do this sort of thing there and they certainly didn't do it when I was there. I don't do this with my relatives, my friends or acquaintances. And I don't know anyone else who does either.

    I would add that I don't wish to argue with you. You contacted me via e-mail and I shared some thoughts with you. Since that time you have pursued an agenda that I find annoying and gratuitous. Had I known that everything I would say would be twisted beyond what I intended or even said I would not have responded. What I am interested in are the facts; proven facts, plausible theories and reasoned and civil discussions. I am not interested in a personal exchange attacking one's ethics or thoughts.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  12. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Missouri Mule View Post
    When did I say they were tied to Cox?

    What I SAID what that they should be eliminated as suspects (so we can focus on Cox). After all he may not have done it.

    I have two specific problems. The time lines and the answering machine.
    Bluntly stated, I find the explanations not credible. I also don't find the actions of those on that day as credible.

    It is possible to chew gum and walk at the same time. I have several suspects and several scenarios. Although I put Cox at the top of my list, I am not satisfied with others and what seems to be inexplicable actions. I have NEVER heard of anyone walking into someone's home as was done on that day. Springfield is not some backwater town where everyone knows everyone else and walks into people's homes uninvited. It is the third largest city in Missouri. People don't do this sort of thing there and they certainly didn't do it when I was there. I don't do this with my relatives, my friends or acquaintances. And I don't know anyone else who does either.

    I would add that I don't wish to argue with you. You contacted me via e-mail and I shared some thoughts with you. Since that time you have pursued an agenda that I find annoying and gratuitous. Had I known that everything I would say would be twisted beyond what I intended or even said I would not have responded. What I am interested in are the facts; proven facts, plausible theories and reasoned and civil discussions. I am not interested in a personal exchange attacking one's ethics or thoughts.
    I'm not attacking your ethics, but I feel I have to point out when certain facts are plainly ignored. I find certain aspects of your agenda annoying as well. You are certainly free to ignore my posts.
    As for our contact via email, you asked I not share any of that on the boards, and I have honored your request and kept my word, so I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

    As I said earlier, the way I read your post was that you thought there might be a connection between Cox and one of the people in the house that day, that was my original confusion with where this was going and why I pointed out those 18 people had been investigated and cleared.

    I'm sorry this has gotten to the level it has between us, and I think it's safe to say we both ought to dial it back a little.
    Out of respect for the case and others on the board I will choose my words more carefully in responding, but in all fairness you should also allow some of the rest of us to have opinions without summarily shooting them down because they don't fit your theories. Because whether you realize it or not, that is how it comes across.
    Again, my apologies to you and the others on the board for letting the dialogue become argumentative.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by odyssey1492 View Post
    I'm not attacking your ethics, but I feel I have to point out when certain facts are plainly ignored. I find certain aspects of your agenda annoying as well. You are certainly free to ignore my posts.
    As for our contact via email, you asked I not share any of that on the boards, and I have honored your request and kept my word, so I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

    As I said earlier, the way I read your post was that you thought there might be a connection between Cox and one of the people in the house that day, that was my original confusion with where this was going and why I pointed out those 18 people had been investigated and cleared.

    I'm sorry this has gotten to the level it has between us, and I think it's safe to say we both ought to dial it back a little.

    Out of respect for the case and others on the board I will choose my words more carefully in responding, but in all fairness you should also allow some of the rest of us to have opinions without summarily shooting them down because they don't fit your theories. Because whether you realize it or not, that is how it comes across.

    Again, my apologies to you and the others on the board for letting the dialogue become argumentative.
    I wasn't aware I was shooting anyone's view down. I welcome any and all "new thinking" regarding this case.

    I don't have any ironclad theory that fits all the facts. What I have said, and what I do believe is that someone, at some time, has put all the facts together perfectly. We just don't know what it is or if it can be proven. After all Einstein labored long in the vineyards of thought before he perfected his General Theory of Relativity. And it was not until it was conclusively proven several years later that he overturned Newton's gravitational theory that had been accepted for two hundred years.

    Let's discuss the various theories:

    1) Cox did it. If so, how did he keep his DNA/forensics out of the house?

    2) The "burglars did it. If so how did they keep their DNA/forensics out of the house?

    3) A random killer(s) did it? Possible, although we have no evidence.

    4) A serial murderer? If so, why would he come to this home?

    5) Drug trade? If so, were any of the women tied to such an enterprise?

    6) Jealousy? One of the girls may have locked horns with another. Any evidence of this? Surely one of the classmates may have some information.

    7) One or more of the 18? Don't know. Didn't interview them.

    8) One or more of the people who entered the home in that two month period? Possible.

    9) Some "motorcycle gang?" Police say no; specifically the "Galloping Gooses."

    10) Some mysterious "concrete workers?" Possibly, some reports say so.

    11) Some mysterious "businessman behind a big desk with wing tipped shoes?" Could be. The lead detective claimed he looked at all the suspects to see what kind of shoes they wore.

    12) The women just ran off the start new lives? Could be, but they have never been seen and left everything behind.

    13) The women were abducted for the "sex trade" and carted off to some third word country. Possible but no evidence of such.

    14) The grave robbing theory? Plausible but the chief evidently ruled them out.

    15) Relatives? We don't know but we do know that relatives have a high percentage of crimes toward other relatives.

    16) "Space Aliens?" Unlikely, since we know that matter cannot exceed the speed of light and the nearest star is four light years away. Would require "worm holes" to go vast distances in the universe since there are no habitable planets in our own solar system. Highly unlikely.

    If anyone can think of any other theories, I'd be interested.
    "Never answer an anonymous letter"

    "I didn't really say everything I said"

    Yogi Berra



  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,263
    Last edited by KateB; 05-10-2015 at 02:42 PM. Reason: remove broken photo img tag

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Ozarks
    Posts
    498
    Thanks for your help in getting Cox's picutre up, Indy. It took me a couple of days to get them to send me the newest one. I have put in a formal request with TXDOC to go interview Cox.
    Don't confront me with my failures.....I had not forgotten them.

    Jackson Browne

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Suspect - John Robert King and Gerald Pieter Zwarst
    By JeannieC in forum Texas Killing Fields and Mysteries Along I-45
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 03-03-2017, 02:24 PM
  2. SUSPECT - Robert Lawrence Wilson
    By JeannieC in forum Texas Killing Fields and Mysteries Along I-45
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-20-2014, 05:23 PM
  3. Zodiac Killer- New Suspect-Robert G
    By acmeintuitiveenergy in forum The Zodiac Killer
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-30-2012, 07:22 PM

Tags for this Thread