1345 users online (216 members and 1129 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 52
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,360

    Theories

    We have had many different theories posted on different threads. I thought it would be nice to put them all in one place.If you have more than one,go ahead and post them all.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,360

    My theories.....

    Ok, I'll go first. I have 2.

    There were people,other than their parents, that knew and some that could have known that they were going to the mall.These people were brother Jay, brother Joe,Melanie Ganas(Kate's friend) and anyone that was at her house(friends,relatives,neighbors,ect.),anyone that Mary talked to at bowling and anyone Jay and Joe talked to that day.So,one of my theories is based on this.

    #1- The girls were stopped by someone that they knew on their walk home that day and accepted a ride.

    #2- We saw on vidoe how Carli Brucia was quietly led away in broad day light by her killer. I can only imagine what he said to her. I'm guessing it was a major threat,thus my next theory.The girls were stopped by a stranger on their walk home. He grabs one of them (not violently,much like Carli's abductor,in a stern manner)and tells the other to comply or the one he grabbed will be hurt. They comply and get into his vehicle.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Here, but I'd rather be at the beach
    Posts
    2,077
    I have three possible theories. Two differ only slightly from one another.

    1. Perp is trolling streets where the girls walk home. Sees the girls, and either (a) says something alarming to get them in his vehicle, something to catch the girls off guard so they are not thinking clearly or (b) somehow snatches one of the girls, probably kate, and threatens harm if sheila doesn't come along and do as he says.

    2. Perp is trolling mall parking lot notices girls entering and exiting mall with no adult present. Gets them into vehicle by doing one of the above mentioned things.

    In parking lot more likely grabs one of them. On street driving, most likely makes an alarming statement. But either could happen at either place.

    3. Perp is in mall for some activity. Being the easter bunny, walking around selling something, acting in some play/doing easter games/hunts, making easter baskets/easter crafts, holiday singers/piano player, a photographer etc.
    the girls see this person, maybe interact with him. He then goes to car which is parked by the entrance from which they exit, and as they leave he approaches them with some info pertaining to his business in the mall. The girls have had some contact previously so they let down their guard, and then he gets them in his vehicle.

    With all of these scenerios the girls are taken by a stranger. A stranger who is in town briefly, but is familiar with the area.
    Last edited by SharetheLight; 05-06-2009 at 02:34 PM. Reason: additional comments
    Children don't stop dancing

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    338

    Never thought of this angle to look at before.....

    Quote Originally Posted by SharetheLight View Post
    I have three possible theories. Two differ only slightly from one another.

    ~ snip ~

    3. Perp is in mall for some activity. Being the easter bunny, walking around selling something, acting in some play/doing easter games/hunts, making easter baskets/easter crafts, holiday singers/piano player, a photographer etc.
    the girls see this person, maybe interact with him. He then goes to car which is parked by the entrance from which they exit, and as they leave he approaches them with some info pertaining to his business in the mall. The girls have had some contact previously so they let down their guard, and then he gets them in his vehicle.

    With all of these scenerios the girls are taken by a stranger. A stranger who is in town briefly, but is familiar with the area.
    Was the person who was playing the Easter bunny ever questioned? I mean you never know who it is that is playing the part and not all people who work that job are nice. You just never know.....

    M ~

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Here, but I'd rather be at the beach
    Posts
    2,077
    Quote Originally Posted by mnegri1973 View Post
    Was the person who was playing the Easter bunny ever questioned? I mean you never know who it is that is playing the part and not all people who work that job are nice. You just never know.....

    M ~
    I think someone posted that all mall employees had been questioned even the bunnies. I just think if you are questioning that many people and really have no leads, then it'd be easy to miss something.
    I hate to think about it but I think a lot of less than desirable people play the part of the Easter bunny and Santa Claus to be near children and have physical contact with children.
    I only hope that anyone working at the plaza that day for holiday activities, seasonal workers etc. were seriously considered. If you are a pedophile you are going to look for a job that allows you contact with children.
    Children don't stop dancing

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,077

    Many Possibilities...

    There are many possibilities and many possible theories with this case. Of course, just about anything is possible, but you also have to consider what is a likely possibility and what is less likely or less probable.

    What makes the case so difficult is that it just does not fit the "normal" definitions or categories. At least not as I can tell based on press releases and stories.

    The most common type of disappearance or missing case occurs when a child simply runs away or fails to state where he/she is going. About 90 percent of those cases resolve themselves within 48 hours or so. It is Possible the Kate and Sheila simply decided to run away. But the fact that they have never turned up after 34 years would tend to argue against that theory. Unless what may have started as a "runaway" caper turned into an abduction. Again, the facts tend to argue against this scenario as well. The girls were considered very obedient and reliable, and one eyewitness even claimed to have seen them walking from the mall in the direction of their home. There was no evidence that they had made preparations to run away. They had less than four dollars between them when they left home for the mall. And there was no evidence of any kind of family strife preceeding their disappearance.

    Another scenario, which was checked out very thoroughly by investigators, was the possibility of the girls somehow falling into a drainage ditch or pond on their walk home. Some disappearances have in fact been resolved weeks or years later when a body is found in a ditch, cave, woods, etc. But this particular case did not involve a lot of wilderness hiking. The walk home for the girls would have taken only about 15 minutes, past about 40 houses, mostly on sidewalks and only part of the way through a wooded area surrounded by houses. There was a swimming pool (not open in March) and a garden pond near their route, but divers very throughly searched it.

    The most likely theories, in my opinion, would be those involving abduction. Here, again, we are faced with some difficult facts. First, there were no eyewitnesses to any abduction, and second it was a somewhat rare double abduction, aparently in the middle of the day, and no physical evidence or trace of the girls has ever been found. These factors make this a very unique - and frustrating case.

    When forming a theory regarding abduction, there are a number of factors to consider. You have the known or generally accepted facts. Then you have the statements of various eyewitnesses and family members. You have the setting or scene of 1975 Wheaton Plaza, and the area surrounding it, including the parking lot, the adjacent residential area of Kensington, and the road system in the area.

    It is possible that the girls were abducted by someone living in one of the houses lining their route. This would have involved a great deal of risk on the part of the abductor. Police went door to door and conducted thorough interviews and even searches of those houses. No trace of the girls was found. While possible, this scenario appears less likely than a stranger abduction. The residents were checked out carefully, as were all known pedophiles in the area. No connections were made and no suspects were developed.

    Most of the above factors, when analyzed, would tend to point to the probability that the abductor (or abductors) used a motor vehicle in commiting the crime. One could consider all the possible types of vehicle and which would be the best, but in the end, almost any vehicle would do.

    If a motor vehicle is to be part of the theory, then one must consider a number of possible scenarios as to how to get the victims into the vehicle. Abduction or even approaching the victims inside the mall would be very risky because of the possibility of eyewitnesses seeing the act.

    It would be most likely that the abductor would attempt to get the girls as close to his vehicle as possible. This could have been attempted and achieved in a number of ways.

    Consider first the possibility of the girls getting into the vehicle in the mall parking lot;

    - If the abductor wanted to trick the girls into going with him to his car, he could have approached them inside the mall with a request, or an offer of some sort. It is not likely that he would have attempted to grab/coerce them in the mall and it is also not likely that he would have shouted anything to them about an emergency INSIDE the mall. But, he might have asked them to help him pick out a present of some sort for "his daughter" or "his neice" and then he could have offered them some money to help him get it to his car. Or he could have asked them to meet him outside for some special treat. To pull this off, he would have to be very engaging and friendly and also believable - to the victims. The problems or risks with this scenario would be that the girls could easily walk away from him and report him. Also, someone might see him with the girls and either interfere, or remember him.

    - Another scenario involves the abductor or an accomplice making contact with the potential victims inside the mall, then making a second contact with them outside the mall and closer to his vehicle. The girls' guard would be down if they had contact with him earlier. This second contact could simply be a friendly greeting, or could be the second part of a more elaborate plan with the initial meeting being the set-up, and the second being the sting. For example: The first meeting inside the mall, the girls are approached by a well dressed, nice man who asks them their opinion on what pet he should buy for his daughter. The second "chance" meeting in the parking lot, he says "Oh, hi girls, say would you like to see the puppy I picked out?"

    - Of course, it is also possible that the abductor had watched children coming and going and simply waited his chance and grabbed the girls when they walked near his vehicle. In this case, he simply takes the chance of someone seeing him, but he calculates the risk and acts quickly. An accomplice could have been involved if this was the way it happened, one to drive and one to grab/subdue the girls.

    The grab/coerce scenario could have been the same if the girls were abducted on a residential street. But the risks of being seen (in this particular case) could potentially have been greater. A grab on the street would involve a moving target and would require the abductor to exit his vehicle. The possibility of the girls running to a nearby house for shelter/help would have been greater than if they were approached in the mall parking lot. So the street scenario would have involved more risk of being seen and greater risk of failure.

    The more likely street scenario would involve the abductor using some sort of scare or trick to get the girls to enter his vehicle voluntarily. He could have parked in a strategic spot and waited for the girls. Then, when they approached, he could have said that he was lost and did they know how to get to Jennings Road? When the girls would try to give directions, he would feign misunderstanding, finally inviting them to get in and show him the way.

    Another possibility would have the abductor driving by the girls and saying that their parents had been in a bad accident and that they had asked him to pick them up and take them to the hospital.

    Of course, there is also the possibility of an acquaintance offering them a ride...
    Last edited by Richard; 10-16-2009 at 12:02 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,077

    Formulating a theory...

    As I mentioned above in an earlier post, there are many possibilities regarding this case and what happened to the Lyon girls.

    The most common or "usual" explanations, such as: A family member did it, or they ran away of their own volition, or they got lost just, etc - do not seem to fit what we know. That doesn't mean that these are not POSSIBLE explanations, but just that this case seems to be in that rare category which does not fit any of the standard and easy answers.

    Although stranger abduction is rare when compared with cases of runaway children, family violence, and accidents, it seems to be the most likely explanation regarding the missing sisters.

    While no forensic evidence exists and no eyewitness actually saw the girls being abducted, it is very likely that they were. Going forward with that basic thought, there have been a number of abduction theories posted over the past several years by quite a few Websleuthers.

    Those theories vary from eachother as to motive of the abductor, whether he was known or not known by the girls, time and place of abduction, whether or not a vehicle was used, method used to abduct the girls, prior planning, and subsequent actions of the abductor. These are all questions that beg asking and answers.

    Katherine and Sheila aparently had not planned a trip to Wheaton Plaza until shortly before they left home to walk to the Mall. Their mother stated that they needed to figure out what they wanted to do, so as not to awaken their father who was asleep after an all night shift at the radio station. Their intentions were to look at Easter displays and to have Pizza for lunch at the Orange Bowl. They were planning to be home about 4PM. Their mother had suggested that to them and they had so stated to a friend who called them. Also, Kate had intended to visit a neighbor to see her new baby that afternoon. The usual route taken by the girls to and from the Mall was also known.

    Knowing the victims' intentions and usual patterns would have been advantageous to a potential abductor, but there is no evidence or reasonable expectation that anyone outside the Lyon Family would have known all that.

    Investigators do know those intentions (as well as a few other facts regarding where and when the girls were seen that day) and this should figure into any theories.

    While it is Possible that someone was specifically targeting these two little girls and had tapped their phone and was keeping continuous vigil on them, just waiting for the right moment and place to grab them, - it seems MORE likely that the girls were simply taken at an opportune moment by someone who was intent on abducting SOMEONE, but not particularly them.

    There are of course, many possibilities between those two ends of the spectrum. For instance, someone may have seen them going into the mall and decided to wait for them to leave. Or someone may have spoken to them inside the mall and convinced them there, or outside to get into a vehicle with him. Or the abductor may have been someone known by the girls.

    There is also the question of whether force or deception was used.

    Then there is the question of where exactly they were abducted. Inside the Mall? In the parking lot? On the streets leading to their home? Or did they go elsewhere on their own after leaving the Mall and get picked up there?

    Who did it? That is a big question. There are a number of named individuals who could have done it. And some unknown possibilities as well. Knowing more about each one as well as what police did to investigate each would help.

    Known serial killers like Ted Bundy, Zodiac, Gerald Stano, and many others were loose and operating at this time, but most investigators feel that they were elsewhere in the country at the time. Then there are others, not quite as infamous, who were active but whose wherabouts cannot be ascertained for the 25th of March 1975. The abductor could be dead now, or he could have been someone completely unknown and still active today.

    Where were they taken? Where are they now?

    All of these questions need to be considered in formulating a theory.
    Last edited by Richard; 11-11-2009 at 03:02 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    38

    Lyon Abduction

    I sometimes have dreams about missing persons cases. I recently had a dream about this case. Here is what I remember from the dream:

    A man posing as a police officer approached them from an unmarked vehicle. He also said he was mall security and told the girls that they had committed an infraction. ( It wasnt clear exactly, something they did at the mall). They were told to cooperate or their parents would be called. One sister was crying at the time, but no violence was used against them initially. They were taken to a home outside of the state where....well.....I think everyone can surmise the rest. That is all I remember.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    492
    This is the most baffling, yet sad mystery of these two little sisters. One impression I get is that it was someone they knew or had been previously confortable being around. Since they were so close to home, it could have been someone who lived along the Drumm Avenue area who may have been the abductor, and they were lured into the house or garage of the residence.

    If it was the Tape Recorder Man, perhaps in his interview with them at the mall, they told him what time they would be leaving the mall that day, and what route home they would take. He could have listened to their voices on the tape recorder over and over, up until the time that they said they were ready to leave.

    If it was TRM, he could have followed them to the area where they were last seen, and asked the girls if they wanted to finish the interview, or he could have used the ruse of "Hey, girls, I just happened to drive by and saw you two walking. Can I take you girls home?" The girls could have got into his car willingly.

    I do not believe the girls were forced into the car, or immediately gaged, bound, and tied. These are two little girls, and little girls (at least in my family through years) giggle, and make a lot commotion, especially when they panic or become scared.

    Once the abductor got them into the car he could have:

    1. Gave the girls a treat, like a candy bar, or ice cream that was laced with a drug to sedate them, or put them to sleep for a long period of time, which would give him ample time to get out of the area to his desired location.

    2. I hate to say it, but probably, or purposely drove past their home. The girls would have said they he went past their house. He would have told them that he didn't realize it, and would turn the car back around. The car kept driving and they started to panic when minutes and miles went by when the car didn't turn back around. I do agree with another poster that the driver could have altered the car doors, the interior handles, and locks. If they started to panic and cry, and tried to escape, they wouldn't have worked. He could have altered the children's seat belts too, so that once they locked, they couldn't be undone.

    This is just a truly sad and terrifying case. I couldn't imagine how those little girls felt, and what was going through their minds once they realized they were in danger. Concerning this case, HOPE is never too late.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,077
    I feel that the Lyon Sisters were abducted after leaving the Mall and on their way home by a single individual waiting for them in his vehicle just outside the Mall.

    This place outside the Mall was very likely a small parking area between the rear entrance of Montgomery Wards and the perimeter road, just opposite the end of Faulkner Road. From this vantage point, the abductor could watch anyone approaching the Mall on foot from the Residential area of Kensington.

    This area is/was very close to the McDonalds Restaurant, just across University Ave from one of four Mall parking lot entrances. Back then, McDonalds did not have inside seating. Food was purchased from a window. You got it in a bag and took it to your car to eat - or go elsewhere with it. So someone sitting in the Mall parking lot eating lunch would be quite normal.

    The abductor was probably someone who was constantly on the hunt for potential victims. He might have had some sort of "time table" or cyclic pattern which drove him to abduct children or women at certain times, but he probably was not rigidly tied to a specific date. He watched for certain things which appealed to him in a potential victim and waited his chance. He probably had a plan thought out in advance and may even have had a back-up plan in mind - just in case something went wrong with his first one.

    In the case of the Lyon Sisters, I think he watched them come up Faulkner toward him and noted that they were afoot and without adult supervision. He saw which entrance they used to the Mall and then either waited in his car for them to come out again, or he followed them into the Mall and observed them in a covert manner.

    He would have dressed in a nice manner - that is, suit or dressy clothes, but nothing loud or memorable. He probably had a certain kind of "uniform" or set of clothes that he chose when hunting for victims. By "uniform" I do not mean like a police uniform or military uniform, but rather some outfit that he thought looked good on him and which he hoped would impress his victim or put them at ease.

    It is my feeling that at some point, he approached the girls or placed himself in their path so that he could make some sort of friendly contact with them. The Tape Recorder Man persona would have fit this bill perfectly, but any other similar ruse could have been used. The point would be to make that initial contact so that a later approach would have the girls at ease. He may have used the contact as a first step in a scenario of "set-up and sting". That is, he may have asked them some innocent thing like, "Where is the pet store, I am thinking of buying a kitten for my neice." Later, he could say that he found the store and had the kitten in his car, would they like to see it?

    Note, it is possible that he might have done this with more than one child or pair of children FOR PRACTICE on other occasions, but in this case he probably only approached Sheila and Kate. To have approached other children that same day would have meant that witnesses could identify him and his technique.

    After making contact, and after deciding that these girls were "acceptable" to him as victims, he returned to his car to await their departure from the Mall.

    At this point, his best chance of abduction would have been right in the parking lot, using a ruse to get the girls to approach him and his vehicle.

    Should something go awry, however - such as the presence in the parking lot of a witness, a passing cop, or such - he could then fall back on his secondary plan. That would be to watch the girls go past him and then drive an intercept course to meet them on their way home.

    Now the intercept could have been planned out days in advance, by driving around the residential streets and observing people, but more likely he had a map showing those roads and picked out a secondary possible ambush site inside the residential area where he could park the car with minimum visibility from houses and in an area that the girls were likely to travel. This would have been at the intersection of Drumm and McComas.

    Should anything prevent him from making the abduction on that day, he could simply do a similar thing the next day or the day after. After all, the girls lived in that neighborhood and the opportunity to abduct them might come again - or there were plenty of other children as well. For him, much of the pleasure he derived was in the hunt itself, not necessarily in the actual abduction.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I feel that the Lyon Sisters were abducted after leaving the Mall and on their way home by a single individual waiting for them in his vehicle just outside the Mall.

    This place outside the Mall was very likely a small parking area between the rear entrance of Montgomery Wards and the perimeter road, just opposite the end of Faulkner Road. From this vantage point, the abductor could watch anyone approaching the Mall on foot from the Residential area of Kensington.

    This area is/was very close to the McDonalds Restaurant, just across University Ave from one of four Mall parking lot entrances. Back then, McDonalds did not have inside seating. Food was purchased from a window. You got it in a bag and took it to your car to eat - or go elsewhere with it. So someone sitting in the Mall parking lot eating lunch would be quite normal.

    The abductor was probably someone who was constantly on the hunt for potential victims. He might have had some sort of "time table" or cyclic pattern which drove him to abduct children or women at certain times, but he probably was not rigidly tied to a specific date. He watched for certain things which appealed to him in a potential victim and waited his chance. He probably had a plan thought out in advance and may even have had a back-up plan in mind - just in case something went wrong with his first one.

    In the case of the Lyon Sisters, I think he watched them come up Faulkner toward him and noted that they were afoot and without adult supervision. He saw which entrance they used to the Mall and then either waited in his car for them to come out again, or he followed them into the Mall and observed them in a covert manner.

    He would have dressed in a nice manner - that is, suit or dressy clothes, but nothing loud or memorable. He probably had a certain kind of "uniform" or set of clothes that he chose when hunting for victims. By "uniform" I do not mean like a police uniform or military uniform, but rather some outfit that he thought looked good on him and which he hoped would impress his victim or put them at ease.

    It is my feeling that at some point, he approached the girls or placed himself in their path so that he could make some sort of friendly contact with them. The Tape Recorder Man persona would have fit this bill perfectly, but any other similar ruse could have been used. The point would be to make that initial contact so that a later approach would have the girls at ease. He may have used the contact as a first step in a scenario of "set-up and sting". That is, he may have asked them some innocent thing like, "Where is the pet store, I am thinking of buying a kitten for my neice." Later, he could say that he found the store and had the kitten in his car, would they like to see it?

    Note, it is possible that he might have done this with more than one child or pair of children FOR PRACTICE on other occasions, but in this case he probably only approached Sheila and Kate. To have approached other children that same day would have meant that witnesses could identify him and his technique.

    After making contact, and after deciding that these girls were "acceptable" to him as victims, he returned to his car to await their departure from the Mall.

    At this point, his best chance of abduction would have been right in the parking lot, using a ruse to get the girls to approach him and his vehicle.

    Should something go awry, however - such as the presence in the parking lot of a witness, a passing cop, or such - he could then fall back on his secondary plan. That would be to watch the girls go past him and then drive an intercept course to meet them on their way home.

    Now the intercept could have been planned out days in advance, by driving around the residential streets and observing people, but more likely he had a map showing those roads and picked out a secondary possible ambush site inside the residential area where he could park the car with minimum visibility from houses and in an area that the girls were likely to travel. This would have been at the intersection of Drumm and McComas.

    Should anything prevent him from making the abduction on that day, he could simply do a similar thing the next day or the day after. After all, the girls lived in that neighborhood and the opportunity to abduct them might come again - or there were plenty of other children as well. For him, much of the pleasure he derived was in the hunt itself, not necessarily in the actual abduction.
    Richard,
    Couple of things : why not,if he was just trolling,pick one single victim ? Sounds like a lot of kids went to the mall area alone ? Why take the risk of attempting to abduct two girls ?

    The other thing that stayed with me is that the boy who claimed to have seen the girls that evening, going towards the mall, and away from their home, still sticks to his story after all these years ? Maybe he did ?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,077

    Take Two...

    Quote Originally Posted by liz b. View Post
    Richard,
    Couple of things : why not,if he was just trolling,pick one single victim ? Sounds like a lot of kids went to the mall area alone ? Why take the risk of attempting to abduct two girls ?

    The other thing that stayed with me is that the boy who claimed to have seen the girls that evening, going towards the mall, and away from their home, still sticks to his story after all these years ? Maybe he did ?
    Very good questions. And they make up part of the conflicting mystery surrounding the girls' disappearance.

    I think that this individual DID take single victims on most other occasions and that he saw something in one or both of the girls which caused him to risk a double abduction. Perhaps it was the challenge of the task that appealled to him.

    A scenario involving a double abduction does involve more risk IF it were a forceful abduction. Obviously trying to grab two girls forcefully is much harder that grabbing only one, and the chance of an escaping witness is great. But if he had a good ruse/story, the girls may have felt safer together and fell for his deceit.

    As to the story of the 12 year-old boy who was quoted in newspapers as having seen the girls going TOWARD the mall at "7:30", I have often wondered about that myself. He may have seen the girls about 11:30 AM as they walked to the mall.

    Police openly doubted (in a press conference) the boy's story within days of the girls going missing - mainly because they felt that the 7:30 time did not mesh with other facts which they had come to believe.

    For one thing, by 7PM, the police and Mr. Lyon were actively looking for the girls at Wheaton Plaza shopping center and in their Kensington neighborhood. Also, (at that time) no other Kensington residents reported seeing the girls anywhere in the neighborhood that afternoon.

    Two teen-aged boys did come forward (AFTER the news media reported that police discounted the 12 year-old's sighting) to say that they had seen the girls some time earlier that afternoon near Drumm and Devin walking AWAY from the Mall. Thirty years later, an old man claimed to have also seen them in the same vicinity headed home that afternoon.

    I have mentioned in previous posts that I feel the 12 year-old boy could have either mispoken or was misquoted regarding the time of his sighting. I would like to know what he actually said to police at the time and what he would say today regarding when and where he saw the girls. It could be an important piece of the puzzle.

    He was probably the first eye witness to come forward with information regarding seeing the girls, and he actually knew both girls from having seen them on several previous occassions.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Very good questions. And they make up part of the conflicting mystery surrounding the girls' disappearance.

    I think that this individual DID take single victims on most other occasions and that he saw something in one or both of the girls which caused him to risk a double abduction. Perhaps it was the challenge of the task that appealled to him.

    A scenario involving a double abduction does involve more risk IF it were a forceful abduction. Obviously trying to grab two girls forcefully is much harder that grabbing only one, and the chance of an escaping witness is great. But if he had a good ruse/story, the girls may have felt safer together and fell for his deceit.

    As to the story of the 12 year-old boy who was quoted in newspapers as having seen the girls going TOWARD the mall at "7:30", I have often wondered about that myself. He may have seen the girls about 11:30 AM as they walked to the mall.

    Police openly doubted (in a press conference) the boy's story within days of the girls going missing - mainly because they felt that the 7:30 time did not mesh with other facts which they had come to believe.

    For one thing, by 7PM, the police and Mr. Lyon were actively looking for the girls at Wheaton Plaza shopping center and in their Kensington neighborhood. Also, (at that time) no other Kensington residents reported seeing the girls anywhere in the neighborhood that afternoon.

    Two teen-aged boys did come forward (AFTER the news media reported that police discounted the 12 year-old's sighting) to say that they had seen the girls some time earlier that afternoon near Drumm and Devin walking AWAY from the Mall. Thirty years later, an old man claimed to have also seen them in the same vicinity headed home that afternoon.

    I have mentioned in previous posts that I feel the 12 year-old boy could have either mispoken or was misquoted regarding the time of his sighting. I would like to know what he actually said to police at the time and what he would say today regarding when and where he saw the girls. It could be an important piece of the puzzle.

    He was probably the first eye witness to come forward with information regarding seeing the girls, and he actually knew both girls from having seen them on several previous occassions.
    There is a scenario in which all of the witnesses could be telling the truth : the 2 boys and the old man saw them going in the direction of their home in the afternoon. Could hold true if the girls headed home when their mother had suggested, and either the house was locked up, and they had no way to get in, or,they had a doorkey, and let themselves in.IIRC,the family was not home between 3-4ish that afternoon. Either way,the girls may have left the house,and gone elsewhere in the neighborhood. Later, in the early evening, they decided to head back to the mall. The other boy then saw them going towards the mall ... MOO

    I read in an earlier thread that the boy still maintains that he saw them when he said he did. He hasn't wavered in his statement at all...

    Allowing for some flexibility in the reported times, it is possible that they are all telling the truth... That boy was 12 at the time,old enough to speak up if he was misquoted,or misunderstood. But,he has never said he was mistaken about the time of day... MOO

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    5,077

    The 12 year-old boy and his sighting of the girls...

    Quote Originally Posted by liz b. View Post
    There is a scenario in which all of the witnesses could be telling the truth : the 2 boys and the old man saw them going in the direction of their home in the afternoon. Could hold true if the girls headed home when their mother had suggested, and either the house was locked up, and they had no way to get in, or,they had a doorkey, and let themselves in.IIRC,the family was not home between 3-4ish that afternoon. Either way,the girls may have left the house,and gone elsewhere in the neighborhood. Later, in the early evening, they decided to head back to the mall. The other boy then saw them going towards the mall ... MOO

    I read in an earlier thread that the boy still maintains that he saw them when he said he did. He hasn't wavered in his statement at all...

    Allowing for some flexibility in the reported times, it is possible that they are all telling the truth... That boy was 12 at the time,old enough to speak up if he was misquoted,or misunderstood. But,he has never said he was mistaken about the time of day... MOO
    Newspapers reported the boy's story and even used his real name within a day or two of the earliest reports, stating that he claimed to have seen the girls going toward the mall and that the time was around "7:30".

    Police very likely interviewed the boy, but possibly AFTER the news reporter spoke with him. I say this because the police never released ANY names of minors in any of their press conferences/releases. Police did say in a press conference on the 27th or 28th of March 1975, that they did not think the sighting was accurate because of the "7:30" time not fitting with other bits of information.

    A later interview of the boy by a Washington Star reporter provided more information about the boy and what he had been doing that morning (playing basketball with a friend) and that he was jogging or running to the mall when he passed the girls and looked back at them. He also indicated that he knew the girls personally from previous sightings or contact.

    That Star interview, however did not quote him as to what time he saw the girls on 25 March.

    One problem is that on 25 March 1975, it would have been dark for about an hour by 7:30PM - an odd time for any kid to have been out playing basketball or jogging to the mall.

    It is possible that a 12 year-old does not know how to tell (or estimate) time very well. It is also possible that the boy could have said "'leven thirty" and was understood to have said "seven thirty".

    The boy (or someone claiming to be him) posted his memories of the girls and his sighting on another website. He did NOT, however, state what time his sighting took place.

    That said, you are right that it is also possible that the boy was telling the truth about seeing the girls and about the time. If so, that would mean that they had disappeared for about four hours, reappeared and then disappeared again.

    I personally feel that the boy did see them, but that the time was mistated or misquoted.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,360

    Questions for Richard

    By Richard....

    Note, it is possible that he might have done this with more than one child or pair of children FOR PRACTICE on other occasions, but in this case he probably only approached Sheila and Kate. To have approached other children that same day would have meant that witnesses could identify him and his technique.

    After making contact, and after deciding that these girls were "acceptable" to him as victims, he returned to his car to await their departure from the Mall.

    At this point, his best chance of abduction would have been right in the parking lot, using a ruse to get the girls to approach him and his vehicle.

    Should something go awry, however - such as the presence in the parking lot of a witness, a passing cop, or such - he could then fall back on his secondary plan. That would be to watch the girls go past him and then drive an intercept course to meet them on their way home.

    Now the intercept could have been planned out days in advance, by driving around the residential streets and observing people, but more likely he had a map showing those roads and picked out a secondary possible ambush site inside the residential area where he could park the car with minimum visibility from houses and in an area that the girls were likely to travel. This would have been at the intersection of Drumm and McComas.

    Should anything prevent him from making the abduction on that day, he could simply do a similar thing the next day or the day after. After all, the girls lived in that neighborhood and the opportunity to abduct them might come again - or there were plenty of other children as well. For him, much of the pleasure he derived was in the hunt itself, not necessarily in the actual abduction.



    If TRM was trying to blend in with his choice of clothing and such....why the tape recorder and briefcase? Why the suit? That's all very "reporterish" as "Jimmy" and friend have stated. He didn't blend in. He probably only approached the girls that day because approaching other kids would have meant witnesses could identify him?..... I don't believe the TRM/Jimmy story but you know that.


    He could try again the next day and the day after if the abduction attempt failed because...after all.....the girls lived in that neighborhood? I agree with you here...but for a different reason. How would a random perp... who was sitting in his car at the mall watching for kids to enter....know which house exactly the girls came from? How would he know that they "lived" near the mall? Because they were on foot? They could have come from anywhere and been dropped off near the mall by a parent. They could have been visiting a family member or friend who lived near by....I don't think a tricky plan or ruse was needed here at all. I think they were taken by someone who knew them. It was spring break...lots of kids going to the mall and someone that knew them and the fact that they went to the mall often....without their parents....could safely assume they'd head up there like all the other kids did that day. He simply shows up at the...runs into them or not....but once he knows they are there...he simply waits for them to walk home....offers them a ride...no elaborate plan needed....no struggle takes place. They would have gone quickly and quietly with someone they knew and trusted.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2151
    Last Post: 06-19-2015, 01:36 AM
  2. Theories: Who and Why?
    By SeriouslySearching in forum Skyla Whitaker and Taylor Placker
    Replies: 521
    Last Post: 12-09-2011, 07:50 PM
  3. Replies: 445
    Last Post: 12-19-2009, 03:00 PM
  4. Theories
    By Ravyn in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 04:33 PM

Tags for this Thread