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

Hurricane said:

n


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

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

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

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

All I am saying is that we should be careful about speculating about what might have happened without evidence to support it because those speculations have a way of becoming fact and misused by others.

Click to expand...

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

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

CaliMama said:

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

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

Click to expand...

I don't agree with your feeling that the facts have led people nowhere for 20 yrs. I believe this crime is essentially solved but lacks a couple of pieces of evidence to get a conviction in a court of law. It really is a very simple case and not some big, dark conspiracy. Whether the case is ever brought into a court of law remains to be seen; perhaps not. There are lots of crimes that are solved but never get a conviction. But if you don't follow the evidence those who are still around will still be discussing the same old things over and over. Might as well take posts from this thread and just change the date.

Is there anything at all that links Garrison and the women? Anything at all that is a hard connection?

Honestly, can I get a head count of who actually believes an ounce of the GGMC/Ricky Dykes route of the case?

Please stand up

HmmWhoKnows said:

Is there anything at all that links Garrison and the women? Anything at all that is a hard connection?

Click to expand...

Not in my opinion. I am more persuaded by the comments in Thread #1, post #20. I think that is as close to the truth as one is likely to get regarding this individual. As a general rule of thumb, if a person is to be believed, at least something that they reveal has to be true even if 99% is false. In his case, so far as I know, nothing he has ever said came to anything. Bottom line: 100% of nothing is still nothing.

Missouri Mule said:

Not in my opinion. I am more persuaded by the comments in Thread #1, post #20. I think that is as close to the truth as one is likely to get regarding this individual. As a general rule of thumb, if a person is to be believed, at least something that they reveal has to be true even if 99% is false. In his case, so far as I know, nothing he has ever said came to anything. Bottom line: 100% of nothing is still nothing.

Click to expand...

Thing is his actions may speak louder than anything he ever said, we know for a fact that he is a rapist. We know what type of rapist he is, he has tied himself to a story, and there is far more to Garrison than burglary.

Trooogrit said:

Thing is his actions may speak louder than anything he ever said, we know for a fact that he is a rapist. We know what type of rapist he is, he has tied himself to a story, and there is far more to Garrison than burglary.

Click to expand...

That may be true, but so far as you know, has anything he has ever told the police ever proven to be accurate? Speaking for myself, I'm unaware of anything. I am aware that he is a convicted rapist but based on his behavior not a particularly bright one. I think I am aware of your working theory (perhaps not) but I really can't see how these individuals could pull off the perfect crime. I'm just saying....

Missouri Mule said:

That may be true, but so far as you know, has anything he has ever told the police ever proven to be accurate? Speaking for myself, I'm unaware of anything. I am aware that he is a convicted rapist but based on his behavior not a particularly bright one. I think I am aware of your working theory (perhaps not) but I really can't see how these individuals could pull off the perfect crime. I'm just saying....

Click to expand...

Well we do not really know if it was the perfect crime, I mean the forensics could be telling. I also think that there are areas that have been rumored that leave it as not such a perfect situation. What about the results of fingerprinting? We do not have those, we do not know how entrance was gained either. We have what we believe to be the exit, but not the entrance. How much has been held back?

Trooogrit said:

Well we do not really know if it was the perfect crime, I mean the forensics could be telling. I also think that there are areas that have been rumored that leave it as not such a perfect situation. What about the results of fingerprinting? We do not have those, we do not know how entrance was gained either. We have what we believe to be the exit, but not the entrance. How much has been held back?

Click to expand...

When I say "perfect crime" I am really defining it as a crime that is unsolved after two decades. That is pretty close to the definition but I do take your points in that there are things we do not know.

You raise a most interesting point and that is the matter of the fingerprints. If we are to believe that there were fingerprints found in the home and we know of about 18 people or so who were there that day, we have a ready pool of possible suspects. Obviously only a small number could be said to be credible suspects. I would look to the prints which aren't there. If none of the prints of any of the GJ3 suspects or of Cox are not in evidence anywhere in or outside the home, that would mean they did a first rate job of scrubbing the crime scene of evidence. Yet, we know that they missed five obvious things which should have been handled prior to exiting the house. They would have switched off the TV, taken the purses, turned off the porch light, locked the door and cleaned up the broken globe.

No credible argument could be made that any of those four individuals would have ever had a legitimate reason to have their prints or DNA anywhere in the house or outside the house. Yet, any of the 18 had reasons to be in the house so it doesn't establish anything that wasn't already known.

So this is a somewhat long winded explanation of what I meant by the "perfect" crime. Everything of critical importance was taken care of by the perpetrators and the things that were not attended to didn't provide any clues.

I wouldn't have cared to have carried out such a crime without a "checklist" of items to be taken care of on the way out the door. Instead this looks now to be an ad hoc affair that was not so perfect, yet the net result it has remained unsolved.

Hurricane said:

I don't agree with your feeling that the facts have led people nowhere for 20 yrs. I believe this crime is essentially solved but lacks a couple of pieces of evidence to get a conviction in a court of law. It really is a very simple case and not some big, dark conspiracy. Whether the case is ever brought into a court of law remains to be seen; perhaps not. There are lots of crimes that are solved but never get a conviction. But if you don't follow the evidence those who are still around will still be discussing the same old things over and over. Might as well take posts from this thread and just change the date.

Click to expand...

What do you think the couple of pieces of evidence could be ?

I don't believe that it is a big, dark conspiracy either.

Crimes cannot truly be solved unless someone has been held accountable and the victim's families have closure...so this case is far from being solved. So all of this..."they know who did it" stuff really doesn't matter does it?

This is just my opinion.

CaliMama said:

What do you think the couple of pieces of evidence could be ?

I don't believe that it is a big, dark conspiracy either.

Crimes cannot truly be solved unless someone has been held accountable and the victim's families have closure...so this case is far from being solved. So all of this..."they know who did it" stuff really doesn't matter does it?

This is just my opinion.

Click to expand...

If I may interject my $0.02, as I mulled these "couple of pieces" of evidence overnight it occurred to me that includes a broad range of possibilities up to and including confessions (which has been suggested elsewhere to possible DNA/fingerprints, etc.) In short, I don't know if that tells us very much to make us hopeful that this case will be closed anytime soon.

Having followed this case for many years; actually since it happened in 1992, I have seen and read many accounts from various sources, including police officers, talked and communicated with reporters who covered this case and I never got the impression that this case had really moved off the dime since it happened. I recently recovered some old e-mails I had with a person with a pipeline into the investigation and the impression I received I believe to be was honest and forthright was that no one really knew what happened although various investigators had their own theories. One person involved with the case went so far as to say it would be up to the reporters to solve the case. That's about as clear a statement as I can see that the police simply do not know what happened; at least when that statement was made several years ago about 2006 (as I recall).

Recently however, some people have opined that the police really do know what happened; that there is a short list of suspects; about 10 in all, and one went so far as to say that Cox was not on the list but wanted him to come clean because they believed he knew where the remains were to be found. Supposedly this came from someone within the police department. The poster and source were anonymous, as usual. This was stated on another website which follows this case closely. I am very very dubious and skeptical that this is factual information.

My personal take on this matter is that unless a new grand jury is convened and all of the individuals who last had contact with the women are requestioned under oath and penalty of perjury that this case will remain dormant and unsolved. Otherwise it will be the subject of endless speculation, accusations, animosity between parties; some with their own ax to grind, that will never end. In other words we will be talking about this case 10 years from now on the 30th anniversary of the case. We are shortly coming up on the 20th anniversary and I see nothing in the offing that would change that probability. I hope I am wrong. I hope I am dead wrong and would be extremely happy to get out my knife and fork and eat a huge helping of crow.

To repeat, this is my own $0.02 worth to this discussion.

CaliMama said:

What do you think the couple of pieces of evidence could be ?

I don't believe that it is a big, dark conspiracy either.

Crimes cannot truly be solved unless someone has been held accountable and the victim's families have closure...so this case is far from being solved. So all of this..."they know who did it" stuff really doesn't matter does it?

This is just my opinion.

Click to expand...

<modsnip> Do you really think the Nicole Brown/Ron Goldman double murder case is not solved? I know OJ was going to spend the rest of his life looking for the real killer, but he got side tracked by a few golf courses and 15 yrs in prison!

How about the muder of actor Robert Blake's wife?

How many hours a month do you suppose LE devotes to these "unsolved" cases? And I only pick these two cases because they are national celebrity cases. There are hundreds of missing person and homicide cases all across this country that are solved but not closed due to a lack of evidence to obtain a conviction.

Missouri Mule said:

Yet, we know that they missed five obvious things which should have been handled prior to exiting the house. They would have switched off the TV, taken the purses, turned off the porch light, locked the door and cleaned up the broken globe.

Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons why I think that Stacy making it out the door (or almost getting out of the house) and being brought back makes sense. If you think about it, the plan for the first part of the evening went pretty flawless. I think most people on this board agree that this was NOT a random b&e or sexual assault, so the planning on when and how to enter the house was not only successful, but was pulled off without the women knowing that someone was watching/following them or having felt threatened or in danger before the event, and without any of the neighbors seeing. To me, I think this makes it reasonable that something happened while the perp(s) were already enacting their plan that made them feel as though they needed to get out of there in a hurry. If you think about it, turning off the TV, grabbing the purses, flipping the light switch, and locking the door would have taken at most 90 seconds. Cleaning up the glass would have taken a bit longer, but if everything else seemed in order when someone entered the house, this wouldn't necessarily be a "tell" that something had gone wrong, so they could have logically excused not taking the time to do that. So, we can logically deduce that SOMETHING must have happened in or around the house to make the perp(s) feel like they had to get out without a second to spare (or that spooked them enough to make them overlook these details).

Let me ask a question. What is the distinction between a "solved" case and a "cleared" case? I can't seem to find the precise definition.

The relevance of this is that if the case is marked as one of the two, (and I'm not sure of the exact definition), does it mean the case has ceased to be investigated? ("cleared" off the detective's desk)

If the case is "solved" or "cleared" does it mean in this case that the case is no longer being worked? There seems to be some controversy about the status of the case. From what I have gathered in recent years, the police are waiting on someone to confess in order to close the case. Short of a confession, is there any other things that could be done to hasten its closing?

Since none of us here, to my knowledge, have actually seen the case file, and until and unless a trial is held, we don't truly know if the case is actually solved or "cleared" do we? It might be conceivable that the police are simply wrong. It would be my belief that if a poll were held here as to whether the case is solved or unsolved that the larger number of people would vote it was not solved. From what I know, and it is certainly not everything, I would vote that it was not solved. Thoughts.

P.S. I would concede that most people would regard the Simpson and Blake murders as "solved" or "cleared" cases. I would be in that camp.

Jaya said:

This is one of the reasons why I think that Stacy making it out the door (or almost getting out of the house) and being brought back makes sense. If you think about it, the plan for the first part of the evening went pretty flawless. I think most people on this board agree that this was NOT a random b&e or sexual assault, so the planning on when and how to enter the house was not only successful, but was pulled off without the women knowing that someone was watching/following them or having felt threatened or in danger before the event, and without any of the neighbors seeing. To me, I think this makes it reasonable that something happened while the perp(s) were already enacting their plan that made them feel as though they needed to get out of there in a hurry. If you think about it, turning off the TV, grabbing the purses, flipping the light switch, and locking the door would have taken at most 90 seconds. Cleaning up the glass would have taken a bit longer, but if everything else seemed in order when someone entered the house, this wouldn't necessarily be a "tell" that something had gone wrong, so they could have logically excused not taking the time to do that. So, we can logically deduce that SOMETHING must have happened in or around the house to make the perp(s) feel like they had to get out without a second to spare (or that spooked them enough to make them overlook these details).

Click to expand...

I do agree about the broken globe. I was speaking in a "perfect world" it would have been cleaned up. Had the house been locked and the other items attended to, it wouldn't have been sufficient to forcibly enter the house to make inquiries about the women. It may simply have been that the globe merely fell off due to insufficient fastening of the small finger screws holding it in place. Not a big deal in and of itself.

I had long held the view this was a planned event. I have come to consider in recent months that perhaps it was not. I'm thinking back to my college days and the night of partying that went on Saturday night. After one party wrapped up, there was always another one or two going on and I couldn't stand to see good beer wasted with all those cold kegs being underutilized. (I'm telling on myself now). I could envision a young man or group of men who struck up a relationship with one or more of these young attractive women and alcohol loosens the inhibitions greatly. I could see that they went over to the Levitt house, pecked on the door leading to Suzie's bedroom and let in. Some roughhouse commenced and Stacy, wanting no part of this decided to exit the house. Suzie was pinned down on the bed, Sherrill came in, hearing this commotion, and was knocked cold (doesn't have to create a mess) and someone grabbed Stacy making her escape. All three were bundled up and hustled into the van and rationality went out the window. The "alpha male" bullied his friends into going along with this fiasco and off they went to deal with the problem which they had to know would land them in prison for false imprisonment, assault and battery and a host of other charges. What would they be willing to do to escape that fate? Murders have taken place for lesser reasons.

I'm just thinking outside the box. Don't know if it will have anyone agreeing with me but if, as we have been told previously, that the police do not know what happened, why is this not as good a theory as any? Tear it apart.

Missouri Mule said:

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

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

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

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

Click to expand...

Or did Stacy have an overnight bag? She had to have a swimsuit and a toothbrush if she planned to stay overnight in a hotel. Were they in a plastic grocery bag? I do that all the time when I want to work out....

It would be nice to know if Sherrill was a sound sleeper. She wasn't expecting Suzie to come home so she might not have fallen asleep in that "twilight" mode that parents have when offspring are out and expected to come home. (I have as aspect of my job that involves travel and my husband never falls fully asleep until he hears me come home.)

Let me say that I have never heard of a Yorkie that didn't yap every time the door opened. It's possible that if the abductor(s) were already in the house, they put Cinnamon in the closet that had stuff removed from it while they were there.

If the abductor(s) came before the girls came home, he/they had to have a way to gain entrance because Sherrill probably locked the door before she went to sleep (not expecting Suzie to come home). If the abductor came in after the two girls got home, access could have been easy if they sat outside for a while, if one of the girls went to the car for something, if they knew the girls (or one of them knew the girls) or if they met the girls randomly at George's or a convenience store and then adjourned to Suzie's to continue the party.

pittsburghgirl said:

....(Snip) Or did Stacy have an overnight bag? She had to have a swimsuit and a toothbrush if she planned to stay overnight in a hotel. Were they in a plastic grocery bag? I do that all the time when I want to work out....

Click to expand...

(snip)

I believe that Hurricane has addressed that issue in post #538....(Snip)" I do think that plans to drive to Branson were fluid and had pretty well fell apart before the girls left their homes close to 8:00 pm. That is why Suzie left her bag which she had previously packed at home, and Stacy didn't have one. That is also why by 8:30 pm they were looking for a place to spend the night and asking Brian Joy if they could stay at his house since he was already having guests stay over for the night"....(Snip)

He may wish to elaborate. I am assuming that he has verified this. I, like you, have often wondered about her presumed overnight bag. We do know, however, that Suzie had one packed which was in the written accounts.

Missouri Mule said:

I could envision a young man or group of men who struck up a relationship with one or more of these young attractive women and alcohol loosens the inhibitions greatly. I could see that they went over to the Levitt house, pecked on the door leading to Suzie's bedroom and let in. Some roughhouse commenced and Stacy, wanting no part of this decided to exit the house. Suzie was pinned down on the bed, Sherrill came in, hearing this commotion, and was knocked cold (doesn't have to create a mess) and someone grabbed Stacy making her escape. All three were bundled up and hustled into the van and rationality went out the window. The "alpha male" bullied his friends into going along with this fiasco and off they went to deal with the problem which they had to know would land them in prison for false imprisonment, assault and battery and a host of other charges. What would they be willing to do to escape that fate? Murders have taken place for lesser reasons.

I'm just thinking outside the box. Don't know if it will have anyone agreeing with me but if, as we have been told previously, that the police do not know what happened, why is this not as good a theory as any? Tear it apart.

Click to expand...

I'll throw out a couple of thoughts about this. If this were the setup for how the evening escalated, it would have had to have been a male/group of males that Suzie was already friends with, or at least knew where she lived. Stacy did not know how to get to Suzie's new house and had to follow her there. So, she couldn't have given directions to someone at a party, nor did she even know that she was going to be staying with Suzie. If a guy/group of guys had been at Janelle's and left with the girls and followed them home, surely this would be information that would have been reported to the police, because these men would then become the last people proven to have seen the girls alive.

If it were a group of Suzie's friends who came over, knocked on the door, and entered the room, surely Stacy would have gotten dressed? If not immediately, then at least when she got up to attempt to leave.

And I know that events have escalated into murder for much less, but I have a hard time believing that a group of teen guys would go from attempted sexual assault to triple homicide that easily. If one had attempted to sexually assault Suzie, one had knocked out Sherrill, and a third (or one of the previous) restrained Stacy, you are talking some pretty small charges and little jail time.

Finally, given that the idea that some kind of van was involved in the abductions has been accepted pretty much universally, wouldn't someone at one of the parties mention that a group of guys in a van of similar description had been there and talking with Suzie?

This is a bit of a change of topic, but I was just reading on the AirAlex board (I've stopped posting over there because I got tired of all the BS), and was wondering if any of you who follow that conversation think that there is anything to the connection about several women going missing in the area at the time being hair dressers?

As I have followed this case for 5 years now, my initial inclination was that this was a planned event. However as I got into the events of the investigation, i came to believe this was random and it was sexual assault. For whatever reason the police claimed this too. The lack of evidence of any other motive is probably the reason. For a long time I believed the perps were in the home when the girls arrived, but I could see someone following the girls home, I also could see someone in the neighborhood working who had interacted with them at some point. I have heard the rumor that Stacy tried to run but I heard it was out the back, and if true she was caught in the backyard. Which means more than one perp. Thinking about this differently, I think the broken globe could be the only sign of struggle because it is where the crime occurred. Lets say someone comes to the door, knocking, and for whatever reason the door was opened. Right there, a struggle occurs. Naturally, Suzie or Sherrill would go to the front door to the aid of the other. Stacy seeing this fears for herself and bolts out the back patio door in Suzies room. the 2nd assailent who is outside the house goes west around the side of the house. That back yard is enclosed with a privacy fence and the west side of the house is the only way out of the backyard. Stacy runs directly into 2nd assailent or is trapped in the back yard. Now the other assaillents were not expecting this to happen either. The "deviant" assaillent put the crime into motion, and they are now in trouble with him. This all happens so fast, they close the door, and are gone. No prints, no forensics nothing but a broken porch globe and a foot print. No master criminal needed.
I always thought that sexual assault was the motive, but it didnt make sense for 2 or more to do this with that as a motive. However, I could believe that one of the men was the "deviant" and anyone with him was only a part of this because it happened so quickly. They may have participated afterward, but the intent was not there to begin with.