Richard Allen Welch, Sr.- A Person of Interest

siriunsun said:

After a search involving no shovels or radar equipment, they actually find bones and personal effects, belonging to one of the Lyon girls.

Click to expand...

They may have found bones, should have found bones in an old graveyard, and should have found personal effects (trash), but at this time, I don't think the police have confirmed any of the remains or personal effect are the Lyon sisters'. If you think the police have, feel free to provide a link.

What the police and news reports have said are things like:
We HOPE to find the remains of the Lyon sisters.
We THINK we will find remains of the Lyon sisters.
We have found bones that MIGHT belong to the Lyon sisters (but might be 100-year old bones).

Obviously the entire purpose of the search warrant and digging for remains is to find remains related to the sisters, but trying to find remains and actually finding remains are two different things.

Police have also said highly confident, but vague things such as:
We know what happened.
We know people on Talyor Mountain know what happened.
We know multiple family members are "responsible" or "involved."
We expect to solve this shortly.
which would give the impression that police have more information, such as any physical evidence, than has been made public.

But so far in this case, whenever "evidence" is released, it's weak circumstantial evidence or jailhouse informants (counting Lloyd as a jailhouse informant).
Police often overstate, even lie, about the evidence to trick the guilty into confessing; which often is everyone saying someone else was the most guilty and minimize their own role (I just watched someone else do it).

steveP120 said:

Police have also said highly confident, but vague things such as:
We know what happened.
We know people on Talyor Mountain know what happened.
We know multiple family members are "responsible" or "involved."
We expect to solve this shortly.
which would give the impression that police have more information, such as any physical evidence, than has been made public.

But so far in this case, whenever "evidence" is released, it's weak circumstantial evidence or jailhouse informants (counting Lloyd as a jailhouse informant).
Police often overstate, even lie, about the evidence to trick the guilty into confessing; which often is everyone saying someone else was the most guilty and minimize their own role (I just watched someone else do it).

Click to expand...

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here. If the bones are 100 years old, forensic science at our disposal can easily determine that. After talking to Lloyd, law enforcement had enough of a picture of what happened to find the bones, in the first place. RAW and his lovely wife (sarcasm...I actually hate people who want missing persons cases to remain unsolved) appear to have LIED to the authorities we pay with our taxes to solve these crimes when they occur, and since the evidence was found on their property, I think they owe both Maryland and Virginia an explanation, not to mention John and Mary Lyon. IT'S NOT OKAY TO KIDNAP CHILDREN, KILL THEM, AND HIDE THEIR BODIES. If any property owners in that part of Virginia have done a thing like that, I hope, if there isn't enough evidence to satisfy a jury, that their lives are forever ruined by the investigation. It still won't compare to the ruin of the lives of Katherine and Sheila's family, or to murder.

Back in 1975, law enforcement had weak evidence. For the past year and a half, or maybe two years, law enforcement has had nothing but iffy circumstantial evidence. But now, I think they have a lot more.

writable said:

So far, it appears that LE has conducted something of a witch hunt against Richard Welch. They have no evidence whatsoever linking him to the Lyons sisters' disappearance, and, in fact, they claimed last month (Jan. 2015) that physical evidence would be found at Taylor's Mountain (where Richard Welch owns some property). Guess what? Nothing was found.

So where does that leave us? An embarrassed LE releasing press conference statements impugning RW via laughable extrapolations: Richard and his wife were "very interested" in what relatives might have told police (who wouldn't be?); Thomas, the (then 10-year-old) nephew named in Lloyd's fantasy alibi as being in the car at the time of Richard's alleged involvement (Thomas said this never happened), "very unusually" called his uncle after the press conference. Apparently, Thomas doesn't normally call his uncle to wish his uncle "Happy Birthday", so obviously, something must very definitely be up if he called his uncle following a televised LE press conference which merely named his uncle as someone who may have kidnapped, raped, and murdered two young girls and which named himself as a material witness, right?

Click to expand...

I believe Thomas called his uncle way before either he (Thomas) or the uncle (Richard) were named publicly.
The top of page two of the search warrant attachment:
http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wset/SKMBT_60115022314160.pdf
"on the day of the press conference naming Lloyd as a person of interest" the phone calls between Thomas and Richard were made and they met for several hours at Richard's house.
The press conference naming Richard as a second person of interest was months later, and I believe Thomas was not named publicly until last Friday.

It is unknown to us, but there is a good chance that neither Richard or Thomas was known to the police at the time of the first press conference.

That being said, that a close relative was named as a person of interest is an innocent reason for telephoning and meeting in person for several hours.
There are also less innocent reasons, such as getting the stories straight.

My own individual guess is that at most Richard, after the fact (murder), helped dispose of the bodies, but at this time, you are correct that there is little public information that is convincing against anyone. Even Lloyd's criminal record is unlikely to be usable as evidence against him.

Richard, Thomas, and Richard's wife did initially cooperate with the police and gave, according to the police "conflicting" reports of what they talked about that day. But almost any two or three reports are slightly conflicting. In fact if the reports were word, for word, we talked about A, B, and C, I would venture the police would the reports not as conflicting, but as "unusually identical."

My own guess is that Thomas came to the attention of the police from calling his uncle, but this is a guess.
It is unknown how or when (before or after Lloyd was named) Richard came to the attention of the police.

My speculation is that if Richard really was a serious person of interest at the time of the announcement, the police would have had better surveillance on him, any person of interest, to see if any attempt was made to cover up evidence. If, and it's a big if, the police knew about Richard and Richard has some guilt, they could have caught him by taping the phone calls (warrant required) or catching Thomas off guard the same day.

j123 said:

Here is the file

http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wset/SKMBT_60115022314160.pdf

The information is very compelling. I got chills reading it. Everything was so vague when this lead was revealed, and I was worried after all these years that it still might not pan out. I don't feel that way anymore after reading this document.

Click to expand...

I'd say LE is most definitely looking at the right people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

While Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. (alias Tyler W. Welch) was certainly a young boy aged 11 years, 8 months in March 1975, he did manage in later years to build quite a criminal and civil record in the Maryland judicial system.

He has been in court for an array of charges, including numerous incidents of battery, drug and alcohol abuse, and domestic violence. Some of those offenses have resulted in his spending time in jail. He lost custody of his children.

Most disturbing is his close association with one Leonard W. Kraisel, a man who was recently convicted of numerous charges of sexual offenses against minor children.

As with his cousin, Lloyd Lee Welch, Jr. his criminal history after 1975 is not legally germane to the case of the Lyon sisters, but it certainly makes one wonder about his upbringing, his youth experiences, and his later life choices.

Richard said:

Most disturbing is his close association with one Leonard W. Kraisel, a man who was recently convicted of numerous charges of sexual offenses against minor children.

Click to expand...

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

Can you elaborate or link, please? Thanks.

Richard said:

While Thomas Teddy Welch, Jr. (alias Tyler W. Welch) was certainly a young boy aged 11 years, 8 months in March 1975, he did manage in later years to build quite a criminal and civil record in the Maryland judicial system.

He has been in court for an array of charges, including numerous incidents of battery, drug and alcohol abuse, and domestic violence. Some of those offenses have resulted in his spending time in jail. He lost custody of his children.

Most disturbing is his close association with one Leonard W. Kraisel, a man who was recently convicted of numerous charges of sexual offenses against minor children.

As with his cousin, Lloyd Lee Welch, Jr. his criminal history after 1975 is not legally germane to the case of the Lyon sisters, but it certainly makes one wonder about his upbringing, his youth experiences, and his later life choices.

Click to expand...

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

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

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

Thomas Jr. was not named at all. He was merely mentioned in the testimony of someone who is currently in prison. That's not the same thing as being "named".

siriunsun said:

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

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

Where do you get the idea that nothing was found? They found quite a bit.

Click to expand...

This cemetery is an old family cemetery named the Charles Arthur "Pomp" Overstreet Cemetery. To get to the cemetery, you drive up the lower driveway in the map then veer to the right and cross a small stream and then up the hill to the cemetery. The 30 possible graves in this cemetery are our ancestors and relatives...probably Jones, Overstreet, Newman family members. This cemetery has been documented at least twice and the oldest living family members on the mountain will only know who is buried there because they were told about them by their family members and by attending funerals at that cemetery. Some of the graves could possibly date back to the 1800s and these families could not afford headstones. It was common practice to use field stones to mark where graves are located. I do not believe investigator Steve Smith made the statement to mean that people were giving conflicting statements about the cemetery deliberately because they didn't want to cooperate. Nobody knows exactly who and how many of our Taylor's Mountain relatives are buried in this cemetery. The cemetery books and information I have show different names, too but the information was also gathered by different people at different times. And for what it's worth, I do know Steve Smith...we went to school together.

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

siriunsun said:

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

Click to expand...

There won't be anybody to tell law enforcement or anybody else, for double triple sure, who is buried there unless some old relative just happens to find a list or 5 different family Bibles in an old trunk somewhere and that's highly doubtful because a lot of the mountain people didn't know how read and write back in those days. As many of us who do family genealogy here, somebody would have known somebody who would have known. Only the good Lord in Heaven knows exactly who is buried there.

steveP120 said:

Here are the relevant paragraphs from the Washington Post:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



I

Click to expand...

BBM

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

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

And that's why a homicide detective from another state would have a very hard time! I don't think Suburban Maryland was prepared for that, at all!

Steely Dan said:

BBM

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

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

Click to expand...

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

Since I last posted on this thred, the search warrant attachment has been released
http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wset/SKMBT_60115022314160.pdf
which on the top of page two describes a conversation at home between Richard, his wife, and nephew Thomas, which the police asked about and obtained "conflicting" descriptions of. These conflicting descriptions could be what someone was lying about.

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

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

http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wset/SKMBT_60115022314160.pdf
Richard states that he believes his phones are being tapped which shows he thinks the police are on to him.
Yet he is blabbing to relatives and visiting a potential burial site area in the same conversations he is asking if the police contacted them and what they told the police.

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

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

Again, it's possible that Richard's involvement, if any, is covering up the crime, knowingly or unknowingly, such as lending his nephew a car or $50 or just not turning his nephew in, which may not even be a crime.

WaynezWorld said:

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

Can you elaborate or link, please? Thanks.

Click to expand...

Summaries of Maryland Judiciary Court proceedings can be viewed on - line. Here is a link to that website.

LINK:

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

siriunsun said:

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

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

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

Click to expand...

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

Thank you for restating my point.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Old Cemeteries...

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

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

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

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

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