GA GA - Shirley, 87, & Russell Dermond, 88, Putnam County, 2 May 2014 - #11

[Deleted member 162919]

I think we really need to find out more about the man on the lawn. This seems to be a small county so there must be some rumors about this killing. Usually when there are rumors one of them is bound to be right. People talk in small towns but apparently not in this small town

 

[Vedder]

Would someone be so kind as to refresh my memory? How do we know the killer(s) stayed at the house a long time?

 

[Deleted member 162919]

It's assumed not fact.

 

[dancinunderthemoon]

Another thing from the podcast which was done in june of 17 . They talked about the man on the lawn and SS had said he considers him a suspect yet in an interview recently SS said he eliminated that man on the lawn after questioning him early on in the investigation. Odd because as of june of last year he didn't know who it was or so he says. Why lie about that to the media ? Everyone considers the man on the lawn to be either with the killers ( a lookout) or 1 of the killers. SS if you cleared the man on the lawn at least tell us why you cleared him. What was he doing on the lawn? I personally think this is where SS found his killer but he can't prove it so he sits and waits for that call

OMG HOckey I wondered about the timeline of that too, I never found where he originally said he was cleared, thanks for clarifying! Yeah something is up with that, maybe he's threatened too? Just throwing that out there
When there are lies, there is confusion where there is confusion there are lies and there lies wrong doings...…..something is definintley up, this is not hard to report...…He definitely forget what he told to whom...….

….WHY throw the public into confusion like that, why lie yet want the public to keep a watch out...HOW? THis is ludicrous...

Whoever is on that lawn is a party to this...……..

IF THERE WAS even a man on the lawn Hockey... He put the witnesses in danger by telling that in the media was my first thougths on this

SO again I degress………..WAS THERE REALLY A MAN ON THE LAWN?
IT very well could have been a decoy in hopes to scare someone out and I feel that's what it was...…….remember there was NO description, the people could tell it was a MAN THRU THE TREES ??? COME ON! But didn't see hair color, clothing colors, short or long hair..…...there had to be some distinctive feature and he never said he was shirtless so I don't buy that, What he said was thru the trees it was very hard to tell......so how did they know it was a man......they did everything right in this murder and not get caught, yet they stand on the freaking lawn, just stand there for all to see???

NOt buying it, I think it was a decoy, that is why he had to "CLEAR this man" to the media.....to get that monkey off his back

IF there was a man, he wouldn't have been cleared...…..he never elaborated on it AT ALL, AT ALL

Im livid over this....Like you said HOckey, SOMEBODY NEEDS TO GET FRESH EYES ON THIS AND START FROM THE BEGINNING

 

[dancinunderthemoon]

Would someone be so kind as to refresh my memory? How do we know the killer(s) stayed at the house a long time?

The time to behead, to go unnoticed, to haul her off, to come back and pick up their guys taking care of RD...….PH in the podcast Hockeyguy posted spoke of the time to do this......so before sunrise Saturday to nightfall Saturday...…..if you look at the FBI profile online, don't have link right off hand, it will give you clues on things of this nature......people who feel comfortable at a location will stay longer but hits like hired hits typically shoot you in the head and leave as they are not comfortable with or haven't been in the house before, they just do a job and get out of town

 

[wildebeest]

I've always thought, almost from the beginning, that someone just could not wait any longer for the elderly Dermonds to die naturally. It's been talked about here, for sure, but it was my first thought, and remains my #1 thought. That motive is inheritance, obviously, either indirectly or more directly. No POIs, but at least that's a good motive... It's the only one that makes any sense to me at all, or ever has.

The puzzling thing of course is the removal of RD's head, and then the obvious effort it took to hide Mrs. D's body, and why- why was it ok to leave his body behind but not hers? I used to wonder if there was some possibly disagreement and/or angst by the killers about that.

I have had the same feelings, myself, Tripod. It’s the only scenario that makes sense. At their advanced ages, Mr. and Mrs. Dermond would not be likely victims of a random murder. I agree, the beheading and drowning aspects of this crime are very puzzling. The perps were trying to confuse LE, perhaps? If this was their intention, it looks like they succeeded!

IMHO

 

[wildebeest]

I think we really need to find out more about the man on the lawn. This seems to be a small county so there must be some rumors about this killing. Usually when there are rumors one of them is bound to be right. People talk in small towns but apparently not in this small town

They don’t talk, nor do they fear for their own lives, assuming an unknown, maniacal, murderer is on the loose.

IMHO

 

[dancinunderthemoon]

The time to behead, to go unnoticed, to haul her off, to come back and pick up their guys taking care of RD...….PH in the podcast Hockeyguy posted spoke of the time to do this......so before sunrise Saturday to nightfall Saturday...…..if you look at the FBI profile online, don't have link right off hand, it will give you clues on things of this nature......people who feel comfortable at a location will stay longer but hits like hired hits typically shoot you in the head and leave as they are not comfortable with or haven't been in the house before, they just do a job and get out of town

WHICH BTW, made me think of what hockeyguy was saying about the podcast and the thought that the perps didn't feel comfortable in the house...…...why did they come to that conclusion? Because it didn't appear they went inside? Why go inside and leave lots of evidence? At any rate, whoever did this, they went to a LOTTTT of trouble to behead and haul her off, not to mention the struggle beforehand...….over what? why?

PH told me becaseu RD had GSR on his collar didn't mean he was killed with a gun, now they say on the podcast they felt he was and that it was to hide evidence the reason for the beheading...….why didnt they just haul them BOTH off?

You know what...….something either prevented them hauling him off as well...…...I guess that's why the separation looks like extortion...……...DID they feel safer inside the garage beheading him instead of hauling him off?? What if someone had shown up looking for them!? Best at nightfall to get rid of both of them...….

WHy does it make sense according to the podcast conclusion by PH that they hauled her off, hit her in the head killing her, yet leaving him behind to extort something...…..that's a LOTTT Of goings on outside, accessing boat, driving all over the lake with a body, well certainly not going to be noticed after dark, she was surely already dead, no pun on surely, so why haul her off at all except to confuse the investigation

Wouldn't hauling them both off confuse the investigation??

Great day! Why did it play out the way it did? Accident or intent?

Well no one gained a thing...…..exceptions of course

 

[dancinunderthemoon]

and IIRC, SS didn't think at all that was the reason in the beginning and IM certain he read that on here as his conclusion on this matter came up AFTER he was questioned about that very idea in an interview and it was discussed on here...….

There are still questions and confusion

That's a lot of dang trouble to go to and blood and possible cross contaminiation of blood and dna to risk that, so Im not sure

Just jabbering

WHICH BTW, made me think of what hockeyguy was saying about the podcast and the thought that the perps didn't feel comfortable in the house...…...why did they come to that conclusion? Because it didn't appear they went inside? Why go inside and leave lots of evidence? At any rate, whoever did this, they went to a LOTTTT of trouble to behead and haul her off, not to mention the struggle beforehand...….over what? why?

PH told me becaseu RD had GSR on his collar didn't mean he was killed with a gun, now they say on the podcast they felt he was and that it was to hide evidence the reason for the beheading...….why didnt they just haul them BOTH off?

You know what...….something either prevented them hauling him off as well...…...I guess that's why the separation looks like extortion...……...DID they feel safer inside the garage beheading him instead of hauling him off?? What if someone had shown up looking for them!? Best at nightfall to get rid of both of them...….

WHy does it make sense according to the podcast conclusion by PH that they hauled her off, hit her in the head killing her, yet leaving him behind to extort something...…..that's a LOTTT Of goings on outside, accessing boat, driving all over the lake with a body, well certainly not going to be noticed after dark, she was surely already dead, no pun on surely, so why haul her off at all except to confuse the investigation

Wouldn't hauling them both off confuse the investigation??

Great day! Why did it play out the way it did? Accident or intent?

Well no one gained a thing...…..exceptions of course

 

[Deleted member 162919]

I'm focusing a few days on the witness aka the man on the lawn. Dancinunderthemoon they talked about it in 1 of the sworn podcasts i'll check tomorrow which one. SS admitted in an interview around the anniversary that the witness had been cleared and I believe SS said early on but i'm not positive

 

[Tripod]

I have had the same feelings, myself, Tripod. It’s the only scenario that makes sense. At their advanced ages, Mr. and Mrs. Dermond would not be likely victims of a random murder. I agree, the beheading and drowning aspects of this crime are very puzzling. The perps were trying to confuse LE, perhaps? If this was their intention, it looks like they succeeded!

IMHO

For sure! I suppose the simplest explanation is that Mr.D's head was taken to dispose of evidence ( a bullet, most likely) and Mrs. D was also bound to blocks and put in the lake for the very same reason. These things have been discussed here. Perhaps the killers' thinking that being in the water would wash away any forensic evidence such as hairs or DNA. So why one earth wouldn't they have put both bodies in the lake?

Or, why on earth would they risk taking that great effort to take Mrs. D with them? Is it known for certainty that Mrs. D. was killed at the same time Mr. D. was, or can that even be known? Would if have been possible for the killers to take her, alive, from the house and into a vehicle and killing her a bit later, for whatever reason? If that's been discussed or ruled out by the sheriff or anyone else, I'm not aware of it but please let me know

 

[Tripod]

My edit button isn't working at the moment, or else I would have corrected some typos and such in my above post. Apologies!

 

[Tripod]

and IIRC, SS didn't think at all that was the reason in the beginning and IM certain he read that on here as his conclusion on this matter came up AFTER he was questioned about that very idea in an interview and it was discussed on here...….

There are still questions and confusion

That's a lot of dang trouble to go to and blood and possible cross contaminiation of blood and dna to risk that, so Im not sure

Just jabbering

I should have read a little farther before I posted my comments, dancing, lol.
I wanted to add one thing: I thought to myself long ago that perhaps a reason Mr. D was left behind ( most of him, anyway) and only Mrs. D. was taken could possibly have to do with how much room there was in whatever boat they had, what it's weight capacity was, and how much time did the killers actually have? They very obviously did some thinking after the fact. I'm not at all sure the beheading was planned in advance, though it's always a possibility.

 

[kirkassoc]

I should have read a little farther before I posted my comments, dancing, lol.
I wanted to add one thing: I thought to myself long ago that perhaps a reason Mr. D was left behind ( most of him, anyway) and only Mrs. D. was taken could possibly have to do with how much room there was in whatever boat they had, what it's weight capacity was, and how much time did the killers actually have? They very obviously did some thinking after the fact. I'm not at all sure the beheading was planned in advance, though it's always a possibility.

SD and RD were together at one time during the struggle that ensued, I would think. HE had HER hair in his hand (I would think he was alive at this juncture). I wonder if her blood was found anywhere? If none of her blood was located anywhere at the home scene, it is possible they tied her up and made her walk to the dock and the awaiting boat. I would think if she had seen RD's murder, she would have screamed as loud as it's possible for an 87 year old lady to scream. I have a feeling we all struggle with this case because none of us can come to grips with the depth of the depravity of these criminals.

I watch and hope this case will be solved because I had grandparents who were so dear to me. It just seems so unbelievably sinister. Evil has no bottom even when it comes to the elderly and children. There are those walking among us who seem to have no soul.

 

[jonnyrock]

One of the most vexing aspects of this double murder - - and there are numerous - - is exactly where these two were murdered. We can say with a reasonable degree of certainty Mrs. D was murdered on the boat. What if both Dermonds were on the boat ? As with most of my theories this, too, is a stretch but there is no known place of murder for Mr. D. The boat as the scene of the double murder makes some sense. Recall, we know each Dermond was dead before the final disposition of each body ( decapitation and water immersion ).

 

[kirkassoc]

If this was a "Charles Manson" type of crime, then there is no rhyme or reason, only drug infested and evil perpetrators who acted upon a mere chance meeting (unplanned). The "why" never understood, and this makes the "who" almost impossible to ascertain, I would think. She was found fully clothed, and even her shoes were still on and tied. He, on the other hand, was found dressed in night clothes (house slippers and his robe close by, I believe).

I can't imagine taking the two of them out on the lake, tying her up and weighting her down, beating her and then throwing her overboard. Then, possibly shooting him, removing his head, throwing it overboard and taking him back to the garage. I would think there would be some evidence from that boat on his body or clothes. And the towels, don't forget the towels which were placed like a dam to keep the blood from oozing under the garage door...where did they come from (one would think from inside the home)?

But, anything is possible.

 

[kay74]

This is by far the most baffling case ever. It's almost like their kids are too busy to care. To kill and then go through all this work of hiding the head, tying Mrs. D to blocks and taking her out and dropping her in the lake, I can't wrap my head around who did this.

 

[Deleted member 162919]

Fact is we don't know what SS has told us is true. He has lied about evidence since the beginning, He has lied about his theories and changed them often since the beginning. SS feeds us misinformation hoping someone will correct him with the information he already knows .

 

[dancinunderthemoon]

I remember it was discussed in the Sworn too Hockeyguy, and he had not been ID'd….SS was pointing out to PH and PL while driving out to the house how it was hard to see thru the trees, then howd they know it was a man, he refused to give any info and now suddenly he's been cleared? HOW.. HOW?? The man didn't come forward for three years? I'd sure like to know whats up with THAT ...even SS considered him a suspect, you know the person heard of the murder if he wasn't involved...3 years though?? THanks Hockeyguy

I'm focusing a few days on the witness aka the man on the lawn. Dancinunderthemoon they talked about it in 1 of the sworn podcasts i'll check tomorrow which one. SS admitted in an interview around the anniversary that the witness had been cleared and I believe SS said early on but i'm not positive

 

[dancinunderthemoon]

ANd some of the media verbiage doesn't help

Fact is we don't know what SS has told us is true. He has lied about evidence since the beginning, He has lied about his theories and changed them often since the beginning. SS feeds us misinformation hoping someone will correct him with the information he already knows .