GA GA - Mary Shotwell Little, 25, Atlanta, 14 Oct 1965

[Noirdame79]

So creepy!

 

[kh_1975]

I can't speak for kh—1975, but most people here don't have information to provide; we're interested in learning information so that we can try to solve the case ourselves. We all want to know who Ray Pate's prime suspect was.

Understood. My comment was directed to bulldoggirl77 as she specifically asked if anyone knows who was working with Ray Pate and I am able to put her in contact with that team if she had something to share. I am a family member of a victim, so I appreciate anything that anyone can share regardless of whether it is concrete information or perhaps a theory that we haven't considered.

 

[Richard]

1965 Ford Mercury Comet, similar to the one driven by Mary Shotwell Little. Hers was Pearl Gray in color.

 

[Richard]

Mary Shotwell Little, age 25
Missing since 14 October 1965

LINK:

The Mystery of Mary Shotwell Little and The Murder of Diane Shields : Two of Atlanta’s Most…

 

[Markybug]

Interesting titbit that the night she went out was the one and only time whilst her husband was away ?

 

[Solvist]

I am a new member. Although I have lived in Dallas for 5 years, I am an Atlanta native and old enough to remember this case and am still disturbed by it. After reading the posts here, other material on the internet, watching the 5 Roses podcasts and other podcasts I have a few observations and questions andI would appreciate any responses.

1) Is it true as I read that employees at the S&S cafteria could not say they saw Mary and Isla there having dinner ? I ate
there frequently and although it was popular and busy, it was truly a cafeteria where you moved down a line and had
contact with several servers as a checkout and cashier.

2) When Mary and Isla went shopping, what if any items did Mary purchase? Could sales clerks identify them? If Mary
bought anything, was the bag and merchandise in the car ?

3) Like others have mentioned, it defies logic that Mary would do her grocery shopping hours before arriving home rather
than after dinner and shopping. The grocery shopping was supposedly for a dinner party so it is likely she would have
perishable items. in the 4 grocer bags found in the car, were there perishable items ? Normally, you would assume going
straight home after shopping so proving they had dinner and did shopping is obviously important. There is no reason to
believe Isla Stack's testimony but you would think it was confirmed.An Isla Stack Hunter, who worked in the C&S
personnel department, died on March 16,2017.

4) On a podcast I heard it said that the FBI closed the case because they never were convinced it was under their
jurisdiction, i.e. that she was taken out of state ? If true, did they dismiss the 2 gas station interactions ? I question
the podcast statement since Mr Ponder continued to follow the case for years.

5) The last televised report by an Atlanta station I could find was 2 years ago when the reporting indicated someone was
contacting the station and Sheryl McCollum via emails and phone calls. Ms. McCollum believed the person was involved in
or knew who was in the murder of Diane Shields. Has there not been an update since those reports ?

6) I read that Mary Little was introduced to Roy Little by William McIntosh Fambrough who Mary once dated. Fambrough and
Little were friends and fellow Citadel graduates, apparently. Did Roy and/or Mary continue to have contact and or
socialize with Mr. Fambrough ?

7) Mary was supposedly overheard at the bank telling a caller she was a married woman now, that the caller could come
over but she wasn't going there. I assume that the person was either known by Roy and wouldn't arouse jealously or
was a woman. What am I missing ?

8) It was bold and reckless to return Mary's car to Lenox Mall in broad daylight particularly since she would have likely
been reported missing by then which was the case. Could it be the person's car was in the area and they were just
willing to take the chance ? If so, then the person could have driven to Charlotte that day and met up with his
accomplice.That could explain why at the gas station in Charlotte there was one man in the car and in Raleigh
there were 2.

It may be they wanted the police to see the car with the blood, undergarments, cut stocking, and North Carolina tag.
To taunt them ? To throw them off by N.C. focus ? Regarding the N.C. tag , could it be they orginally planned to take her
car to N.C. but changed their mind. Might it be someone said to return the car. It has been said Roy wanted to know
when he could have the car back.

9) I have never read any testimony by Judy Brownlee. Is any available ? I have read that someone thought they saw Judy
and Diane Shields eating at a diner late night on the night of her disappearance . Was that ever confirmed or denied ?

10) One of the detectives in reopening of the case a few years ago said he was struck by how authorities...he reluctantly
said the F.B.I....were not being cooperative even after all these years. If so, then why ?

11) It has been said that during the go go boom days in Atlanta in the 60s that there was a lot going on at the
Mitchell Street location of the C&S Bank where both Mary and Diane worked. Cash would be left laying around
in envelopes. Offices were used to have sex with prostitutes that worked out of a hotel across the street.
The bank had a love shack where female employees had encounters with other employees or customers.
That upstairs employees used binoculars to watch prostitutes in the hotel across the street.

Have you read if these rumors were confirmed to be true ?

These rumors seem sensationilzed but the 60s were kind of crazy. IF true they lend some credence that things were
very loose.
Maybe even to the extent money laundering was going on and the Dixie Mafia involved.
And maybe Mary and Diane had knowledge of the activities.
In reading about other murders committed by the Dixie Mafia the way Diane Shield was killed would fit them.
Sheryl McCollum is very familiar with the Dixie Mafia and their violent crimes...Billy Sunday Birt in particular.
He was young then and I don't know if he was active in violent crimes then.


12) Even though it was a different time, what was it that both of the gas station attendants saw or heard or thought that
made them not call the police when observing a woman bleeding from her head and had blood on her legs ? What
did they say to the police when asked that question which I assume they were.

13) Rather than the murderer coming from her banking connections, could it have gone back to when she quit her
volunteer work due to obscene phone calls. He could have followed her from that world.

14) Has Roy Little or Gene A. ( Mary's boss at C&S Bank ) made any public statement in the last 50 years about
Mary's disappearance ?

 

[Solvist]

My mistake... In 3) I state there is no reason to believe Isla Stack when I meant to say there is no reason to not believe her.

15) Although Carolyn S. was shown photos of possible suspects for the "Tire Guy" and none looked familiar, did the
police or FBI have an artist do a sketch ? She was quick thinking, observant, and the guy was as close as the
between the drivers seat and the passenger window when he was speaking to her.If they didn't do a sketch, it begs the
question why not ? After they reviewed police photos, did the police simply decide she didn't remember enough to
do a sketch ? That would be surprising since she saw enough to know he was tall, thin, young, with brown hair,
and a crew cut.

As an aside, on one podcast the speaker said Carolyn was at the Mall "to walk her cat". I believe he misread
a statement that said she " walked to her car". And I believe the speaker was implying that walking a cat would make
you question the "tire Guy" encounter.

 

[BethAnn777]

I am a new member. Although I have lived in Dallas for 5 years, I am an Atlanta native and old enough to remember this case and am still disturbed by it. After reading the posts here, other material on the internet, watching the 5 Roses podcasts and other podcasts I have a few observations and questions andI would appreciate any responses.

1) Is it true as I read that employees at the S&S cafteria could not say they saw Mary and Isla there having dinner ? I ate
there frequently and although it was popular and busy, it was truly a cafeteria where you moved down a line and had
contact with several servers as a checkout and cashier.

2) When Mary and Isla went shopping, what if any items did Mary purchase? Could sales clerks identify them? If Mary
bought anything, was the bag and merchandise in the car ?

3) Like others have mentioned, it defies logic that Mary would do her grocery shopping hours before arriving home rather
than after dinner and shopping. The grocery shopping was supposedly for a dinner party so it is likely she would have
perishable items. in the 4 grocer bags found in the car, were there perishable items ? Normally, you would assume going
straight home after shopping so proving they had dinner and did shopping is obviously important. There is no reason to
believe Isla Stack's testimony but you would think it was confirmed.An Isla Stack Hunter, who worked in the C&S
personnel department, died on March 16,2017.

4) On a podcast I heard it said that the FBI closed the case because they never were convinced it was under their
jurisdiction, i.e. that she was taken out of state ? If true, did they dismiss the 2 gas station interactions ? I question
the podcast statement since Mr Ponder continued to follow the case for years.

5) The last televised report by an Atlanta station I could find was 2 years ago when the reporting indicated someone was
contacting the station and Sheryl McCollum via emails and phone calls. Ms. McCollum believed the person was involved in
or knew who was in the murder of Diane Shields. Has there not been an update since those reports ?

6) I read that Mary Little was introduced to Roy Little by William McIntosh Fambrough who Mary once dated. Fambrough and
Little were friends and fellow Citadel graduates, apparently. Did Roy and/or Mary continue to have contact and or
socialize with Mr. Fambrough ?

7) Mary was supposedly overheard at the bank telling a caller she was a married woman now, that the caller could come
over but she wasn't going there. I assume that the person was either known by Roy and wouldn't arouse jealously or
was a woman. What am I missing ?

8) It was bold and reckless to return Mary's car to Lenox Mall in broad daylight particularly since she would have likely
been reported missing by then which was the case. Could it be the person's car was in the area and they were just
willing to take the chance ? If so, then the person could have driven to Charlotte that day and met up with his
accomplice.That could explain why at the gas station in Charlotte there was one man in the car and in Raleigh
there were 2.

It may be they wanted the police to see the car with the blood, undergarments, cut stocking, and North Carolina tag.
To taunt them ? To throw them off by N.C. focus ? Regarding the N.C. tag , could it be they orginally planned to take her
car to N.C. but changed their mind. Might it be someone said to return the car. It has been said Roy wanted to know
when he could have the car back.

9) I have never read any testimony by Judy Brownlee. Is any available ? I have read that someone thought they saw Judy
and Diane Shields eating at a diner late night on the night of her disappearance . Was that ever confirmed or denied ?

10) One of the detectives in reopening of the case a few years ago said he was struck by how authorities...he reluctantly
said the F.B.I....were not being cooperative even after all these years. If so, then why ?

11) It has been said that during the go go boom days in Atlanta in the 60s that there was a lot going on at the
Mitchell Street location of the C&S Bank where both Mary and Diane worked. Cash would be left laying around
in envelopes. Offices were used to have sex with prostitutes that worked out of a hotel across the street.
The bank had a love shack where female employees had encounters with other employees or customers.
That upstairs employees used binoculars to watch prostitutes in the hotel across the street.

Have you read if these rumors were confirmed to be true ?

These rumors seem sensationilzed but the 60s were kind of crazy. IF true they lend some credence that things were
very loose.
Maybe even to the extent money laundering was going on and the Dixie Mafia involved.
And maybe Mary and Diane had knowledge of the activities.
In reading about other murders committed by the Dixie Mafia the way Diane Shield was killed would fit them.
Sheryl McCollum is very familiar with the Dixie Mafia and their violent crimes...Billy Sunday Birt in particular.
He was young then and I don't know if he was active in violent crimes then.


12) Even though it was a different time, what was it that both of the gas station attendants saw or heard or thought that
made them not call the police when observing a woman bleeding from her head and had blood on her legs ? What
did they say to the police when asked that question which I assume they were.

13) Rather than the murderer coming from her banking connections, could it have gone back to when she quit her
volunteer work due to obscene phone calls. He could have followed her from that world.

14) Has Roy Little or Gene A. ( Mary's boss at C&S Bank ) made any public statement in the last 50 years about
Mary's disappearance ?

#7 - maybe she had a female friend she used to meet at the friend’s house and then they’d go out together drinking and partying? Maybe the friend still wanted to do the things they did before Mary was married? By telling the caller they could come over, maybe just meaning we can still hang out, so feel free to come over, but I can’t meet you at your place and go out like we used to?

Just a thought.

 

[Solvist]

In an above post I mentioned the violent murders committed by Billy Sunday Birt and his accomplices in the Dixie
Mafia. As far as murders in the Atlanta area, Billy Sunday Birt, Billy Wayne Davis, and Willie Hester
shot to death Drs Warren and Rosina Matthews in their home in a robbery/murder case on 5/7/71. This was 4-6 years after
Mary's disappearance and Diane's murder so it is not clear to me that they were committing violent crime in the Atlanta area in the earlier period. Sheryl McCollum and or the Atlanta Police probably know.

Interestingly though, Billy Sunday Birt admitted that he, Bobby Gene Gaddis, Charles David Reed,and Billy Wayne Davis murdered Bryce Durham, his wife Virginia Durham, and son Bobby Durham in their Boone N.C. home in 1972.The father and son were drowned while the wife was strangled. All three showed marks indicating that a cord or rope had been wrapped around their necks. I couldn't help but think of how Diane Shields body showed severe cuts around her neck from a cord of some type and died from strangulation. As of 2/22 Billy Wayne Davis was the only one still alive and admitted to only being the getaway driver.No valuables or money were taken and these murders were a hit and although admitting the murders they refused to say who paid them. Late in life Billy Sunday Birt admitted to some of the supposedly dozens of murders but to my knowledge never revealed who paid him...maybe the Dixie Mafia code.

All of this is maybe a stretch but the fact they operated in the Georgia and North Carolina areas (and other states) together with the violent nature of the murders and methods would seem to beg questions. If Billy Wayne Davis is still alive maybe be knows or heard something about Mary and Diane. He probably has been interviewed about it.

Speaking of North Carolina, the N.C. tag on Mary's car is one of the many puzzles.I mentioned that he/she/they may have put it on the car to lead investigators away from Atlanta, particularly with the later gas station encounters.And that maybe
they originally intended to take her car to N.C.,changed their mind, and used their other car(s). It may well be though that
when they decided to return the car to Lenox Square they assumed police were looking for the car. So, a N.C. tag
made it less likely that the car would be pulled over during the drive to Lenox Square. He,she,or they wanted the police
to see the car and its contents and took a good bit of risk in driving there to accomplish it. Otherwise, they could leave the car most anywhere and it likely would have been discovered later. Even if they had their car near Lenox to pick up they could have used other transportation to get there. And again, police felt that Roy appeared to be more interested in getting his car back than in finding his wife.

In Mary mentioning comments to a caller that they could come to her and Roy's place but she would not go to their place, I was wondering if the person was a man it had to be someone Roy knew and maybe knew well to come to the Little's apartment.Otherwise it would likely raise questions on Roy's part.
In saying she wouldn't go "there", you have to wonder if she felt compromised to the extent of her safety, sexual involvement, or simply been seen and leading to rumors, etc. If a woman, to go to the Little's wouldn't be an issue as far as
Roy's questioning her company. To refuse to go the woman's home, you have to wonder if it could be safety concerns or sexual involvement..the prior lesbian innuendos. Of course, "going there" could have been their place of residence, a bar, a hotel, North Carolina, a Lake Lanier cabin, a mountain cabin,....

It would seem though you have to assume she did want to be with that caller on their turf for whatever reason. And again, the conversation began with reminding the caller that she is "a married woman now".

 

[Solvist]

So many aspects of this case led the police and others to say: "It makes no sense". My belief is that once, if ever, the truth is known it will all make sense. One aspect that falls under this heading is "staging". Some folks, including several police at the time, believe Mary staged her own disappearance.That was definitely a possibility but there was nothing she indicated to family or friends that warranted running away from her marriage and her job unless she had to do it for her safety and in fact she had shared that she was afraid when she was alone and even including in her car. To support staging was ....what was actually a small amount of blood across the dash, the doors, the steering wheel, the seats and the undergarments, returning the car to Lenox at considerable risk to be sure police saw the staging, putting a North Carolina tag on her car to reduce the chance it would be pulled over during the trip back to Lenox, leaving her undergarments folded between the front seats suggesting she was stalling for time while being assaulted, her bra and cut stocking on the floorboard suggesting force was used, grass in the floorboard and red dust covering the car which had a 41 mile trip suggesting she was taken to a remote location, groceries bought and left in the car to confirm she intended to be there for the dinner party the next night.
With regard to the groceries, if she was staging then maybe that would explain why she bought the groceries first even thought it would be hours before she was home...because she was so fixated on being sure to create the right appearance with the groceries and forgot the questions the time element would foster with regard to perishable items.
I read that although she drove the Comet it was actually in Roy's name. Maybe, in addition to staging via the car, maybe she
subconsciously wanted to return the car to Roy. As I typed that it sounded absurd but who knows where your logic goes when you are thinking thru a complicated plan under great duress.
The 2 North Carolina gas station appearances could support staging since the woman in the car if it was Mary or not Mary made no effort to ask for help and yet used her credit card and signature for purchases.
To further support this line of reasoning, maybe Mary contacted her Mother and let her know she was safe. Then when Diane Shields was killed that would explain why her Mother asked the police to stop looking for her. She was afraid they would eventually locate her, others would then find her and something would happen to her.

All of this taken together, although possible,is a lot of planning by Mary to create an illusion when there is little firm evidence that she would want to exit. And in doing so, it would be complicated further because she would certainly need accomplices.

My thought is staging was likely involved but not by Mary. The theory..I believe others used staging to suggest she was abducted for sexually assault when in fact she was abducted because of what she knew about bank activities or a bank customer. Because the people that committed the crime may have been deviates she may have been raped but their main motive was to find out what she knew ( and if others knew ) and to then kill her. And to use the appearance of a sexual crime to draw attention away from the bank or other activities. It may well be that a person was stalking her but that person was also with the bank or with a banking customer and involved in illegal activities so things were complicated further.

 

[John/Jane Doe]

Mary Shotwell Little – The Charley Project

 

[Frank Smith]

Dear Solvist,
You make an interesting point about staging. You raise the possibility that MSL was abducted because a certain person, or persons, at C&S had reason to believe she might have been in possession of material information regarding unsavory, and probably illegal, activities at the bank. And so, this person, or persons, may have arranged to have her abducted. Rather than just killing her on the spot, or having her disappear without leaving any clue as to motive, her Comet is instead returned to the mall and parked with her blood smears inside, as well as her blood speckled underwear placed between the seats and on the floor. This placed evidence suggested the primary motive for her abduction was sexual, but consistent with your speculation, it was actually placed to obscure the fact her abductor(s) really wanted to find out what she (and perhaps others at C&S) knew before they killed her to ensure silence. If this was their true motive, then it would make sense to stage the car in such a way as to suggest a sex related motive for her abduction. It also allowed her abductors to buy time because if they intended to question her, she couldn’t be killed immediately. Presumably, as the car was returned with 41 unexplained miles, she was taken somewhere roughly a 20 mile radius from the Lenox parking lot to a location where she was kept, or more likely transferred to another car and driven to another location.

I have read the available articles and reports on this case over and over, but really can‘t find anything on the internet that would suggest criminal malfeasance or fraud on the part of C&S higher ups in the mid-1960’s. Perhaps this is just another theory that can never be proven, but I agree with you point that there is a strong likelihood that the Comet was parked and the condition of its interior was deliberately staged. The question then becomes why.

One question arises. Assuming that the above theory is true, after presumably bundling MSL off, likely into another car, why did they drive the Comet back to Lenox at some risk of being spotted rather than just abandon it elsewhere? Why was it so important to have the Comet discovered at Lenox shopping mall?


FS

 

[Frank Smith]

Further thoughts ...

 

[Frank Smith]

Addendum: Actually, further to the theory about staging as outlined above, and assuming the statement of MSL's co-worker and dinner/shopping companion was accurate, all we really know for sure is that MSL was last seen alive and well at approximately 8 p.m. at Lenox shopping mall on the evening of October 14. We don't actually know for sure when and where her abduction took place. It could have been at the mall around 8 p.m. or perhaps it took place somewhere else at a later time, presumably at some spot approximately within a 20-mile radius from the shopping mall. MSL may have left the mall after 8 p.m. and been abducted someplace else and taken to another location. The staging theory assumes her abductor(s) staged the interior of her Comet with and drove it back to the mall (sometime later the next morning if you believe mall security) to allow it to be found there. Again, why was it so important for her abductor(s) to have MSL's Comet discovered at Lenox as opposed to elsewhere?

 

[Valiant]

The car may have returned to Lenox because someone involved in the act needed to get back to that area because that was near where they lived or worked or their car was.
That’s my guess rather than returning the car to make it seem she was abducted there.

 

[Frank Smith]

The car may have returned to Lenox because someone involved in the act needed to get back to that area because that was near where they lived or worked or their car was.
That’s my guess rather than returning the car to make it seem she was abducted there.

Fair point. But let's unpack it a bit. My following analysis assumes Solvist's idea that the bloodstains, undergarments, etc. in MSL's car were deliberately staged in order to make it seem that the intent behind her abduction was sexual, thus camouflaging the real motive. We can speculate later as to what the real motive may have been - perhaps a violent attempt to cover up malfeasance at the bank? Perhaps something else? In any event, assuming the abductor(s) staged the condition that her Comet was found in, it's certainly possible that they forced MSL into her car at approximately 8 p.m. and drove off, returning the bloodstained Comet to the Lenox mall later the next morning (something like 14 to 16 hours after the presumed time of her abduction if mall security was correct about the Comet not being in the lot earlier that morning) in order to retrieve their own vehicle.

First, the vehicle left behind scenario raises the possibility of MSL being abducted at the shopping mall by only one person. Leaving a vehicle behind seems to make some sense if there was only a single abductor at the scene. But even so, given the inherent risks, one would suppose her abductor would have had at least thought about the danger of being spotted driving MSL's car back to Lenox the next morning plus the possibility of their own vehicle drawing unwanted attention overnight.

Would a single abductor have forced a woman into her car with the intention of driving her car back to retrieve their own vehicle the next day? Perhaps, but such an intention is obviously risky as opposed to not leaving a potentially suspicious vehicle behind overnight to draw unwanted attention and/or abandoning MSL's Comet somewhere as soon as possible under the cover of darkness instead of driving it around the next morning.

Furthermore, if there were at least two abductors at the scene when MSL was taken, the vehicle left behind scenario becomes somewhat less likely. Why would the abductors take the risks noted above when they could simply drive their own vehicle away? I suppose it's possible that something unexpected could have occurred during the abduction necessitating the abductors leaving their vehicle behind. Perhaps MSL was harder to subdue than anticipated, thus requiring the presence of more than one abductor in her car, or they had to leave their car behind in haste because someone was approaching the scene and they needed to flee.

Of course, we don't have much evidence as to whether or not MSL's abductor(s) were bright enough to understand the risks of leaving a vehicle at Lenox overnight and driving her Comet back the next day to retrieve it, though they did at least attach stolen NC tags her car presumably indicating that they had some idea of the risks involved in driving a missing woman's car around.

I must say that I have never come across any evidence of another vehicle involved in this case, other than a '56 or '57 white over blue Buick that was described by at least one of the gas station attendants in NC where MSL's charge card was used to buy gas on October 15. Correct me if I am wrong, but I also recall reading that Atlanta police did not ask Lenox mall security for any citations issued on vehicles that would have been left overnight in the parking lot. If true, I find this to be astounding to say the least, but in all of the articles published on this case, I don't remember information about any suspicious vehicles in the Lenox parking lot or immediate vicinity on the night of October 14. Of course, this doesn't mean that the abductor(s) didn't leave a vehicle at Lenox, but neither is there any evidence that they did. All we know for sure is that when the Comet was discovered by MSL's boss sometime around noon on October 15, it had bloodstains in the interior, along with MSL's undergarments and groceries, and a coating of red dust on its exterior with 41 unexplained miles on the odometer.

The Comet also had the stolen NC tags mentioned previously, presumably placed on it by the abductor(s) to deflect suspicion from anyone, including police, who would have been on the lookout for a pearl gray '65 Comet displaying the proper Georgia tags. Not sure how probable cause would have been applied by the police 60 years ago, but it seems to me the abductor(s) would have had to have known they were taking a huge risk driving that car back to Lenox mall, notwithstanding the NC tags. Perhaps they thought it would be very difficult for police to trace the stolen out of state license plates, thus making it less likely of being pulled over, but that is complete conjecture on my part. Still, how many pearl gray '65 Comets could there have been in the Atlanta area? If the police spotted one, wouldn't they have likely pulled it over to check it out regardless of the license tags?

Perhaps MSL's abductor(s) was just not smart enough to understand the risk they were taking by (a) driving the Comet back to Lenox on the morning of October 15 to (b) retrieve a parked vehicle that may have already drawn suspicion by the authorities.

Forcing a woman into her car and driving off with her into the night and then, the very next morning, driving her car back to the place where you abducted her in order to retrieve your own vehicle - which may have already drawn unwanted attention - seems to be a very risky plan. The same could be said about the scenario where her abductor(s) drove her car back to Lenox not because they left a vehicle there, but because they worked/lived in the area. Why take the risk of being spotted and pulled over by the police?

Well, perhaps her abductor(s) was merely dumb. Prisons are full of criminals who are not quite Einstein. We can't rule out this possibility, of course.

Or perhaps her abductor(s) understood the risks, but believed it was nevertheless necessary because for some reason the Comet had to be discovered at Lenox with the bloodstains, etc. as part of an effort to deflect attention from the real motive behind her abduction.

Or perhaps there's an entirely different scenario. Perhaps MSL's abductor(s) knew there was no risk of being pulled over by police on the morning of October 15 because they knew that the authorities had not yet been alerted to the fact that MSL was missing. As far as we know, all the efforts to find MSL that morning were directed by her boss at C&S bank, presumably from 8 or 9 am in the morning until approximately early afternoon when he drove to Lenox and discovered her Comet. I might have missed something and would appreciate being corrected if someone knows the facts, but isn't it true that police were not contacted until after the Comet had been discovered? Does anyone know when the police were actually contacted? In any event, I recall reading that MSL's boss spent quite a bit of time on the morning of October 15 talking to her landlord, etc. before actually making the drive out to the shopping mall himself. What if her abductor(s) had real-time information as to what was happening at the bank? What if they knew the actual time as to when the police were contacted?

Then why would they bother to attach the stolen NC license plates to the Comet when they knew there was no risk of being pulled over? Perhaps as a way to make the police think that they believed they could have been pulled over, therefore obscuring the fact they were in possession of inside information from the bank and knew for certain there was no risk of being pulled over.

If MSL's abductor(s) was deliberately provided with such information from someone inside the bank, this would be the legal definition of a conspiracy and certainly in line with what Solvist has posited above.

I hasten to add that all of this is nothing but speculation at this point, but nevertheless a scenario worth further discussion.

 

[Frank Smith]

Addendum: Further to my response above, a cursory glance at some previous postings on this thread from years ago indicates that MSL’s Comet did not display stolen tags when it was discovered by her boss at Lenox Square Shopping Center early on the afternoon of Friday, October 15. Apparently, some sloppy reporting by the media confused the tags on MSL’s ‘65 Comet with the stolen NC plates on the vehicle that was filled up in Charlotte and Raleigh on October 15 using MSL‘s Esso credit card; also, according to the same postings, MSL’s boss notified police about MSL’s disappearance right after discovering her bloodstained Comet at Lenox Square and police immediately responded to the scene as well as issuing a missing person alert for MSL

 

[Valiant]

Here are a few things as I understand them:
1) Mary was not reported missing until the following morning. Police would not have been looking for her car the day/night before. The car was likely never driven after she was actually reported missing. The reporting is a little unclear here. Did security search the entire lot or just the area they were told the car was? How close to the original area did her boss find the car?
2) Just because someone needed to get back to Lenox and returned her car there does not necessarily mean they had another car left in the lot. Perhaps they lived close by and walked to work.

 

[Frank Smith]

Here are a few things as I understand them:
1) Mary was not reported missing until the following morning. Police would not have been looking for her car the day/night before. The car was likely never driven after she was actually reported missing. The reporting is a little unclear here. Did security search the entire lot or just the area they were told the car was? How close to the original area did her boss find the car?
2) Just because someone needed to get back to Lenox and returned her car there does not necessarily mean they had another car left in the lot. Perhaps they lived close by and walked to work.

I agree that it isn’t clear how close the Comet was to its original spot when it was discovered, though I believe it was found in the same zone. Nor is it clear what areas of the parking lot mall security searched.

We basically share the same understanding as to when police were contacted about MSL’s disappearance. Police were notified immediately after her Comet was discovered by her boss at Lenox Square early in the afternoon of October 15. While it’s true that police were not looking for her car before then, MSL’s abductor(s) had no way of knowing this — unless they had information from someone about when police were contacted. But without this information, one would think the abductor(s) would have to assume (unless they weren’t very bright) that police were on the lookout for MSL’s car hours before they actually drove it back to Lenox Square. Regardless of whether they did so to retrieve a vehicle or to walk back home, or to work, returning the Comet to Lenox in broad daylight some 14 to 16 hours after abducting MSL was enormously risky unless they knew for certain that police had not yet been made aware that MSL was missing.

 

[Valiant]

I think it is very possible the suspects knew Mary would not be reported missing for a some time. With her husband out of town it was the perfect time for the disappearance. On a normal day, she might be reported missing that evening. With her husband traveling they knew they might have until the next day - especially since long distance phone calls were expensive back then and he might be unlikely to call home.