Who Occupied the House Prior to Suzie and Sherrill?

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tuffgong

Tuffgong

Former Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2016
Messages
254
Reaction score
567
I know that the girls had only been in the house for about two months. Anybody know who occupied that house prior? And what the person or persons did for a living? Crimes have happened because of a wrong address or people not knowing there was a change of occupants.
 
Good point,considering Suzie and Sherrill had moved to that house a short time before the disappearance. I never came across anything related to previous homeowners, but I remember some speculation about the possibility that locks might not have been changed by the new owner (Sherrill), or some of the previous owners still kept a copy of those keys and could have used them.
 
Wow, different angle. Never thought that.
 
We have a website here in Springfield called Beacon. When I looked, it shows current owner, and it says that the house is 1498 sq ft.
There is a parcel number and book/page number for deed but this may be for the current owner.

I will continue to snoop..lol

Just looked at another site, it lists the past residents, including her. Says that she is related to a D Levitt. I am not sure if the name above her came after her or before as it does not list dates. I am not sure if we can put name. Question MOD?
 
Quote:

Shrum, 53, reached at his second home in Marble Hill, MO., said he
never met any of the missing women and isn't related to Hazel
Pauline Shrum. But Shrum said he considered briefly that whoever is
responsible for the disappearances may be trying to get him.
Police say they are looking into that theory, although they doubt
anyone who took the women was trying to get the judge.

Shrum lives next door, at 1705 E. Delmar St., but wasn't in
Springfield the night the women vanished. He was in his hometown of
Marble Hill, where he goes every weekend.

Shrum has a college-age daughter who looks somewhat-like Streeter
and McCall.

He was appointed an appeals court judge in 1990, and before that he
was a prosecuting attorney for 22 years, winning convictions against
many people.

Marble Hill's police force has three members. Shrum's son, Gary
Shrum, is the police chief. Anybody who wanted to do us harm could
have done it very easily here in Marble Hill (1,477 residents). End
quote. News-Leader, July 3, 1992.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:


Read more: http://3missingwomen.proboards.com/thread/32/valuable-information#ixzz534PBuqX6
 
I often wondered my self if the targets could have been the previous owner. Remember that the Manson family chose the Tate house because Melcher had lived there and Charlie had a grudge against him. When you see the owner was a prosecutor and judge, WHOA, motive established. Then you find out that he had a daughter that fit Suzie's description? Seems very possible. Some ex-con seeking revenge, maybe targets judge's daughter, who he perceives is Suzie. But that one thing that always has me scratching my head, if the motivation was sexual, why leave the house with the women? He had control of the house and could have committed the crimes there. Would have been much easier killing three women in house and leaving then taking them. DNA was not a concern at that time.
 
Tuffgong said:
I often wondered my self if the targets could have been the previous owner. Remember that the Manson family chose the Tate house because Melcher had lived there and Charlie had a grudge against him. When you see the owner was a prosecutor and judge, WHOA, motive established. Then you find out that he had a daughter that fit Suzie's description? Seems very possible. Some ex-con seeking revenge, maybe targets judge's daughter, who he perceives is Suzie. But that one thing that always has me scratching my head, if the motivation was sexual, why leave the house with the women? He had control of the house and could have committed the crimes there. Would have been much easier killing three women in house and leaving then taking them. DNA was not a concern at that time.
Click to expand...
Interesting thoughts. Tell us more about this previous owner. Was this angle checked into thoroughly during the initial investigation?
 
skip tracy said:
Except that it was, having been used successfully in criminal cases since 1987.
Click to expand...
The science had not been developed to make it a key component in cases yet. Yes, people knew about it, but science had not caught up. I would cite the Austin Yogurt Shop murders, they had the DNA sample in 1991, but could not test it scientifically until five years later.
 
From the June 12, 1992 Springfield News-Leader:

"Roff's son, Dan Roff, who sold the 1717 E. Delmar St. house to Levitt..."​

There is an interesting anomaly in the Greene County Recorder's records regarding this sale. Document 041788-92 is a Warranty Deed with Danny L. Roff as the Grantor (Seller) and Sherrill Levitt as the Grantee (Buyer). The document date is listed as 03/02/1992 but it was not filed with the Recorder until 11/13/1992, more than 8mos later and after Sherill's disappearance. That's an extremely tardy filing. What's also curious is Document 042674-92, which is a Release Deed with Boatman's Bank as the Grantor and Danny L. Roff as the Grantee,. That document is dated 11/18/1992 and was (very promptly) filed on 11/19/1992. A release from a Lienholder (such as the Bank) is normally granted once a Deed of Trust (i.e. a Mortgage) is paid in full. That should have happened at the closing with Sherrill, the previous March. Why was this held up for roughly 8mos, and why was everything on both sides of the transaction filed within a few days of each other? Was this a very inept job by the Title Company or was there a problem with the funds between Sherrill and Roff such that a Release wasn't granted promptly? If you look at the Docket Entries for case # 31292-00411 I think you'll find evidence to support the latter:
  • 10/07/1992 REPORT OF SALE OF REAL ESTATE FLD &DUE 10-20-92
  • 10/20/1992 ORDER APPROVING REPORT OF SALE OF REAL ESTATE
  • 10/21/1992 CLAIM OF BOATMEN'S BANK OF SO MO $4,729.16 + INT
  • 11/02/1992 SATISFACTION OF CLAIM FILED - BOATMEN'S
Basically, whatever proceeds Levitt paid Roff weren't enough to cover the balance of the mortgage, and only after Sherrill disappeared and her home was essentially auctioned off was Boatman's made whole and Roff able to obtain his lien release. That also means Sherill never owned the home, "free & clear of any encumbrances," as is normally represented by a Seller/Grantor. That could be considered fraudulent misrepresentation.

Wonder if any of this becomes some kind of motive?
 
Last edited:
the_p0ssum said:
From the June 12, 1992 Springfield News-Leader:

"Roff's son, Dan Roff, who sold the 1717 E. Delmar St. house to Levitt..."​

There is an interesting anomaly in the Greene County Recorder's records regarding this sale. Document 041788-92 is a Warranty Deed with Danny L. Roff as the Grantor (Seller) and Sherrill Levitt as the Grantee (Buyer). The document date is listed as 03/02/1992 but it was not filed with the Recorder until 11/13/1992, more than 8mos later and after Sherill's disappearance. That's an extremely tardy filing. What's also curious is Document 042674-92, which is a Release Deed with Boatman's Bank as the Grantor and Danny L. Roff as the Grantee,. That document is dated 11/18/1992 and was (very promptly) filed on 11/19/1992. A release from a Lienholder (such as the Bank) is normally granted once a Deed of Trust (i.e. a Mortgage) is paid in full. That should have happened at the closing with Sherrill, the previous March. Why was this held up for roughly 8mos, and why was everything on both sides of the transaction filed within a few days of each other? Was this a very inept job by the Title Company or was there a problem with the funds between Sherrill and Roff such that a Release wasn't granted promptly? If you look at the Docket Entries for case # 31292-00411 I think you'll find evidence to support the latter:
  • 10/07/1992 REPORT OF SALE OF REAL ESTATE FLD &DUE 10-20-92
  • 10/20/1992 ORDER APPROVING REPORT OF SALE OF REAL ESTATE
  • 10/21/1992 CLAIM OF BOATMEN'S BANK OF SO MO $4,729.16 + INT
  • 11/02/1992 SATISFACTION OF CLAIM FILED - BOATMEN'S
Basically, whatever proceeds Levitt paid Roff weren't enough to cover the balance of the mortgage, and only after Sherrill disappeared and her home was essentially auctioned off was Boatman's made whole and Roff able to obtain his lien release. That also means Sherill never owned the home, "free & clear of any encumbrances," as is normally represented by a Seller/Grantor. That could be considered fraudulent misrepresentation.

Wonder if any of this becomes some kind of motive?
Click to expand...
In my humble opinion. No.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 207 more.
Total: 3,561 (members: 208, guests: 3,353)

Online statistics

Members online
208
Guests online
3,353
Total visitors
3,561
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,754
Messages
17,958,471
Members
228,603
Latest member
megalow
Back
Top