WI WI - Evelyn Hartley, 15, La Crosse, 24 Oct 1953

I just reread Evelyn's charleyproject page and, while we all seem to agree that Ed Gein had nothing to do with it, really thinking about it...it is so so ironic that he just happened to be right there and is a giant creeper.

punklove said:

Its sad they wont do it - there are so many cases that have nothing to test for DNA so its frustrating where there is ample evidence in her case that could be very helpful in finally solving this.

Im sure they have reasons but I dont see the big deal oh allowing them to test their DNA if it could result in answers in this 57 year old case.

Click to expand...

I agree!

Claudette said:

I just reread Evelyn's charleyproject page and, while we all seem to agree that Ed Gein had nothing to do with it, really thinking about it...it is so so ironic that he just happened to be right there and is a giant creeper.

Click to expand...

I go back and forth with the Gein thing, so Im not sure what I think, a lot of people think this wasnt his normal type of crime but if he was responsible for this it would have been during the 'learning' stage of killing. Some interesting facts:

1) Some of Evelyns clothes were found in a cemetery; Gein later confessed that he often (50+ times) would go to grave yards because he wanted to dig up graves. "On about 30 of those visits, he said he had come out of the daze while in the cemetery, left the grave in good order, and returned home empty handed. Also, there were three cemeteries less than a mile from the home she was taken.

2) The jacket that was found is very much similar to the type of jacket that Gein ALWAYS wore. Here is a photo of the jacket found and here, here and here are photos of him in the similar jacket. Jeans werent really popular until the late 50s (early 60s) yet the person that did this seems to have been wearing a denim jacket and denim 'trousers' - Just like Gein often did, as seen here.

3) Gein was small enough to get into the basement window with no problem, but also small enough that Evelyn could have gotten away from him in the struggle upstairs, allowing her to run out of the home before he caught her. (She was 3 inches taller than him). Just a random fact - Gein was frequently a babysitter for his neighbors and everyone considered him trustworthy.

As far as Evelyn not matching his typical MO its worth note that it seems that he had a psychotic break mid May, 1944. Until this time he hadnt harmed anyone.. His brother started to go against their mothers view and mocking Ed for how close he was to his mother. On May 16th his brother was killed, people commonly agree that Ed killed him.. The murdering of his brother could have set him into motion as a killer.

It doesnt seem unthinkable that Evelyn could have been his first (or near the first) person he killed, only deciding afterwards that it was too messy (or risky)for his liking so moved onto already dead bodies, and what better place to do so than a place where nobody knows him? The town he was from was tiny (in 2000 - 899 people) so of course he wouldnt practice there.

punklove said:

I go back and forth with the Gein thing, so Im not sure what I think, a lot of people think this wasnt his normal type of crime but if he was responsible for this it would have been during the 'learning' stage of killing. Some interesting facts:

1) Some of Evelyns clothes were found in a cemetery; Gein later confessed that he often (50+ times) would go to grave yards because he wanted to dig up graves. "On about 30 of those visits, he said he had come out of the daze while in the cemetery, left the grave in good order, and returned home empty handed. Also, there were three cemeteries less than a mile from the home she was taken.

Click to expand...

Wait.....what? Seriously? I didn't know anything of hers had actually been found. If that's so that's just TOO WEIRD.

You're right, it really wasn't his MO, or what we KNOW of his MO, he didn't really kill that many people (that we know about) he just messed with the dead (to put it nicely :yuck. While nothing is impossible, what are the chances that in any given night, creeper Gein is mere blocks away from other kidnapper/murderers? I tried to find the population of La Crosse during this time but couldn't, but I can't imagine it was giant.

joellegirl said:

I "think" they still have the bloody clothes that were found along the road, but I could be wrong. The jacket(believed to have belonged to one of the perps) that was found was paraded all over the area in hopes someone recognized it. I'm not sure if that has survived. According the the book "Where's Evelyn?" they still have her menstrual pads. This is a quote from the book

Click to expand...

I have a bit of a weird question - since it seems that the blood-stained brassiere and panties belonged to her (her mother told police it was the same brand/style/size that she wore) why was there no menstrual pad found with the panties? We know for certain she was on her period, and that she wore pads but there was no pad found with the bloody panties and bra? Where did it go? Or better yet, who removed it?

Claudette said:

Wait.....what? Seriously? I didn't know anything of hers had actually been found. If that's so that's just TOO WEIRD.

You're right, it really wasn't his MO, or what we KNOW of his MO, he didn't really kill that many people (that we know about) he just messed with the dead (to put it nicely :yuck. While nothing is impossible, what are the chances that in any given night, creeper Gein is mere blocks away from other kidnapper/murderers? I tried to find the population of La Crosse during this time but couldn't, but I can't imagine it was giant.

Click to expand...

I need to find the article about things being found in the cemetery, Im thinking it was her panties and bra that were found on the highway that was adjacent to a cemetery. Will post article when I find it.


http://lacrosselibrary.org/digitalproject/images/hartley/00080008.jpg

That article shows a frontal view of the jacket that was found.

Im trying to find the article about finding items in a cemetery, the items that were found that officals feel have connection to this case are as follows (most of this is listed in the article above):

Blood spotted jacket found on Highway 14 a 'short time' after she went missing, found just off the shoulder of the highway in a 'sodded' section.

The jacket was found 800 feet north of the spot where a pair of tennis shoes, were found - The shoes matched the odd print of the shoe at the home. They were found on the same side of the highway as the jacket and both were within view to passerbys.

The jacket had blood stains (spots and smears) that were either type A or O, the most of the blood being on the back and front of the jacket, but there was a small amount of blood on the sleeves and neckline. The jacket was odd because it had been cut off (it was cut off around 2 inches below the tops of the bottom pockets) and rehemmed by a machine, the new hem was made with white thread (that didnt match the jacket).

It was size medium, and seemed to be rather old as the color of the jacket seemed very washed out. It had four button holes, but the second button from the bottom was missing. There was a three inch vertical tear in the vicinity of the button holes that had been machine sewn with brown thread.

Her panties and bra were found on RT 14, and I also remember an article about clothes in a cemetery but not sure if it was proven they were hers or not.

punklove said:

I have a bit of a weird question - since it seems that the blood-stained brassiere and panties belonged to her (her mother told police it was the same brand/style/size that she wore) why was there no menstrual pad found with the panties? We know for certain she was on her period, and that she wore pads but there was no pad found with the bloody panties and bra? Where did it go? Or better yet, who removed it?

Click to expand...

Good question!

Another tidbit from the book. Evelyn's hairbrushes, combs and curlers(obviously taken from her home) are still in the crime lab, so more ways to test DNA, if they have been properly stored.

About Gein, I don't think it was ever proven he was in the La Crosse area that night. It was rumored he was visiting relatives in Onalaska, WI which is a few miles away, and another rumor had him only a block or two away.. A policeman at the time of the abduction and who later became La Crosse police chief told the local paper, the Tribune, that they had proven Gein was not in La Crosse that night (how, I do not know and this was said after 1957.). Gein himself said he was working on his farm in Plainfield ( a few hours away) at that time and he said he had nothing to do with her disappearance (for what his word was worth) and until his death he always denied it.
However,there were female body parts believed to belong to a teen aged girl found on his farm(not sure if they still have them for testing), and he saved articles about her disappearance. Detectives took on the grisily task of looking at the heads and face masks etc of corpses but none matched Evelyn. They also searched his farm for any trace of her.


No matter what proof the police come up with, it seems Gein will always be connected to Evelyn's disappearance. Remember in 1953, Gein was not famous yet for his crimes, only in 1957 did that come about, and only then the connection to Evelyn was thought of which led to the investigation if he was involved. So four years later it was kind of hard to know where he was that night for sure, and until more evidence comes about it looks like we will never know for sure if Gein was involved or not.

It would make more sense that he wasnt in La Crosse that night, it didnt seem that he really ever left the farm his mother moved them to unless he had to so it seems strange that he would actually be there. I honestly think the only reason anyone would think he had anything to do with this case was due to how unlikely it would be that two people would be in such a small area that could have done something so awful.

Ed was born in La Crosse, soon after his birth his mother forced the entire family to move to Plainfield (buying a farm with over 100 acres of land), saying that LaCrosse was a 'sinkhole of filth' and was full of sin. Once moved she no longer allowed either of her sons to leave the farm other than to go directly to school and directly home from school as she felt anything else would 'cast them to hell'. His father died in 1940, then his brother died (most likely killed by Gein) in 1944. In 1945 his mother had a stroke, making her confined to her bed and although Ed took care of her night and day it is reported this is when her abuse became the most intense. She died in December 1945 and Ed was left alone, even after his mothers death he would very rarely leave the farm - only when he had no other choice.

Judge Gollmar (the Judge later involved in Gein's trial) is the person that really tied Gein to this case, saying that Gein was visiting family in the area at that time. The same Judge later wrote a book so who knows what he was looking for, but some of the things that he noted were reasons he felt Gein was involved were that Gein had been known to work on and off as a logger, which could have explained the jacket having the marks on it from a harness and One of the vuvlas found in his 'collection' belonged to a young girl, was "fresh" and was not taken from any local graves.

Just to note...When Evelyn's father looked for her he entered by the basement window so maybe it wasn't THAT small.

The jacket could well have belonged to Gein and more than likely was sewn by his mother. Maybe it was his brothers/fathers and had been altered to fit.

The question of why somebody would remove a badly injured/dying girl could be the same reason that Gein took bodies back to his farm, he prefered them dead.

I would look at Gein more closely. JMHO

http://lacrosselibrary.org/digitalproject/images/hartley/00080008.jpg

Ive not heard anything about this before so thought Id post and see if anyone else had? I recall them saying that the jacket was found on the highway but the above article has the police saying that the jacket was on the highway at one point but that a farmer actually picked it up and took it home with him.

The article above says that there was a rumor going around that several days before the shoes were found that there had been a jacket on the same highway that was then gone.. They looked into the rumor and found that a farmer was in possession of the jacket - saying that he saw it on the road and tosses it into the back of his truck. If thats true, why would he have not turned it in? They found the jacket with him Nov 17th, well after the time the police were asking people to be on the look out for anything odd, including clothing as they had found the bloody shoes.

Could the farmer have been Gein himself ? retreiving it maybe.

Robin Hood said:

Just to note...When Evelyn's father looked for her he entered by the basement window so maybe it wasn't THAT small.

The jacket could well have belonged to Gein and more than likely was sewn by his mother. Maybe it was his brothers/fathers and had been altered to fit.

The question of why somebody would remove a badly injured/dying girl could be the same reason that Gein took bodies back to his farm, he prefered them dead.

I would look at Gein more closely. JMHO

Click to expand...

Not to be gross but he certainly had sewing skills too, I doubt a jacket would be any harder to sew than a skin suit. I dont think her father was all that big either, Here is a photo of what he looked like as well as the window.

He didnt always want them dead, at the start he would look in newspapers for women that had died very recently that looked similar to his mother and would unbury them, taking the bits that he wanted back to his home.

He moved on to want 'fresh' bodies as well, which is what made the Judge involved with sentencing him think that he was involved with Evelyn (and another missing girl in the area) becoming missing - they found two vulvas in his home that were from young women but there were no young women buried in the area.

The thing is this - none of what happened with Evelyn matches what he was known to do, the Judge involved said that he was visiting an aunt within two blocks of the home - if we could prove or disprove this fact I think it would be helpful.

Robin Hood said:

Could the farmer have been Gein himself ? retreiving it maybe.

Click to expand...

Although Gein was born in La Crosse he lived in Plainfield which was about 112 miles away, the police apparently (according to the paper) went to the home of the farmer (not in Plainfield) and retrieved the jacket from there.

Not that it proves anything but Gein also passed a lie detector test about not being involved with the Hartley case.

Yeah I guess you know much more than me Punklove, I wasn't sure of the distance from Plainfield. Very coincidently though he was possibly 2 blocks away visiting his aunt, he's a good candidate though IMO

Robin Hood said:

Yeah I guess you know much more than me Punklove, I wasn't sure of the distance from Plainfield. Very coincidently though he was possibly 2 blocks away visiting his aunt, he's a good candidate though IMO

Click to expand...

Haha, I dont know all that much.

I think the issue is that apparently its not fact that he was actually there, if we knew that he was there Id have to completely agree - but it seems that the only person that has said he was there was the Judge who later wrote a book. I wish there was a way to prove it, its hard to not believe its true if the Judge wrote about it in his book.. Wonder where he got the facts?

I've just looked briefly on the net and found this http://hubpages.com/hub/Seriously-Interesting-Facts-about-Ed-Gein-Serial-Killer

Penises ? scrotum ? where did they come from ? maybe a little exageration from the author.

Any cemetrys near to where Evelyn was babysitting ?

Robin Hood said:

Yeah I guess you know much more than me Punklove, I wasn't sure of the distance from Plainfield. Very coincidently though he was possibly 2 blocks away visiting his aunt, he's a good candidate though IMO

Click to expand...

Its kind of weird but when they found the jacket and shoes they felt that the same person couldnt have worn both items - the jacket was a medium and the shoes were sized 10, so they assumed that someone that would wear a size 10 shoe couldnt wear a Medium size jacket.

Oddly enough - one of the main reasons people saying that it couldnt have been him (other than him passing the lie detector test) is that he wore a size 9 shoe, and the shoes found were size 10 - he is also said to have weighed around 125 pounds, which would mean he could fit into a medium size jacket. Here is a photo that you can see that show his feet, they dont look all that small to me. Besides, wearing a shoe thats one size bigger doesnt see unthinkable.