OH OH - William 'Bill' Comeans, 14, Columbus, 7 Jan 1980 - #1
- Thread starter pdxmama
- Start date
New Posts
-
Still Missing OH - Glenna White, 16, Alliance, 2 June 2009 *endangered* *Mistrial*
- Latest: imstilla.grandma
- Status
GoingByMyGut
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,173
- Reaction score
- 17
I've been meaning for some time to look up some stuff about polygraph tests, so I'm jumping off your post to do that, Methodical. The first three reliable sources I went to all said that, as a rule, polygraphs are not given to children under 12 because the test is unreliable with that population. The test is considered reasonably reliable with children who are about age 12 and up. So technically, Bill, at age 14, would have been a viable candidate.
One report I read on how the polygraph works and when it should not be used explains how it works: "if the subject shows bodily changes that indicate anxiety during a polygraph test, this is evidence that they are lying" (p. 4). The report goes on to say (on p. 5) what can confound the results (BBM):
"Many factors may affect polygraph results:
- Extreme emotional tension or nervousness
- Anger
- Concern over neglect of duty or responsibility that made possible the commission of the offense
- Physical discomfort during the test
- Excessive number of test questions
- Use of medications
- Poor question phrasing"
BBM2: What if Bill felt responsible for the attacks -- in much the same way that a victim of rape might feel an assault is her "fault"? Could the fact that he was subdued and didn't "fight" have made him or others challenge his masculinity? Could the test have picked up guilt?
BBM3: I suspect this means during the test, and we don't know the answer to that. But I wonder too, if he was drugged by his assailants during the attacks, whether Bill's hazy recollection of the events could have triggered a false positive?
What if Bill came up as "deceptive" because he didn't share something that embarrassed him? A name he was called? A way he was touched? The report presents arguments as to why victims of sexual assault or those that have PTSD should not be polygraphed: "[M]any social and psychological factors may produce signs of anxiety in rape victims who are actually telling the truth. The stress and anxiety likely to accompany a sexual assault experience may produce a polygraph result that shows that the victim is being deceptive when she is not" (p. 8).
IOW, I think there are many good reasons to take the lie detector result with a grain of salt. This kid had to be a MESS over this entire affair. I don't see how that could NOT upset a test designed to detect anxiety.
I have some other thoughts related to this part of your post, Methodical, but will save them for another day as it's so late.
Methodical
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2014
- Messages
- 161
- Reaction score
- 1
I had been in the process of posting the response to RFA below, but just saw GBMG's post (#278) which is "spot on" related to my RFA response.
Thank you RFA, but altho I hope to contribute to the team, my analysis, opinions, and comments are far from infallible. Please don't hesitate to question or disagree with any of "my takes" on any of my posts. Any exchange may enlighten both of us, and all of us, to a new perspective. I've already been enlightened to new perspectives & direction just by reading this thread from the beginning.
My add, in response to GBMG (post #278)...
Fantastic thought processes you have, and I truly admire you for questioning several parts of my previous post. I'll try to quote it and respond in more "itemized" & thorough detail, but just wanted to quickly fully agree with you that we should NOT "lock in" to my theory/insights, nor anyone's theory/insights, until we have a very solid direction to take, backed by indisputable hard evidence.
Briefly, (I'll go into this more extensively, soon), a large part of my rejecting the bullying/scare angle on these 3 attacks was:
#1. The very high risk they took on #3 abduction, as it took place directly at BC's own home, in his front yard or porch. How boldly brazen, and to me, suggests the perps were against their own "comfort" deadline, and had to take an extraordinary risk to make sure Bill was dead that night. I feel they were afraid if Bill went alive even for 1 day longer, they risked "something big" being exposed.
#2. The severity of the strangulation attempts and the ligature tools used. Seems far beyond even the worst of "teen years type" scare tactics. I could understand if they didn't use the tools (plastic bag, tied/wrapped inner tube on #1 attack, then rope on #2 attack) and if they didn't leave these tied tight (we can't be sure of actual tension). But according to Bill, something was severe enough to leave him "unconscious" for 6 hours. BTW, there's a lot of questions to be answered relative to that "6 hr" story.
On your BBM 3, 4, & 5...
Simply, killing a human is not at all comparable to killing a dog, cat, bird, or typical wild animals. For the most part, at the hands of a sicko, most any animal can die easily/rapidly, and clinical death is far more obvious in an animal. It would be entirely up to the sicko how fast, easy, slow or painful he wants to carry it out.
As for the suspected "psycho perp" not releasing or walking away before he "knew" or could feel the death... unless that perp had many prior hands-on kills with actual humans, he would not realize that true clinical and unrecoverable death typically is a fair amount longer after the point where one "thinks" the subject is dead. Even doctors have to closely monitor the heart for a beat/pulsation, with a stethoscope, before determining clinical (unrecoverable) death.
That is why I believe the perps "thought" BC was dead each time, and I surmise they were crude and "somewhat sloppy" in their strangulation measures, and underestimated guaranteed death. (the human body is very resistant most times)
But I agree, it's far from being 100% certain.
Wow Methodical! Just wow! Your moniker suits you well!
Welcome, you are an incredible addition to the sleuthing team!
Thank you RFA, but altho I hope to contribute to the team, my analysis, opinions, and comments are far from infallible. Please don't hesitate to question or disagree with any of "my takes" on any of my posts. Any exchange may enlighten both of us, and all of us, to a new perspective. I've already been enlightened to new perspectives & direction just by reading this thread from the beginning.
My add, in response to GBMG (post #278)...
Fantastic thought processes you have, and I truly admire you for questioning several parts of my previous post. I'll try to quote it and respond in more "itemized" & thorough detail, but just wanted to quickly fully agree with you that we should NOT "lock in" to my theory/insights, nor anyone's theory/insights, until we have a very solid direction to take, backed by indisputable hard evidence.
Briefly, (I'll go into this more extensively, soon), a large part of my rejecting the bullying/scare angle on these 3 attacks was:
#1. The very high risk they took on #3 abduction, as it took place directly at BC's own home, in his front yard or porch. How boldly brazen, and to me, suggests the perps were against their own "comfort" deadline, and had to take an extraordinary risk to make sure Bill was dead that night. I feel they were afraid if Bill went alive even for 1 day longer, they risked "something big" being exposed.
#2. The severity of the strangulation attempts and the ligature tools used. Seems far beyond even the worst of "teen years type" scare tactics. I could understand if they didn't use the tools (plastic bag, tied/wrapped inner tube on #1 attack, then rope on #2 attack) and if they didn't leave these tied tight (we can't be sure of actual tension). But according to Bill, something was severe enough to leave him "unconscious" for 6 hours. BTW, there's a lot of questions to be answered relative to that "6 hr" story.
On your BBM 3, 4, & 5...
Simply, killing a human is not at all comparable to killing a dog, cat, bird, or typical wild animals. For the most part, at the hands of a sicko, most any animal can die easily/rapidly, and clinical death is far more obvious in an animal. It would be entirely up to the sicko how fast, easy, slow or painful he wants to carry it out.
As for the suspected "psycho perp" not releasing or walking away before he "knew" or could feel the death... unless that perp had many prior hands-on kills with actual humans, he would not realize that true clinical and unrecoverable death typically is a fair amount longer after the point where one "thinks" the subject is dead. Even doctors have to closely monitor the heart for a beat/pulsation, with a stethoscope, before determining clinical (unrecoverable) death.
That is why I believe the perps "thought" BC was dead each time, and I surmise they were crude and "somewhat sloppy" in their strangulation measures, and underestimated guaranteed death. (the human body is very resistant most times)
But I agree, it's far from being 100% certain.
Hey guys. Bill's case has specifically made me want to sign up here and give my 2 cents...
I believe Bill was being bullied and then killed by two twisted individuals slightly older then him from Westland High school.
Katco's post
By all accounts he was the 'perfect kid', good looking, good natured, possibly naive? He is the perfect prey for a couple of older/stronger cowardly bullies.
Did he have a girlfriend or a girl that liked him that one of the bullies liked? Or was it out of jealousy because he was popular?
He received threatening letters before the attacks, so to, did this 'girl' and another of his friends.
This sounds to me like some cruel crazy stalking game concocted by two local misfits in the neighbourhood.
I think its pretty clear that whomever attacked him on the two previous occasions had a very good idea of the neighbourhood.
They also knew about Bill's newspaper round. Presumably, he was attacked at night time on those two assaults? Such a small vicinity i think its very possible for two older youths to stalk and follow him undercover of darkness pretty easily.
Im not convinced that they tried to murder him the first time or the second tbh. Again, i think they were getting their 'kick's and adrenaline fix out of the 'hunt' and the complete power they held over him the two occasions they strangled him. I reckon to them, this was some sick macabre game and they wanted to prolong it as much as they could. Hence the letter posting before and after and after that.
The second assault they apparently drove a turquoise car? I mean, if thats true, then i guess its plausible that they were roaming the streets when they happened upon him by chance and decided to attack him again.
A couple of guys earlier in the thread mentioned that they think the killer/s seemed very disorganized and quite brazen to attempt to kill Bill on three occasions.
I do not believe they were trying to kill him at all. Seriously harm him and terrorise him yes, but i dont think the intentions were the first two times to kill. Two men aged from 18+ could definitely kill a 15 year by strangulation if they really wanted to.
About the Polygraph. LE stated that BC was trying to be deceptive? Perhaps he did have an incline as to who it was but was so petrified of the consequences of naming them.
He stated to LE that he could not ID his attackers? Did the attackers wear some kind of ski mask? Hoody? Scarf? Plus the fact it was dark and he was attacked from behind leads me to believe they did not intend to kill BC, they intended on doing it again and again and sending more letters and continuing their bullying campaign.
On the night Bill was killed i think the two attackers came on foot and put a knife to him and marched him off up to the train tracks (Same knife found at the scene) and there they presumably forced him to take Valium for reasons im not sure, to render him weaker? Power/dominance play?
And then they strangled Bill until he passed out and then they vanished off again into the night back to their houses.
Because Bill was still alive when they left him, again im not sure if they intended to kill him?
Im really stuck at this point tbh. Were they spooked by a neighbour and ran off prematurely? Or again, did they intend to render him unconscious for their twisted little game?
The above is just way to much of a coincidence in such a small neighbourhood to be ignored. They fit the profile for sure. Right age, same school, lived a mile away from BC. And they are murderers (Hindsight to BC case)
Im so baffled by this sad story. I feel so terrible seeing Bill's picture and reading those heartbreaking interviews and articles. Me personally, i could never keep such a secret if i was being tormented, i would tell someone straight away...
I believe Bill was being bullied and then killed by two twisted individuals slightly older then him from Westland High school.
Katco's post
By all accounts he was the 'perfect kid', good looking, good natured, possibly naive? He is the perfect prey for a couple of older/stronger cowardly bullies.
Did he have a girlfriend or a girl that liked him that one of the bullies liked? Or was it out of jealousy because he was popular?
He received threatening letters before the attacks, so to, did this 'girl' and another of his friends.
This sounds to me like some cruel crazy stalking game concocted by two local misfits in the neighbourhood.
I think its pretty clear that whomever attacked him on the two previous occasions had a very good idea of the neighbourhood.
They also knew about Bill's newspaper round. Presumably, he was attacked at night time on those two assaults? Such a small vicinity i think its very possible for two older youths to stalk and follow him undercover of darkness pretty easily.
Im not convinced that they tried to murder him the first time or the second tbh. Again, i think they were getting their 'kick's and adrenaline fix out of the 'hunt' and the complete power they held over him the two occasions they strangled him. I reckon to them, this was some sick macabre game and they wanted to prolong it as much as they could. Hence the letter posting before and after and after that.
The second assault they apparently drove a turquoise car? I mean, if thats true, then i guess its plausible that they were roaming the streets when they happened upon him by chance and decided to attack him again.
A couple of guys earlier in the thread mentioned that they think the killer/s seemed very disorganized and quite brazen to attempt to kill Bill on three occasions.
I do not believe they were trying to kill him at all. Seriously harm him and terrorise him yes, but i dont think the intentions were the first two times to kill. Two men aged from 18+ could definitely kill a 15 year by strangulation if they really wanted to.
About the Polygraph. LE stated that BC was trying to be deceptive? Perhaps he did have an incline as to who it was but was so petrified of the consequences of naming them.
He stated to LE that he could not ID his attackers? Did the attackers wear some kind of ski mask? Hoody? Scarf? Plus the fact it was dark and he was attacked from behind leads me to believe they did not intend to kill BC, they intended on doing it again and again and sending more letters and continuing their bullying campaign.
On the night Bill was killed i think the two attackers came on foot and put a knife to him and marched him off up to the train tracks (Same knife found at the scene) and there they presumably forced him to take Valium for reasons im not sure, to render him weaker? Power/dominance play?
And then they strangled Bill until he passed out and then they vanished off again into the night back to their houses.
Because Bill was still alive when they left him, again im not sure if they intended to kill him?
Im really stuck at this point tbh. Were they spooked by a neighbour and ran off prematurely? Or again, did they intend to render him unconscious for their twisted little game?
The above is just way to much of a coincidence in such a small neighbourhood to be ignored. They fit the profile for sure. Right age, same school, lived a mile away from BC. And they are murderers (Hindsight to BC case)
Im so baffled by this sad story. I feel so terrible seeing Bill's picture and reading those heartbreaking interviews and articles. Me personally, i could never keep such a secret if i was being tormented, i would tell someone straight away...
YidArmyRach
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,549
- Reaction score
- 36
The problem I have with this part is that Bill was home, with his dad very close by and surely within ear-shot? Also other family members were home.
If someone who had previously strangled me to the point of near-death put a knife to me whilst I was in my front yard, I'd assume I knew what was coming next, and would scream and fight them off. May as well risk being stabbed with help nearby, than be taken away to be strangled in isolation.
So, I'm not sure I'd go along with that one. If threatened with a gun, I could see les chance to fight back, but not so with a knife.
Just MOO.
GoingByMyGut
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,173
- Reaction score
- 17
Original posts TBM:
Rainy and Methodical, you both make a very good point here. And I think this is a great conversation -- I am really enjoying it
When I said our hypothetical psychopath's experiences with animals would have taught him what death "looks" like, I meant it literally. He may not have known what it felt like to kill a human, but he might know what a body looks like and feels like when dead.
And to make a similar point, our psychopath is not an ordinary human. He's one we've defined as someone who is highly motivated to kill, one who savors that very moment, gets a thrill from it. and who wants to get close to it. A psychopath would not be timid or nervous about this act. IMO, he would learn from his mistakes, if that's what they were.
Yet these attacks have a sloppy "strangle and run" feeling to them. The first one, in the woods, had the luxury of time on it's side. (Really, I see no evidence of anyone being surprised by witnesses at either of the first two attacks, as BC got away on his own both times and had to point out what happened to everyone else.)
I'm just saying, I think the fact that this highly motivated killing machine leaves the scene two -- maybe three -- times without seeing death occur is a contradiction in type. We are not talking about a thin line here. By the second or third time, he hasn't figured out that he can check to see if BC is breathing? Check his pulse or heartbeat? Or go for OVERKILL because by now he's PO'd? (I'm not seeing him as a patient type either.) Psychologically, I think it's just not a perfect fit. That's all.
If he's a psychopath, he may have to be one who's fired up by something else. JMO
Rainy and Methodical, you both make a very good point here. And I think this is a great conversation -- I am really enjoying it
When I said our hypothetical psychopath's experiences with animals would have taught him what death "looks" like, I meant it literally. He may not have known what it felt like to kill a human, but he might know what a body looks like and feels like when dead.
And to make a similar point, our psychopath is not an ordinary human. He's one we've defined as someone who is highly motivated to kill, one who savors that very moment, gets a thrill from it. and who wants to get close to it. A psychopath would not be timid or nervous about this act. IMO, he would learn from his mistakes, if that's what they were.
Yet these attacks have a sloppy "strangle and run" feeling to them. The first one, in the woods, had the luxury of time on it's side. (Really, I see no evidence of anyone being surprised by witnesses at either of the first two attacks, as BC got away on his own both times and had to point out what happened to everyone else.)
I'm just saying, I think the fact that this highly motivated killing machine leaves the scene two -- maybe three -- times without seeing death occur is a contradiction in type. We are not talking about a thin line here. By the second or third time, he hasn't figured out that he can check to see if BC is breathing? Check his pulse or heartbeat? Or go for OVERKILL because by now he's PO'd? (I'm not seeing him as a patient type either.) Psychologically, I think it's just not a perfect fit. That's all.
If he's a psychopath, he may have to be one who's fired up by something else. JMO
YidArmyRach
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,549
- Reaction score
- 36
Original posts TBM:
Rainy and Methodical, you both make a very good point here. And I think this is a great conversation -- I am really enjoying it
When I said our hypothetical psychopath's experiences with animals would have taught him what death "looks" like, I meant it literally. He may not have known what it felt like to kill a human, but he might know what a body looks like and feels like when dead.
And to make a similar point, our psychopath is not an ordinary human. He's one we've defined as someone who is highly motivated to kill, one who savors that very moment, gets a thrill from it. and who wants to get close to it. A psychopath would not be timid or nervous about this act. IMO, he would learn from his mistakes, if that's what they were.
Yet these attacks have a sloppy "strangle and run" feeling to them. The first one, in the woods, had the luxury of time on it's side. (Really, I see no evidence of anyone being surprised by witnesses at either of the first two attacks, as BC got away on his own both times and had to point out what happened to everyone else.)
I'm just saying, I think the fact that this highly motivated killing machine leaves the scene two -- maybe three -- times without seeing death occur is a contradiction in type. We are not talking about a thin line here. By the second or third time, he hasn't figured out that he can check to see if BC is breathing? Check his pulse or heartbeat? Or go for OVERKILL because by now he's PO'd? (I'm not seeing him as a patient type either.) Psychologically, I think it's just not a perfect fit. That's all.
If he's a psychopath, he may have to be one who's fired up by something else. JMO
I'd agree with that.
A real contradiction - skilled enough to leave no evidence or witnesses, but can't actually complete the kill until the 3rd attempted.
Mad thought, but what if it was girls rather than boys/men? Not physically strong enough to complete the strangulation.
Highly unlikely I know, especially as there were signs of Bill struggling - unless it was done for kicks and perhaps Bill was in on it (but too embarrassed to say?).
Just another theory to put on the table and just MOO.
GoingByMyGut
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,173
- Reaction score
- 17
Original posts TBM:
Hello, murkmanz Welcome to the fray!
BBMs 1&2: Methodical, I think the third abduction does definitely feel this way. However, I think it's possible to make this argument about the first attack too. Bill was visiting a friend in the adjacent neighborhood and took a shortcut home through the woods behind a school in that neighborhood. No one would have been able to see him from a car or street. But his attackers knew somehow that he was in those woods. Do the killers live by this scene? Do they watch from their homes here too?
BBM3: I think a lot of signs point to what murkman calls a "stalking game." I am wondering less how they timed the three attacks to catch Bill when they did, and more how many times they laid in wait watching Bill when no good moment presented itself.
I completely agree that it feels like someone in the neighborhood or the adjacent one, someone of the age BC pointed to who is off the radar a bit, but knows the neighborhood the way a child does -- on foot, from playing in and cutting through people's yards, from being young enough to go unnoticed as belonging there.
This is actually one of the things that I think points to depravity of some sort. Whoever the person with the motive is -- one or both attackers -- they managed to go unnoticed for four months of stalking and three assaults. And they were PERSISTENT in carrying out whatever their motive or experiment was. Yes, too persistent for ordinary bullies -- but possibly not for someone who was both bully and had a darker side than most. IOW, I think it's possibly to combine the bully and psychopath hypotheses in one.
As to any sense of urgency to get Bill the third time (I don't remember who made this point, but I read it somewhere), keep in mind that there were about three months between the second and third attacks. That doesn't seem terribly urgent to me. If the attackers were after Bill for something he knew, why a month between the first two attacks? Why nothing more for three months after that? And what would make January 7 a deadline? Very perplexing.
Hello, murkmanz
Welcome to the fray!BBMs 1&2: Methodical, I think the third abduction does definitely feel this way. However, I think it's possible to make this argument about the first attack too. Bill was visiting a friend in the adjacent neighborhood and took a shortcut home through the woods behind a school in that neighborhood. No one would have been able to see him from a car or street. But his attackers knew somehow that he was in those woods. Do the killers live by this scene? Do they watch from their homes here too?
BBM3: I think a lot of signs point to what murkman calls a "stalking game." I am wondering less how they timed the three attacks to catch Bill when they did, and more how many times they laid in wait watching Bill when no good moment presented itself.
I completely agree that it feels like someone in the neighborhood or the adjacent one, someone of the age BC pointed to who is off the radar a bit, but knows the neighborhood the way a child does -- on foot, from playing in and cutting through people's yards, from being young enough to go unnoticed as belonging there.
This is actually one of the things that I think points to depravity of some sort. Whoever the person with the motive is -- one or both attackers -- they managed to go unnoticed for four months of stalking and three assaults. And they were PERSISTENT in carrying out whatever their motive or experiment was. Yes, too persistent for ordinary bullies -- but possibly not for someone who was both bully and had a darker side than most. IOW, I think it's possibly to combine the bully and psychopath hypotheses in one.
As to any sense of urgency to get Bill the third time (I don't remember who made this point, but I read it somewhere), keep in mind that there were about three months between the second and third attacks. That doesn't seem terribly urgent to me. If the attackers were after Bill for something he knew, why a month between the first two attacks? Why nothing more for three months after that? And what would make January 7 a deadline? Very perplexing.
GoingByMyGut
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,173
- Reaction score
- 17
Original posts TBM:
Yeah, I have to say I don't find either the car or on-foot abduction theory satisfying. In fact, I might be more inclined toward "beamed aboard by aliens from above"!
No matter how we paint this, it feels like the killers threaded a very lucky needle that third time. One thing that stands out to me from the family's twitter feed is that BC may have been eating ice cream on his porch before he was abducted. If he left it unattended, perhaps they added the drug to his bowl? (That's with the caveat that the source of the valium found in BC's blood is unverified.)
Another thought: If the killers were part of the neighborhood, the vehicle they used (not the blue one but a different one) may have belonged there, could have been parked inauspiciously nearby. Also, they may not have parked by the dead end at the tracks. A car or van could have been the crime scene while parked on a street, and the BC could have then been dumped at the end of Buena Vista. Also, I'm not convinced that having a vehicle meant that they would have dropped BC father away. This was their neighborhood, they felt safe here, they KNEW LE did not patrol here. They were not afraid on the prior two attacks to soil their own backyards ... why would they be the third time? Just speculating/thinking out loud ...
Okay, off to work
Yeah, I have to say I don't find either the car or on-foot abduction theory satisfying. In fact, I might be more inclined toward "beamed aboard by aliens from above"!
No matter how we paint this, it feels like the killers threaded a very lucky needle that third time. One thing that stands out to me from the family's twitter feed is that BC may have been eating ice cream on his porch before he was abducted. If he left it unattended, perhaps they added the drug to his bowl? (That's with the caveat that the source of the valium found in BC's blood is unverified.)
Another thought: If the killers were part of the neighborhood, the vehicle they used (not the blue one but a different one) may have belonged there, could have been parked inauspiciously nearby. Also, they may not have parked by the dead end at the tracks. A car or van could have been the crime scene while parked on a street, and the BC could have then been dumped at the end of Buena Vista. Also, I'm not convinced that having a vehicle meant that they would have dropped BC father away. This was their neighborhood, they felt safe here, they KNEW LE did not patrol here. They were not afraid on the prior two attacks to soil their own backyards ... why would they be the third time? Just speculating/thinking out loud ...
Okay, off to work
rosesfromangels
Amateur opinion and speculation only
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 12,364
- Reaction score
- 63,388
I don't think they intended to kill him the first two times or at all. I now believe this was SM torture, with blackmail of some sort. And yes, the two suspects have a very high probability of being the perps.
Jmoose
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2009
- Messages
- 6,862
- Reaction score
- 51,950
I believe, in those days, that valium was much, much more freely prescribed than it is today. Many more people could have accessed it from the family medicine cabinet then. If there wasn't anyone in the Comeans family taking it, then there was a good possibility that someone Bill knew or encountered that night, had access to it.
rosesfromangels
Amateur opinion and speculation only
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 12,364
- Reaction score
- 63,388
God bless you Bob. I pray with all my heart this case gets solved, and I truly believe it will!
Bob, you and your family are so so brave. Your brother was a beautiful child. I hope to God you get the answers you have been looking for.
Methodical
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2014
- Messages
- 161
- Reaction score
- 1
Original posts TBM...
Green replies by me.
100% agree, YARach! This entire 3rd attack (ie. kidnapping/abduction) is very perplexing. Bill was right at home! Within sure safety of his family, if he yelled. The only reasons I can see for not yelling is:
1. A choke hold & knife to his throat, whereby he couldn't yell.
2. BC made a fatal mistake in feeling he was "too outnumbered/disadvantaged" and succumbed to a 100% terror paralyzing "fallen sheep" syndrome.
3. BC consented to leaving with them solely to protect a member of his family, who they might have previously told him they would kill, if he ever didn't do what they say.
Me without green... As I said above, without further critical details, I hate to go down paths too far beyond the presented details and evidence. Really need a lot of the blanks filled in by family or those with first hand info. Even media reports are very often wrong and flawed. But so far, the media reports I've seen are from years ago and very basic, not leaving too much room for error. I try to resist speculation, but do offer insights based on present info. But so much detailed info is lacking, which is critical.
I strongly believe there are many classmates and people from that community that have key information that would point at a specific POI, at bare minimum.
Hopefully one of them will see this WS quest, the family's Twitter, the YouTube videos, or something that tells them "it's time" I spoke up.
Green replies by me.
100% agree, YARach! This entire 3rd attack (ie. kidnapping/abduction) is very perplexing. Bill was right at home! Within sure safety of his family, if he yelled. The only reasons I can see for not yelling is:
1. A choke hold & knife to his throat, whereby he couldn't yell.
2. BC made a fatal mistake in feeling he was "too outnumbered/disadvantaged" and succumbed to a 100% terror paralyzing "fallen sheep" syndrome.
3. BC consented to leaving with them solely to protect a member of his family, who they might have previously told him they would kill, if he ever didn't do what they say.
Original posts TBM:
Rainy and Methodical, you both make a very good point here. And I think this is a great conversation -- I am really enjoying it
When I said our hypothetical psychopath's experiences with animals would have taught him what death "looks" like, I meant it literally. He may not have known what it felt like to kill a human, but he might know what a body looks like and feels like when dead. I understand your logic. I think, however, I explained/detailed my views on this a little more than I previously had done, which is in my bolded green response in murkmanz post above.
And to make a similar point, our psychopath is not an ordinary human. He's one we've defined as someone who is highly motivated to kill, one who savors that very moment, gets a thrill from it. and who wants to get close to it. A psychopath would not be timid or nervous about this act. IMO, he would learn from his mistakes, if that's what they were.
Yet these attacks have a sloppy "strangle and run" feeling to them. The first one, in the woods, had the luxury of time on it's side. (Really, I see no evidence of anyone being surprised by witnesses at either of the first two attacks, as BC got away on his own both times and had to point out what happened to everyone else.) I agree on the "strangle & run" feeling. That overtone dominates, even if it's later showed the perps had no intention of it "being that way". I've given that 1st attack a lot of thought, having the same observations as you. For me, it's intensely hard for me to determine anything out of it. Simply not enough info or details. Very aggravating, and I absolutely hate to go to "guesswork". I need to know far more details of what exactly they did to Bill, and I mean "exactly". I'm having to just base it all on the plastic bag and the inner tube. Critical missing info: How tight did they tie it? Was he unconscious when they left him? Was he blue or pure ghostly white, to where they might have thought he was dead? Sooo many unanswered questions.
I'm just saying, I think the fact that this highly motivated killing machine leaves the scene two -- maybe three -- times without seeing death occur is a contradiction in type. We are not talking about a thin line here. By the second or third time, he hasn't figured out that he can check to see if BC is breathing? Check his pulse or heartbeat? Or go for OVERKILL because by now he's PO'd? (I'm not seeing him as a patient type either.) Psychologically, I think it's just not a perfect fit. That's all. Pulse/heartbeat: I believe this can surely & easily confuse any young attacker/killer. Even some first responders sometimes have a hard time telling if there's a pulse. Faint pulses and very faint breathing can easily go unnoticed especially for a young person, psycho or normal. Even when time permits ample time to "check" it. But remember, it was also dark out on that 1st attack.
If he's a psychopath, he may have to be one who's fired up by something else. JMO
Me without green...
As I said above, without further critical details, I hate to go down paths too far beyond the presented details and evidence. Really need a lot of the blanks filled in by family or those with first hand info. Even media reports are very often wrong and flawed. But so far, the media reports I've seen are from years ago and very basic, not leaving too much room for error. I try to resist speculation, but do offer insights based on present info. But so much detailed info is lacking, which is critical.I strongly believe there are many classmates and people from that community that have key information that would point at a specific POI, at bare minimum.
Hopefully one of them will see this WS quest, the family's Twitter, the YouTube videos, or something that tells them "it's time" I spoke up.
I think we need to start back at the school. Sorry guys if im being unrealistic, ive never participated in such a case.
Is it possible somehow to track down all of Bill's classmates? Girlfriends? Fellow students of that year? And ask them who had it in for Bill? Who was bullying him?
^^ This is waaaay to important. Bill was an exceptional young man. What possible reason would he have caused these 'upper classmen' to have it in for him? We need to identify who those people were because im sure as can be they are directly involved in Bills murder.
As for my previous post. The final attack/murder still baffles me too. I admit, my own version of him being frog marched at knife point might be a bit far fetched. But, then again, is it? It was night time, snowing. If he were to have a knife pressed against his throat and threatened to keep quite whilst they walked up the street just far away enough for the dad to be out of ears reach then that's half the battle won right there.
I know someone mentioned that he would have surely screamed out? Well, the thing is, if we are to believe that he did infact know or suspect who his attackers were for the last four months, he kept it quite from everyone didnt he? Even from his family. So why now, when he has a knife thrust against him would he suddenly feel the courage to scream and break his silence? His last attack was two months before that night right? He was confident enough to sit outside eating icecream so he could have been startled and dumbstruck at such a confrontation.
Sorry, i dont mean to waffle on, im just thinking out loud.
JMOOS
If thats true. Then maybe we are placing too much emphasis on the Valium found. Could be that he was secretly taking that to curb his anxiety from the ongoing bullying?
I have been trying to come up with another scenario as to him leaving his house. Was he indeed approached by two people he knew who asked him to accompany them down the street to either show him something or tell him something? According to Bill's family, he would NEVER have left the house without telling his father. Plus according to his sister, he was shortly going to accompany mum and dad to town to return some Christmas presents....
So, it can only leave me speculating that he was indeed, promptly and abruptly abducted. If the dad was working on his car, surely the first thing he would have reported was hearing or seeing a car very close by in that small time frame. Even the sound of doors quickly opening and closing would be detected and given the fact he was found at the end of a parallel street, that just doesnt make sense to me. Sure if he was found miles away its obvious, but to be found so close, walking distance.
And, the LE version that it was suicide is highly insensitive and absurd. The only part i picked up on in that theory was BC teacher 'Bill asked how long strangulation would take one to pass out?'
Well, is it not plausible, that Bill, having been strangled on two occasions and passing out, that he might ask that question out of curiosity? It did happen to him, twice. So, its not out of the realm that he posed the question.
Were Ronald Steven Capehart (18) and Gary Lee Trudell (16) the 'upperclassmen'?
Is it possible somehow to track down all of Bill's classmates? Girlfriends? Fellow students of that year? And ask them who had it in for Bill? Who was bullying him?
^^ This is waaaay to important. Bill was an exceptional young man. What possible reason would he have caused these 'upper classmen' to have it in for him? We need to identify who those people were because im sure as can be they are directly involved in Bills murder.
As for my previous post. The final attack/murder still baffles me too. I admit, my own version of him being frog marched at knife point might be a bit far fetched. But, then again, is it? It was night time, snowing. If he were to have a knife pressed against his throat and threatened to keep quite whilst they walked up the street just far away enough for the dad to be out of ears reach then that's half the battle won right there.
I know someone mentioned that he would have surely screamed out? Well, the thing is, if we are to believe that he did infact know or suspect who his attackers were for the last four months, he kept it quite from everyone didnt he? Even from his family. So why now, when he has a knife thrust against him would he suddenly feel the courage to scream and break his silence? His last attack was two months before that night right? He was confident enough to sit outside eating icecream so he could have been startled and dumbstruck at such a confrontation.
Sorry, i dont mean to waffle on, im just thinking out loud.
JMOOS
If thats true. Then maybe we are placing too much emphasis on the Valium found. Could be that he was secretly taking that to curb his anxiety from the ongoing bullying?
I have been trying to come up with another scenario as to him leaving his house. Was he indeed approached by two people he knew who asked him to accompany them down the street to either show him something or tell him something? According to Bill's family, he would NEVER have left the house without telling his father. Plus according to his sister, he was shortly going to accompany mum and dad to town to return some Christmas presents....
So, it can only leave me speculating that he was indeed, promptly and abruptly abducted. If the dad was working on his car, surely the first thing he would have reported was hearing or seeing a car very close by in that small time frame. Even the sound of doors quickly opening and closing would be detected and given the fact he was found at the end of a parallel street, that just doesnt make sense to me. Sure if he was found miles away its obvious, but to be found so close, walking distance.
And, the LE version that it was suicide is highly insensitive and absurd. The only part i picked up on in that theory was BC teacher 'Bill asked how long strangulation would take one to pass out?'
Well, is it not plausible, that Bill, having been strangled on two occasions and passing out, that he might ask that question out of curiosity? It did happen to him, twice. So, its not out of the realm that he posed the question.
Were Ronald Steven Capehart (18) and Gary Lee Trudell (16) the 'upperclassmen'?
GoingByMyGut
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,173
- Reaction score
- 17
Original post TBM:
I'm getting confused on dates and times, so am pasting a refresher below. Yes, they all seem like night time attacks.
I'm also wondering if the dates are of any importance. For example, the Sept./Jan. attacks come just after school holidays. Thinking back to my very dated years in HS, often those students treading the slippery slope between being in school and dropping/getting booted out would come to school for a few days when school started, then start cutting again shortly after. By any chance would 10/22 fit this bill in Ohio schools -- some kind of "fall break" maybe?
I'm getting confused on dates and times, so am pasting a refresher below. Yes, they all seem like night time attacks.
I'm also wondering if the dates are of any importance. For example, the Sept./Jan. attacks come just after school holidays. Thinking back to my very dated years in HS, often those students treading the slippery slope between being in school and dropping/getting booted out would come to school for a few days when school started, then start cutting again shortly after. By any chance would 10/22 fit this bill in Ohio schools -- some kind of "fall break" maybe?
- First Assault: 9/5/1979, Wednesday, 8:30 PM
Re the above, I'm on the east coast. Here, two days post Labor Day, this might be dusk. Can anyone near Columbus say for sure?
- Second Assault: 10/22/79, Saturday, 6:30 PM
Definitely dark?
- Third assault/murder: 1/7/80, Monday, About 9 PM
Definitely dark.
pdxmama
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2008
- Messages
- 751
- Reaction score
- 47
Just wanted to jump in here and say how grateful I am to all of you who have joined this thread. I think there is excellent sleuthing going on here! After reading through all of your thoughts I am very much leaning toward this being older students from his school but am very perplexed by how early in the year they seemed to have it out for him. The only motive that seems to make sense to me at this point is that Bill witnessed something he shouldn't have.
I also feel that the valium is very likely a red herring at this point. If anything, I believe he may have been taken it (with or without a prescription) for his anxiety after the previous attacks. This was a very different time than now without much less awareness about prescription drugs and their abuse. A well meaning family member could have provided the valium to help ease his stress.
I also feel that the valium is very likely a red herring at this point. If anything, I believe he may have been taken it (with or without a prescription) for his anxiety after the previous attacks. This was a very different time than now without much less awareness about prescription drugs and their abuse. A well meaning family member could have provided the valium to help ease his stress.
pdxmama
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2008
- Messages
- 751
- Reaction score
- 47
Thanks for sticking with us, Bob! I'm very much looking forward to hearing about any progress made by this new detective. I'm hoping he goes back and interviews anyone who went to school with Bill during that time.
Methodical
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2014
- Messages
- 161
- Reaction score
- 1
First Assault: 9/5/1979, Wednesday, 8:30 PM = dark edge of twilight (fairly dark to be accurate).
Second Assault: 10/22/79, Monday, 6:30 PM = still light out
Third assault/murder: 1/7/80, Monday, About 9 PM = dark
- Status