GA - Tara Grinstead, 29, Ocilla, 22 Oct 2005 #1 *Arrests*

[annoulzz]

I re-watched the ID episode and I am beginning to think that the person who did this possibly followed her home after the party. The mom stated that every night when Tara goes home, she turns on the light to indicate to her neighbors that she got home. Wouldn't that had been the first thing she did once getting home, despite her clothes being on the floor and the phone being charged next to her bed? Mind you, there was also an envelope found in the middle console of the car containing $100. Would it seem likely that she did those things first then when she went to turn on the light [but in which room would she have... the kitchen, the bedroom??] someone was already in the house and abducted her? I know that if I was coming home, one of the first things I did besides locking the door behind me was to turn on the light and let my neighbors know i am okay. In the Stolen Beauty, 48 hours episode, it stated that the Ocila PD and GBI tested 150 men who knew her and none of them matched the DNA sample from the glove. So, either someone paid someone else off to commit this crime, or it is someone completely different altogether.

 

[fasteddy8170]

annoulzz, as far as the outside light, I don't believe she was followed home that night. But, in any case, I think we have to be open to the idea that if Tara did go home that night, whether followed or not, that whoever removed her body from her house shut off the light before carrying her out. It's very possible Tara turned on the outside light and nobody noticed it. Then the perpetrator turned it off later. Just because it was off when police got there on Monday doesn't mean it wasn't on at some point the night of Oct. 22. I agree with you, though, that if her habit was to turn on the light at night she probably did it immediately when she got home, if she got home.

The $100 in the envelope reminds me to ask something: How much did Tara charge to watch people's dogs? Did she charge at all? Was she doing someone a favor? $100 seems like a lot of money to do something like that but not if the job was over a few days. I don't have pets so I'm not sure what a reasonable price would be, if Tara even charged at all.

annoulzz, you're correct about 150 people, not just men I don't think, who were cleared due to the DNA not matching--you can read my very conspiratorial reason for that a few pages back. However, sundrop has assured us somebody who has been overlooked for a while is back in the crosshairs of GBI--someone who hasn't been tested, I guess. I hope sundrop has an update for us shortly.

 

[sundrop]

She did make it home because she had changed clothes

 

[digndoodle]

annoulzz, as far as the outside light, I don't believe she was followed home that night. But, in any case, I think we have to be open to the idea that if Tara did go home that night, whether followed or not, that whoever removed her body from her house shut off the light before carrying her out. It's very possible Tara turned on the outside light and nobody noticed it. Then the perpetrator turned it off later. Just because it was off when police got there on Monday doesn't mean it wasn't on at some point the night of Oct. 22. I agree with you, though, that if her habit was to turn on the light at night she probably did it immediately when she got home, if she got home.

The $100 in the envelope reminds me to ask something: How much did Tara charge to watch people's dogs? Did she charge at all? Was she doing someone a favor? $100 seems like a lot of money to do something like that but not if the job was over a few days. I don't have pets so I'm not sure what a reasonable price would be, if Tara even charged at all.

annoulzz, you're correct about 150 people, not just men I don't think, who were cleared due to the DNA not matching--you can read my very conspiratorial reason for that a few pages back. However, sundrop has assured us somebody who has been overlooked for a while is back in the crosshairs of GBI--someone who hasn't been tested, I guess. I hope sundrop has an update for us shortly.

If I recall correctly Tara always turned on her bedroom light to let the 1 neighbor know she was home and that she was OK, I would have to go way back and re-read a lot to get this exactly right but I believe it had to do with the way the houses sat to each other that they could see the bedroom light better from their home.

I cannot answer your question about what price is charged to sit a dog, May I HIGHLY suggest you go on the web and enter the person's name she was dogsitting for in the browser area
I did this last evening, if you read and search with all ears and eyes open, I THINK I GOT IT!!!...LOL..................I'm not sure how much or what to posts without making a mistake on here, but I can easily see Why and How this person could have done a visit and perhaps spouted their mouth off in a very bad way that may have opened up a whole new can of worms
and from what I did read I believe the grandfather died in December 2013 and the obit gave a list of kids, grandkids and etc. and it seems apparent this family had a lifelong tie to Ocilla Georgia....what I call a very successful businessman in Ocilla and etc.

fasteddy, you seem sharp as a tac to me....I believe you will GET IT also as a hummmmmm well could definitely be a new possibility
and Sundrop.....all that comes to my mind and mouth right at this minute is WOW and thank you for posting the new info.....I am only too happy that this thread is UP and new possibilities are being brought forward...PRAYING this family may soon get some much needed answers and find some type of closure in all this

 

[fasteddy8170]

digndoodle, thank you for the compliment. Let me take your points one at a time.

The bedroom light--this is a perfect example of the perplexing facts in the case. If it's true she used the bedroom light as a way to alert the neighbors, then why didn't she turn it on when she stepped into the room? The answer can't be she was attacked in her bedroom first because, as sundrop just pointed out, she had time to undress there. Wouldn't she turn the light on then undress? I don't know--I'm not a woman. And I'm certainly not Tara. But that seems logical--enter room, turn on light, then undress. So, either she never turned it on OR she turned it on and she/someone else turned it off and the neighbor missed it OR she was never in the room at all despite her clothes being there. So, take your pick.

The dog owner--this is where I diverge from many people on here (I say this while keeping a TOTALLY open mind regarding what sundrop said about some new questioning going on): I don't believe the police are idiots. And I'm not a cop, I've never been a cop, and I never wanted to be a cop. More to the point, it's easy for us to sit and say they don't know what they're doing--you know, because we all love it when people outside our fields of work critique our performance. I'm not in their shoes . . . but we all hear stories of detectives who are haunted for the rest of their lives by crimes they couldn't solve. Yes, they make mistakes. They forget things. But I think that 99.9% of them want to solve cases. In fact, given how cops can be today, they sometimes want to solve cases a little TOO much by purposely invading people's rights. Given that, I find it very hard to believe they'd somehow overlook what would appear to be very good suspect for 9 years. Like they just happened to not interview or take the DNA of somehow who might have the best chance of being connected to Tara's disappearance? I don't think so. Can I type that without being negative?

The dog owner (continued)--Here's what I know: if someone on here like sundrop has known about the dog owner, then the police have too. What more likely happens in cases is the criminal is interviewed early on and it takes police years and years to build a case against him (and that may be what's going on now) Not: A person is right under the police's nose and then ten years later the police suddenly smack their collective foreheads and say: How did we not investigate him? This is the GBI we're talking about and not the local police who might have some personal connection to the case and thus push stuff under the carpet. Even so, I'm willing to listen to any fact that comes out of the new interviews. All I'm trying to do is keep it all in perspective.

The overall case--As I've said before, the toughest part I see in this case is connecting all the facts together--because we have way more than you usually get in a disappearance. Clothes, driver's seat moved back, $100 in the console, a damaged lamp, clock under the bed, the glove with a stranger's DNA in it--that's A LOT of stuff. Usually with that much evidence it would be easy to put together a reasonable story of how it all went down.

Instead, all those facts make it more complicated. Why did the abductor seemingly use Tara's car--it was a sports car and not the best vehicle for hauling a body? Nobody believes the $100 is Tara's--so why would the abductor have $100 in an envelope? We have a glove with DNA but it matches no one close to Tara--so whose is it? So, it looks like there was a fight in Tara's bedroom but where's the sign of forced entry? There was a fight in her bedroom but somehow her phone was in the charger--you mean she didn't have time to reach for it? This is all why I think at least part of those facts are staged because it's hard to put together a logical story that covers every base; it's like trying to fit a queen size sheet on a king size bed--you cover 3 corners but can never get the fourth.

One more thing for sundrop--I love our differences and debates on this case. But as I said before: Just because Tara's clothes from the night of Oct. 22 were at her house doesn't mean she ever came home. The clothes being there is a fact. That she went home can be inferred but it's not a fact--it's a guess. And I would add, jumping onto digndoodle's point: The neighbor's never saw the bedroom light come on, so it can be inferred Tara never made it home. One more reason it's hard to put Tara's disappearance into nice orderly box.

 

[fasteddy8170]

I don't have much going on tonight besides watching baseball so I might as well keep typing . . .

If I had to narrow it down to the most confusing fact it's the driver's seat being moved back. It infers (not a fact) that somebody besides Tara drove her car. Other possibilities are: Somebody moved the seat back to reach something under the seat OR it was put in that position to throw police off.

If it is, in fact, what appears to be--That somebody else drove her car--when did that happen? Did she go out after the BBQ and somebody drove it home? Did she go home after the BBQ and then left and then somebody drove it back to her place? The possibilities are many.

But here's what I know: If we're to believe Tara went home, got into bed, somebody broke in, and took her away, using her car has to be the riskiest choice of all choices.

First, her car just as a percentage of the auto population is a rare car--A Dodge Stealth/Mistubishi 3000. And it had to have been VERY rare in the areas around Ocilla. Now, if it were L.A., then not so rare. But in a little town, very rare. And it was white--so it sticks out even more. In fact I would go so far as to say that if someone in Ocilla saw that white car the person would automatically know it was Tara. That's how unique it had to be in that town.

Second, it's small. I used to sell those cars. No room in them except for the front two seats. You wouldn't want to even go food shopping with one. Carry a body in one possibly? Very very very awkward.

Third, if somebody went to her house, wouldn't the person have his own car/truck? Given the first two points, the person's vehicle would have to less conspicuous and more utilitarian than Tara's.

Fourth, if the person did in fact attack Tara in her house and take her away, why bring the car back to her house? True, maybe the person's vehicle was already there and he came back to get it. But, then we're back where we started--why not take his vehicle in the first place? Plus, what kind of kidnapper/killer is going to leave his car parked in the vicinity of a victim's house for any extended period of time?

Fourth (cont.), I can almost see the guy (if it was a guy) parking his car down the street, then creeping up to her place, breaking in, taking her out to her car and using it to transport her body to his vehicle and then bringing her car back, then creeping back to his vehicle (That's a beautiful long sentence). But then I'm thinking: So, it's okay to leave the vehicle parked down the street for say 15 minutes, but it's too risky to leave it out in front of Tara's house for an additional minute by running down to get the vehicle, driving it up to her place, throwing her in it, and taking off. Driving her car back and forth, especially with the problem of getting her body in it, seems like A LOT of work.

Everybody has their own approach to thinking about a case, the above is how I go about mine: Kind of a flowchart.

I should say: To my knowledge there's no evidence Tara was ever in any place in her car than in the driver's seat. Any DNA in the trunk? Any hair in the backseat? Any blood anywhere? Not that I know of. So, it's possible her car wasn't used for anything. But then we're totally back to: If it wasn't used to transport her body, why does it look like it was driven? But on the other hand, an attack looks like it happened at Tara's and somehow her body was whisked away.

Do you see what I'm saying? It's all very hard to understand. I realize criminals don't act logically and it's easy for me to look back at it all with hindsight. But I also know criminals do their best to not get caught. And having anything to do with Tara's car seems like the worst choice of all choices. Yes, we know the perpetrator got away with it up to now but he couldn't have known that at the time in 2005. He would've suspected that driving her car under any circumstances was very, very risky. So, he must've done it because he had no other choice. And I have a hard time creating a "no other choice" scenario.

All the above is exactly why I've opened my mind up to the idea Tara didn't go home that night after the BBQ. That she went somewhere, something happened, and the criminal drove her car to her house with her clothes to make it look like she went home. And then walked away from the house after he was done creating the attack scene in her bedroom. Remember: The neighbors insist her bedroom light never came on--possibly one sign she was never in her house that night.

Keep in mind, it's much more plausible somebody walked away from her house after staging the crime scene than walking to her house and causing the real one. Why? Because if the guy walked to her house to commit the crime he knows her, he knows her car, he knows he'll have to use her car to get rid of her body--and he'd have to be thinking like I am right now: That's gonna be a lot of work and risky.

Whereas, walking away from the house after the staging, it's different. He doesn't have to worry about putting her body in the car. He knows if he can drive to her house, stage the scene, and get away, he can totally throw the police off. He doesn't have to break into her house since he'd have her keys. He'd have her clothes. He'd have her phone--he'd put it on the charger, where it ended up. All he has to do is not get caught in her car. Plus, if the attack happened somewhere else, he only has to drive the car half the time he would've if he walked to her house, used her car to dump her body, and then returned it.

I know: This is a lot of stuff on one fact of many. But I think this is the kind of detail that's needed not to just solve this case but many others like it. Sometimes facts seem very straight-forward. But once you start working out the details, facts can start telling hidden stories.

 

[digndoodle]

I don't have much going on tonight besides watching baseball so I might as well keep typing . . .

If I had to narrow it down to the most confusing fact it's the driver's seat being moved back. It infers (not a fact) that somebody besides Tara drove her car. Other possibilities are: Somebody moved the seat back to reach something under the seat OR it was put in that position to throw police off.

If it is, in fact, what appears to be--That somebody else drove her car--when did that happen? Did she go out after the BBQ and somebody drove it home? Did she go home after the BBQ and then left and then somebody drove it back to her place? The possibilities are many.

But here's what I know: If we're to believe Tara went home, got into bed, somebody broke in, and took her away, using her car has to be the riskiest choice of all choices.

First, her car just as a percentage of the auto population is a rare car--A Dodge Stealth/Mistubishi 3000. And it had to have been VERY rare in the areas around Ocilla. Now, if it were L.A., then not so rare. But in a little town, very rare. And it was white--so it sticks out even more. In fact I would go so far as to say that if someone in Ocilla saw that white car the person would automatically know it was Tara. That's how unique it had to be in that town.

Second, it's small. I used to sell those cars. No room in them except for the front two seats. You wouldn't want to even go food shopping with one. Carry a body in one possibly? Very very very awkward.

Third, if somebody went to her house, wouldn't the person have his own car/truck? Given the first two points, the person's vehicle would have to less conspicuous and more utilitarian than Tara's.

Fourth, if the person did in fact attack Tara in her house and take her away, why bring the car back to her house? True, maybe the person's vehicle was already there and he came back to get it. But, then we're back where we started--why not take his vehicle in the first place? Plus, what kind of kidnapper/killer is going to leave his car parked in the vicinity of a victim's house for any extended period of time?

Fourth (cont.), I can almost see the guy (if it was a guy) parking his car down the street, then creeping up to her place, breaking in, taking her out to her car and using it to transport her body to his vehicle and then bringing her car back, then creeping back to his vehicle (That's a beautiful long sentence). But then I'm thinking: So, it's okay to leave the vehicle parked down the street for say 15 minutes, but it's too risky to leave it out in front of Tara's house for an additional minute by running down to get the vehicle, driving it up to her place, throwing her in it, and taking off. Driving her car back and forth, especially with the problem of getting her body in it, seems like A LOT of work.

Everybody has their own approach to thinking about a case, the above is how I go about mine: Kind of a flowchart.

I should say: To my knowledge there's no evidence Tara was ever in any place in her car than in the driver's seat. Any DNA in the trunk? Any hair in the backseat? Any blood anywhere? Not that I know of. So, it's possible her car wasn't used for anything. But then we're totally back to: If it wasn't used to transport her body, why does it look like it was driven? But on the other hand, an attack looks like it happened at Tara's and somehow her body was whisked away.

Do you see what I'm saying? It's all very hard to understand. I realize criminals don't act logically and it's easy for me to look back at it all with hindsight. But I also know criminals do their best to not get caught. And having anything to do with Tara's car seems like the worst choice of all choices. Yes, we know the perpetrator got away with it up to now but he couldn't have known that at the time in 2005. He would've suspected that driving her car under any circumstances was very, very risky. So, he must've done it because he had no other choice. And I have a hard time creating a "no other choice" scenario.

All the above is exactly why I've opened my mind up to the idea Tara didn't go home that night after the BBQ. That she went somewhere, something happened, and the criminal drove her car to her house with her clothes to make it look like she went home. And then walked away from the house after he was done creating the attack scene in her bedroom. Remember: The neighbors insist her bedroom light never came on--possibly one sign she was never in her house that night.

Keep in mind, it's much more plausible somebody walked away from her house after staging the crime scene than walking to her house and causing the real one. Why? Because if the guy walked to her house to commit the crime he knows her, he knows her car, he knows he'll have to use her car to get rid of her body--and he'd have to be thinking like I am right now: That's gonna be a lot of work and risky.

Whereas, walking away from the house after the staging, it's different. He doesn't have to worry about putting her body in the car. He knows if he can drive to her house, stage the scene, and get away, he can totally throw the police off. He doesn't have to break into her house since he'd have her keys. He'd have her clothes. He'd have her phone--he'd put it on the charger, where it ended up. All he has to do is not get caught in her car. Plus, if the attack happened somewhere else, he only has to drive the car half the time he would've if he walked to her house, used her car to dump her body, and then returned it.

I know: This is a lot of stuff on one fact of many. But I think this is the kind of detail that's needed not to just solve this case but many others like it. Sometimes facts seem very straight-forward. But once you start working out the details, facts can start telling hidden stories.

I think if Tara did make it home, perhaps she changed clothes there, but I feel she either went back out for something and never made it back home again, I do NOT think this kidnap or attack took place in her home at all......Remember we had someone that has been known to be seen sitting in a grassy area of her yard in a black/dark colored truck and he sure was upset over something
My gut instincts tell me this man was really upset with Tara over something, I somehow feel even if she did make it home, she never made it inside or he was more than likely right on her heels without her even knowing he was there and perhaps followed her inside, he could have had a gun on her and trying to force her back out into his vehicle and that could explain why the light was never turned on and perhaps the phone still in the charger

Personally, I think after she left the cook-out with her friends someone followed her and forced her to go to a place I fear may have been where she met her death, and I just feel this person in someway managed to drive her car back to her house and proceeded to go in and stage a crime scene, I just feel her phone may have been put on the charger to keep LE and family to think she was or had been at home to delay the investigation process, but as fasteddy said everyone says this money was not Tara's, makes me think this person did a lot in a short period of time and got sloppy, forgot to take his envelope with money back out of her car
this case has a lot of things that can cause one to become very confused at times, but as stated above, if you start working out the details, facts can start telling hidden secrets *I like that fasteddy* and it certainly applies in Tara's case
the only thing I would even dare to disagree with is that GBI may not have investigated a person right under their nose (so to speak) for over 8 yrs.....I think they may have not had 1 clue that this person would have had any involvement in this crime...I mean not 1 single clue but perhaps with a little time started saying crazy things, or perhaps acting in certain ways that they may have went back and started to do some hard thinking and doing more research and now know they may have over-looked a person that should have been right up front in the top 5 of main POI'S in this case....our minds can play funny games sometimes, our mind is like a big box, and when we keep storing things, hiding things and etc. that box can become very full, sometimes to the point there simply is no more room to put anything and it EXPLODES and when it does there will be things come out that even we forgot about having in this box, things we thought we had hidden for life, but a huge explosion will blow our thoughts and secrets into a million pieces!!!

 

[sundrop]

If the clothing she confirmed had on at the BBQ were found in her bedroom, then its a highly probability that she got home and pulled those clothes off

 

[fasteddy8170]

sundrop, I agree--high probability. But how does the car seat figure into that?

 

[digndoodle]

If the clothing she confirmed had on at the BBQ were found in her bedroom, then its a highly probability that she got home and pulled those clothes off

Or during whatever happened the POI pulled off those clothes and as we have talked above, brought them back into the home to plant as to further throw off the investigation

Sundrop can you please answer 1 question if you know....Did Tara often dog-sit for people???....and was this perhaps kinda a 2nd job to earn a few extra dollars
This keeps spinning in my mind and I just can't dismiss it...If she did dog-sit for people, then there could or may have possibly been various people come to her home at different times

 

[sundrop]

She looked after the dog this particular time so the friend could attend a ball tournament

 

[digndoodle]

sundrop, I agree--high probability. But how does the car seat figure into that?

Until they prove me wrong 100% with strong evidence to support their findings, I definitely think someone else drove her car and I get a deep deep feeling it was perhaps brought back to her home in the wee hours of morning when the person that did this thought no-one would be awake or at a time they thought most neighbors would not be at their homes
I have read on another site that family members stated there was no way Tara could have ever drove the car as far back as the seat was at the time it was discovered as it was and that would require somewhat of a very smart person to figure out how and why's as to other ways the seat could have been pushed this far back...in my opinion, I feel the car seat as it was plus the envelope with the money in it will be one of the top 5 clues that will solve this case....someone got in a really big hurry and at the same time they got sloppy

 

[digndoodle]

She looked after the dog this particular time so the friend could attend a ball tournament

Yes I understand that, but was wondering if she did this (dog sitting) for others as well as maybe a way to earn extra money
I guess a plain way to ask is "Did Tara Dog-Sit for anyone needing an overnite sitter or perhaps a weekend sitter for their furbabies"??

 

[sundrop]

No, because she stayed gone a lot with work and night school

 

[annoulzz]

With the seat far back like that, could the police determine how tall he/she was? If it was someone above 6'1" it had be a man. I think there were 2 guys not 1

 

[digndoodle]

No, because she stayed gone a lot with work and night school

Thanks for all your replys sundrop, so we have a lady that is very busy at school teaching, then going to night school (and that would leave hardly
anytime for other things or enjoyment) and she helps someone out by keeping a dog or dogs on a certain week in October so they can go to
a ball tournament and low and behold that very same weekend from the cookout with friends and her goodbyes there just seems to UP and dropped
off the face of the earth and never has been heard from nor seen again
The proof in the pudding is that according to statements here recently, we all know this dog owner showed up at her house and picked up their dog-dogs
so that places a person coming and going from her home for sure, would not be hard to know and prove this person-persons came to her home
but WHAT were LE thinking (if they knew this) not to pull this person/persons into be questioned??? even if there was not 1 bad word between them
that still places someone at the time she went missing coming and going to and from her house, but if there were words between them (and sundrop
says the dog owner was not happy with this dog sitting session) WHY WHY was this not among the 1st of the people to be questioned???
Do we know positive that Tara was seen again after this person/persons picked up their dog??? Did she talk on her cell phone after this person picked up the dog???
or was Tara ever seen or heard from after they picked up the dog????.....................Do we have any clue as to how tall this person/person's possibly are??? I would
think since Tara agreed to dog-sit this had to be someone or some family she knew personally and I understood from way back when reading everyone in that town
almost was questioned including family, so how in the world did this 1 person or this family escape being questioned??? or if they were, they had to think they were pretty
smart to keep LE away from them for well over 8 yrs now (almost 9).....with all this mumbling in my mind being put into words here, I'm thinking this had to be someone
that was well aware of how LE conducted cases such as Tara's plus the fire at snapdragon road I feel plays into all this mess in this case.....and I feel it was to destroy
any possible dna that otherwise might have been left behind on what may have happened to Tara and personally I still do not believe she made it home that evening, I know
we have discussed her changing clothes because they were found in her home, but I just get a feeling this person was smart enough to get those clothes and just like I feel her
car was brought home at a later time, those clothes in my mind were put there to further throw off this investigation.......
back a few pages I had my #1 POI and there was no-one on the face of this earth have changed my mind and I have stated until FBI brought forth another person
and had 100% proof it was someone else I would go to my grave believing my POI did this, but this has put a big dent in my thinking because I certainly was never aware
of her dog-sitting the same weekend she went missing, I'm still not convinced enough to fully change my mind that it is someone I never heard of before, but puts some really strong
possibilities in my thinking, but there is just too much stuck down in my heart on the person I believe that did this, I simply cannot dismiss the POI I have had at the top of my list
for way over 1 1/2 yrs now........my mind keeps getting on STUCK mode knowing a personal friend of mine having the rental home out from Tara's and that daggone black-dark colored
truck speeding at a high rate of speed that almost ran her friend over and it came from the direction of Tara's house at around 1:00 to 1:30 a.m........Something was happening I feel at
Tara's home at this time, why else would a truck be going that fast in this little rural neighborhood at those hours???
Just something that in my mind fits into this case in those 30 minutes that I can't put my finger on at this time....could be when her car was driven back home??? hummmm
excuse my thinking out loud...but this case can be solved I feel, there is just too much out there to work with, just a matter of crossing all the t's and dotting the i's

 

[sundrop]

I agree

 

[annoulzz]

I think one of the neighbors know something and just are afraid to speak up. I mean how can not 1 person see something strange with the scenario? Not hear anything? How far apart were these houses that they could see her light being turned on but not possible screams or huge thumping noises/ truck screeching?!

 

[digndoodle]

I think one of the neighbors know something and just are afraid to speak up. I mean how can not 1 person see something strange with the scenario? Not hear anything? How far apart were these houses that they could see her light being turned on but not possible screams or huge thumping noises/ truck screeching?!

I agree with all the above, from the photo's that are on this thread and the one showing Tara's house with her dog sitting in the fenced back yard, looks as if these houses were fairly close to each other, I am stuck on Tara never made it home that night, but most definitely I feel neighbors surely would have heard that truck speeding at that rate of speed, and if it is 100% pure truth that the little man out walking in that neighborhood that same evening that had to walk past Tara's yard, saw and was threatened by a man known sitting in the grassy area of Tara's yard, yet he was so frightened by those threats he choose to not come forth until several years later, not sure he would have been able to see a person's face if it was dark but I get a feeling some knew there was some strange things happening in this neighborhood that very evening, nothing to back all this up at this time, but in my thinking I feel if all evidence comes to the surface, there will be several come forth and say they knew something was not right in the neighborhood that same night or very early morning
I will say this, I live in a very small town and with that being said sometimes if something really bad happens you are afraid to tell what you may have seen or heard, in a small town everybody seems to know everybody else and then you face a danger from talking because someone will more than likely take what you said and relay it on to someone that could do great harm to you or perhaps a family member....That is one thing I HATE by living in such a small place, yet otherwise it is so quiet and peaceful....but I cannot honestly say what I would do if placed in a position where I knew something, yet if I talked I know I would live in fear for my life...that would be a very hard call for me

 

[sundrop]

Tara made it home because she changed clothing from what she had on at the BBQ