Identified! IL - Will Co., Male body in Des Plaines River, May'09 - Gary Schmidt

[Peculiar Petunia]

on the map I posted (page 27, post 675), I placed the barrel on the north western shore of the McKinley Island. I did so based upon MW's statement that she saw it from the I & M trail and police statements that the location (of barrel) was only accessible by boat. Had the barrel been on either side of the river right there a mile south of the remains police would have been able to get to the shore on foot (Dow on East, Forest Preserve on West). I hope I'm close with my location. If anyone has better info, please post so I can update the map.

Now all "we" need is measurements of current, but I can't help but think that if the barrel was buried in the bank, on the area marked as "Dow Chemical," the barrel (even if exposed again) might have gone unremarked as belonging to Dow. If the barrel broke and the remains fell out, the barrel may have travelled downstream. Not knowing for certain what the next part discovered is, and being uncertain where it was found (especially if it were upstream), I can't speculate more. I'm not familiar with that stretch of the Des Plaines at all. I really think that a scientist familiar with the river could work out where/when things happened using weather and river measurements.

 

[mysteriew]

This is a map marked to the best of my ability and knowledge of the area and where the items were found. Please let me know if I've marked things incorrectly and I can revise. I thought we should also all clarify Up Stream from Downstream, as I think it gets confusing when we aren't all on the same page regarding directions. Upstream would be against the current and downstream with the flow of the river. Is this how others are defining the terms?

Bringing the map forward

I read in a couple of the articles that the area where the remains were found was only accessible by boat. Yet looking at the map I don't see that. I would think that it was more easily accessible by boat, but that it was also accessible by land.

 

[kikid]

Bringing the map forward

I read in a couple of the articles that the area where the remains were found was only accessible by boat. Yet looking at the map I don't see that. I would think that it was more easily accessible by boat, but that it was also accessible by land.

I know, I thought they said that as well about inaccessiblity, but of pics of scene from the media of the tent at the crime scene you can clearly see Dow offices and white tanks behind the treelines.

 

[kikid]

click this link, http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/channahon-des-plaines-river-body-recovery-illinois-state-police.html below the article are two videos. The video titled "Channahon Body Found" shows the crime scene.. and it pulls out to show Dow Chemical behind the treeline.

 

[Peculiar Petunia]

Bringing the map forward

I read in a couple of the articles that the area where the remains were found was only accessible by boat. Yet looking at the map I don't see that. I would think that it was more easily accessible by boat, but that it was also accessible by land.

Could they mean not legally accessible, as one would have to trespass on Dow's land to reach that point?

 

[Leila]

I was just reading the news reports on a couple of different sites and the new remains are possibly a leg bone. I sure hope they dive all this week and find even more, if they haven't already.

In one report it said the new remains were found about a mile upstream from the other body parts. Does anyone recall if the barrel was upstream or downstream from the remains site? I had heard it was approx. 1 mi away also.

Just catching up on this thread..........

It would seem that the new remains were found north of where the remains were found on Wednesday, whereas the blue barrel was found south of the Wednesday find. The area where the leg bone was found might be closer to where the body was originally dumped. I hope LE continues the search of the river, even going further north, and thoroughly searches all of this area of the river. They may recover more of the remains, clothing, and other evidence.

 

[Leila]

IIRC, wasn't there also a missing sidetable from the bedroom? I think I remember this information, I'll have to go all the way back to the original but that is what I'm remembering. Please correct me, anyone, if I'm getting cases mixed up. But, if I'm correct, I hope they also find it in the river.

I had forgotten that detail. Thanks! It's been such a long time since there's been active and ongoing discussion of this case, that we need a thread for "case review."

 

[Leila]

on the map I posted (page 27, post 675), I placed the barrel on the north western shore of the McKinley Island. I did so based upon MW's statement that she saw it from the I & M trail and police statements that the location (of barrel) was only accessible by boat. Had the barrel been on either side of the river right there a mile south of the remains police would have been able to get to the shore on foot (Dow on East, Forest Preserve on West). I hope I'm close with my location. If anyone has better info, please post so I can update the map.

Kikid..............those maps are great and really help a lot! In the article about finding the leg bone that's related to the original find, it was stated that the leg bone was found about a mile upstream of where the remains were found on Wednesday. In looking at the map, a mile upstream appears to be before the marina, and south of the golf course.

I went to Google maps and zoomed in on this area. It looks like it's real marshy with a lot of vegetation in the river, and there seems to be some sort of plant or business that would have access to the river where someone could dump a body. The plant/business is south of the marina on the same side of the river.

 

[Mels3kidz]

Bringing the map forward

I read in a couple of the articles that the area where the remains were found was only accessible by boat. Yet looking at the map I don't see that. I would think that it was more easily accessible by boat, but that it was also accessible by land.

There could be something in the terrain that a flat map doesn't show. Perhaps a steep bank or an overhang that the recovery team couldn't manuever past/over. Unfortunately Google Earth doesn't zoom in well enough to be able to be sure.

Mel

 

[Leila]

The article about finding a leg bone that's related to the remains found last Wednesday, states that the leg bone was found about a mile upstream from the original find. This might be closer to where the body was dumped in the river.

I went to Google maps and zoomed in on the area that's approximately a mile upstream, and that's west of the marina and south of the golf course, near the area that looks like marsh with a lot of vegetation in the water.

There seems to be some sort of plant or business there, and would probably afford access to the water. I've put a question mark on the plant/business. This looks like an area where someone could access at night and go un-noticed. The remains and/or the blue barrel could have been caught in that marsh area for a long time before flood waters carried it further downstream.

Thanks to Kikid for helping me with how to copy a Google map.

 

[kikid]

The article about finding a leg bone that's related to the remains found last Wednesday, states that the leg bone was found about a mile upstream from the original find. This might be closer to where the body was dumped in the river.

In the article I read it quoted a Dow Chemical empolyee saying it was there on Dow land. So I'm presuming it was found about 1 mile farther upstream on the same shoreline.

 

[:+:MrTT:+:]

In the article I read it quoted a Dow Chemical empolyee saying it was there on Dow land. So I'm presuming it was found about 1 mile farther upstream on the same shoreline.

kiki i hope you don't mind, and if this has already been posted i will delete
but here is a link, showing video on the latest discovery, and there is a path LE was able to walk to get to the area where a bone was found.......LE was not sure how to get to the area on foot....so a worker showed them a way down through the brush and showed them how...
Its an area, it seems one would have to know it being there, to get to since it looks kinda remote...........
​

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/Des_Plaines_River_New_Evidence​

 

[:+:MrTT:+:]

I am just curious whom owns this private property....behaps a business close to the site, but only speculation........but would like to know?
​

 

[scandi]

Hi. I wanted to bring up Marsha's post from the previous page. She is the one who brought up all the great photos of the river on PP 11. She says:

"I just went back several pages to recap..........Well, that answers my question about the blue barrel being upstream.

Hmmmm, blue barrel about 1 mi. upstream........leg bone located about 1 mi. upstream." Marsha


I also wanted to thank you both, Kikid and Leila for your map work. xox

 

[scandi]

In the article I read it quoted a Dow Chemical empolyee saying it was there on Dow land. So I'm presuming it was found about 1 mile farther upstream on the same shoreline.

Hi Kikid, Both you and Marsha put the remains at the same X on the map. I can't c & p her photos on pp 11, but the first one shows where the remains spot was from those 2 tanks on Dow Chem land.

Now we have established from links that the leg bone found yesterday was found 1 mile upstream from the remains. I'm also thinking that would be on the same side of the river up closer to the bridge, across the water from that marina. That is because access to that land would be thru Dow Chemical property as is the spot of the original remains.

And Marsha also found something in a link saying the barrel was also found sbout 1 mile upstream from the original remains of last Wed. It makes sense then to me the barrel and the Saturday find might be quite close together.

Now if Michelle walked on that path close to the town, she could have looked across the water to the east bank and seen the blue barrel. She would be on the west bank which would be close to housing subdivisions, right?

Just thinking and of course this could be all wet! xox

 

[kikid]

kiki i hope you don't mind, and if this has already been posted i will delete
but here is a link, showing video on the latest discovery, and there is a path LE was able to walk to get to the area where a bone was found.......LE was not sure how to get to the area on foot....so a worker showed them a way down through the brush and showed them how...
Its an area, it seems one would have to know it being there, to get to since it looks kinda remote...........
​

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/Des_Plaines_River_New_Evidence​

ohhh, thanks!! watching now!!

 

[kikid]

Hi. I wanted to bring up Marsha's post from the previous page. She is the one who brought up all the great photos of the river on PP 11. She says:

"I just went back several pages to recap..........Well, that answers my question about the blue barrel being upstream.

Hmmmm, blue barrel about 1 mi. upstream........leg bone located about 1 mi. upstream." Marsha


I also wanted to thank you both, Kikid and Leila for your map work. xox

see for some reason I was thinking the barrel was found downstream... I guess based upon the pics clicked by the woman on the I & M trail, I assumed that was correct... I should know better than to assume!! lol, thanks for clarifying that, I'll readjust my mapping.

 

[kikid]

ok, I went digging and have found mention of the barrel as downstream.

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=6823493&rss=rss-wls-article-6823493

About a mile downstream from where those remains were found there a blue barrel was found along the riverbank.

I'm also changing the barrel location as that has been clarified as well.

 

[Peculiar Petunia]

OK--leg snags in something upstream (are we certain it's a leg?), separates, freeing the partial torso. The barrel (if it's connected at all) keeps traveling after the torso snags, being more buoyant.
So, if the implants (if intact) are of neutral buoyancy, might they be between the torso and the barrel?

 

[kikid]

OK--leg snags in something upstream (are we certain it's a leg?), separates, freeing the partial torso. The barrel (if it's connected at all) keeps traveling after the torso snags, being more buoyant.
So, if the implants (if intact) are of neutral buoyancy, might they be between the torso and the barrel?

I know I was just considering that the skull would most likely be located between the torso and the barrel as well. And the implants imo would perhaps be near the foot bones (not yet found) or lower legs, as they probably floated out first thing.

we've had so much rain and there has been so much flooding that the pieces may have just softly floated out as well... then the water receeds taking the barrel with it.