Lloyd Welch is Person of Interest

[siriunsun]

What Lloyd Welch could or should have done is something that could be debated for ages. But what we have been told that he did and said is all that we have to go on. It is possible and likely that MCP has more information on and from Lloyd to frame their investigation and future prosecutions.

Mental competance covers a wide range of areas in regard to the law. Whether or not Lloyd can, should, or will be tried for anything will remain to be seen, but mental competance will most certainly be an issue that will need to be addressed. The same can be said if Lloyd is to be called as a witness against anyone else.

Since Lloyd has to date not been charged with anything, he does not have a lawyer appointed to defend or legally advise him. I hardly think that he has the ability or competance to defend himself in a court of law - nor do I think that his ability to do so should be considered a factor regarding his mental condition.

When asking whether or not Lloyd did the Right or Lawful thing regarding his alleged sighting of the girls, you have to consider the source. Lloyd is a Psycopath who has had many run-ins with the law. He wouldn't know the truth if he stepped in it, and the same could be said of him regarding what is right or what is lawful. How would you expect him to know? His morality code is probably a little different than yours or mine.

We have no idea when Lloyd Welch first knew that the girls were missing - unless he was in fact responsible for or a participant in their abduction. His initial story on 1 April 1975 was that he SAW the girls get into a vehicle with an unknown man. We only know this today, 40 years after their disappearance, because MCP didn't deem his story credible at the time. We know that he made the statement because he wanted to collect the $7000 reward offered that day. As I pointed out in my earlier post, there are a number of possibilities in regard to Lloyd's widely varying stories between then and now. He could have made up his story on 1 April 1975 after reading the Washington Post.

You can debate it for ages if you wish. As a parent, I am going to tell you that if someone actually claims to have witnessed, first hand, and event such as this, but does not care enough about the victims, the community, the law, or the population out side of the community to come forward, I do not want that person in my community, participating at any level. And if he did witness what he claims, he knew the law as well as anyone else: he had a responsibility to come forward. If he was as intimately connected to the whole thing as at least one other is claiming, he definitely did NOT do the lawful or right thing. Why did you even bring that up? And who cares about his morals? It goes without saying that his "code" is different than mine. So what? As long as he obeys the law here in this country, he can quietly subscribe to whatever code he wishes. As long as he OBEYS THE LAW. His mental condition also does not matter to me; he is obviously equipped to assist in his own defense.

 

[siriunsun]

Unless the police come up with DNA evidence, I was about to give up hope this case would be solved since all the police have is a good suspect, decades old rumors, and a mentally ill liar.

Telling the security guard does not seem odd to me. First, Lloyd loved to hang out at the mall, so it would actually be a struggle for him to keep away from the mall, just as I would have to go out of my way to avoid the mall/plaza since I live near it. Of course Lloyd liked checking out jailbait at the mall, while it's just stores to me.

One might speculate that someone who committed a crime at the mall would try to stay away until the heat died down. If Lloyd did more than look at the girls, he would have no idea if anyone saw him with the girls. Of course Lloyd could have been a total idiot and for some reason, some criminals do return to the scene of the crime.

I don't think we know for sure if Lloyd telephoned the police, although he told his stepmother he would do so. If Lloyd was shooting his mouth off to his stepmother and girlfriend (later wife) about knowing something, it's likely he was shooting his mouth off to his mall friends. Just as his stepmother did not believe Lloyd enough to insist on him calling the police right there, it's likely anyone else Lloyd told did not believe him, or thought what he saw was not important. Just seeing the two girls at the mall is not the same as seeing someone push them into a car. The two boy in the car that saw (the?) girls on Drumm (only one boy knew the girls) did not think it was important enough to contact the police until a week later.

It would be nice to know if Lloyd walked up to the security guard, maybe a security guard he was slightly friendly with, or if some other kids pointed out Lloyd out as someone who was mouthing off about knowing something.

The police obviously did not believe Lloyd in 1975 and gave him a lie detector test. Lloyd may have flunked the lie detector test if he lied about why he was watching the girls; even idiot Lloyd would not say, "I like young girls to a cop." Lloyd was likely up to other petty criminal activity such as shoplifting and underage drinking or drugs. Or Lloyd could have read the description of TRM in the newspaper and added that to his seeing the girls to increase his chance of getting the reward.

It looks like very bad record keeping by the Montgomery County Police to not have recorded the security guards names. Likewise, not to notice that Lloyd was the person in the sketch was very bad luck (for the police). The only excuse I can think of for the bad/no record keeping is that the police were putting all their effort into trying to find the girls alive.

It's odd that Lloyd never mention the police interview and lie detector test to his stepmother.

It's possible that Lloyd has half a brain, and if he is guilty was/is trying to send the police down the wrong path, away from where Lloyd knows the bodies are buried, which would be near the mall.

But I think it's more likely that Lloyd's recent statements are a combination of the his mental weakness and the police using tricky tactics. A smart detective could have talked someone like Lloyd into saying "maybe" or "it could have happened" to almost anything. I have no idea if the American Sniper murderer is legally insane, but it's obvious that the police talked a mentally ill person into saying he knew what he was doing was wrong with leading questions. My guess is that the police know anything Lloyd said is worthless, but they just used the statements to get the search warrants.

Besides DNA, if any, the only other evidence the police may have is a half dozen or so women who came forward in 2014 saying someone (one of the two persons of interest?) tried to lead them to the parking lot (using a fake security guard badge?). Even if one of the persons of interest was doing a sex-for-getting-away-with-shoplifting scam, it's a far cry from kidnapping and murder.

I understand your perspective, but Lloyd was of legal age to drink in Maryland at the time, so underage drinking was not a crime; about mentioning the police interview and polygraph to his stepmother......I don't find it as strange, at all, that he didn't tell her about it. I, personally, could not imagine going home and saying something like, "Hi Dad. I had an interview with the police today. They gave me a lie detector test." Can you imagine the family arguing after that?

 

[j123]

You can debate it for ages if you wish. As a parent, I am going to tell you that if someone actually claims to have witnessed, first hand, and event such as this, but does not care enough about the victims, the community, the law, or the population out side of the community to come forward, I do not want that person in my community, participating at any level. And if he did witness what he claims, he knew the law as well as anyone else: he had a responsibility to come forward. If he was as intimately connected to the whole thing as at least one other is claiming, he definitely did NOT do the lawful or right thing. Why did you even bring that up? And who cares about his morals? It goes without saying that his "code" is different than mine. So what? As long as he obeys the law here in this country, he can quietly subscribe to whatever code he wishes. As long as he OBEYS THE LAW. His mental condition also does not matter to me; he is obviously equipped to assist in his own defense.

Lloyd Lee Welch is in jail and you are preaching to the choir. This thread and forum are for discussing the case; there is nothing wrong with examining all of the information and speculating, nor does it imply anything about the personal beliefs of the poster (which really aren't even relevant). Richard is and has been an absolutely superb poster in this forum for years; his messages are always informative, well-written, and helpful, and I am so grateful that he is around.

 

[steveP120]

You can debate it for ages if you wish. As a parent, I am going to tell you that if someone actually claims to have witnessed, first hand, and event such as this, but does not care enough about the victims, the community, the law, or the population out side of the community to come forward, I do not want that person in my community, participating at any level. And if he did witness what he claims, he knew the law as well as anyone else: he had a responsibility to come forward. If he was as intimately connected to the whole thing as at least one other is claiming, he definitely did NOT do the lawful or right thing. Why did you even bring that up? And who cares about his morals? It goes without saying that his "code" is different than mine. So what? As long as he obeys the law here in this country, he can quietly subscribe to whatever code he wishes. As long as he OBEYS THE LAW. His mental condition also does not matter to me; he is obviously equipped to assist in his own defense.

Except for a few professionals, such as doctors to report child abuse, and a few other exceptions, there is NOT a legal obligation to come forward and report a crime or even dial 911:
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/failure-to-report-a-crime.html

Obviously reporting a crime, especially a personal injury crime, is the moral thing to do, but there are problems with laws mandating people come forward. Lloyd's stepmother did not think Lloyd's information, even if believable, was serious enough to call the police. Should we charge her? The two boys driving down Drumm Avenue who think one saw the girls did not come forward for a week, since they thought the sisters were seen later at the mall. Should we charge them?

Serious legal discussions can be found online on the problems of requiring people to report crimes.
The famous murder of Kitty Genovese, where 38 people may have heard the fight/murder and none called police, in 1964, restarted some discussion of the issue, but it largely went nowhere.

 

[siriunsun]

Except for a few professionals, such as doctors to report child abuse, and a few other exceptions, there is NOT a legal obligation to come forward and report a crime or even dial 911:
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/failure-to-report-a-crime.html

Obviously reporting a crime, especially a personal injury crime, is the moral thing to do, but there are problems with laws mandating people come forward. Lloyd's stepmother did not think Lloyd's information, even if believable, was serious enough to call the police. Should we charge her? The two boys driving down Drumm Avenue who think one saw the girls did not come forward for a week, since they thought the sisters were seen later at the mall. Should we charge them?

Serious legal discussions can be found online on the problems of requiring people to report crimes.
The famous murder of Kitty Genovese, where 38 people may have heard the fight/murder and none called police, in 1964, restarted some discussion of the issue, but it largely went nowhere.

That's a subject of debate. The problem in enforcing laws involving the reporting of crime is proving that the would-be witness actually witnessed it, or understood that a crime had been committed. Most cases that have been lodged against defendants involving such charges have actually alleged concealment, which is a step beyond merely witnessing a crime. It looks to me as if LLW did more than merely witness a crime.

 

[siriunsun]

No argument. I just do not want to see the understanding how trust was eroded, and the changes in relationships between neighbors in Montgomery County belittled, or downgraded, in any way. This case changed everything for children growing up in Maryland. And the Lyons family certainly deserves more sensitivity when witnesses speak openly or publicly about Sheila and Katherine's missing persons case. Also, some of the perspectives Richard introduces, regarding this particular case, remind me of arguments that are often used to defend violent defendants..... more successfully IN MARYLAND than anywhere else. While I would never want to pretend that those arguments are not successfully made in court, I would hate to see America more desensitized to violent crime than it already is.

 

[steveP120]

I understand your perspective, but Lloyd was of legal age to drink in Maryland at the time, so underage drinking was not a crime

The minimum-age drinking laws were changing at the time, different for beer and hard liquor, and different in MD and DC for a time (DC is a few hundred yards off Lloyds walk to the plaza/mall):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._history_of_alcohol_minimum_purchase_age_by_state

I can pretty much guarantee you, that any drink Lloyd got his hands on, legally or not Lloyd would have sold or given it to any underage friend (one year younger than he was). I would guess that Lloyd would even offer a drink to any girl he liked even if the girl was way underage. Someone who does not draw a line for sex with underage girls is unlikely to draw a line for sharing alcohol.

 

[steveP120]

That's a subject of debate. The problem in enforcing laws involving the reporting of crime is proving that the would-be witness actually witnessed it, or understood that a crime had been committed. Most cases that have been lodged against defendants involving such charges have actually alleged concealment, which is a step beyond merely witnessing a crime. It looks to me as if LLW did more than merely witness a crime.

If one helps conceal a crime, most often one would be an accessory after the fact, but it usually requires some action.
If I saw Lloyd burying bodies, but said nothing, usually not a crime.
If I helped Lloyd bury bodies or even gave him $20 to buy a shovel, a crime.
If I lied to the police after the police came to me and said falsely, "I saw nothing," a crime.

 

[siriunsun]

The minimum-age drinking laws were changing at the time, different for beer and hard liquor, and different in MD and DC for a time (DC is a few hundred yards off Lloyds walk to the plaza/mall):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._history_of_alcohol_minimum_purchase_age_by_state

I can pretty much guarantee you, that any drink Lloyd got his hands on, legally or not Lloyd would have sold or given it to any underage friend (one year younger than he was). I would guess that Lloyd would even offer a drink to any girl he liked even if the girl was way underage. Someone who does not draw a line for sex with underage girls is unlikely to draw a line for sharing alcohol.

Mostly, I agree with you, but I grew up in, and lived in, that very community, and in 1975, the laws were not changing about alcohol. In fact, I think it was 1981 or 82 before the laws began to change in Maryland, and Maryland started getting a reputation as a "nanny state", partly because of that, to it's neighbors.

 

[siriunsun]

If one helps conceal a crime, most often one would be an accessory after the fact, but it usually requires some action.
If I saw Lloyd burying bodies, but said nothing, usually not a crime.
If I helped Lloyd bury bodies or even gave him $20 to buy a shovel, a crime.
If I lied to the police after the police came to me and said falsely, "I saw nothing," a crime.

Understood, but it would all be criminal if it could be proven in court.

 

[Falcon500]

It in not against the law to lie to the police in Maryland. A federal agent? Yes but not a police officer.

Also to correct an earlier post Wheaton Plaza is at least five miles from the Washington, DC line. Not a few hundred yards.

 

[steveP120]

It in not against the law to lie to the police in Maryland. A federal agent? Yes but not a police officer.

I am not sure it's good advice to say it's not against the law to lie to the police, but I would agree that over 99% of the people who lie to the police are not prosecuted for it.

Lying to the police, if done to obstruct justice, is usually illegal. It's a higher burden of proof to prove intent to obstruct justice, rather than a lie to cover up embarrassment such as lying about an affair to cover up an affair.

Virtually all criminals who don't take the fifth lie to police, but police want to convict them for more serious crimes. The lies criminal tell police such as I was with my girlfriend all night, are usually used to convict them of other crimes, so it's really not a good idea to lie to the police even if you are guilty; take the fifth.

Likewise, for people who say, "I saw nothing," at first, like if I saw Lloyd burring a body, the police would be more interested in convicting Lloyd for murder rather than the person who did not want to get involved for lying.

 

[Richard]

In the Lyon case, as with so many other similar cases, police solicit public help and ask that anyone who knows something come forward with information. This has been very true of this particular case since 25 March 1975 right up to today.

Don't take my word for it. Look at all the press conferences, news paper files, TV reports, internet sites, etc. People are constantly asked to come forward with what they know - even if they might not think it important.

And people have done just that over the past 40 years. We don't have all the information on who called or what they said, but MCP has several large boxes of reports, interviews, tips, etc. In March and April 1975, hundreds of phone calls came in to police daily. One of those calls was from Lloyd Welch, Jr.

Lloyd Welch is currently in prison and will likely spend the rest of his life there for very serious crimes against children - crimes which were proven in a court of law. He is not a nice guy. He is not a very truthful person. He is not a law abiding citizen. But for whatever reasons, he did come forward with information in 1975, and since 2013 has cooperated with investigators who visited him in prison.

Many folks seem to think he is guilty of something - but of what? To date he has not been charged with anything in the Lyon case, and the information available to the public is sketchy at best. The problem is that it all comes from Lloyd Welch, himself and he has made various conflicting statements. Police considered him a liar in 1975, and the passing years have probably not improved his reliability.

Under our Constitution and judicial system, Lloyd Welch is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, and must be afforded proper legal representation should he be charged with any crimes in this case.

We know that the Lyon sisters, Sheila and Kate went missing from Wheaton Plaza the afternoon of Tuesday, 25 March 1975. It is very likely that they were abducted. Montgomery County Police have maintained an open status of their case for 40 years and have followed up numerous tips during that time.

Investigators have a number of priorities in this case. The first is to hopefully locate the girls, or their bodies and to determine what happened to them. The second would be to determine who is responsible and bring them to justice.

At this point, Lloyd Welch is more important to police as a potential witness and source of information, than as a prime suspect. Naming him a suspect and charging him with any crime in this case would cause their source (however truthful or reliable he might be) to get a lawyer and clam up.

Charging a person who came forward voluntarily and who provided useful information in 1975 would potentially hazzard any future police requests for assistance from the public.

 

[steveP120]

When you read the 20 February 2015 Washington Post article about Lloyd Lee Welch, Jr. Try to keep some things in mind and try to separate three distinctly different time frames.

1. The article discusses Lloyd talking with MCP on 1 April 1975 and stating that he was at the mall on 25 March 1975 and that he saw Sheila and Katherine get into a car with a man. He did not state that he was with them in the car and he does not identify the man by name.

2. The article also mentions a recent afidavit which states that MCP investigators interviewed Lloyd in prison in 2013 and that he admited being at the mall, riding in a car with the the girls, his uncle Dick, and his cousin Tommy. Further, that he later walked in on his uncle in the porcess of raping one of the girls. It was this information that police used to obtain search warrants in 2014.

3. The Washington post reporter also states that Lloyd sent the paper a letter in 2014 denying any involvement whatsoever in the Lyon sisters' disappearance.

The Washington Post article jumps all over different time frames, and is poorly written in my opinion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...dc5a4c-b872-11e4-a200-c008a01a6692_story.html
Hidden, starting in the MIDDLE of the second to last paragraph is Lloyd showing up on Taylor Mountain in the spring of 1975:

"A relative of the Welches told detectives that she recalled Lloyd Welch visiting Parker unannounced in the spring of 1975, according to the affidavits. When contacted by a reporter, that relative has declined to discuss the case.

In the affidavits, detectives described how they were able to link Lloyd and Richard Welch to adjacent parcels of land in the Taylors Mountain area of Bedford County. (Over the years, the area also has been spelled Taylor’s Mountain and Taylor Mountain.) One parcel is owned by Richard Welch. A larger parcel next to it was formerly owned by Allen and Elizabeth Parker, who is Richard Welch’s sister."

I assume "Parker" is Elizabeth Parker, who is Richard Welch's Sister.
Lloyds unexpected visit to the area should not be confused with another "unannounced trip to the area" which I think was in 2014, from the same wandering Washington Post article:

"Relatives of the couple in Bedford County later told detectives that after the news conference, Richard and his wife, Patricia, made several unannounced trips to the area. “Richard and Patricia Welch have also been extremely interested in whether these relatives were contacted by investigators,” detectives wrote, “and what information they provided to the investigators.” "

 

[simplifymylife2014]

It really makes you wonder WHAT those "unannounced visits" (in 1975 by LLW to Bedford and the visits there in 2014 by RAW, Sr. and his wife PW) WERE FOR and WHAT THEY WERE DOING THERE!!

 

[beachlvr0810]

Taylor's mountain is outside of Roanoke I think.

Yes...Taylor's Mountain is located in Thaxton...between Roanoke and Bedford.

 

[beachlvr0810]

The Washington Post article jumps all over different time frames, and is poorly written in my opinion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...dc5a4c-b872-11e4-a200-c008a01a6692_story.html
Hidden, starting in the MIDDLE of the second to last paragraph is Lloyd showing up on Taylor Mountain in the spring of 1975:

"A relative of the Welches told detectives that she recalled Lloyd Welch visiting Parker unannounced in the spring of 1975, according to the affidavits. When contacted by a reporter, that relative has declined to discuss the case.

In the affidavits, detectives described how they were able to link Lloyd and Richard Welch to adjacent parcels of land in the Taylors Mountain area of Bedford County. (Over the years, the area also has been spelled Taylor’s Mountain and Taylor Mountain.) One parcel is owned by Richard Welch. A larger parcel next to it was formerly owned by Allen and Elizabeth Parker, who is Richard Welch’s sister."

I assume "Parker" is Elizabeth Parker, who is Richard Welch's Sister.
Lloyds unexpected visit to the area should not be confused with another "unannounced trip to the area" which I think was in 2014, from the same wandering Washington Post article:

"Relatives of the couple in Bedford County later told detectives that after the news conference, Richard and his wife, Patricia, made several unannounced trips to the area. “Richard and Patricia Welch have also been extremely interested in whether these relatives were contacted by investigators,” detectives wrote, “and what information they provided to the investigators.” "

Yes..."Parker" is Elizabeth "Lizzie" Welch Parker.

 

[WaynezWorld]

I think they did. I am wondering if LLW looked like that on 4/1/1975 when he spoke to police. It is possible he cut his hair between the time of the abduction and his attempt to collect the reward money on 4/1/1975.

 

[WaynezWorld]

I think that is a great question.

I find it reasonable to believe that relatives of RAW recall his visit in 2014 and considered it strange or suspicious, though it is kind of odd for someone to remember a visit from LLW nearly 40 years ago unless the circumstances were really odd also.

I would be asking suspects and relatives how often LLW and RAW visited the area over the years.

Was it a regular occurrence?
How much time would elapse between visits?
Who did or who would they visit there?

 

[WaynezWorld]

QUESTION for the posters in Thaxton/Taylor Mountain area.....

Is RAW's land vacant?

Is it used for anything or is there an inhabitable structure on the property?

Is there any evidence or recollection of LLW visiting the property between 1975 and his last major arrest in the 90's?