MA MA - Molly Bish, 16, Warren, 27 Jun 2000

New Posts

somequestions said:
If there is a DNA profile to help identify a potential suspect in Molly Bish's case, then that also probably means that there is a DNA profile to help exclude possible persons of interest known to the investigation. People like the sand truck driver, the work supervisor, and other potential persons of interest that have come up during the course of the investigation could be excluded based on this DNA evidence. I am guessing they probably already have been.

The only thing I really ever came to any sort of personal conclusion about in this case was the possible location of a suspect. When Molly Bish's bathing suit was found by the hunter and the ex-police officer detective, they said they went to the town of Ware to get the police and report it. That is where I would have thought her killer lived at the time because it seems like it is the closest residential area. Whiskey Hill does not seem like the type of place someone would just happen upon to place a body, in my opinion. The news said this new main suspect Sumner lived in Spencer, MA although maybe he did not live in Spencer at the time of the crime.

I was always a little suspicious of the work supervisor, but mainly because of the story of him first learning of Molly Bish's disappearance at the pond. He then radioed the police with Molly Bish's two way radio at 11:44 am from the pond area. Then he must have left and ran into her brother at the hardware store without mentioning Molly was missing?

My theory was that the work supervisor drove to somewhere near Ware, Palmer area to drop off the lifeguard, then drove back to the pond, but stopped at the hardware store in case anyone noticed he was not painting the fence.

When you do not have all the information regarding facts and sequences it is so hard to correctly understand a story. A person's reaction to a given situation is not evidence. At least now in this case people that may have been suspected for a long time can be cleared.

Hopefully this is the year Molly Bish's case comes to a conclusion.
Click to expand...

If you do a Whitepages (or similar) search on the suspect's name, you will see that he lived in multiple places all around the area, including some that are 18 minutes or less from Whiskey Hill. I think he was close enough to be aware of the area, especially if he ever had an interest in hunting or knew people who did.

Also, according to this article: Molly Bish murder suspect’s family demands Worcester DA provide proof; Early cites information from ‘last several months’ - The Boston Globe

We learn that while he is newly named as a suspect, he was not new to investigators. His family indicated that he was already on LE's radar 4 years after the crime. Whether that is because of his locality and previous convictions for kidnapping and rape, or because LE had tips on him, or some other reason, we do not know right now.
 
When Molly Bish's remains were found, I wondered whether or not she had been buried on Whiskey Hill in Palmer? It seems so unlikely her body was above ground for nearly 3 years.

The reason I wondered that was because in order to bury a body on the side of a hill, I think you would need a shovel. But like so many things in this case, the abduction site was next to a cemetery and workers there probably know how to dig.

That is the thing about Molly Bish's case. It could literally be anyone who potentially drove a white car. Even though it looks like the case is solved, since the person of interest is dead, it is probably another question that will go unanswered. It is the little unknown details that cause me to keep wondering about certain questions in this case.
 
somequestions said:
When Molly Bish's remains were found, I wondered whether or not she had been buried on Whiskey Hill in Palmer? It seems so unlikely her body was above ground for nearly 3 years.

The reason I wondered that was because in order to bury a body on the side of a hill, I think you would need a shovel. But like so many things in this case, the abduction site was next to a cemetery and workers there probably know how to dig.

That is the thing about Molly Bish's case. It could literally be anyone who potentially drove a white car. Even though it looks like the case is solved, since the person of interest is dead, it is probably another question that will go unanswered. It is the little unknown details that cause me to keep wondering about certain questions in this case.
Click to expand...

I dont beleive she was buried, buried bodies, remain pretty intact for the most part, only something like 2 dozen bones, were recovered from the area indicating a good amount of animal activity.

Its rare these types will take the time to dig a grave ,(takes too much time, and is pretty obvious) they usually hide the body with whatever is available , like branches, or leaves etc , then they distance themselves from the scene for a few days then they usually return usually subsequently until the remains either begin to decompose , or until it is discovered

Which is why I say again over the years there is someone out there who most likely saw an individual in that area during either a return visit or around the time of the murder, but they just dismissed it or never put it together,
 
Kell1 said:
I dont beleive she was buried, buried bodies, remain pretty intact for the most part, only something like 2 dozen bones, were recovered from the area indicating a good amount of animal activity.

Its rare these types will take the time to dig a grave ,(takes too much time, and is pretty obvious) they usually hide the body with whatever is available , like branches, or leaves etc , then they distance themselves from the scene for a few days then they usually return usually subsequently until the remains either begin to decompose , or until it is discovered

Which is why I say again over the years there is someone out there who most likely saw an individual in that area during either a return visit or around the time of the murder, but they just dismissed it or never put it together,
Click to expand...

Mulling over the good information you posted here...would it be fair to say that another reason these types don't often bury the body is that so many of them do want to/plan to return to the body in the days after the crime? Perhaps they want access to the body in a way that burial does not afford? Just speculating.
 
Yemelyan said:
Mulling over the good information you posted here...would it be fair to say that another reason these types don't often bury the body is that so many of them do want to/plan to return to the body in the days after the crime? Perhaps they want access to the body in a way that burial does not afford? Just speculating.
Click to expand...

perhaps though I’ve never seen that in any studies done on these types of cases

I know that some have engaged in necrophilia upon returning to the body as it was undiscovered prior to decomposition

what is most surprising in these types of cases post offense is the percentage of and frequency of returning to the victims body Something like 85% of child abduction murders involve returning to the victims remains on multiple occasions

I will add however I don’t believe that, they make that conscious decision in the majority of these cases they usually want to commit the act and then get away as quickly as possible

Returning to the victim is almost always a secondary component
 
Last edited:
In the case of Abigail Williams and Liberty German, one of the interesting things was how eyewitnesses reported seeing people they thought were bridge guy even though the timing was way off. The people they were reporting were people who were there later looking for the girls.

The reason I thought of this was the sighting of the white car in the Molly Bish case. I decided to make a list of all the people I know of that may have seen a white car the morning of Molly Bish's abduction or the day before. I know the list is probably bigger than the one I have below.

1. Her mother(on June 26th the day before)
2. Friends who saw a man at the beach who had a white car (in the week leading to the disappearance)
3. Sand truck driver (day of June 27th)
4. Woman near car wash (day of June 27th)
5. Cemetery workers (day of June 27th and previous days)

Unfortunately we do not know when each of these people were first interviewed or first mentioned to police they saw a white car. Even if the case is solved and the guy in the white car was found, that was the last question I had about it.
 
If the picture of the beach chair setup on 48 hours is correct and not a re-creation(?), then I could see Molly Bish taking off her sandals and putting the water bottle in the heel of the right one as the murderer approached her to ask for a band-aid. The left sandal is left in front of the chair. The first aid kit is left open. She is abducted.

But if the information I read is correct. the whistle and the police radio that she used to make her daily radio call to the police were still in her bookbag on the bench behind her. The only thing that makes sense is that there are not as many sticks in the sand near the woods as the beach I went to.
 
Why did the white car return to the Commins Pond parking lot on the day of the abduction?

My guess is that the original plan was to take Molly Bish out through the regular parking lot if no one was around. Then he moved to putting the plan in motion by approaching from the cemetery.
The reason this was always a little strange to me was the cemetery worker's statement that they saw a white car parked in the cemetery the same day, I am assuming in the morning timeframe before the abduction took place.

That is the part I thought was strange. If a person did indeed do the planning to make sure that "plan B" would work, once they saw the layout of the land in the beach and the cemetery, would they really have still tried to abduct her through the parking lot?
 
somequestions said:
Why did the white car return to the Commins Pond parking lot on the day of the abduction?

My guess is that the original plan was to take Molly Bish out through the regular parking lot if no one was around. Then he moved to putting the plan in motion by approaching from the cemetery.
The reason this was always a little strange to me was the cemetery worker's statement that they saw a white car parked in the cemetery the same day, I am assuming in the morning timeframe before the abduction took place.

That is the part I thought was strange. If a person did indeed do the planning to make sure that "plan B" would work, once they saw the layout of the land in the beach and the cemetery, would they really have still tried to abduct her through the parking lot?
Click to expand...

A lot of assumptions here....

We assume that the witness who supposedly saw a white car in the regular parking lot before she arrived was correct on what day he saw this. It might have been the day before - the same day her mother saw the white car.

We assume that the cemetery worker saw the same car (it could have been a different white car visiting the cemetery), and we assume it was parked there before the abduction took place. Instead -- if it was even the same car -- he might have abducted her through the regular parking lot, and driven to the more secluded cemetery to assault her. If I'm not mistaken, a lot of times the actual physical assault occurs in the abductor's vehicle. The cemetery worker might have witnessed the aftermath of a crime instead of a person stalking/planning how they would do it.

There is almost no point in getting hung up on the flow of the crime because not enough information is publicly available. But you can be certain that police have more information, and a better idea than we do.
 
Yemelyan said:
A lot of assumptions here....

We assume that the witness who supposedly saw a white car in the regular parking lot before she arrived was correct on what day he saw this. It might have been the day before - the same day her mother saw the white car.

We assume that the cemetery worker saw the same car (it could have been a different white car visiting the cemetery), and we assume it was parked there before the abduction took place. Instead -- if it was even the same car -- he might have abducted her through the regular parking lot, and driven to the more secluded cemetery to assault her. If I'm not mistaken, a lot of times the actual physical assault occurs in the abductor's vehicle. The cemetery worker might have witnessed the aftermath of a crime instead of a person stalking/planning how they would do it.

There is almost no point in getting hung up on the flow of the crime because not enough information is publicly available. But you can be certain that police have more information, and a better idea than we do.
Click to expand...

I thought the Unsolved Mysteries episode on this case said a truck delivering sand was in the parking lot on the day of the abduction. But I think on the 48 hours Mystery episode her mother said the parking lot was empty when she arrived with Molly on the day of the abduction, June 27, 2000. I do not know what information is correct.

The information in this case is so confusing. What is a re-creation? What is not? What info is correct? What info is not?

I keep trying to understand all the sightings of the white car, even if it was not the same white car seen each time. I only think what I do about the white car in the Commins Pond parking lot because of how desolate the pond area seems to be that possibly the same white car would be there around the same time as the abduction took place?

Molly's friends at the pond said that in the previous week a strange guy in a white car had been hanging around the pond. But then those friends probably would have pointed to the sketch in the case as being the man in the white car her mother saw on June 26, 2000, the day before.

I only get hung up on a little detail like the white car being seen in the Commins Pond parking lot on June 27th, 2000, a few minutes before Molly Bish arrived, because I cannot explain it, even if the case has already possibly been solved.
 
If the picture of the crime scene at Commins Pond from the 48 Hours mystery episode is correct, then there is one thing I thought strange about it. The right sandal is next to the chair and has a Poland Springs water bottle in the right heel and the other left sandal is in front of the chair. It appears as if Molly Bish was abducted between placing the two sandals next to each other. We know she probably placed the right sandal next to the chair because of the water bottle being in the right heel of that sandal.

But yet the theory is that she may have been abducted after she opened the first aid kit to potentially provide help to someone who approached her. The first aid kit was left open.

I thought it was strange neither action was completed i.e. placing the left sandal next to the right one or closing the first aid kit if it was at either of those points that she was abducted.

I wondered if it was possible if maybe Molly Bish was knocked unconscious, dragged up the hill behind Commins Pond and left near the top and that might explain the dog scent and her being able to disappear so quickly? But then what about the white car?
 
The crime scene picture from 48 Hours Mystery is what is strange: left sandal facing the water, the right sandal with the water bottle in the heel facing the woods.

I thought if Molly Bish was knocked unconscious somehow and someone tried to drag her, the sandal or sandals might fall off in the sand. What kind of abductor would care about retrieving them? I thought someone might do something like that if they were wearing gloves.
 
lowes123 said:
Has there been any word about when the DNA from the current POI's son will be back? I haven't heard anything.
Click to expand...

This brand-new article says that LE are still waiting on testing that's being done both by an outside lab and the state lab:

www.wcvb.com

Bish family hoping for answers as wait for DNA test results drags on

16-year-old Molly Bish vanished from her lifeguard shift in Warren on June 27, 2000. Her remains were found years later in the woods a few miles away.
www.wcvb.com www.wcvb.com

The article says they are using the DNA of Sumner's incarcerated son to try to link Sumner to the crime because even though Sumner was a convicted rapist, his DNA sample is not in CODIS and cannot be directly compared to evidence from crime scenes connected to Molly's murder.
 
Yemelyan said:
This brand-new article says that LE are still waiting on testing that's being done both by an outside lab and the state lab:

www.wcvb.com

Bish family hoping for answers as wait for DNA test results drags on

16-year-old Molly Bish vanished from her lifeguard shift in Warren on June 27, 2000. Her remains were found years later in the woods a few miles away.
www.wcvb.com www.wcvb.com

The article says they are using the DNA of Sumner's incarcerated son to try to link Sumner to the crime because even though Sumner was a convicted rapist, his DNA sample is not in CODIS and cannot be directly compared to evidence from crime scenes connected to Molly's murder.
Click to expand...
Why wasn't his DNA in CODIS? This case may have been solved much sooner if it had been.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 113 more.
Total: 3,485 (members: 114, guests: 3,371)

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
3,371
Total visitors
3,485
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,294
Messages
17,966,764
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top