Missouri - The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #9

Discussion in 'The Springfield Three' started by tlcya, Jul 5, 2016.

  1. SpringfieldMan341

    SpringfieldMan341 Active Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    211
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ah, I figured this was the case--those were the written statements.

    Not grounded in truth and subject to cross-examination. So in fact, the cops saying he was believed to have been in town could have in fact been true. Going by the police both times here. The papers didn't misprint it.
     
  2. asyousay

    asyousay Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,416
    Likes Received:
    1,233
    Trophy Points:
    113

    See I would buy this as all teenagers are hot headed and get jealous. That’s perfectly normal.

    But Janelle obviously knew (imo) those girls hadn’t gone off. The 3 cars in the drive way the first big clue and the fact Stacey’s clothing was all out in the open in Suzie’s room. They let themselves in to look around to see where the women were and obviously they checked the bedrooms. That’s place number 1 and with all the cars outside they expected them inside.

    That’s why Janelle’s story has more holes than a colander.

    Stacey’s mum even said the first thing she noticed when she walked into suzies room was Stacey’s clothes laid out. So is Janelle registered blind?
     
    MooseMeMuch and flute4peace like this.
  3. SpringfieldMan341

    SpringfieldMan341 Active Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    211
    Trophy Points:
    43
    The behavior of Janelle doesn't even come remotely close to the behavior of those who were actual suspects, and stole skulls and lit them on fire to steal gold teeth from another skull for $30.

    Have you heard of anything like that, and exactly that, before or since? And one of those dated a girl whose mom and her went missing months later?
     
  4. asyousay

    asyousay Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,416
    Likes Received:
    1,233
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Yes, a really weird sick crime. I had never even heard of such a thing before.

    How twisted and desperate would you have to be to rob off the dead. That’s why I have always said they needed looking into more. Anybody who has such a warped personality is certainly capable of murder.
     
  5. irisheyesofblue

    irisheyesofblue Verified Family Member Springfield Three Case

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Yep, done. Gave you far more info than you deserve. I will only put a fact out if you tell something not true. Other than that I will not answer anymore of your questions because it won’t matter anyway.
     
    MooseMeMuch likes this.
  6. MooseMeMuch

    MooseMeMuch "It wasn't me! It was the one-armed man."

    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    93
    My 'theory' would be bolstered with a 2nd call.
    Did you read about a 2nd call on here or do you have another source? (excluding Topix)
    Thanks :)
     
    flute4peace likes this.
  7. SpringfieldMan341

    SpringfieldMan341 Active Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    211
    Trophy Points:
    43
    The second call--only source is SPD's website (11:15 call)

    Janet Oliveras said she called Sherrill at 9:30. The details of the second call are not publicly known.
     
    asyousay and MooseMeMuch like this.
  8. MooseMeMuch

    MooseMeMuch "It wasn't me! It was the one-armed man."

    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Cool :cool:
     
  9. irisheyesofblue

    irisheyesofblue Verified Family Member Springfield Three Case

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    43
    “The crowd and the GJ3 suspects and the Garrison party where he heard about the burial--it's all part of this, isn't it?[/QUOTE]

    What does this even mean?

    Joe was not there. I know Dusty did not do it for one thing if he did everyone would of known it long ago because he likes to talk. Believe me they were questioned many times and Mike actually reached out to the police in April about someone on one of these pages. They never met or know the GJ3 and Mike only met Garrison once or twice.

    Also motive? If you say Suzie’s statement and she was set to testify, I have the witness list, she is NOT on it. Plus both Joe and Dusty talked before her and Joe took a deal to testify against both Mike and Dusty. Suzie’s statement is just as good as the officers that took Dusty’s. I would think Joe would of been a little higher on the list if these people did not like people talking to police.
     
    cherrymeg likes this.
  10. MooseMeMuch

    MooseMeMuch "It wasn't me! It was the one-armed man."

    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    93
    What does this even mean?

    Joe was not there. I know Dusty did not do it for one thing if he did everyone would of known it long ago because he likes to talk. Believe me they were questioned many times and Mike actually reached out to the police in April about someone on one of these pages. They never met or know the GJ3 and Mike only met Garrison once or twice.

    Also motive? If you say Suzie’s statement and she was set to testify, I have the witness list, she is NOT on it. Plus both Joe and Dusty talked before her and Joe took a deal to testify against both Mike and Dusty. Suzie’s statement is just as good as the officers that took Dusty’s. I would think Joe would of been a little higher on the list if these people did not like people talking to police.[/QUOTE]

    Dusty was noted as being quite 'chatty'...not sure which LE rep. referred to them as being chatty and couldn't keep a secret.

    It was on one of the first newscasts...it wasn't Asher. Darker hair, glasses and a mustache...everybody on the force except the females. :rolleyes:
     
    Betty P likes this.
  11. Missouri Mule

    Missouri Mule Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,128
    Likes Received:
    517
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dusty was noted as being quite 'chatty'...not sure which LE rep. referred to them as being chatty and couldn't keep a secret.

    It was on one of the first newscasts...it wasn't Asher. Darker hair, glasses and a mustache...everybody on the force except the females. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    How is it that we know that Joeseph Riedel was NOT there that night the women were taken? I'm not clear on that.
     
  12. irisheyesofblue

    irisheyesofblue Verified Family Member Springfield Three Case

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Dusty was not called and he too had a statement.
     
  13. irisheyesofblue

    irisheyesofblue Verified Family Member Springfield Three Case

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    43
    How is it that we know that Joeseph Riedel was NOT there that night the women were taken? I'm not clear on that.[/QUOTE]

    He was in IL. They had where he worked and that he was staying with his mother. It is not hard for the police to look into these things.
     
    cherrymeg, Catmammy and MooseMeMuch like this.
  14. SpringfieldMan341

    SpringfieldMan341 Active Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    211
    Trophy Points:
    43
    The police also said Joe was believed to have been in town.

    So the next question is this: why are the cops getting so many details wrong?
     
    Missouri Mule likes this.
  15. MooseMeMuch

    MooseMeMuch "It wasn't me! It was the one-armed man."

    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    93
    If interested.....some of us are pushing to get the Cold Justice team to look at this ice-cold case.

    Submit the case on their 'tip' site:

    Cold Justice Tip Line

    Thank you for your support in advance :)
     
  16. irisheyesofblue

    irisheyesofblue Verified Family Member Springfield Three Case

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Depending on when statements are said maybe certain statements were not verified yet. New evidence can change things. Also police are allowed to mislead to get information, it happens all the time. Sometimes they are stating what they thought is true until they find out different. Many reasons. All I know for sure is what is in the file.
     
  17. irisheyesofblue

    irisheyesofblue Verified Family Member Springfield Three Case

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    43
    That is not in the file. That is from a phone call to the police dept.
     
  18. SpringfieldMan341

    SpringfieldMan341 Active Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    211
    Trophy Points:
    43
    This was July 1,1992 when they said that.

    What is the date on your statements?

    Also your statement is just what he said. Not what actually happened. That is key here. And there's still many questions.......

    Why did Mike decide to come back? Why did Mike go with Joe to IL? If he was running from the vandal case, that makes sense, but why did he come back? And why would he be around Garrison after Garrison just got out of jail (rhetorical)?

    If cops questioned Mike (and they did in June) why did they announce that Joe was believed to have been in town on July 1?
     
  19. flute4peace

    flute4peace Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,277
    Likes Received:
    7,240
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Good points, and I should have made more clear that I do find her actions to be questionable & puzzling. I was just trying to look at it from a moody teenager in that era viewpoint. I was only a few years older than that at the time, and I’m not sure my mind would have immediately gone to abduction/missing the way it would now. Especially if I had been (speculating) coming off a big night of partying and (speculating again) already jealous/mad about Suzie choosing to spend the night with Stacy at the last minute. So yeah maybe a little blind/oblivious to what the situation actually was.

    I definitely do not think she handled it well, regardless of the reasons behind the way she acted.

    MOO
     
  20. SpringfieldMan341

    SpringfieldMan341 Active Member

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    211
    Trophy Points:
    43
    We're supposed to believe he was in IL for some reason.......
    Yet the cops say on July 1, 1992 he was in town.

    "Riedel left town for Illinois shortly after the women vanished from
    Levitt's 1717 E. Delmar St. house on June 7. He was arrested there,
    and returned to Springfield a month ago. He remains in jail in
    connection with the Feb. 21 mausoleum break-in at Maple Park
    Cemetery.
    Police Sgt. David Asher would not say Wednesday whether Riedel has
    been questioned about the women. End quote. News-Leader, Sept. 17,
    1992."

    So Riedel left after they were VANISHED. It means he came back from the time Mike and he left town.

    That article is from September 17 1992. If we're to believe Michelle that the cops "got all that right and checked those things" then why are they saying this as late as September? As well as on July 1.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2018
    Missouri Mule likes this.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice