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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would be interested in the following information.

Who actually knew who? Obviously the vandals knew one another. But who individually did each know other than casual contact?

What were the actual times that disprove anyone was not involved? For example, when was the concert? When did it end? After that where did they go? What time did they go there? Who can provide evidence they were other than the Delmar residence? Are they reliable alibi witnesses? How is that known?

Not to put too fine a point on this, but Cox was known to be working the neighborhood prior to the abductions. For reasons unclear to me, why did he concoct an alibi he didn’t even need and that was disavowed at the grand jury?

His back-up alibi was that he was supposed to be at his parents and they provided an alibi that he was at their home and would not have the opportunity to have been involved. Were they warching his bedroom? Could he simply have climbed out of a first floor bedroom window and returned after the women were abducted?

The upshot of this is that I would like to see a firm timeline where all these individuals were and how solid their alibis were.

I will give my own example. At this time I was 1,800 miles away near Missoula, Montana visiting relatives. Although I have no alibi I had no motive nor prior contact with any of the victims.

What is the actual proof af anything here that could establish any of the obvious suspects could not have participated?

If there is, I would like to move onto the alternate theory that an unknown serial killer or killers committed this crime.
 
Last edited:
Missouri Mule said:
I would be interested in the following information.

Who actually knew who? Obviously the vandals knew one another. But who individually did each know other than casual contact?

What were the actual times that disprove anyone was not involved? For example, when was the concert? When did it end? After that where did they go? What time did they go there? Who can provide evidence they were other than the Delmar residence? Are they reliable alibi witnesses? How is that known?

Not to put too fine a point on this, but Cox was known to be working the neighborhood prior to the abductions. For reasons unclear to me, why did he concoct an alibi he didn’t even need and that was disavowed at the grand jury?

His back-up alibi was that he was supposed to be at his parents and they provided an alibi that he was at their home and would not have the opportunity to have been involved. Were they warching his bedroom? Could he simply have climbed out of a first floor bedroom window and returned after the women were abducted?

The upshot of this is that I would like to see a firm timeline where all these individuals were and how solid their alibis were.

I will give my own example. At this time I was 1,800 miles away near Missoula, Montana visiting relatives. Although I have no alibi I had no motive nor prior contact with any of the victims.

What is the actual proof af anything here that could establish any of the obvious suspects could not have participated?

If there is, I would like to move onto the alternate theory that an unknown serial killer or killers committed this crime.
Click to expand...
Cox had no connection to the women. It would have been a random crime. And his MO was one single female, not multiple. As is the case with most sexual assaults. I believe this case was planned and with more than one involved (James Wright) so that rules out Cox to me. Stacy connection was weak and the last minute decision to leave Battlefield for Delmar makes no sense when it comes to Cox.......

I would like to know if Suzie talking to the cops set this whole thing in motion. Where some one-offs to the crowd Garrison knew would have been ticked off at her talking when the 3 GRs were involved in some of their dealings.
 
Last edited:
MooseMeMuch said:
okay, this is confusing....Garrison had a party where someone heard about a burial? :confused:

LE might be interested in said 'burial'...
Click to expand...
What is confusing? This is old news.

Garrison told detective Doug Thomas that a friend confessed to the killing at a party and told him where they were buried. Obviously they dug in the wrong spot. But why is he the one Doug/SPD leaned on so heavily and made frequent trips to discuss things with?

Asher said he believed a ruse was used to get access to the house. Wright says "comings and goings" were known to the perps. If a ruse had to be use, it makes sense that someone with vague familiarity with the women entered the house saying he needed to talk to someone? Or just forced the door open. It's also possible the perpetrators lured Sherrill out of the house (Apco sighting). Perhaps what is meant when "ruse" is theorized to have been used.
 
asyousay said:
Is it Garrison where none of what he has ever said has been proven true though?

He claimed to know stuff but nothing has ever come from his so called knowledge.
Click to expand...
SPD said despite the bodies not being where Garrison led them, he still holds information not known to the public about the case.

Also in the article "Inmate can still be of help"

Dec. 12, 1993 Newsleader
 
SpringfieldMan341 said:
SPD said despite the bodies not being where Garrison led them, he still holds information not known to the public about the case.

Also in the article "Inmate can still be of help"

Dec. 12, 1993 Newsleader
Click to expand...


So if he does hold knowledge then why has he never been arrrested?

If he has knowledge that only a person involved in the crime would know then it makes no sense he was never arrested to me.
 
asyousay said:
So if he does hold knowledge then why has he never been arrrested?

If he has knowledge that only a person involved in the crime would know then it makes no sense he was never arrested to me.
Click to expand...
Why would he be arrested? Especially if cops can't prove it?

"We know but we can't prove" is something SPD said a lot from late 92 to the GJ in 1994.

His word must be important if they went to two dig sites based on information he gave. He was a notorious criminal who had stolen weapons on him. He had two buddies who were ex-cons also brought to the grand jury. Along with his girlfriend, her daughter, and their roommate. Along with Mike and Dusty.
 
SpringfieldMan341 said:
Why would he be arrested? Especially if cops can't prove it?

"We know but we can't prove" is something SPD said a lot from late 92 to the GJ in 1994.
Click to expand...


If he has knowledge then obviously the cops don’t need to prove it. He has already shown his hand by revealing stuff that only somebody involved could know, no?
 
asyousay said:
If he has knowledge then obviously the cops don’t need to prove it. He has already shown his hand by revealing stuff that only somebody involved could knows, no?
Click to expand...
But they DO need to prove it. That's how a trial and our justice system works.
 
Physical proof is required - bodies would be a start. Eyewitness testimony cannot be compelled or even considered firm evidence until there is some thing to back it up. During high profile investigations a lot of people say things that aren't so to make themselves just a bit more important by knowing things or they confuse dates trying to help or they're just liars and there are more of those walking around than you can even imagine.
 
Thread is staying closed until further notice for two reasons - 1) we have a user presenting as a VI who has not been verified yet, 2) personalized/rude/confrontational posting continues.

Feel free to message me for an update if we reach Tuesday 11/13 with no further update.
 
Hi Everyone,

I would like to welcome our new verified family member, Irisheyesofblue is a verified insider.

While you may ask questions of Irisheyesofblue, you cannot be rude, make flippant comments, or in anyway harass a verified person on Websleuths. It is up to you to believe
a verified member or not. If you do not believe a verified member then we ask you scroll by the post rather than try and argue with this person

A verified poster is allowed to post without providing links. In this case, since we have a verified family member she can post about things connected to the case without providing links.

The thread is now open.

Thank you,
Tricia
 
Tricia said:
Hi Everyone,

I would like to welcome our new verified family member, Irisheyesofblue is a verified insider.

While you may ask questions of Irisheyesofblue, you cannot be rude, make flippant comments, or in anyway harass a verified person on Websleuths. It is up to you to believe
a verified member or not. If you do not believe a verified member then we ask you scroll by the post rather than try and argue with this person

A verified poster is allowed to post without providing links. In this case, since we have a verified family member she can post about things connected to the case without providing links.

The thread is now open.

Thank you,
Tricia
Click to expand...
Tricia, can you clarify if this is a family member of one of the victims, or of another person potentially connected to the case? Thanks!
 
<modsnip - quoted post removed>
Does your Husband or his friends remember what Suzie was like and who she hung out with?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
wasnt it mike clay who stated to police he hoped the *advertiser censored* were dead?
I dont know that you shall get the answers you seek from this source @cherrymeg if that is correct.
 
cherrymeg said:
Does your Husband or his friends remember what Suzie was like and who she hung out with?
Click to expand...

They did not hang around each other very much. It was mostly just her and Dusty when they were together, but Mike said she was very nice the times he did see her. Mike and his friends back then liked to drink and smoke pot, but she was not into that so they did their own thing.
 
irisheyesofblue said:
They did not hang around each other very much. It was mostly just her and Dusty when they were together, but Mike said she was very nice the times he did see her. Mike and his friends back then liked to drink and smoke pot, but she was not into that so they did their own thing.
Click to expand...
so irsh if your mike thought she very nice where does that tid bit come from?
is it a different mike ?
what can you tell us about that .
thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 233 more.
Total: 3,946 (members: 234, guests: 3,712)

Online statistics

Members online
234
Guests online
3,712
Total visitors
3,946
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,333
Messages
17,967,593
Members
228,749
Latest member
knownstranger07
Back
Top