"Tape Recorder Man"

[steveP120]

My post was not about random weird events, but rather specifically about perverts or predators approaching the two girls prior to their disappearance. And I do consider the Tape Recorder Man to be a pervert and a predator, not just a random guy with a strange hobby.

At this point, there is no evidence that Tape Recorder Man was a predator or even a pervert. Tape recorder man could be 1) a guy with a weird hobby, 2) a "pervert" who liked children, but did nothing illegal since talking or looking is not illegal, or 3) the much rarer extreme predator who not only molested children but abducted and killed them.

Regardless of the odds, the police should look into any possible connections. Perhaps Tape Recorder Man met Long Hair Man at the mall, noticed they had a mutual interest in children and became friends, but I doubt it. If my reading of the news is correct, the police never found the Wheaton Tape Recorder Man, although they found P.G. County Tape Recorder Man who had an alibi?

But now that the police have identified (or reidentified) Welch as the Long Hair Man, they could check if Welch had any older friends fitting the description of TRM. Now that Welch, after decades of crimes, has revealed himself to be a sexual predator, the police should be investigating all aspects of his life anyway?

 

[Richard]

The Tape Recorder Man (TRM) came to the attention of Montgomery County Police (MCP) in the afternoon of Friday, 28 March 1975, when the parents of a 13 year-old boy referred to as "Jimmy" (not his real name) brought him to the station to relate a story that he had already told his parents. That was that he had been at Wheaton Plaza on Tuesday, 25 March 1975 with a friend riding bicycles when he happened to see Sheila and Kate Lyon (whom he knew from school) in front of the Orange Bowl Piza Take-Out talking to a man with a microphone and tape recorder.

"Jimmy had told his mother a day or two earlier about he encounter when the girls' disappearance was reported in the news, but on Friday, when his mother began asking more specific questions of him, it became clear to her that the information should be brought to the police.

"Jimmy" related his story over a period of two and a half hours and assisted MCP officer Davis Morton with a composite drawing, known now as the TRM sketch.

MCP did not immediately release the sketch or story. They first went to Wheaton Plaza and interviewed people there in hopes that someone might recognize the man in the sketch. Nobody that they interviewed recognized the man or had seen him.

Late in the day on Monday, 31 March 1975, police held a press conference and released information about the Tape Recorder Man, including the first of two sketches. By the next morning, 1 April 1975, the sketch was all over the local news on TV and in the newspapers.

Many people responded to MCP's request for assistance, including three Wheaton Plaza employees who had seen a man fitting the description and sketch on Monday, 24 March - the day before the girls went missing.

Several other people also reported seeing a man that they believed was TRM. All reports were for other days prior to 25 March 1975. There were other sightings in Montgomery County at Wheaton Plaza and at White Oak Mall.

A number of people reported seeing such a man at Iverson Mall, Marlow Heights Shopping Center, and Bowie Shopping Center - all in Prince Georges County. The Iverson Mall/Marlow Heights (adjacent malls) sightings took place on Saturday, 22 March 1975 three days before the girls disappeared.

MCP interviewed all of the people who reported seeing a Tape Recorder Man. They were showed the composite TRM sketch and all agreed that it was fairly close. A few suggested changes in the mouth and chin area, and Davis Morton made some changes to his origional sketch. This second sketch was released a few days later, but it still had the same 28 March 75 date and serial number as the origional (first) sketch.

The Prince Georges County sightings were significant because they expanded the investigation to the south (Montgomery County and Prince Georges County of Maryland are adjacent and border on Washington DC.) MCP interviewed at least three men in PG County by the end of the first day, according to reports in the Washington Post.

Eventually, a man called MCP investigators claiming that he was the man with the tape recorder at Iverson Mall. He stated that he had never done anything with a tape recorder in Montgomery County, and he had an alabi for Tuesday, 25 March 1975, stating that he was at a hospital due to an accident involving a US Government Vehicle. MCP quietly dismissed the PG mall sightings and let the guy go. The man stated that he knew that what he was doing was probably perverted and did not want his family or friends to know about it. Police kept it quiet and never held any press conferences about it. It was not until I interviewed an MCP cold case officer around 2000 that I learned about this so-called PG TRM, or TRM Number Two.

Was MCP correct to dismiss the possible connection in PG County, based on this guy's "confession"? There are a number of possible scenarios.

- It is possible that there were two guys who looked and dressed very similar, each with a tape recorder, a love of young girls, and an attraction to area malls. Totally independant of each other and each sticking strictly to his own county.

- It is possible that the self confessed PG TRM was lying and only wanted to "get into the act" by going to the police. Did MCP photograph him? Did they take his tape recorder and tapes? Did they thoroughly check out his alabi?

- It is possible that the actual abductor of the Lyon girls lived in Prince Georges County and that he had used the TRM ruse at Wheaton Plaza - and may have practiced it in PG as well. Could he have gotten a friend to pose as the PG-Only TRM in order to get MCP to stop their PG County probe?

What ever the reason, MCP seems to have given up on their PG County search and then later dropped the TRM suspect all together. They did not release or even refer to the TRM sketches after April 1975.

In 1982, a new potential suspect appeared on the radar - Raymond Mileski. He had murdered his wife and son in November 1977 and was serving a life term in Maryland prisons. Coincidentally his home and business were very close to Iverson Mall and Marlow Heights Shopping Center. MCP went so far as to dig some holes in his former back yard on Suitland Road, but found only "bird bones" and dropped the matter. Mileski did come to MCP attention again around 2000 when an informant implicated him as allegedly being involved with the girls' abduction, murder, and burial. Mileski himself offered to assist MCP investigators in return for a prison transfer. He died in 2004.

The TRM story and sketch, however, lives on. This past February, when MCP was holding their "Lloyd Welch is a person of interest" press conference, several Washington DC area TV stations aired pictures of the TRM sketch as detectives referred to a "sketch made at the time" in their presentation. It was not until near the end of their presentation that they unveiled the sketch of a Long Haired Man (LHM) drawn by Davis Morton on 27 March 1975 (but only released in November 2013), along with a side-by-side 1977 mug shot of Welch.

MCP was NOT saying that Welch was the Tape Recorder Man, but rather suggested that he LOOKED like the sketch of the Long Haired Man.

In fact, no mention was made of TRM or any possible connection between him and LHM/Welch during that press conference.

 

[Richard]

Photo of a typical cassette tape recorder circa 1975. These tape recorders could be activated (turned off and on) by a small microphone with a switch.


LINK:


http://www.brucesallan.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/old-cassette-tape-recorder.jpg

 

[STANDREID]

If he isn't the killer, he's one bizarre dude. Why didn't someone give him the bum's rush?

 

[Ausgirl]

Sexual predators/child killers, however (and as I am sure Mr Douglas knows), do sometimes communicate with the parents of their victims. Particularly the sadistic ones, who get to relive the pain they've caused by inflicting more of it on the family.

Off the top of my head, Albert Fish comes to mind. He stalked, manipulated and then fooled a family into handing their daughter over for a day trip with an apparently kindly, harmless old man. He raped, tortured, butchered and ate parts of her before sending vicious, horrible and taunting letters to her family informing them of what he'd done.

I think the courthouse thing was a cruel opportunist trying to cash in, personally. But who knows.

 

[Richard]

Chuck him out, the brute...

If he isn't the killer, he's one bizarre dude. Why didn't someone give him the bum's rush?

It was stated at the time by MCP that the Tape Recorder Man was considered a person of interest because someone had seen him talking to the Lyon sisters. Police emphasized that they did not consider him a suspect, but wanted to interview him if he would come forward. He never did.

As weird as he may have seemed in retrospect, what he was doing - just sitting on a planter/bench with a tape recorder and talking with a couple of girls - was not illegal in any way. He was in a public place where many other people were also going about their business. He was dressed nicely, and not (intentionally) attracting any attention to himself or making himself a nuscience.

He was not doing anyting that would cause a security officer to throw him out - in contrast to the story about the Long Haired Man who was reported by a girl as following and bothering her and the girls.

Only little "Jimmy" and his friend took notice of him that day, and only by chance. They remembered the encounter later only because they knew Sheila and Katherine, and they went missing a short time later. It was "Jimmy's" mother who recognized the possible significance in the TRM when she heard her son relate the story in a matter-of-fact way, and it was she who insisted that he tell the police.

Other stories came out after TRM was in the news of the same man or another like him interviewing other girls at other malls. This information was provided by other young sales girls and mothers of girls that he bothered. No information seemed to come from Mall Security, however.

Today, a Tape Recorder Man might draw more attention by Security than back in 1975.

About two years ago, I met a young man who was working as a clerk in a store at Wheaton Plaza (called Shoppingtown West - Wheaton today). He told me that he had been a Security Guard there a few years ago (although he was born long after 1975).

I asked him if (as a security guard) he would do anything if he had seen a man with a tape recorder interviewing young girls. He responded that, Yes, that was something they were briefed to watch for and interceed on.

I asked him if he knew why that was, and he thought that it might have to do with a terrorist plot, or with Homeland Security, or something of the sort. He did not even know about the Lyon case, but to this day Wheaton Plaza security guards are told to watch out for a TRM.

 

[STANDREID]

Chuck him out, the brute...

Somebody need to put the curb on this boy.

 

[Richard]

I was quoting Rudyard Kipling.

 

[Sigrun]

It's not as unlikely as one might think, because one of the events, the abduction (or other crime), happened with 100% certainty.

The correct question to ask is what is the chance of one weird guy making contact at a mall (eye contact or talking to them for a minute) with two young girls on any given day, enough contact so that a police sketch could be drawn? I would guess one in ten or 10%, although it may be higher or lower.

The chance of two independent weird contacts each with a 10% chance of happening both happening on the same day is .1 times .1 or 1%.

The one-in-a-million event, the girls never making it home and never being found, already happened, but it skews the perception of the odds.

If the third event, the crime, was independent of the first two events, there would still be a 1% chance of the other two events independently happening.

If the third event , the crime was related to one of the first two events, (the person was the same) there would be a 10% chance of the other event independently happening.

Expanding the definition of "weird event" to include many other things and expanding the time from that day to that week or month would increase the odds of a "weird" coincidence happening by chance to the point where some coincidence that day or that week would have been likely.

I like your approach to the problem. I would like to point out that the odds-making indicated requires a subtle correction. The crime given is not the same as the “mall event”; that is, the act of approaching pre-teen girls in a public shopping mall and “interviewing” them (and which is not a crime). Therefore, the probability of two “weird” events occurring in the same mall the victims just visited and at that approximate time is still only 1%, as you correctly calculated above. Whether one or both were connected to the crime given is a different matter altogether.

Having said that, your initial assumption of odds at 10% is, in my view, much too high. The probability of that occurring at that location in 1975 in that specific time frame is likely far less than 1%. The problem however, is that this is a subjective interpretation for which no data presumably exists. Therefore, the entire exercise is interesting but, in my view, exposes no defect in Richard’s point.

To see Richard’s point, let us imagine randomly entering a mall in 1975; that is, Wheaton mall without knowing about these events a posteriori. How many times would we need to enter that mall (presumably on different days) before we could reasonably expect to see a middle-aged man attempting to "interview" pre-teen girls with a tape recorder (or a similar "weird", sexually loaded event)? I’d think we’d need to enter at least 1000 times before we can expect that to occur. Ergo, the probability of this occurring merely once is 0.1 percent at best. To occur twice is 0.001*0.001 = 1 in 1 million. Ergo, we have an extraordinary event if it occurred twice, and even more fantastic if neither is related to the crime. The probability is very high that TRM had prior knowledge of the abduction of the Lyon girls.

~ s

P.S. I could restate that last sentence a simpler way. Given the crime propounded, the "interviews" in the mall in the same vicinity and at the same approximate time are highly unlikely to have occurred if the given crime is unrelated to the "interviews".

 

[Richard]

Very interesting discussion regarding the "odds" of various events happening in this case. Randomness, Chance, and Probability all enter in, but unfortunately some things are really hard to quantify, especially when you are dealing with such a rare event (abduction of two girls in daylight and in a residential area).

When tossing dice, dealing cards, or considering a race horse's past record, one can reasonably determine odds by fairly simple formulas and known factors. Unfortunately, there are many variables which enter into a crime and subsequent investigation which simply are unknown or which cannot be calculated accurately.

Montgomery County Police investigators spoke of some figures early on in the investigation, such as - Most missing kids turn up with in 24 hours, or most simply run away, etc etc. Stranger abduction is one of the rarest of all those possibilities when it comes to missing children. But, they were quick to point out that they did not believe that this was a run away situation from the very beginning.

So, already we are looking at a rare occurrence. And then it is a Double Abduction rather than only one child. Even more rare. Any statistician can tell you that in order to come to conclusions a survey has to be drawn from a large number of cases or individuals. When you are dealing with rare events, it is hard to get enough cases together to study them and draw valid conclusions or figures.

Now if the perpetrator was a disorganized individual who simply grabbed the girls on an impulse and drove off with them, it would mean that the complete randomness of abducting two girls on the move - in daylight - in a residential area, etc would be an extremely rare event and it might tend to argue that the Tape Recorder Man was also just a random, rare occurrence, completely unrelated to the abduction. Certainly a possibility when speaking mathematically. Coincidences DO happen. It begs the hypothetical question, "What are the chances of these two events taking place so close together with these two girls?" Even without the math, one certainly has to realize that it would be extremely rare.

Were the two events completely unrelated? What if the perpetrator was a highly organized, intelligent individual? Would he not attempt to "better" his chances of success through careful planning? Most likely. We do not know what the purpose of the TRM interview was, but it has been discussed quite a bit in past posts and threads. IF the TRM interview and the later (probable) abduction were indeed related, then the chances of the two events occurring would actually increase because both events would simply be two steps of several in one overall organized plan.

It is this difference in criminal styles (Organized vs Disorganized) that would determine whether the abduction was a random, out-of-the-blue event or a very carefully planned and executed one. The Disorganized Criminal usually trips himself up and gets caught through carelessness. The Organized Criminal may have everything planned out in advance - or if acting on impulse of the moment - can revert to previous plans and practices.

One also has to consider that a careful criminal does not want to get caught and may have planned his moves so that he can abort the mission at any point should something go wrong. In this way, there is no crime and he corrects his mistakes the next time 'round.

In light of the fact that there was absolutly no forensic evidence found and no eyewitnesses to any attack or abduction, one would have to conclude that the abductor was more likely very skilled and careful than a disorganized perp who simply got very lucky.

 

[Cherry]

What about Acala or bundy, where were they during these crimes, does anyone know? Acala had all those photos of women found....

 

[SharetheLight]

In regards to the odds of TRM being at a mall and an abduction taking place, I'd say there were previous TRM sightings at malls nearby (and I think a poster on this forum even saw TRM at Wheaton plaza on some day prior to the Lyon girls disappearing) and no child disappeared. So statistically speaking, prior to 3/25/75 when TRM is seen at malls no child disappears. Therefore the odds are that TRM did not take the girls.
Weird series of events. Completely coincidental.

 

[Motherof5]

In regards to the odds of TRM being at a mall and an abduction taking place, I'd say there were previous TRM sightings at malls nearby (and I think a poster on this forum even saw TRM at Wheaton plaza on some day prior to the Lyon girls disappearing) and no child disappeared. So statistically speaking, prior to 3/25/75 when TRM is seen at malls no child disappears. Therefore the odds are that TRM did not take the girls.
Weird series of events. Completely coincidental.

Very good points and I would add that,by way of contrast to TRM,when Welch was around...girls were harmed.

 

[Richard]

Absolutely true that it could have been simply a big coincidence that TRM was at the Mall on the same day that the girls disappeared. But was it still a coincidence when he disappeared at aproximately the same time? TRM was seen at Wheaton Plaza on at least three previous occasions that I know of but was never seen again (with his tape recorder) after speaking with Kate and Sheila on 25 March 1975.

News of his being seen that day did not come out in the press until a full week later on 1 April 1975. Yet he did not attempt any more interviews in the meanwhile - anywhere in the area.

It is possible that he simply had other things to do and his absence for the week immediately following the Lyon sisters' disappearance was a coincidence.

But is also just as possible that he was involved in their abduction and his TRM persona was no longer needed - he may have moved on to the next step in his scheme. Of course, once news of the TRM came out on 1 April, he would have been a fool to attempt that same "interview" tactic again.

As I stated in my previous post, a careful perpetrator could bide his time and call off an abduction attempt at any time due to caution or fear of being caught. Perhaps the time, place, and victim was just not right before 25 March. It is also possible that at other times and places, TRM was practicing his "lines" to see what worked and what didn't.

What begs the question regarding the "odds" of the two events occurring is that both the TRM interview with ONLY Kate and Sheila, and the girls' subsequent disappearance take place within a very short time of each other.

 

[Sigrun]

When this happened we had two people in the Wheaton Plaza and neither of them, as far as we know, had committed any acts that would classify them as sexual offenders. Only later did Welch become a sexual offender and we don’t know about TRM because he remains unidentified. I’m not suggesting this means that Welch nor TRM could not have been sexual offenders at that time, I’m making a point again about odds to clarify what I wrote prior to this post. I noted that the odds that two offenders (known as such or not) were in the same mall at the same time doing “weird” things were really long.

What I should have pointed out perhaps is that what Welch was doing, as far as I’ve heard, doesn’t constitute the “weird” I’m talking about. He was “checking out” two pre-teen girls in the mall. He was about 18 years old at that time. Presumably, he didn’t know their ages. One may find this “weird” by itself, but my point is that whatever he was thinking, there is no evidence so far of an agenda. A witness said he “seemed” to be following them, but to my mind this is not enough to establish an agenda. Guys do this within reason. Guys who like young girls will be no different. And yes, we know he later showed up as a sexual offender. So it all follows that he would do this. But still, I do not see an agenda. I see a young man who likes girls too young for him paying attention to them. This is not remarkable in the context of a felony abduction.

On the other hand, when I look at TRM I see a man who, in this case, remains unidentified. So, we don’t know if he was or later became a sexual offender. But here is what we do know. He was also checking out these girls; and just those girls. Not only did he just look, he approached them, he spoke to them and his actions belied an agenda. So, alack, his behavior was “weird”. Now, flipping back to the odds play, I’ve already noted that the odds of two such “weird” events occurring in the same place time are long. Ergo, Welch was looking at these girls in a way consistent with his deviant thoughts, but he was not demonstrating an agenda of action. So, which is more likely? Given the long odds of both of them with a similar agenda, is it more likely that it was just one of them that had the agenda or both of them did? Second, which is more likely? Is it more likely that the one with the already demonstrated agenda is the one engaging in “weird” behavior or is it more likely both of them engaged in “weird” behavior, even though we don’t have any direct evidence of Welch doing that? Another way of saying this is that the narrative with the least number of required assumptions is more likely the correct one. If only TRM, no assumptions are required. If both TRM and Welch, we must assume that Welch as violent sexual offender was acting at that moment and place with a felonious agenda. He probably looked at young girls everywhere he went, but we can’t assume he abducted and killed (his M.O.) every one of them.

I’m saying it this way so that we don’t need to quantify anything, we only need ask, step by step, which is more likely. And I think that which requires the least number of assumptions is the more likely narrative. It is the very presence and behavior of TRM that tells us, as the more likely explanation, that Welch was being a “good boy” at that time … sort of (everything’s relative).

I think what is going on here is there is immense frustration over not being able to identify TRM, so some people in LE and elsewhere are fishing and shaking the barrel looking for sexual offenders in the mall. I’m sure they were in fact there and there might have been 3, 4 or even more. But what matters is the agenda at that time, if and where indicated.

So, in other words, if a third person was the abductor, by the very nature of abduction, we have to assume a third person was also engaged in “weird” behavior. And that brings us back to the same dilemma we had with Welch. We can just substitute nameless perpetrators all day and get the same result. What doesn’t change is that the narrative with the least number of assumptions is that TRM abducted the girls; and that the known interview was merely an extension of that same “weird” narrative.

~ s

 

[Sigrun]

Absolutely true that it could have been simply a big coincidence that TRM was at the Mall on the same day that the girls disappeared. But was it still a coincidence when he disappeared at aproximately the same time? TRM was seen at Wheaton Plaza on at least three previous occasions that I know of but was never seen again (with his tape recorder) after speaking with Kate and Sheila on 25 March 1975.

News of his being seen that day did not come out in the press until a full week later on 1 April 1975. Yet he did not attempt any more interviews in the meanwhile - anywhere in the area.

It is possible that he simply had other things to do and his absence for the week immediately following the Lyon sisters' disappearance was a coincidence.

But is also just as possible that he was involved in their abduction and his TRM persona was no longer needed - he may have moved on to the next step in his scheme. Of course, once news of the TRM came out on 1 April, he would have been a fool to attempt that same "interview" tactic again.

As I stated in my previous post, a careful perpetrator could bide his time and call off an abduction attempt at any time due to caution or fear of being caught. Perhaps the time, place, and victim was just not right before 25 March. It is also possible that at other times and places, TRM was practicing his "lines" to see what worked and what didn't.

What begs the question regarding the "odds" of the two events occurring is that both the TRM interview with ONLY Kate and Sheila, and the girls' subsequent disappearance take place within a very short time of each other.

These are great points. I had not thought of the "disappearing tape recorder" (DTR) as inculpatory. Can you sell this idea a little more? My contention would be that any man engaged in those interviews probably knew it was "weird". It would require only news that two people had been abducted from an area mall to make him stop. And this is true even if he were totally innocent. I'm guessing news that one or two people had been abducted from an area shopping mall was out within hours? Maybe one day? I don't know, but I agree with your conclusion, I'm just not sold on that particular logic yet.

Do you know if LE has released any more information on Welch's behavior in the mall that day? All I know is someone (it sounds like the same one that provided the composite info) said they "thought" Welch had followed the girls. I'm wondering if they released anything that would suggest an "agenda" by Welch. There was this mysterious talk of being stopped, or having spoken with, the "Captain of Security" in the mall. This is weird, but that is what they said in their news conference when they introduced Welch as a POI. But as far as I can see, I don't see an agenda there either.

~ s

 

[Richard]

Regarding the "disappearance" of TRM or the tape recorder (if not the actual person himself) from the scene:

News of the girls going missing on Tuesday, 25 March 1975, did not go out until late the next day, Wednesday, and it appeared only as a short article in Washington Metro newspapers. By that evening's TV news, it was repeated. Over the following days, the story took on immense proportions and was "front page news" for days, weeks and months in the Washington DC, Maryland, and Virginia area.

The story about TRM interviewing the girls was reported to Police on Friday, 28 March - 3 days after the girls disappeared and the first TRM composite sketch was drawn by PFC Davis Morton of Montgomery County Police.

MCP, however, only distributed the sketch and story internally at first so that their investigators could ask around during their (by then) intensive door to door searches and interviews. Over the course of that weekend and through Monday, no witnesses could be found (other than "Jimmy" and his friend) who could corroborate the story or identify the man.

By late in the afternoon of Monday, 31 March 1975, MCP released the TRM sketch and story to the press in a news conference. The TV news may have broken the story in their evening newscasts, but the Sketch and story did not appear in the news papers until Tuesday morning, 1 April 1975.

It was following that press release that many people began calling in to state that they, too, had seen this TRM or someone who resembled him at various places and times PRIOR TO Tuesday, 25 March 1975. Nobody mentioned any more recent sightings of a TRM occurring AFTER the sighting of him interviewing the girls on 25 March. Thus, my statement that TRM "disappeared" at about the same time that the girls did.

Three Wheaton Plaza employees reported seeing TRM on Monday, the 24th with his tape recorder, and a large number of women and girls reported seeing someone who resembled the sketch with a tape recorder at Iverson Mall and Marlow Heights Shopping Center (adjacent to each other) in nearby Prince Georges County on Saturday, 22 March. Other sightings were reported at other times as early as mid February.

So a TRM was active right up to 25 March 1975 and not seen again. Of course after 1 April 1975 the public was alerted to watch for him. But the in the critical time between 25 March and 1 April, there were no sightings.

Regarding Welch: Montgomery County Police have not released any further information about him since their initial Press Conference last February, although a number of researchers have found information about him through various sources - most of which has been posted here on Websleuths.

 

[thebigcookie]

I have a strange interest of my own to compare with this tape recorder man and as to why I most likely do not believe tape recorder man was responsible for the abduction of the Lyon sisters. I have this strange fascination with old Kroger interiors stemming from childhood, so I enjoy going to Kroger stores old and new, and taking pictures of the outside and wall décor inside mostly around the Memphis area and in a few other places I have visited as well. I have only been asked by someone what I was doing taking pictures in two places, neither of which were Krogers. I even know approximate dates of when certain decor packages were used and have a good memory of when many stores got remodeled. Anyways, you can check out photos I have taken of Kroger stores, as well as some Walgreens and other stores on my flickr page:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kingskip

Many people might find it strange to see someone snapping photos in Kroger, which might be comparable to seeing a man with a tape recorder asking someone questions in public. Here is where I might connect this to a similar case of the Lyon sisters. This is not something I do every day but just something I do in my free time that I enjoy. Suppose I was around in 1975 and I was using a camera that was around at the time and went to a Kroger to take pictures of the interior. What if two girls had walked to that same Kroger when I was there and disappeared later that day. Let's say three days later a witness comes forward and says that a man was there taking pictures and he happened to see the girls in a spot where I was taking a picture. He may have though I was photographing them rather the store interior which I what my purpose was (by the way when I take pictures at these places, I try to avoid getting people in the picture, but that does happen in some places). I might have been doing any other photo shoots during that time because I was busy and didn't have time to drive all over town. Then, two days later a sketch comes out that looks similar to me and people name me as a person interest, known as "camera man." It's possible after the sketch came out, then people that were in other Kroger stores would say they saw me taking pictures there too. I don't think after that I would be going to take pictures of Krogers for a long time if I was named a person of interest in a case of a disappearance. However, the only thing that contradicts the trm here is that I would go to police to show that I am not in any way involved in these girls disappearance and show him my photos and explain.

Another observation, I will point out is that while posting these photos online, I have met two other people in the same area that share the same interests of photographing old Krogers and other retail stores and shopping areas around the Memphis area mostly (a very popular location that has had us visiting many times and taking many photos of is a Kroger on Stateline Rd in Southaven, MS just south of Memphis. It still has the 70's Bauhaus interior, which very few if any stores still have today):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bradley_memphis/ (this one has mostly Kroger photos)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/l_dawg2000/ (he has tons of different locations and has covered some Kroger remodels in great detail)

...which brings me to my next point. There may have been two or even more tape recorder men around the area east of DC in Maryland at the time. It is possible that this man who told police he was a TRM at Prince George county malls but not Wheaton Plaza may have been telling the truth. He may or may not have known the one at Wheaton Plaza, but it is possible that there were people at that time with fascinations with tape recorders and hearing peoples voices on them, just like my fascination with Kroger interiors, and they wanted to try them out and record people's voices. While it's strange, maybe that's all they were doing and meant no harm.

It's also interesting at the beginning of this thread that someone mentions Ron Meroney. Since I've been in Memphis most of my life, I know exactly who he is. He was an anchor on WHBQ Fox 13's Good Morning Memphis back in the late 90s-mid 00s along with Valerie Calhoun and Leon Griffin. Meroney left in 06 when these charges came forward and Griffin retired in 2010. Calhoun is still there. Anyways, the connections he has to Maryland near the time of the Lyon sisters disappearance are interesting and I never would have suspected him in this but who knows. Maybe he even had ties to Welch. You never know.

Anyways, here's my theories on tape recorder man.

 

[simplifymylife2014]

Thanks thebigcookie for that info
However, weren't some or all of the reports about men with Tape Recorders that would interview young girls or females?
I can see your analogy, however, common sense is that someone with a Tape Recorder taping young children is just
highly suspect. Why not tape adults of the same sex as the TRM and perhaps older in years?
It is KNOWN that children are more trusting and even a legitimate TRM would be FOOLISH taping young children.
Not sure how I feel about TRM, unless there was possibly yet ANOTHER relative in the family playing that "role"
as bait to lure ones in by building their trust.

 

[STANDREID]

It's hard to imagine that no-one said anything to this creep. People in the 1970s were well aware of pedophiles and this guy, whether he was or not, was showing all the signs.

I also find it odd that he wasn't captured on a security camera. There was a low rate coffee shop that I used the frequent in the mid 1970s and even they had a security camera.