The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #4

[Missouri Mule]

Well there really was no solid evidence to convict him of the Zellers murder at that time. He was wrongfully convicted. Today I believe DNA would either convict him, or set him free, and opinions would not matter, only evidence would matter as it should.

Alibis have nothing to do with guilt or innocence, yea Cox might have been better off saying I do not remember. The only reason he even had an alibi is because he knew they would be looking at him. That is how it works here. Once accused always accused. It does not matter that there is nothing to tie him to the crime scene, tie him to the women, tie him to anything other than the the city of Springfield. Evidence does not matter in a witch hunt.

Seems to me that if the portion of his tongue that was remaining could have been matched up Sharon Zeller's teeth it would have been rather convincing evidence. This is academic because even if DNA was (and probably was obtained) available, double jeopardy would obtain. He could shout from the treetops he was guilty of savagely murdering Ms. Zellers and the law couldn't touch him.

My own person opinion is that the Florida Supremes took leave of their senses in his case. And so, apparently did the jurors who were queried and agreed after he was set free to murder again. I suspect strongly, although I cannot prove it obviously, unless he has a "come to Jesus" moment and confesses to all his crimes we will never know how many people died at his hands. I believe to my core he is a serial murderer. The only upside to his sordid life is that he will rot in the Texas cell until 2025 when he will be 65 and then he will have to serve additional federal sentences (according to my information) that will result in his dying in prison. He will never see freedom again unless some other judge or judges take leave of their senses.

The alibi issue is not an insignificant matter. He had to believe that claiming to be at his parent's home might not hold up to scrutiny. So he concocted a phony alibi. It goes to his state of mind. He had no obligation to provide any alibi.

 

[Trooogrit]

Seems to me that if the portion of his tongue that was remaining could have been matched up Sharon Zeller's teeth it would have been rather convincing evidence. This is academic because even if DNA was (and probably was obtained) available, double jeopardy would obtain. He could shout from the treetops he was guilty of savagely murdering Ms. Zellers and the law couldn't touch him.

My own person opinion is that the Florida Supremes were composed of mentally challenged imbeciles. And so, apparently did the jurors who were queried and agreed after he was set free to murder again. I suspect strongly, although I cannot prove it obviously, unless he has a "come to Jesus" moment and confesses to all his crimes we will never know how many people died at his hands. I believe to my core he is a serial murderer. The only upside to his sordid life is that he will rot in the Texas cell until 2025 when he will be 65 and then he will have to serve additional federal sentences (according to my information) that will result in his dying in prison. He will never see freedom again unless some other judge or judges take leave of their senses.

The alibi issue is not an insignificant matter. He had to believe that claiming to be at his parent's home might not hold up to scrutiny. So he concocted a phony alibi. It goes to his state of mind. He had no obligation to provide any alibi.

Ever notice how he adamantly denied killing Zellars all the way through the process? However, we both are in agreement we think he did kill her. Now, he does not even come close to denying involvement in this case?? Why is that? Here is the reason He knows that there is nothing that can tie him to that crime scene or to those women because he was not there, so he plays with the imagination of the public. There is not one single thing about Robert Cox that is text book serial killer, not one. Look at his criminal history as true serial killers go, he is a wannabe, biggest liar in the game, that is what I see.

 

[Missouri Mule]

...
In the first of two cases, Cox stalked a woman and then grabbed her when she left her car. He held a knife to her throat. The woman struggled and, in the process, badly cut her hands. Bleeding all over his car, she persuaded Cox to take her to a hospital. When police showed up, he fled. Police later found handcuffs and an arsenal of weapons in Cox's home.

In the second case, Cox abducted Gidget Wickham at gunpoint from the Monterey Airport parking lot. From the trunk of his car he grabbed a duffel bag filled with automatic weapons and survival gear, then instructed her to drive him to the mountains.

She escaped after she got Cox to stop by a friend's house. Police arrested Cox after he had held the friend hostage at gunpoint, threatening to kill the man and then himself.

Wickham remains haunted by her attacker.

"There was no question in her mind he was going to kill her had they driven into the mountains," says her mother, Marge Lawyer. "He had the gun stuck in her side while she drove.' Lawyer says her daughter now locks her doors with deadbolts and sleeps in the family room with the lights and TV on every night. She is getting counseling, Lawyer said, "but she will be in total fear when she learns he's getting out of prison again.' Cox pleaded guilty to kidnapping and assault charges. A presentence investigator concluded "Robert Cox is a dangerous man"and found little to explain his "bizarre behavior other than to say that once he sets his mind to do something, he does it.' He was in prison in Tracy, Calif., when Hansen, the Orange County detective, found out about the convictions. Before long, prosecutors Jeff Ashton and Fred Lauten had obtained an indictment and brought Cox back to Florida to stand trial for the murder of Sharon Zellers. During the four-day trial, the jurors studied key evidence that included:

Type O blood, the same as Cox's, was found in Zellers' car in the grove. Though an inconclusive sample, indications of type A, like Zellers', were found in Cox's motel room.

Three hairs found in the victim's car were "indistinguishable"from Cox's chest hair, a Chicago scientist testified.

A shoe print found in the car was consistent with the type of military boot the defendant wore the night the girl vanished.

But for the jurors, it was not any single piece but rather a tapestry of all the evidence woven together that convinced them of Cox's guilt.

"Sure," said Funk, "there's always the chance that the orange grove fairy did it. But there was not one shred of evidence anywhere that said he didn't do it. I know that's not the way to convict someone; but if it looks like grape jelly, smells like grape jelly and tastes like grape jelly, well then, it's probably grape jelly ...

(Snip)

SUN 02/04/1990 HOUSTON CHRONICLE, Section A, Page 9, 2 STAR

 

[Kathee]

Seems to me that if the portion of his tongue that was remaining could have been matched up Sharon Zeller's teeth it would have been rather convincing evidence. This is academic because even if DNA was (and probably was obtained) available, double jeopardy would obtain. He could shout from the treetops he was guilty of savagely murdering Ms. Zellers and the law couldn't touch him.

Double jeopardy or nothing else will ever be utilized in the Zellers murder. The case was overturned WITH prejudice, meaning he could never be tried for it again.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Double jeopardy or nothing else will ever be utilized in the Zellers murder. The case was overturned WITH prejudice, meaning he could never be tried for it again.

Typically, don't we see that with civil matters? In any event, it is equivalent to double jeopardy is it not?

"A case dismissed with prejudice means it is forever barred from coming into court again."

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_criminal_charges_dismissed_with_prejudice#ixzz1I8edAXdi

Since we are discussing this, I wonder why the Florida Supremes took this particular action. Wouldn't it have been proper and much more reasonable to have simply remanded this back to be retried? If the evidence was not there, the case wouldn't have been retried. But at least the prosecution would not be barred from keeping this case active and eventually resolved. As it is, no justice was ever possible for Sharon Zellers since it is self evident that she was obviously murdered by only one man and he walked free as a bird.

In the case the law was turned on its head. I cannot imagine the framers of our constitution ever intended for such a result. I understand the rationale of double jeopardy but I don't understand the thinking of this case at all. This was a complete travesty of our court system. A cold blooded murderer walks free and a wholly innocent victim is forever foreclosed from having her murderer brought to justice. I just don't get it.

To demonstrate how utterly absurd and outrageous was this ruling let us imagine that Al Capone is on trial for multiple murders. The jury returns a guilty verdict and sentences him to be hanged or whatever. A court comes along, such as this, looks at the proceedings and decides that there was only "a suspicion of guilt" and promptly cuts Capone loose, dismissing the case "with prejudice" which results in his walking out of the jailhouse into the open air of freedom. Back in those days it was common for the police all the way to the mayor and even the governor I believe to be on the mob's payroll. They could buy the justice they wanted. Fast forward to Cox's trial. What's the real difference?
​

 

[bystander77]

I saw this on Wikipedia.. it seems to NOT be sourced, which is a shame...

Cox has told authorities and journalists that he will tell them what happened to Sherill, Suzie and Stacy after his mother dies.

I believe I read previously that the sewer in which Ms. Zellers body was left, caused whatever DNA that was there to either not be there or damage it to the point it could not be used... I don't think there's many people that think he's not a murderer. It's a real shame, what happened in Florida.

 

[Kathee]

If you've never read the appeal it is very interesting. The law says his rights were violated. I have talked with the prosecutor in the case and he wishes he had done things differently and that there was more evidence.

They were left with very little with the condition Sharon's body was in when she was taken out of the weigh station. Ashton (the prosecutor in FL) believes that Cox's tongue was still in her mouth when she was put head first in there and that all the sewage matter broke it down.

Yes, bystander, Cox has said that he will tell the cops what he knows in our girls disappearance after his mother dies.

 

[Trooogrit]

[ Before long, prosecutors Jeff Ashton and Fred Lauten had obtained an indictment and brought Cox back to Florida to stand trial for the murder of Sharon Zellers. During the four-day trial, the jurors studied key evidence that included:

Type O blood, the same as Cox's, (and 40% of the population)was found in Zellers' car in the grove. Though an inconclusive sample, indications of type A, like Zellers', were found in Cox's motel room.

Three hairs found in the victim's car were "indistinguishable ( does this just mean looking at them?"from Cox's chest hair, a Chicago scientist testified.

A shoe print found in the car was consistent with the type of military boot ( no size? narrows it down to a miliary boot is all?) the defendant wore the night the girl vanished.

But for the jurors, it was not any single piece but rather a tapestry of all the evidence woven together that convinced them of Cox's guilt.

"Sure," said Funk, "there's always the chance that the orange grove fairy did it. But there was not one shred of evidence anywhere that said he didn't do it. I know that's not the way to convict someone; but if it looks like grape jelly, smells like grape jelly and tastes like grape jelly, well then, it's probably grape jelly ...

(Snip)

SUN 02/04/1990 HOUSTON CHRONICLE, Section A, Page 9, 2 STAR[/quote]


Guilty or not guilty does not matter this prosecutor jumped the gun and risked the conviction with a weak case to begin with. This was overturned rightfully so, dont blame the judge, blame the prosecutor. What you say about DNA evidence is true, if they drag their feet a couple more years on it, let him sweat it out in California maybe DNA advances enough and they have a stronger case and he fries in Florida, this isnt the judge, this is an ignorant overzealous prosecuting attorney.

 

[Missouri Mule]

[ Before long, prosecutors Jeff Ashton and Fred Lauten had obtained an indictment and brought Cox back to Florida to stand trial for the murder of Sharon Zellers. During the four-day trial, the jurors studied key evidence that included:

Type O blood, the same as Cox's, (and 40% of the population)was found in Zellers' car in the grove. Though an inconclusive sample, indications of type A, like Zellers', were found in Cox's motel room.

Three hairs found in the victim's car were "indistinguishable ( does this just mean looking at them?"from Cox's chest hair, a Chicago scientist testified.

A shoe print found in the car was consistent with the type of military boot ( no size? narrows it down to a miliary boot is all?) the defendant wore the night the girl vanished.

But for the jurors, it was not any single piece but rather a tapestry of all the evidence woven together that convinced them of Cox's guilt.

"Sure," said Funk, "there's always the chance that the orange grove fairy did it. But there was not one shred of evidence anywhere that said he didn't do it. I know that's not the way to convict someone; but if it looks like grape jelly, smells like grape jelly and tastes like grape jelly, well then, it's probably grape jelly ...

(Snip)

SUN 02/04/1990 HOUSTON CHRONICLE, Section A, Page 9, 2 STAR

Guilty or not guilty does not matter this prosecutor jumped the gun and risked the conviction with a weak case to begin with. This was overturned rightfully so, dont blame the judge, blame the prosecutor. What you say about DNA evidence is true, if they drag their feet a couple more years on it, let him sweat it out in California maybe DNA advances enough and they have a stronger case and he fries in Florida, this isnt the judge, this is an ignorant overzealous prosecuting attorney.[/quote]
==============================================

Let me be perfectly clear. My beef is not that the jury verdict was overturned but that all opportunity to retry the case was ruled off the table in the future.

Let me put it to you this way. If a murderer has a friendly judge who decides; perhaps after having his hands greased that he is going to deny justice and dismisses the case "with prejudice" the murderer gets a free pass to murder again.

Contrast this with the George Revelle case in Nixa. I won't relate all the details as there was a two hour program on Dateline in 2001 which went into this crime. Originally Revelle was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. However, the prosecution entered into evidence a letter that his deceased wife had written and was found in the home. In my opinion the evidence that was most convincing was the alarm system. The case was appealed by a new attorney and he was found not guilty upon retrial which came about only because the letter was entered as evidence and the deceased victim was not available to cross-examine and ruled as hearsay evidence!

The difference was that on the one hand Cox was not retried and Revelle was. Both walked. Cox was given a free get out of jail card but Revelle had to establish he was not guilty although a canvass of the jurors indicated that they could only establish he was not guilty but were not convinced he was innocent. In Cox's case he had to do nothing except to have his case rendered null and void forever. I believe this was unjust. For a sympathetic summary of the Revelle case the link provides details.

http://frank.mtsu.edu/~cfrost/mitigation/revelle.htm

I do not agree with the Revelle outcome but I believe the system worked as it should. In the Cox outcome I believe the system failed the victim and justice under the law. For that I put the blame entirely on the Florida Supremes.

 

[Trooogrit]

Let me be perfectly clear. My beef is not that the jury verdict was overturned but that all opportunity to retry the case was ruled off the table in the future.

Let me put it to you this way. If a murderer has a friendly judge who decides; perhaps after having his hands greased that he is going to deny justice and dismisses the case "with prejudice" the murderer gets a free pass to murder again.

Contrast this with the George Revelle case in Nixa. I won't relate all the details as there was a two hour program on Dateline in 2001 which went into this crime. Originally Revelle was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. However, the prosecution entered into evidence a letter that his deceased wife had written and was found in the home. In my opinion the evidence that was most convincing was the alarm system. The case was appealed by a new attorney and he was found not guilty upon retrial which came about only because the letter was entered as evidence and the deceased victim was not available to cross-examine and ruled as hearsay evidence!

The difference was that on the one hand Cox was not retried and Revelle was. Both walked. Cox was given a free get out of jail card but Revelle had to establish he was not guilty although a canvass of the jurors indicated that they could only establish he was not guilty but were not convinced he was innocent. In Cox's case he had to do nothing except to have his case rendered null and void forever. I believe this was unjust. For a sympathetic summary of the Revelle case the link provides details.

http://frank.mtsu.edu/~cfrost/mitigation/revelle.htm

I do not agree with the Revelle outcome but I believe the system worked as it should. In the Cox outcome I believe the system failed the victim and justice under the law. For that I put the blame entirely on the Florida Supremes.

The system failed long before those judges overturned that conviction and I am not sure they could retry this case.


On 03/10/89, the defendant filed his Direct Appeal initial brief, which included the
following claims of trial court error: the evidence was legally insufficient to support a
conviction; improper excusal of two prospective jurors; the State failed to try Cox for the
offense within 180 days and did not indict until nine years after the murder thereby
violating the defendant’s due process and preventing him from conducting a proper
investigation; and, that Cox’s due process was violated regarding other evidentiary
matters.
The Florida Supreme Court unanimously agreed that there was insufficient evidence to
support the verdict and commented that, although the State’s evidence would have
created a reasonable suspicion, the case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The
Court stated the evidence did not prove that Cox, and only Cox, murdered the victim.

The system has to work no matter what, to many wrongful convictions are now being overturned and convictions overturned because of sloppy prosecutors.

 

[_mb_]

I stumbled upon this earlier:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-88630.html

Kathee, I see you posted in that thread. Do you know anything more about the attempted abduction of the women in Branson? I don't recall seeing this information before.

 

[Kathee]

The Branson case of the assault in the state park is still unsolved. One of the victims suffered traumatic brain injury.

 

[Auburn]

I noticed in the media links section that the PD said they were looking into possibly digging up the parking garage where many believe the three are buried. This article was from Feb of this year. Has anyone read anything else about that?

 

[Missouri Mule]

I noticed in the media links section that the PD said they were looking into possibly digging up the parking garage where many believe the three are buried. This article was from Feb of this year. Has anyone read anything else about that?

Hadn't moved off dead center the last I heard. Speculation that if it does occur it would be on a weekend but it hasn't happened yet.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Lastly, I know many are glad this story is getting national attention. I've often been puzzled as to why this never 'took off' as a national story. Personally (although I'm bias because I lived there), I find it a very interesting and odd story, worthy of the coverage the later JonBenet Ramsey got. Sure, he was a rich guy, ransom note, small town/big crime, but our story is really fascinating in its own right. Part of the disparity could be explained as these events were in two different worlds. June 1992, the national attention was on race relations/police brutality in the wake of the Rodney King beating/acquittal of officers, the ongoing recession and a presidential election stirring great interest. The world by 1997; the economic boom had taken off, Congress had already changed hands, these kinds of stories attracted interest. A few years later, I remember one news director saying 'we're in an era of stories on two headed cows.' Then...came 9/11. The advantage of a frenzy of national coverage is the pull of journalists probing into every detail, looking for ideas being glossed over or missed, and of course, making a name for themselves. The disadvantage is also the attraction of cranks, with worthless tips which distract from the investigation.

Um...you know that JonBenet was a girl right, and not a rich guy? Or are you referring to her dad? :waitasec:

The crime taking place in 1992 probably did hurt its chance when it came to media attention. However, I believe that the case would have had to have taken place in the 2000's for it get some national coverage. If it had taken place in the mid-late 90s, it would have been "competing" against OJ and JonBenet for the media's attention, and the media would go with those two cases over this one. After all, can you name another disappearance or murder that took place between 1994-1999 that got national attention?

The Disappeared episode is on YouTube so I'm going to watch it now. I have always found this case interesting, and being able to watch a show about a case helps me to understand it better, than reading about it. 48 Hours also did a special about this case back in the 90s.

 

[bystander77]

This is a totally unorthodox approach to a unique case, however, I figured I may as well throw it out there...
Has anyone attempted to contact Janis McCall or Bartt Streeter? Obviously, Janice is more likely to have more details about the case that are not known to the public, but I'm sure there are things that Bartt knows too that could be a big help in our search for information. As this case crawls towards 20 years, I'd hope they might consider the simple fact that by sharing information with the public or even in forums like this, that perhaps more ideas may come to light. While they have all suffered, presumably, an unspeakable loss, they may not have much to lose by sharing information with the public and striking more interest and dialogue in the case. Has anyone ever reached out to them?

Also, does anyone know if a private investigator was ever retained in this case? I'd be interested in seeing what sort of information was discovered by one if they existed.

I have driven by 1717 E Delmar a handful of times, and the robbery motive in my mind diminishes with each pass. There's way to many palaces around the Delmar home for a thief to even see it as they went past the Levitt home. The palaces are where the money/gold/etc would be sought.

I know I'm beating a dead horse on behalf of Janelle and Mike's strange behavior on Sunday. Perhaps Janelle (along with an unknown suspect(s)) lured them out for what was supposed to be a prank that went sour, but for some unknown reason was spared herself. Perhaps they returned the purses to the home on Sunday morning. It just doesn't seem right that all three of them would be next to eachother.. maybe the women here can speak for or against my notion..
Perhaps Janelle was aware of the prank, but not the end result, which could explain the excessive calls made on Sunday morning (trying to see if they were ok), the crying, etc. Perhaps the obscene calls made to the home were to remind her that she was next if she didn't stay quiet...
Does anyone have any word on SPD and the coring? They need to put this thing to bed or make a discovery that will ultimately get them closer to the goal. If it was my kin believed to be there, I would've personally cored the place out myself, and would've done so... well, in a fashion in which I couldn't be stopped once I started... I'll just put it that way.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Bartt reads on this board, but does not respond to questions. He has a website that archives many of the important mainstream media accounts of the case.

I do not blame him for choosing not to answer questions. First of all, once he was cleared as a suspect, as the most recent TV show on the case indicates, that fact never got out to the national public. And like many family members of crime victims, he has endured a lot of abuse on the internet from people who either don't know he was cleared or don't care. In addition, this crime was a terrible trauma and remains a lifetime sorrow. He gets to choose this, at least--to decide who and where to speak on the case. He did a great job on the Disappeared episode. So we are glad to have him on the board and are grateful for anything he contributes.

Others will have more information about your other question regarding the private investigator. I am not aware that one was hired by either family, and I am not sure what one could accomplish, given the contaminated crime scene. What the case needs is a top-notch cold case investigator like the guy who worked on the Adam Walsh case (he just co-wrote a book on that case but I can't call up the name from my overloaded brain.) Someone would need access to the case files--no doubt thousands of pages.

 

[:+:MrTT:+:]

Hello Mr Streeter​

 

[Kathee]

Bartt and Janis choose to remain quiet for the most part for obvious reasons. The McCall family has an investigator.

I agree with you bystander; the house is so far from the road and if you didn't know it was there you'd pass right by it. That's what make me sway toward it being an intentional act.

Still no word on the core.

 

[Hurricane]

Suppose the parking garage is cored by LE without a search warrant and the excalibur sword which has been speculated to be there from the scan was found and could be tied to a suspect. Could the sword ever be used as evidence in a court of law? I am told that it could not. It and everything else recovered would be lost as potential evidence without a search warrant. Does LE have enough to get a search warrant? Apparently not.