The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #6

Status
Not open for further replies.

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
In some ways that’s a little encouraging. It would appear that at least some in the investigation are willing to look ‘outside the box,’ and put their biases/prejudices aside from being overly familiar with the case and individuals involved. I was also encouraged recently by ‘new technology’ analyzing old evidence, getting good hard evidence in a case mostly of ‘he said/she said/they said,’ is nice.

I agree and a fresh set of eyes may have helped bring more leads, suspects, and evidence to light. Some of this may have come about from the 3 day conference with NCMEC, and also from SPD 'digitizing' all that evidence.
 

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
Actually, they did release some information that we didn't previously have. They made it clear that there is one sole male individual whose whereabouts are unaccounted for during the time from about 9 PM to 6 AM the next morning. They want someone to talk to them about this person. I have read about everything ever published about this case and can never remember that they were this specific. From what I gather this person is not one of the "usual suspects" that have been discussed.

I hadn't seen 9PM to 6AM anywhere, but I did read the report from the police stating:

"the suspect clearly spent a considerable amount of time out and about from late at night on Saturday, June 6, 1992 into the morning of Sunday, June 7, 1992."

That time frame is interesting. It leaves the door wide open for someone to have abducted/harmed Sherrill well before the girls allegedly got to the house at 2:30 AM.

Maybe the police are still considering the sighting of a man loitering around the neighborhood to be valid- at least within the context of Saturday evening. If the police thought the only crime that occurred happened after the girls got home- then the time frame would be smaller and say something like "early Sunday morning" rather than including Saturday night as well. I can think of a few reasons why they would include Saturday evening in the time frame:

1) They know something happened to Sherrill late Saturday evening
2) They consider the 'transient' to be the suspect and he was seen by the witness on Saturday evening
3) Both 1 & 2
4) ?

I'm taking the statement "into the morning of Sunday, June 7. 1992" to mean well into the morning. Like 11 AM or later.

I would think that an abduction of three women, driving somewhere to rape/kill/abandon them, and coming back home would take some time. It could be shorter if he left them imprisoned somewhere and returned later to do his thing, but that would be much riskier than killing them right away and being done with the whole deal. With that being said, I wonder what condition his clothes were in when he got home.
 

Jaya

New Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
30
Reaction score
4
I would think that an abduction of three women, driving somewhere to rape/kill/abandon them, and coming back home would take some time. It could be shorter if he left them imprisoned somewhere and returned later to do his thing, but that would be much riskier than killing them right away and being done with the whole deal. With that being said, I wonder what condition his clothes were in when he got home.

That is assuming that the abductor and the murderer are the same person/people. I know that there are a few of us who are not necessarily convinced that this is the only plausible scenario.
 

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
That is assuming that the abductor and the murderer are the same person/people. I know that there are a few of us who are not necessarily convinced that this is the only plausible scenario.

Ahhh, yes, another perp or two would certainly open up the possibilities within the "late Saturday night, early Sunday morning" timeframe publicized by the police.

I was actually applying the scenarios based on the timeframe statement released by the police. But, their lack of mentioning another suspect doesn't necessarily eliminate the fact that there may be another suspect.

When I first learned of this case a few years ago (I was stationed in England before coming back to the States), my original theory was that there was just one perp.

I've read extensively, both this forum and through my own research, and developed theories that included everything from one to several perps.

At the moment, I'm back on the one perp theory- but barely. I wouldn't be surprised if there were two, but I would be surprised if there was more than that.
 

Missouri Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
2,487
Reaction score
1,532
I hadn't seen 9PM to 6AM anywhere, but I did read the report from the police stating:

"the suspect clearly spent a considerable amount of time out and about from late at night on Saturday, June 6, 1992 into the morning of Sunday, June 7, 1992."

That time frame is interesting. It leaves the door wide open for someone to have abducted/harmed Sherrill well before the girls allegedly got to the house at 2:30 AM.

Maybe the police are still considering the sighting of a man loitering around the neighborhood to be valid- at least within the context of Saturday evening. If the police thought the only crime that occurred happened after the girls got home- then the time frame would be smaller and say something like "early Sunday morning" rather than including Saturday night as well. I can think of a few reasons why they would include Saturday evening in the time frame:

1) They know something happened to Sherrill late Saturday evening
2) They consider the 'transient' to be the suspect and he was seen by the witness on Saturday evening
3) Both 1 & 2
4) ?

I'm taking the statement "into the morning of Sunday, June 7. 1992" to mean well into the morning. Like 11 AM or later.

I would think that an abduction of three women, driving somewhere to rape/kill/abandon them, and coming back home would take some time. It could be shorter if he left them imprisoned somewhere and returned later to do his thing, but that would be much riskier than killing them right away and being done with the whole deal. With that being said, I wonder what condition his clothes were in when he got home.

I'm going to eat crow about a recent post as I can't find the specific time frames what I thought I had read. I sincerely thought I had read that somewhere but I haven't been able to lay my hands on it now. (I'm going to have to be more exacting in the future.)

The information I have been getting recently points to at least two perpetrators. Hurricane might want to opine here if he wishes.

This is the best I have been able to find at this time. This comes from "The Crime Scene." Maybe I did imagine it. I apologize for misleading you.

At the very least we know the police are referring to one male subject and if he "clearly" spent a considerable time out and about, etc., this comports with the recent information I have seen. What is particularly interesting about this is that the police state he "may" not have a history of violence. This suggests that he is not someone who has been discussed in the various forums. I would call this person "Mystery Man" and I do not know the identity of this person although I know the identities of the usual suspects bandied about. If, as I believe, two of the GJ3 suspects are in prison (as is Cox) and one's whereabouts are unknown but had a long history of bad behavior it reinforces the view that we are looking at someone not generally known to the public. I do believe this press release was carefully constructed by the police department, although they do leave themselves considerable "wiggle" room in the interpretation of their wording, i.e. "may not" instead of "does not", etc. Stated differently, even Cox could be fitted into this description of the suspect.

"The suspect clearly spent a considerable amount of time out and about from late at night on Saturday, June 6, 1992, into the morning of Sunday, June 7, 1992. The suspect had to have been unaccounted for at the time of the crime. Someone who knew or lived with the suspect in 1992 likely would have been aware of this fact. In addition, in order to explain his whereabouts on the night of the crime, the suspect may have fabricated a story regarding his activities.
-
Around the time of the crime, the suspect may have spent a considerable amount of time in, or may otherwise have been familiar with, the area of the crime, and he may have frequently been out and about at odd hours. The suspect also may have developed an interest in the victims.
-
People who know the suspect may not believe that he is capable of committing this type of crime, and he may not have a history of committing crimes of violence."

http://crimesceneinvestigations.blo...0-05:00&max-results=20&start=20&by-date=false


 

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
This is the best I have been able to find at this time. This comes from "The Crime Scene." Maybe I did imagine it. I apologize for misleading you.

Oh, no, please don't apologize!

In my post, I was trying to point out that I thought it was significant that the police included "late Saturday night into the morning of Sunday" as a timeframe for the crime.

(I just figured I hadn't seen the info on the 9PM to 6AM, yet, and I was going to search it out.)

I cerainly don't feel that your post was misleading. You and some others on this forum have been most informative! :)
 

Jaya

New Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
30
Reaction score
4
The information I have been getting recently points to at least two perpetrators.

I have also for a long time believed that there are at least 2 perpetrators, but perhaps more- at least 2 involved in the abduction and 1 who murdered the women. I also believe that those who were sent to abduct the women may not have known that they were going to be murdered. If it is true that the police pretty much know what happened but don't have the evidence to prove it, this would make sense and fit with the statement they released earlier this year about this person not necessarily having a history of violence and that those close to him would never suspect that he would commit this type of crime. If they are referring to the person who abducted the women, and if the abductor did not know that the women would be killed, it would make perfect sense for this individual to not have a violent criminal record or be suspected by his family or friends.

Someone without a history of violence does not go out one night and murder 3 women without making a mistake, pulling off a perfect crime.
 

kemo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
1,655
Reaction score
1,131
I offer up the case of Cary Stayner and the Yosemite murders as an example of how one guy can abduct, murder and dispose of the bodies of three women with only a knife. He had no criminal record and a good standing in the community. He would have gotten clean away had he not committed another murder that was not nearly so well executed. I am using this example to illustrate that it is possible for one man to pull off such a crime without any criminal experience.

The girls arived home at around 2:30 AM and appear to have gotten in bed as if everything was OK. We do not know for sure that Sherill was alive or alone in bed when the girls arrived. Was there someone hiding in her closet?, was Sherill already dead? We don't know. We only know that Stacy and Suzy went to bed as if everything was fine. We also know that Sherill did not expect Suzy to come home that night. (if Suzy let her know, it would have been after 2:00 AM). Even a total stranger would know that teenage girls don't always come home on Saturday nights. If some creep was "waiting for Suzy to get home" most likely he would "call it a night" before 2:30AM. This is strongly suggestive that nobody was "waiting" for Suzy to come home but it doesn't rule it out entirely.

There was no sign of forced entry and no signs of a struggle. This again is highly suggestive that someone in the house let the perp in and he was able to control them with minimal struggle. It stands to reason that, confronted with a total stranger in their home, there would have been some resistance.

All this leads to the conclusion that someone the women knew came by after the girls were in bed and someone in the home, who knew and trusted that person, (or persons) let them in where they were caught by surprise.

I'll admit that there are other possible explainations and there may be information out that might change the above senerio, but I feel pretty strongly that this fits strongly with known facts.
 

Missouri Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
2,487
Reaction score
1,532
I offer up the case of Cary Stayner and the Yosemite murders as an example of how one guy can abduct, murder and dispose of the bodies of three women with only a knife. He had no criminal record and a good standing in the community. He would have gotten clean away had he not committed another murder that was not nearly so well executed. I am using this example to illustrate that it is possible for one man to pull off such a crime without any criminal experience.

The girls arived home at around 2:30 AM and appear to have gotten in bed as if everything was OK. We do not know for sure that Sherill was alive or alone in bed when the girls arrived. Was there someone hiding in her closet?, was Sherill already dead? We don't know. We only know that Stacy and Suzy went to bed as if everything was fine. We also know that Sherill did not expect Suzy to come home that night. (if Suzy let her know, it would have been after 2:00 AM). Even a total stranger would know that teenage girls don't always come home on Saturday nights. If some creep was "waiting for Suzy to get home" most likely he would "call it a night" before 2:30AM. This is strongly suggestive that nobody was "waiting" for Suzy to come home but it doesn't rule it out entirely.

There was no sign of forced entry and no signs of a struggle. This again is highly suggestive that someone in the house let the perp in and he was able to control them with minimal struggle. It stands to reason that, confronted with a total stranger in their home, there would have been some resistance.

All this leads to the conclusion that someone the women knew came by after the girls were in bed and someone in the home, who knew and trusted that person, (or persons) let them in where they were caught by surprise.

I'll admit that there are other possible explanations and there may be information out that might change the above scenario, but I feel pretty strongly that this fits strongly with known facts.

A couple of points and I am familiar with the Stayner case.

We don't know where Sherrill was after the phone call to the house at about 11:15 PM. She may not have been in the house when the girls arrived home. Stated differently, she may already have been abducted. We don't know if the girls talked to her when they arrived.

Secondly, I have been getting some information (that I believe to be reliable) that there was in fact some signs of forced entry AND that there was some forensic evidence left behind. If that is true then it goes to the probability that it was someone known to the women.

Minor point. I think it is more likely they arrived at about 2:50 AM as they didn't leave the Kirby house until 2:20 AM according to the mother. It is about 12 miles to the Delmar address from Battlefield.
 

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
I offer up the case of Cary Stayner and the Yosemite murders as an example of how one guy can abduct, murder and dispose of the bodies of three women with only a knife. He had no criminal record and a good standing in the community. He would have gotten clean away had he not committed another murder that was not nearly so well executed. I am using this example to illustrate that it is possible for one man to pull off such a crime without any criminal experience.

Controlling three women could be done using the elements of fear and surprise. If the perp was holding a gun to, lets say, Sherrill's head, and demanding Suzy and Stacy comply with his demands, then yes, I think it could happen. The girls would go along with him wanting to believe his promises of 'do as i say and no one will get hurt' or some such stuff. Despite what happens on tv, not everyone turns into a ninja when placed in a dangerous situation.

There's also the example of the Groene's murder and kidnapping. Five people were ambushed, murdered, and attacked by a lone psycho.
 

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
Secondly, I have been getting some information (that I believe to be reliable) that there was in fact some signs of forced entry AND that there was some forensic evidence left behind. If that is true then it goes to the probability that it was someone known to the women.

Does the sign of forced entry include something besides the front door? I've never been completely comfortable with the theory that the front door was the entrance/exit point.

I would think that someone trying to get three women out of a house- and avoid detection- would use a darker entrance/exit point. Some place that was not well lit by the porch light and the yard light.
 

Missouri Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
2,487
Reaction score
1,532
Does the sign of forced entry include something besides the front door? I've never been completely comfortable with the theory that the front door was the entrance/exit point.

I would think that someone trying to get three women out of a house- and avoid detection- would use a darker entrance/exit point. Some place that was not well lit by the porch light and the yard light.

Honestly, I don't know but two people whose knowledge of this case I trust have indicated there was some evidence of forced entry.

There were also reports of some shady characters who were in the neighborhood that night and that a pocket knife was dropped by a window that might be used to cut the outside screen. As I recall they were scared off. It may or may not have had something to do with this crime. Which brings up the GJ3. I believe all three had histories of burglaries in their resumes. (And if my recollection is faulty, anyone can readily correct me. It is impossible to keep up with all of the news reports over the years.)

We know for a certainty that at least one of the GJ3 had a rather sordid history of sexual assault. It has been postulated by another poster that a "sexual deviant" might be involved. I think that is entirely possible. There must have been some reason for the prosecutor to present those names to the 1994 grand jury. I don't know what it was or what reason or evidence was provided as there was no indictments handed down.

I am more drawn to the idea that there is someone we haven't discussed much, if at all, who had formed some bond or friendship or other relationship with one or more of the women who could have gotten the door opened at that time of night. The story has become somewhat muddled over time and I wouldn't bet the farm on it but I think it should be strongly considered.

I do believe that one or more of the "usual suspects" probably played a hand in the actual murders of the women later on. And I don't think any of these individuals was necessarily the brightest bulbs in the chandelier. But murder doesn't require a high IQ. Getting that door unlocked probably did.
 

Jaya

New Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
30
Reaction score
4
I do believe that one or more of the "usual suspects" probably played a hand in the actual murders of the women later on. And I don't think any of these individuals was necessarily the brightest bulbs in the chandelier. But murder doesn't require a high IQ. Getting that door unlocked probably did.

I would agree with this. I also don't necessarily think that the bodies are hidden in concrete anywhere or anything complicated like that. I was watching something recently about a college student who had disappeared and every field and body of water around her city was searched extensively. It wasn't until several years later (maybe 8?) that a hiker discovered her remains deep in a wooded area because he had ventured off of the marked trails. LE acknowledged that it was a stroke of luck that her remains were found, because if he hadn't gone off the trail in that exact spot, the woods were so deep that no one would have ever seen her. Anyone who has ever lived in the Ozarks knows how many thousands of acres of densely wooded areas there are around Springfield. I would put my dollar on them being in a remote (or at least secluded) wooded area.
 

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
I would agree with this. I also don't necessarily think that the bodies are hidden in concrete anywhere or anything complicated like that. I was watching something recently about a college student who had disappeared and every field and body of water around her city was searched extensively. It wasn't until several years later (maybe 8?) that a hiker discovered her remains deep in a wooded area because he had ventured off of the marked trails. LE acknowledged that it was a stroke of luck that her remains were found, because if he hadn't gone off the trail in that exact spot, the woods were so deep that no one would have ever seen her. Anyone who has ever lived in the Ozarks knows how many thousands of acres of densely wooded areas there are around Springfield. I would put my dollar on them being in a remote (or at least secluded) wooded area.

I agree. I think it's much riskier to dump the bodies in a construction area, and 'hope' nobody discovers them during the time between them being dumped and the concrete being poured.

It's much less of a risk- and much easier- to bury or dump them in a secluded location. Especially a densely wooded location, where the chances of someone stumbling across them are much more remote.

Of course, a body of water would do the same thing, if it was deep enough and remote enough.

I agree with your theory, Jaya, they are in a remote, secluded, wooded area.
 

Missouri Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
2,487
Reaction score
1,532
I would agree with this. I also don't necessarily think that the bodies are hidden in concrete anywhere or anything complicated like that. I was watching something recently about a college student who had disappeared and every field and body of water around her city was searched extensively. It wasn't until several years later (maybe 8?) that a hiker discovered her remains deep in a wooded area because he had ventured off of the marked trails. LE acknowledged that it was a stroke of luck that her remains were found, because if he hadn't gone off the trail in that exact spot, the woods were so deep that no one would have ever seen her. Anyone who has ever lived in the Ozarks knows how many thousands of acres of densely wooded areas there are around Springfield. I would put my dollar on them being in a remote (or at least secluded) wooded area.

That is certainly true. It can be so thick with vegetation that one could literally walk right over the remains and not even seen anything. And after 20 years and the animals there may be little to nothing left of the bones. It is said that some of these places are so dense with trees, bushes, and the like it is necessary to pipe in sunlight.
 

Indianagirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
1,262
Reaction score
53
Actually, they did release some information that we didn't previously have. They made it clear that there is one sole male individual whose whereabouts are unaccounted for during the time from about 9 PM to 6 AM the next morning. They want someone to talk to them about this person. I have read about everything ever published about this case and can never remember that they were this specific. From what I gather this person is not one of the "usual suspects" that have been discussed.

Are you saying, according to the news article, there is one specific male that LE has identified in private (unknown to the public) that has unknown whereabouts the night of the crime?
 

Missouri Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
2,487
Reaction score
1,532
Are you saying, according to the news article, there is one specific male that LE has identified in private (unknown to the public) that has unknown whereabouts the night of the crime?

All I can say (or know) is that a source that I have been in touch with has strongly indicated there is such a person and that he is someone not generally discussed. (Yes, I believe the police know his identity) I've tried everything to pry the name out but have been unsuccessful. However, one or more of the "usual suspects" were also strongly suspected as being involved, but apparently after the actual act of abductions.

Hurricane may not want me to say this (and he is not my source) but I believe he knows the name of this male subject. He has done a lot of work on this case, having reviewed much material and I would go with what he brings to the table. He probably has more expertise about this case than anyone who has posted here.

I will tell you this. I believe I know the names of the GJ3. But I can't definitively link them to the crime. And evidently neither could the prosecutor as he didn't bring indictments. How Cox figures in this I am not sure. For a long time I believed he could have been the sole perpetrator, and still hold out that possibility but the consensus of others is that he isn't. I am agnostic at this point.
 

Auramyst

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
130
Reaction score
23
As a helpful reference, I'm going to post some threads from an earlier discussion referring to possible suspects:

From this forum, thread 5, page 10, post #238:

Kemo:
I came up with the following list. These are names that have come up in various discussions. I have no idea if they include the "12".

1) Gerald Carnahan: DOB 1958 Abducted, raped murdered and concealed body of Jackie Johns in Ozark Mo in 1985. No other known connection.
2) Francis Robb: DOB ? killed three people in early 1990 And disposed of their bodies. This was apparently not sex related. He was convicted and died in prison.
3) Ricky Evans: DOB ? Close friend of Robb who might have been involved in the triple murder. Later convicted of a different double murder (non-sexual) and disposing of bodies by feeding to hogs on his farm.
4) Darrel Felton: DOB ? Friend of Evans, grandson of Robb. Was witness against Evans.
All three above were meth using low-lifes who lived in the rural area east
of Springfield.
5) Melvin Cheney: DOB (early 1960's) convicted of 1/19/91 abduction/rape/murder/ with body disposal of Trudie Davis who was abducted from convenience store where she worked. There are two similar crimes in the general area (about an hour north of Springfield) that are unsolved that he is suspected of.
6) Jesse Rush: DOB 1976 (brother of Melvin) convicted, with Melvin of the Trudie Davis caper. His statement implicated two other men who were never charged (Greg Cheevers and a Marshall Cheevers) and, in a letter to another inmate, made references to having killed several other women Jesse and Melvin were living in Camden county Mo
7) Robert Cox DOB 1960 History of Rape/murder in Fl+ other sex and property crimes. Serving long sentence in Texas. Made statements suggesting he knew something of murder but nothing solid. No known ties to women
8) Stephen Eugene Garrison: DOB ? Raped a student in Springfield in 1993 serving 40 year sentence . He apparently claimed bodies were buried on Francis Robb's farm. No know connection to women.
9) Mike Kovacs:, DOB 1975 Suzie's former boyfriend. Associated with of the
Graverobbers. Supposedly had rock solid alibi
10) Dustin Recla: Graverobber
11) Michael Clay: Graverobber
12) Joseph Riedel: Graverobber All three of the Graverobber have pretty well convinced LE they were not involved. Statements from LE claim they were cleared but there are reports that some involved in the investigation feel they should be investigated further.
13) 36-year-old man from Springfield (Grand Jury three)
14) 28-year-old man from Kansas(Grand Jury three)
15) 28-year-old man who was originally from Cedar County, Mo(Grand Jury three) the Grand Jury Three were recent paroles fm the Kansas system who arrived in Springfield a month before the abduction. As the Grand Jury is conducted in secret, it is not know what, if any connection they had to the crime but no indictment was issued.
16) Bart Streeter: DOB 1965 Brother of Suzie, Long history of Substance abuse and minor crimes. Generally considered to have been leared during initial investigation.
17) Chris Revak DOB 1973 Committed suicide after arrest for sex related murder in Ava Mo. Is a strong suspect in two other similar murders, Internet rumors place him in Springfield area in 1992 but LE has played down any interest in him

and then the following post:
post #239:
Missouri Mule:
That's a pretty complete list. I can tell you that there is one duplicate on there if you look closely. I also do not believe the perps who murdered Trudy Darby were involved. And Revak wasn't on anyone's radar until he turned up dead in jail from a suicide.
I would add to the list any known associates or related people to the elder Francis Robb as well, in particular two other people.

and then a following post:
Hmmmwhoknows:
Add Ricky Eugene Dykes and Teddy Gale Roberts and Mike Hiram Henson to that list.

I thought this might be helpful to folks as a reference to who's who and their possible connection in the 3MW case.
 

Hurricane

Active Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
899
Reaction score
166
All I can say (or know) is that a source that I have been in touch with has strongly indicated there is such a person and that he is someone not generally discussed. (Yes, I believe the police know his identity) I've tried everything to pry the name out but have been unsuccessful. However, one or more of the "usual suspects" were also strongly suspected as being involved, but apparently after the actual act of abductions.

Hurricane may not want me to say this (and he is not my source) but I believe he knows the name of this male subject. He has done a lot of work on this case, having reviewed much material and I would go with what he brings to the table. He probably has more expertise about this case than anyone who has posted here.

I will tell you this. I believe I know the names of the GJ3. But I can't definitively link them to the crime. And evidently neither could the prosecutor as he didn't bring indictments. How Cox figures in this I am not sure. For a long time I believed he could have been the sole perpetrator, and still hold out that possibility but the consensus of others is that he isn't. I am agnostic at this point.

Maybe you are interpreting SPD's statement incorrectly and reading too much into it. I'm not going to even confirm there is a mystery man, but assuming there is and I know his identity I'm not going to release that info publicly or privately and have it published on every forum that discusses this case within 15 minutes. If true, to do so would be jeopardizing this case.
 

Missouri Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
2,487
Reaction score
1,532
Maybe you are interpreting SPD's statement incorrectly and reading too much into it. I'm not going to even confirm there is a mystery man, but assuming there is and I know his identity I'm not going to release that info publicly or privately and have it published on every forum that discusses this case within 15 minutes. If true, to do so would be jeopardizing this case.

I didn't expect or want you to. I was just trying to be as responsive to the previous posts and knew that you more likely than not had the information I had been seeking. Assuming such a person existed, as I believe, I wanted to look into his background and see if I could make sense of this case.

I think, like most who have looked at this case, we are just frustrated that it hasn't seen justice. Personally, I am out of ideas where to proceed. I appreciate your response and am going to step off the stage until new information is released.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top