TX TX - Julie Moseley, 9, Mary Trlica, 17, Lisa Wilson, 14, Fort Worth, 23 Dec 1974 #8

New Posts

Valiant said:
I've never seen this verified. I'd count it as a rumor. Especially since I've never seen a definite police statement such as "We have direct evidence the girls were at the mall that day."
Click to expand...
Some of the things that make this case so difficult are that it is rife with unsubstantiated rumors presented as fact, people inserting themselves into the story, and inaccuracies in reporting that have never been corrected. jmo
 
Valiant said:
I've never seen this verified. I'd count it as a rumor. Especially since I've never seen a definite police statement such as "We have direct evidence the girls were at the mall that day."
Click to expand...

LE seem to think that they were (although I hope they are not basing this solely on the fact that the car was there that evening), but as you say they have never said anything 100% definitive. JMO, I think they probably were at the Mall sometime that morning, I am about 60/40 on that one. I think the sighting back at the house (12:30pm ?) was after they returned from A/N store and the Mall. I base this on a comment that I read somewhere from TM saying that the earlier timeline was the correct one.

A couple of things that make me wonder about them making it as far as the Mall is :-

- To date no purchases from the Mall have been found, yet at least some of the A/N purchases were still in the car.
- They did not meet the girls they arranged to meet there (at 1pm ?)

For me, the second point is perhaps the more relevant. Back in pre-cell days you generally turned up for appointments that you had made. Even if they didn't meet the other girls, but were in the Mall at that time, there is a reasonably good chance that the two groups of girls would have 'bumped' into each other. I would imagine that they would have 'hung out' in the same type of shops.

I seem to recall reading that Dan James had a timeline that went to 4pm that day. I would love to know what that was, as I think whatever fate befell the three girls occurred around 1pm - 2pm that day.
 
"Even if they didn't meet the other girls, but were in the Mall at that time, there is a reasonably good chance that the two groups of girls would have 'bumped' into each other. I would imagine that they would have 'hung out' in the same type of shops."

Yes.
We have an expression in France that says "Le Monde est petit" ("The world is small"). It means that wherever you go, whether it's shopping or the seaside or a public party, the likelihood of running into someone you know is generally high.
Plus, I'm told Fort Worth wasn't as big in the '70s. Plus I hear Rachel was still in school.

"as I think whatever fate befell the three girls occurred around 1pm - 2pm that day."
Yes, I also think, as do others, that the disappearance took place very early in the afternoon.
 
Florent B said:
Apart a link to this adress for TT, interesting is the proximity of Rachel and TT marriage date (as indicated above) of June 8,1974, to the business's incorporation date of 20 June 1974. Less than two weeks !
Click to expand...
Then also look at the date of the deed on the Arnold home on 6th Ave. it was rented prior to June of 74 and no bank listed as financing it in the deed. Very interesting indeed.
 
If I'm not mistaken, TT's father died on June 19, 1974, so the incorporation of the company with CA took place just the next day.
 
Florent B said:
"We have an expression in France that says "Le Monde est petit" ("The world is small"). It means that wherever you go, whether it's shopping or the seaside or a public party, the likelihood of running into someone you know is generally high.
Plus, I'm told Fort Worth wasn't as big in the '70s. Plus I hear Rachel was still in school.
Click to expand...
Florent B said:
"as I think whatever fate befell the three girls occurred around 1pm - 2pm that day."
Yes, I also think, as do others, that the disappearance took place very early in the afternoon.
Click to expand...
RSBM
The kids were all out of school, people would've been out-and-about, preparing for the Holidays.
Although Seminary South was not far from the A/N store, there are a number of parks and lake areas within a 4 mile radius of A/N store that the girls could've gone to or been taken to, some of which have a very dark history (Cobb Park, for example).
A few members of FWPD stated they felt the girls never left Fort Worth. LE had to know what went on in their town. Some of them may even have been involved. jmo
 
Last edited:
T rex said:
I tend to believe that the girls did make it to the mall but then left and the Oldsmobile was later returned and staged.
Click to expand...
T rex said:
The question for me is what is the real reason for them having went to the mall because I believe the shopping trip ended at the Army Navy. In my opinion if we knew the real reasons for things leading up to the girls disapperance we would have most of the answers.
Click to expand...
RSBM
It's been suggested that Rachel was pregnant when she disappeared. While I do not believe she was wilfully cheating on her husband, I do believe she might've been in a situation that got her pregnant involuntarily (possibly with someone connected to LE), and either ran into the man or planned to confront him that day.
I'm not sure where the meeting took place, but it did not go well, and three girls vanished. The car was planted at SS, because that's where the perpetrator wanted people to think the girls had been, and at some point Rachel's family (either willingly or under duress) invented the sightings and started the narrative "last seen shopping at Seminary South"...
If they were responsible for her being used by Mr. X to start with, I can see where they wouldn't want that to get out.
Also, someone higher up in LE or heavily connected to LE would have the connections and ability to get away with murder and intimidate a bunch of kids.
This is just a theory and jmo.
 
What worth was the nine-year-old to the man/men?

Unless they were planning on gifting Julie to those people in the middle 1970s who made those repugnant "special movies" that a year or two later were used as the antagonists in a plot in an episode of "The Sweeney" on ITV in the UK.
 
Brightchaser47 said:
RSBM
It's been suggested that Rachel was pregnant when she disappeared. While I do not believe she was wilfully cheating on her husband, I do believe she might've been in a situation that got her pregnant involuntarily (possibly with someone connected to LE), and either ran into the man or planned to confront him that day.
I'm not sure where the meeting took place, but it did not go well, and three girls vanished. The car was planted at SS, because that's where the perpetrator wanted people to think the girls had been, and at some point Rachel's family (either willingly or under duress) invented the sightings and started the narrative "last seen shopping at Seminary South"...
If they were responsible for her being used by Mr. X to start with, I can see where they wouldn't want that to get out.
Also, someone higher up in LE or heavily connected to LE would have the connections and ability to get away with murder and intimidate a bunch of kids.
This is just a theory and jmo.
Click to expand...
I have often wondered about LE involvement, also, but I can't figure how the 'Runaway' letter fits into this scenario (as I believe it was written by someone close to Rachel).
 
jetsfanjohn said:
I have often wondered about LE involvement, also, but I can't figure how the 'Runaway' letter fits into this scenario (as I believe it was written by someone close to Rachel).
Click to expand...
Assuming this scenario, Rachel's parents would have a pretty good idea who was responsible for the girls going missing, as it would be someone they knew through previous contact. They needed a diversion to make sure people didn't make the connection.
TT seemingly looked up to his father- in-law, and may have been complicit in writing the letter, but could've been instructed to do so. We've discussed how the A family could've manipulated TT for his money-- they could've also done so regarding the letter.
I don't necessarily believe Det. Wilbanks was involved in the disappearance itself, but he may well have known who was. I don't believe at this point it was coincidence that he was put in charge of the case, and the one who handled the letter.
All jmo.
 
Brightchaser47 said:
Also, someone higher up in LE or heavily connected to LE would have the connections and ability to get away with murder and intimidate a bunch of kids.
This is just a theory and jmo.
Click to expand...

You just described the mall security. It's possible. If I was looking at that angle then that's probably where I would focus. We know about the former police officer Hutchins at Sears and then there was the head of security at JC Penny that I also believe was an FW police officer at one time. And don't forget about the head of security at Buddies Super Market. His brother was the Dallas chief of police and later Austin.
 
Brightchaser47 said:
RSBM
Could he have been a Tarrant County deputy? He's not listed on FWPD's roster.
Click to expand...

I don't know but I think I was going on a few articles such as this one. It refers to him as a reserve in this one so maybe that's all he ever was. Of course it may not even be the same person.

chrome_screenshot_Mar 21, 2024 12_06_14 PM EDT.png
 
Anamaeisme1 said:
Im wondering what would could the time line fore these girls couls be?
Click to expand...
The following are approximate guesses on my part.

I would have all three at the Moseley house around 10.30am then at the A/N store around 11.00am. Maybe a short trip to the Mall and back at Rachel's House at 12.30pm. After that is anyone's guess, but I don't think they made second later trip to the Mall, as they did not meet the girls they were due to meet there at 1.00pm. They may even have been 'gone' by 1.00pm.
 
falkenberg3132 said:
What worth was the nine-year-old to the man/men?

Unless they were planning on gifting Julie to those people in the middle 1970s who made those repugnant "special movies" that a year or two later were used as the antagonists in a plot in an episode of "The Sweeney" on ITV in the UK.
Click to expand...

I think someone was supposed to respond with "Oooh, what does THAT mean?" So, I'll take one for the team.

What is this all about?
 
PGHJW said:
I think someone was supposed to respond with "Oooh, what does THAT mean?" So, I'll take one for the team.

What is this all about?
Click to expand...
Basically i wondered what did they want with Julie Moseley and what did might they have done with her. Unfortunately, I'm also an anglophile old telly buff and was posting with mental energy reserves all but tapped out. Sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 53 more.
Total: 3,944 (members: 54, guests: 3,890)

Online statistics

Members online
54
Guests online
3,890
Total visitors
3,944
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,490
Messages
17,969,769
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top