TN TN - Kathy Jones, 12, Nashville, 29 Nov 1969 #1

December said:

The daughters were not with him. He had dropped them off and was on his way home when he saw Kathy walking. this is why she didn't accept the ride, she didn't recognize him without his daughters.

i thought we weren't even sure hd had a bus? but, i have seen a reference where they specifically did say the rd bus picked them up and dropped them off. but, i can't link it up since there are a bunch of people's personal emails etc all over it. however, it is still one person's memory. i did quote it earlier in the thread somewhere... i think. but, this is where i read it.

you carried these cards in your purse? this is what i am wondering about. not just owning cards, but having them inside a purse and carrying them around. i mean, i guess she probably did. but, i didn't know would this be a thing to carry always or a thing to carry only ifyou had plans to use them.

Click to expand...

bbm: To be honest, I don't specifically remember whether I carried them in my purse, but I PROBABLY did, right after I got them, 'cause they were NEW and CUTE and all, LOL -- that is, if I even routinely carried a purse at around age 10 (which I may not have). Now by 12, I'd pretty surely be carrying a purse, but I do think I was not yet 12.

I guess I'm saying that if they were a new or especially treasured acquisition, Kathy may have kept them in her purse routinely -- or, very likely, as you are saying, she may have thought she might have an opportunity to play cards at the rink or wherever that evening and so put them in there for that purpose.

:+:MrTT:+: said:

Thank you for the response to my question. Either the cards were already there, discarded by someone else, or they were hers, or they were left by the killer. I am just assuming the cards were in a card box, and I assume we are talking about a whole deck of cards and not just a few.

Until you find out more about whom they belong to ask if it was a box of cards and the box was found also.

If they still have them, and a box maybe they could dust for prints once again. If they ever dusted any of the cards found from the scene.

But something is telling me that the killer kept a card from the stack. I believe it was a whole set. 52 i assume was written on the box. He kept a card so if ever he decided to taunt the police and for whatever reason call them with information he could mention that card and the LEOS would know this person knows something.

Have them see if a hi value card is missing. Ace through 10. But especially look and see if the A of hearts or King of diamonds are missing. It could be any really, the joker, Ace of spades etc.

I just have a hunch if those cards are related to the crime scene, They belonged to the killer and not Kathy. But just guessing. But it doesn't change my suspicion that the killer kept a card from the deck.

Click to expand...

according what i've read, the cards were scattered. they weren't in a box. but, there should be a box, now that i think about it, or a rubberband or some way of keeping them together and neat (for normal, not crime scene purposes).

i think the killer probably did keep a card from the deck.

what is the significance of ace of hearts and king of diamonds?

the killer may well have thought he would taunt the police until he saw them rounding up anybody and everybody for questioning (some of these they arrested for various small crimes). i am a little surprised that, after the crime went unsolved in spite of this, he didn't try to taunt them. maybe he just moved.

December said:

The daughters were not with him. He had dropped them off and was on his way home when he saw Kathy walking. this is why she didn't accept the ride, she didn't recognize him without his daughters.

i thought we weren't even sure hd had a bus? but, i have seen a reference where they specifically did say the rd bus picked them up and dropped them off. but, i can't link it up since there are a bunch of people's personal emails etc all over it. however, it is still one person's memory. i did quote it earlier in the thread somewhere... i think. but, this is where i read it.

you carried these cards in your purse? this is what i am wondering about. not just owning cards, but having them inside a purse and carrying them around. i mean, i guess she probably did. but, i didn't know would this be a thing to carry always or a thing to carry only ifyou had plans to use them.

Click to expand...

bbm: Did we glean from comments on some blog or something that this man was questioned by LE, sort of in a POI way? Or am I confusing him with someone else...?

December said:

according what i've read, the cards were scattered. they weren't in a box. but, there should be a box, now that i think about it, or a rubberband or some way of keeping them together and neat (for normal, not crime scene purposes).

i think the killer probably did keep a card from the deck.

what is the significance of ace of hearts and king of diamonds?

the killer may well have thought he would taunt the police until he saw them rounding up anybody and everybody for questioning (some of these they arrested for various small crimes). i am a little surprised that, after the crime went unsolved in spite of this, he didn't try to taunt them. maybe he just moved.

Click to expand...

I dunno -- especially if this guy WAS pretty much a disorganized perp, who attacked Kathy on impulse where she was found and left things "as they were" when he fled, I'm not sure he'd be the "type" to take a "trophy" or to plan on taunting... . But maybe, because I'm surely no expert...

Backwoods said:

I almost have to think that LE would have checked with Kathy's mom to verify the cards were (or were not) hers -- I sure hope so!

I agree with bessie, though, that it doesn't seem unusual for a girl Kathy's age to have a deck of cards in her purse. I can remember playing various card games with friends at about that age.

Maybe there were times during skating outings where kids took a break and playing cards was something they did at those times...? Then, for sure, Kathy might have taken some. Also, at that age, sometimes girls just like to have something to carry in their purses -- any little thing of interest, etc.

This has reminded me of a memory of my own. Around the same time (1969 or so, I mean) I remember buying a little "mini" deck of cards, at Woolworth's in Macon I think -- they had a design on the back of a teddy bear dressed as a fireman, and I just thought they were so cute. I probably toted them around for awhile, kind of a "treasure". (Kathy was born a couple of years before me, so maybe I was a little younger -- maybe 10 instead of 12, etc.) It'd be interesting to know if the backs of the cards Kathy had were novel in some way -- pretty flowers, cute animals, etc. -- and whether they were full-size or maybe a mini deck like I had.

Click to expand...

someone from the police in an article called them 'her little playing cards' so that makes me think there was something girly or small about them that caught his notice. maybe she had the mini deck. this would also make sense for a purse (i can't imagine her having a large purse being so young), it'd fit better. i can see her carrying such a thing around. there was a woolworth's close to where she lived, too.

Backwoods said:

I dunno -- especially if this guy WAS pretty much a disorganized perp, who attacked Kathy on impulse where she was found and left things "as they were" when he fled, I'm not sure he'd be the "type" to take a "trophy" or to plan on taunting... . But maybe, because I'm surely no expert...

Click to expand...

i know it looks disorganized, but the crime is unsolved after nearly 45 years and at least 20 detectives trying to solve it. so... this makes me think that it isn't exactly what it appears.

of course, that type might not take a trophy either.

December said:

someone from the police in an article called them 'her little playing cards' so that makes me think there was something girly or small about them that caught his notice. maybe she had the mini deck. this would also make sense for a purse (i can't imagine her having a large purse being so young), it'd fit better. i can see her carrying such a thing around. there was a woolworth's close to where she lived, too.

Click to expand...

RE: "her little playing cards" -- could definitely mean a small-scaled deck, but then -- December, you are from the South, I think, so maybe you will know what I'm saying here -- in my mind, I can hear folks (I'm thinking my grandmother or my mom, specifically) using "little" to refer to any possession of a child or other vulnerable person, ESPECIALLY one who is being treated badly, hurt, misjudged, etc. For example, in Kathy's case, maybe: "That monster just ripped the lining of her little coat!" etc. Not meaning so much, I think, that the coat is small (though it probably was, relatively) but that it belonged to a vulnerable person who was treated badly...

But it does make sense that, if she had the opportunity, Kathy would have liked owning a compact, cute little deck of cards, just as I did. (I think I bought them with my allowance.)

December said:

i know it looks disorganized, but the crime is unsolved after nearly 45 years and at least 20 detectives trying to solve it. so... this makes me think that it isn't exactly what it appears.

of course, that type might not take a trophy either.

Click to expand...

As I said, I'm no expert, but I do think that, as criminal typologies go, "that type" -- the organized kind -- would be more likely to take a trophy. And I am not saying I'm convinced yet that the killer was a disorganized type or that she was not taken and held captive, etc. -- still pondering and waiting for more info to come in from your efforts!

December, the Retrospect "facts" originally published in the Banner, the ones that bessie listed a few posts back: States that Kathy's folks were separated. But you said her father had died not long before, right? (I realize that both can be true!)

bessie said:

A dark b&w photo accompanies the article. I'll try to scan it later, but it's so dark, I don't think scanning will work well. General description:

The photo is taken from a viewpoint about 6 feet from K's body. Between the photographer and the body is a narrow path of pressed down weeds and grass. At the end of the pathway is K's body lying horizontally, and covered by what appears to be a white sheet. On either side of the pathway and behind K are tall weeds, at least three feet high. Strewn about in front of the sheet are light colored objects that look like pieces of paper, perhaps something used by the investigators. It's very hard to distinguish.

Click to expand...

looking forward to seeing your photo.
I may be able to do some editing on it. To brighten it up if need be.

Bessie, I thanked you for your posting with the additional details from the banner -- but that didn't seem like enough. This really pulls together so many of the crime scene specifics that we all were questioning. Thank you for going the extra mile to make that available. :yourock:

With all the conversation about playing cards, I will say that my son (11) carries cards in his backpack just in case he can get a game of 'something' in on the bus ride home from school. Honestly, I think he and his buds just make up games to pass the time. When bored, he will even play solitaire. Maybe this was the same for Kathy. When I saw Bessie's comment about the photo with little slips of paper lying around I immediately thought, ah...her playing cards.

Backwoods said:

Wow, bessie, some of this sounds a good bit different from what we've had thus far, doesn't it?

I'm anxious to hear what December has to say about the differences. I do remember December has said, more or less, that sometimes the Banner got things wrong ...

Click to expand...

They did.

They had a tendency to jump to conclusions.

Most people in Nashville had already read The Tennessean which was the morning paper. So, the Banner comes along in the afternoon and does their own take on the same story. But, their take was more... sensationalistic maybe?

If they actually interview a named person and have a direct quote MAYBE you can trust that.

But, if they're the only ones saying something then they probably more or less made it up.

If we had The Tennessean that ran in the morning, then that is where a lot of their facts (that turn out to be right) are from.. they just took them from there.

The doctor they name was probably a doctor who did those things sometimes and they jumped to the conclusion he would. Of course, this does make me wonder, did certain people in Nashville rate an autopsy while others didn't? Or was the Banner talking out of their hat again?

In the Banner's defense, I will say there to this day is a lot of confusion on facts in this case. So, they MIGHT have believed they had accurate information not realizing no one had accurate information (this is going by one source and not doublechecking, usually).

The information about the search is interesting. But, bad news... there is some controversy about that. I'm not sure what exactly. And I'm not sure it affects anything they printed, but I'm just saying... it's a weird and confusing case.

It is unknown whether or not she got to the Rollerdrome. But, perhaps at one point, they thought she had not.. so why would they change their mind? Or did the Banner just ask the cop who gave them the quote and just gambled that the answer they got from him would be the right answer?

'at least three people involved'... well, hey, I agree with them on that. I think, based on brutality and logistics, it's a multi perp crime. But, that may just be me, unnamed cop, and the crazy Banner. Officially, as far as I know, that's not how it's being looked at...

Her father lived in Clarksville... well, maybe he did. I am very confused about that. someone's husband died during an operation and I really thought it was Nora's and since he wasn't mentioned in any of these articles... Or maybe he died after Kathy? This is a person I don't know, so I'm sorry.. no idea about him.

I really never knew much about the search, btw. so that is interesting. there may be some problems with it, but it is probably more or less right.

nola said:

Bessie, I thanked you for your posting with the additional details from the banner -- but that didn't seem like enough. This really pulls together so many of the crime scene specifics that we all were questioning. Thank you for going the extra mile to make that available. :yourock:

With all the conversation about playing cards, I will say that my son (11) carries cards in his backpack just in case he can get a game of 'something' in on the bus ride home from school. Honestly, I think he and his buds just make up games to pass the time. When bored, he will even play solitaire. Maybe this was the same for Kathy. When I saw Bessie's comment about the photo with little slips of paper lying around I immediately thought, ah...her playing cards.

Click to expand...

I wish I could see the photo...

But, yes.. she had those cards with her.

I had wondered if her having them meant she had specific plans to play cards or something. But, I guess not.

I was not allowed to play cards growing up. So, it is hard for me to relate. I didn't learn to play anything other than Uno until I was maybe 25.

Backwoods said:

December, the Retrospect "facts" originally published in the Banner, the ones that bessie listed a few posts back: States that Kathy's folks were separated. But you said her father had died not long before, right? (I realize that both can be true!)

Click to expand...

I thought he had. Someone's husband died during or right after an operation. It was someone in that group, so since Nora's husband is never mentioned (except the Banner) I thought it must be him and it'd already happened. I'd thought it was a bit later, but since no one mentioned him I just thought...

I really don't know. But, maybe he did live in Clarksville in 1969. The Banner claims to have talked to her. I never asked her anything about husbands when I knew her, so they're one up on me there.

December said:

I don't see a photo?

This alley, if I'm remembering right, looks like a small road. Most people wouldn't need to drive on it, but I don't think a car being on it would attract attention. This being said, it was more than likely a bigger vehicle than a car.

KK had delivery vans. But, I do not know when they operated exactly. They took doughnuts to various stores (not KK stores, grocery stores). I never thought about where they went after deliveries, but parked behind the store seems as good a place to be as any.

The KK vans where mostly white. They had green trim. If someone had a mostly white delivery van, maybe it wouldn't even be noticed among the KK vans.

Click to expand...

Sorry, if my link is on the blink -- I can still see the photo, but here the shot is again (XX fingers crossed that it will work). This is identified as Nolensville at Thompson Lane.

And the link is the same blog that Bessie shared, just a different entry and photo. <Incidentally, I really like this blog> http://www.southnashvillelife.com/2010/03/nashvilles-history-in-pictures.html

December said:

They did.

They had a tendency to jump to conclusions.

Most people in Nashville had already read The Tennessean which was the morning paper. So, the Banner comes along in the afternoon and does their own take on the same story. But, their take was more... sensationalistic maybe?

If they actually interview a named person and have a direct quote MAYBE you can trust that.

But, if they're the only ones saying something then they probably more or less made it up.

If we had The Tennessean that ran in the morning, then that is where a lot of their facts (that turn out to be right) are from.. they just took them from there.

The doctor they name was probably a doctor who did those things sometimes and they jumped to the conclusion he would. Of course, this does make me wonder, did certain people in Nashville rate an autopsy while others didn't? Or was the Banner talking out of their hat again?

In the Banner's defense, I will say there to this day is a lot of confusion on facts in this case. So, they MIGHT have believed they had accurate information not realizing no one had accurate information (this is going by one source and not doublechecking, usually).

The information about the search is interesting. But, bad news... there is some controversy about that. I'm not sure what exactly. And I'm not sure it affects anything they printed, but I'm just saying... it's a weird and confusing case.

It is unknown whether or not she got to the Rollerdrome. But, perhaps at one point, they thought she had not.. so why would they change their mind? Or did the Banner just ask the cop who gave them the quote and just gambled that the answer they got from him would be the right answer?

'at least three people involved'... well, hey, I agree with them on that. I think, based on brutality and logistics, it's a multi perp crime. But, that may just be me, unnamed cop, and the crazy Banner. Officially, as far as I know, that's not how it's being looked at...

Her father lived in Clarksville... well, maybe he did. I am very confused about that. someone's husband died during an operation and I really thought it was Nora's and since he wasn't mentioned in any of these articles... Or maybe he died after Kathy? This is a person I don't know, so I'm sorry.. no idea about him.

I really never knew much about the search, btw. so that is interesting. there may be some problems with it, but it is probably more or less right.

Click to expand...

bbm: Yeah, the fact that the M.E. is named and is "expected" to do this and possibly that -- and it didn't happen! Oh, I really hate that it didn't happen.

I'm like you -- wondering if this report was just "assuming" things -- and wondering, again, if maybe things would have happened that way if it had not been HOLIDAY time!! Maybe the usual M.E. was not available...?

It just seems to me that the brutal rape and murder of a 12-year-old would rate an autopsy, no matter her economic status or whatever! It's really hard to fathom that under those circumstances, some would "rate" an autopsy but some wouldn't -- I really, really hope not.

ETA: December, you did say that some kind of exam was done, though -- wonder if Dr. Simpkins may have done that, though not an autopsy? Hoping so, hoping so! Maybe there is more physical evidence/professional opinion than we have thought...

Backwoods said:

As I said, I'm no expert, but I do think that, as criminal typologies go, "that type" -- the organized kind -- would be more likely to take a trophy. And I am not saying I'm convinced yet that the killer was a disorganized type or that she was not taken and held captive, etc. -- still pondering and waiting for more info to come in from your efforts!

Click to expand...

Until the killer is found, we won't know a lot about him. but, the type i mean is trained to use items from the victim to leave less clues. but who knows? maybe he just got really, really lucky.

But, she was taken and held captive. She just could not have been lying there for all of those days. Let's just say no ones senses worked so all clues were turned off until that guy stumbled over her.. it would be very obvious she had been lying there outside with various creatures doing what they do for days. It was only cold at night. The days were 50ish.

I don't know where she was between being disappeared and being found, but not there. for one thing, she was alive for part of that time.

going through this i wonder if someone had started looking for her the first night... would it have made a difference?

Just wanting to speculate -- maybe a funeral home was not an unusual place to carry out some post-homicide investigation at that time?

I know that on one of the Nashville-of-the-past web sites, I was reading how, at a time not all THAT long ago, ambulance service was provided by hearses from funeral homes.

I could relate -- was the same in my home county for many years (unless you waited for some kind of transport from Macon). I remember my dad had a bad asthma attack at work and was transported by hearse to the hospital! That can't have felt too encouraging!

So maybe there was more "overlap" of roles and "official sites" to carry certain things out -- between medical/LE/funeral home personnel and sites, back then.

Backwoods said:

bbm: Yeah, the fact that the M.E. is named and is "expected" to do this and possibly that -- and it didn't happen! Oh, I really hate that it didn't happen.

I'm like you -- wondering if this report was just "assuming" things -- and wondering, again, if maybe things would have happened that way if it had not been HOLIDAY time!! Maybe the usual M.E. was not available...?

It just seems to me that the brutal rape and murder of a 12-year-old would rate an autopsy, no matter her economic status or whatever! It's really hard to fathom that under those circumstances, some would "rate" an autopsy but some wouldn't -- I really, really hope not.

ETA: December, you did say that some kind of exam was done, though -- wonder if Dr. Simpkins may have done that, though not an autopsy? Hoping so, hoping so! Maybe there is more physical evidence/professional opinion than we have thought...

Click to expand...

Yes, an exam was done. It was not as thorough as it should have been, but there was an exam. I don't really know the details (eta, by details i mean names) about it other than what has been printed various places. But, this is something I am very interested in trying to find out.

When they found her, the holiday weekend was over. Just over, but still. I think it had some impact, but people should've been starting to get back to their normal posts by then.

I don't know if anyone got an autopsy. Maybe the Banner just threw that in there for who knows why. It is kind of surprising they didn't figure out a way to get one for her, but I think in those days ... oh, who knows what they thought. It makes no sense.

Backwoods said:

bbm: Did we glean from comments on some blog or something that this man was questioned by LE, sort of in a POI way? Or am I confusing him with someone else...?

Click to expand...

the daughter of one of the girls who went skating commented about this somewhere.

so it is possible it never happened.