OK OK - Girl Scout Murders, Lori Farmer, 8, Michele Guse, 9, Doris Milner, 10, 1977 #2

[LeBlack]

But was it really that common and so not-strange, normal, understandable and reasonable for everyone that campers have no guards?
Is't it like the whole point of teaching kids how to be responsible in wilderness or unknown areas?
Was it really unheard of in US to do so? How that happened?

It's been awhile since you posted your question. I'm sure different troops (IDK what the larger groups were called) did things differently from location to location. I went to GS camp in the Midwest for 2-3 years not long after these murders. IIRC we ran free to dip in and out of crafts and activities without a lot of adult supervision unless we went looking. I remember thinking it was odd that we hadn't seen OUR Troop leaders between the bus ride to camp and the bus ride home.

I do remember our camp had similar signage along the lines of "Girl Scout property" -- hindsight 20/20, probably not the best idea to advertise

 

[beubeubeu]

It's been awhile since you posted your question. I'm sure different troops (IDK what the larger groups were called) did things differently from location to location. I went to GS camp in the Midwest for 2-3 years not long after these murders. IIRC we ran free to dip in and out of crafts and activities without a lot of adult supervision unless we went looking. I remember thinking it was odd that we hadn't seen OUR Troop leaders between the bus ride to camp and the bus ride home.

I do remember our camp had similar signage along the lines of "Girl Scout property" -- hindsight 20/20, probably not the best idea to advertise

Thank you. I was wondering about that a lot. As far as I could be able to learn, in my part of the World - even thou kids at such camping/scouting trips weren't supervised properly, everyone tends to recall this kind of watered down but almost paramilitary attitude that even younger girls were taught to have.
So I guess there was not much of such thing around - it just makes all that guilt that fell on people "responsible" for kids safety there more tragic. If that attitude was present and widely spread it could be reasonable to assume that everything "out of the ordinary" would have slightly better chances of alerting some of the older girls in other units.
If it wasn't there, then actions of that monster of monsters who murdered the girls required less sophistication, planning and nerve that some narratives tend to apply.

 

[dotr]

Very lengthy, includes pics, video.
Oklahoma 1977 Girl Scout Murders: Latest in the investigation (koco.com)
May 3, 2022
''LOCUST GROVE, Okla. —
At any moment, one of Oklahoma’s most notorious murder mysteries could go from a cold case to a case closed.''

''Part I: The Crime

On the evening of June 12, 1977, the stormy skies opened, and heavy rain descended over Locust Grove, Oklahoma. Nearby, down a narrow dirt road, lined with looming trees and 400-acres of dense woods, young Girl Scouts rushed inside their tents. Instead of their previously planned activities, the girls were sent back to their tents after dinner to write letters home. It was their first night at Camp Scott, having been bussed in earlier that day for their two-week session of summer camp.

The excited campers were blissfully unaware when they walked into camp, their two weeks would end abruptly.

For three young girls, their first night of camp would haunt Oklahoma to this day.

"It was the boogeyman story," said Andrea Fielding, the Director of Forensic Science Services at the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation.

On that dreary evening, eight-year-old Lori Lee Farmer, nine-year-old Michelle Heather Guse, and ten-year-old Doris Denise Milner returned to their cabin in the Kiowa Unit. Their tent, Number 8, was the last in the semi-circle and the furthest away from the counselors’ tent, over 80 yards away. The tents, though made to look like cabins, were wooden platforms with four cots, no lights, and a large flap serving as the door.

Anyone could get in. Anyone could get out.

"There was not necessarily a barrier that would keep people out," said Marty Wilson, an OSBI Investigator.

With their fourth roommate set to arrive the following night due to a scheduling error, the trio got situated in their unit and wrote letters back home.

KOCO 5
Lori Farmer, a bright little girl who was said to be mature beyond her years and the youngest Girl Scout at camp that week, was excited to write home to her family in Tulsa. She told her loved ones about her two new friends and roommates. Her father, Dr. Charles Farmer, had been the emergency room director at Tulsa’s St. John’s Medical Center.

No stranger to Camp Scott, having attended the camp the year prior, Michele Guse was a shy, athletic girl with a love for plants. In fact, before leaving her home in Broken Arrow, her mother GeorgeAnn told a newspaper that Michele insisted she take care of her plants while she was away at camp. African violets were one of her favorites.

Having sold enough Girl Scout cookies to be able to attend camp with her friends, Denise Milner had been excited about going to camp. She was a straight-A student and had already been admitted into a Tulsa school that was created for exceptionally bright students. However, at the last minute, her friends backed out and Denise reluctantly went alone to camp. She was not keen on the idea of leaving her mom Bettye and her five-year-old sister. On the bus, Denise cried about having to leave.

“While all the other tents in the camp had four girls in them, Tent #8 only had three girls,” Wilson said.''

 

[Betty P]

From your link:

"We have pretty much analyzed everything we can analyze in this case and we are waiting on Sheriff Mike Reed to make a decision of whether he’s going to administratively close the case," said Fielding of the OSBI.

The evidence obtained by the OSBI has never excluded Hart and to this day, the OSBI says that in addition to not being able to exclude Hart, the evidence does not point to anyone else.

 

[interestedincases]

Killer Identified In 1977 Girl Scout Murders


We have new information about the 1977 Girl Scout Murder that shocked Green Country and the nation.

No one has ever been convicted, but Investigators say recent DNA testing has ruled out every single possible suspect, except one. Three young girls, Lori Farmer, Michelle Guse, and Denise Milner were raped and murdered at camp in Mayes County.

Evidence was re-tested and tested for DNA a few years ago and the results are now being made public for the first time. Mayes County Sheriff Mike Reed has spent the last nine years digging into this case after Lori Farmer's parents asked him to give the case a fresh look. He says every single piece of DNA evidence has been accounted for and he says there's no doubt in his mind, the evidence shows, Gene Leroy Hartis the killer.

<modnsip: Copyright violation>

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Killer Identified In 1977 Girl Scout Murders


We have new information about the 1977 Girl Scout Murder that shocked Green Country and the nation.

No one has ever been convicted, but Investigators say recent DNA testing has ruled out every single possible suspect, except one. Three young girls, Lori Farmer, Michelle Guse, and Denise Milner were raped and murdered at camp in Mayes County.

Evidence was re-tested and tested for DNA a few years ago and the results are now being made public for the first time. Mayes County Sheriff Mike Reed has spent the last nine years digging into this case after Lori Farmer's parents asked him to give the case a fresh look. He says every single piece of DNA evidence has been accounted for and he says there's no doubt in his mind, the evidence shows, Gene Leroy Hartis the killer.

<modnsip: Copyright violation>

Interesting. Notice he doesn't come out and say the DNA evidence implicates Hart, just that it didn't rule him out.

 

[beubeubeu]

Interesting. Notice he doesn't come out and say the DNA evidence implicates Hart, just that it didn't rule him out.

Wasn't it kinda the same thing when they stated that 3 of 5 probes matched Hart's DNA and statistically only 1 in 7.700 Native Americans would get results like that?
I never really understood what that means and never saw it explained further.
Can anyone clear it a bit for me?

Did these results, these probes that they had ruled out the possibility that perp was NOT a Native American?
How many NON Native Americans could match 3 of 5 - 1 in 1.000? 1 in 8.000? 1 in 1.000.000? None?
Would these results be kinda random?
Let's assume that all not-Native American person could match 3 or more of these probes. That would mean that statistically few hundred other Native Americans would also match at least 3 of 5 probes. Is that ruling out them all, cause whatever was there that matched Hart's DNA appear so randomly, that it has nothing to to with geolocation or family tree - so chances that any other person in the area at that time couldn't possibly match 3 of 5 (cause others would be like 80yo from Alaska or a toddler from Wisconsin and so on)?
Or maybe just one in 7.700 of ALL Native Americans could match 3 of 5, but most of those that would, would be living in this very area of Oklahoma, possibly being closely or furtherly related to Hart?

What does that really mean? Cause for me there is a world of a difference between all possible interpretations of these numbers.
I think that explaining it further could really cut all the rumors and doubts. Why it wasn't done if wild theories and rumors are really that big of an issue?

There is no doubt in my mind that Gene Hart was a monster, criminal, serial rapist, serial burglar, liar and so on.
But still, he attacked, kidnapped, brutally raped and only by sheer luck didn't end up killing two teenage girls - cause he left them for dead, took a lot of serious effort to make sure that they'll suffocate and die.
And he got just 2,5 years for that. And he still came across as super nice guy in the community that knew well what he did to them.
I can't help but conclude same as I did when I first stumbled on this case - that in the area at that time were many at least as bad or worse than him.

It wouldn't matter if it was clearly stated: we can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that Hart did it, cause we don't have enough to test anymore, probes are deteriorated, but with reasons 1, 2, 3, 4 and so on we can basically exclude anyone else, cause:
- 3 of the 5 probes matched his DNA,
- no non Native American man could get these results,
- and even thou theoretically one in every 7.700 Native Americans would also match that, none of xx people that we tested matched,
- chances that any other person that could match 3 or more of 5 of these probes and wasn't tested was anywhere near the Tulsa area in 1977 are like those for winning a lottery twice in a row.

But it wasn't, still wasn't. Why?

What does that mean that "recent DNA testing has ruled out every single possible suspect, except one"?
How many suspects were there to rule out? A few? Just him?

 

[beubeubeu]

Let's assume that all not-Native American person could match 3 or more of these probes.

* that only a Native American person could match 3 or more = that all not-Native American person couldn't match 3 or more.
Sorry.

 

[Betty P]

Wasn't it kinda the same thing when they stated that 3 of 5 probes matched Hart's DNA and statistically only 1 in 7.700 Native Americans would get results like that?
I never really understood what that means and never saw it explained further.
Can anyone clear it a bit for me?

Did these results, these probes that they had ruled out the possibility that perp was NOT a Native American?
How many NON Native Americans could match 3 of 5 - 1 in 1.000? 1 in 8.000? 1 in 1.000.000? None?
Would these results be kinda random?
Let's assume that all not-Native American person could match 3 or more of these probes. That would mean that statistically few hundred other Native Americans would also match at least 3 of 5 probes. Is that ruling out them all, cause whatever was there that matched Hart's DNA appear so randomly, that it has nothing to to with geolocation or family tree - so chances that any other person in the area at that time couldn't possibly match 3 of 5 (cause others would be like 80yo from Alaska or a toddler from Wisconsin and so on)?
Or maybe just one in 7.700 of ALL Native Americans could match 3 of 5, but most of those that would, would be living in this very area of Oklahoma, possibly being closely or furtherly related to Hart?

What does that really mean? Cause for me there is a world of a difference between all possible interpretations of these numbers.
I think that explaining it further could really cut all the rumors and doubts. Why it wasn't done if wild theories and rumors are really that big of an issue?

There is no doubt in my mind that Gene Hart was a monster, criminal, serial rapist, serial burglar, liar and so on.
But still, he attacked, kidnapped, brutally raped and only by sheer luck didn't end up killing two teenage girls - cause he left them for dead, took a lot of serious effort to make sure that they'll suffocate and die.
And he got just 2,5 years for that. And he still came across as super nice guy in the community that knew well what he did to them.
I can't help but conclude same as I did when I first stumbled on this case - that in the area at that time were many at least as bad or worse than him.

It wouldn't matter if it was clearly stated: we can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that Hart did it, cause we don't have enough to test anymore, probes are deteriorated, but with reasons 1, 2, 3, 4 and so on we can basically exclude anyone else, cause:
- 3 of the 5 probes matched his DNA,
- no non Native American man could get these results,
- and even thou theoretically one in every 7.700 Native Americans would also match that, none of xx people that we tested matched,
- chances that any other person that could match 3 or more of 5 of these probes and wasn't tested was anywhere near the Tulsa area in 1977 are like those for winning a lottery twice in a row.

But it wasn't, still wasn't. Why?

What does that mean that "recent DNA testing has ruled out every single possible suspect, except one"?
How many suspects were there to rule out? A few? Just him?

The prior tests were done on a sample that only had part of the DNA, not all of it. The portion of the DNA that they did extract and compare to existing databases, it had a very high match to native American DNA of that area. It also was a partial match to Hart's DNA.

The results were "partial" because the only samples they had yielded only a portion of the full DNA signature. Obviously, no one knew back in the 70's what kind of evidence to retrieve or how to preserve it so it could be analyzed for DNA 40 or 50 yrs later. IIRC, the source for the DNA was semen found on the clothing of one of the victims.

If you follow cold cases much, you'll realize that partial DNA sample from that long ago is still good evidence, especially when combined with all the other evidence that pointed to the same killer. As the press release also notes, there was ZERO exculpatory evidence to eliminate Hart.

The jury also wasn't allowed to hear evidence of Hart's prior criminal activity, including the rapes and attempted murders, armed burglaries, etc.

Best wishes always to the families of the victims and to those who worked at the camp and were traumatized by the event for many years.

JMO, MOO

 

[MaryG12]

Sheriff Says DNA Links Longtime Suspect To 1977 Girl Scout Murders

Details were slim about how DNA definitively tied Hart to the triple homicide, but Sheriff Reed asserted that there was no room for doubt that Hart was the person responsible. In fact, had this science been used in the 1979 murder trial, he says Hart would have been found guilty.

.....................

I was not expecting that curveball, as I more than half expected it was someone inside the camp who committed these crimes, like a groundskeeper.

Finally solved!

 

[Betty P]

Sheriff Says DNA Links Longtime Suspect To 1977 Girl Scout Murders

Details were slim about how DNA definitively tied Hart to the triple homicide, but Sheriff Reed asserted that there was no room for doubt that Hart was the person responsible. In fact, had this science been used in the 1979 murder trial, he says Hart would have been found guilty.

.....................

I was not expecting that curveball, as I more than half expected it was someone inside the camp who committed these crimes, like a groundskeeper.

Finally solved!

How sad for the people who worked at the camp to have lived for years with terrible speculation and rumors, all after trying to deal with a horrible crime against children in their care.

There was never any evidence to implicate the employees and volunteers at Camp Scott, but the rumors continued for decades. Prayers for them and their families. I hope some day the terrible rumors and false information about this case will cease. JMO

 

[Richard]

Proven by DNA 45 years later...


Gene Leroy Hart, Rapist and Murderer.

 

[beubeubeu]

The prior tests were done on a sample that only had part of the DNA, not all of it. The portion of the DNA that they did extract and compare to existing databases, it had a very high match to native American DNA of that area. It also was a partial match to Hart's DNA.

The results were "partial" because the only samples they had yielded only a portion of the full DNA signature. Obviously, no one knew back in the 70's what kind of evidence to retrieve or how to preserve it so it could be analyzed for DNA 40 or 50 yrs later. IIRC, the source for the DNA was semen found on the clothing of one of the victims.

If you follow cold cases much, you'll realize that partial DNA sample from that long ago is still good evidence, especially when combined with all the other evidence that pointed to the same killer. As the press release also notes, there was ZERO exculpatory evidence to eliminate Hart.

The jury also wasn't allowed to hear evidence of Hart's prior criminal activity, including the rapes and attempted murders, armed burglaries, etc.

Best wishes always to the families of the victims and to those who worked at the camp and were traumatized by the event for many years.

JMO, MOO

I understand why these results were "partial", and I see it as good evidence, I was just always curious about the way it was told. ONE Native American out of 7.700 sounds like insanely low chance that it could be someone else, but these statistics would sound significantly less impressive if only Native American males from the area were "counted".

It's a good evidence, but IMO not as good as the fact that he previously attacked not one but two tiny teenage girls (not "pregnant women", cause that always made me picture visible belly kind of pregnant woman), took them away, tried to hide their bodies (under assumption that they will die) and tied them in similar way that girls from Camp Scott were tied.

I wonder about other teenage or younger girls from the area and if Lori, Michele and Denise are the only ones that he murdered, and if there were "only" two other murder attempts on one occasion, while he was out there for years.
I get that we will never know how many rapes he commited, as in 70's if victims get out of it alive, they would more than likely not report it out of fear but what about missing girls that were never found and disappeared while he was on the run? Is he not a suspect in any other case?

 

[beubeubeu]

How sad for the people who worked at the camp to have lived for years with terrible speculation and rumors, all after trying to deal with a horrible crime against children in their care.

There was never any evidence to implicate the employees and volunteers at Camp Scott, but the rumors continued for decades. Prayers for them and their families. I hope some day the terrible rumors and false information about this case will cease. JMO

Well, there was that bloody shoeprint - that could be Hart's, and could be more considered as Hart's if it wasn't ignored that in 70's many people, even not being on the run from jail were wearing shoes few sizes too small, just because that was what they could get. Sadly nobody seemed to point that out while retelling the story that grew on this tragedy.

 

[Betty P]

Well, there was that bloody shoeprint - that could be Hart's, and could be more considered as Hart's if it wasn't ignored that in 70's many people, even not being on the run from jail were wearing shoes few sizes too small, just because that was what they could get. Sadly nobody seemed to point that out while retelling the story that grew on this tragedy.

I understand why these results were "partial", and I see it as good evidence, I was just always curious about the way it was told. ONE Native American out of 7.700 sounds like insanely low chance that it could be someone else, but these statistics would sound significantly less impressive if only Native American males from the area were "counted".

It's a good evidence, but IMO not as good as the fact that he previously attacked not one but two tiny teenage girls (not "pregnant women", cause that always made me picture visible belly kind of pregnant woman), took them away, tried to hide their bodies (under assumption that they will die) and tied them in similar way that girls from Camp Scott were tied.

I wonder about other teenage or younger girls from the area and if Lori, Michele and Denise are the only ones that he murdered, and if there were "only" two other murder attempts on one occasion, while he was out there for years.
I get that we will never know how many rapes he commited, as in 70's if victims get out of it alive, they would more than likely not report it out of fear but what about missing girls that were never found and disappeared while he was on the run? Is he not a suspect in any other case?

As has been mentioned here many times, he raped and attempted to murder 2 young women several years prior. He bound and kidnapped them, put them in his trunk, drove them to a remote location near Locust Grove (where the Girl Scout murders happened). He then gagged them and completely wrapped their heads in tape, with the intention of suffocating them. Fortunately, one of the women was able to loosen the tape and free herself and her friend.

This and other evidence of Hart's previous rape and murder attempts were not allowed to be discussed in his trial. Jurors later said had they known of his previous crimes, they would have voted to convict.

Hart also was captured hiding out in a cabin where there was quite a bit of evidence linking him to the GS murders, including items belonging to camp counselors, stolen from their tent the night of the murders.

Oklahoma Girl Scout Murders: The criminal history of prime suspect

Over the years, Gene Leroy Hart’s lengthy criminal history has been studied, criticized, debated and analyzed.

www.koco.com

In June of that year, outside of a Tulsa nightclub, Hart abducted two young, pregnant women from the parking lot and drove them to Mayes County. There, he brutally raped and sodomized the two women. It is important to note that the two women wore eyeglasses. Both of the victims were forced to ride in the trunk at several points during the kidnapping, but he would take one or both of them into the car with him throughout the trip. While they were in the car, Hart would try on their eyeglasses to test out the prescription.

When Hart was caught, he confessed to kidnapping, raping, and sodomizing the two pregnant women and was sentenced to three 10-year prison terms to be served concurrently.

 

[Kell1]

Sadly with his background these murders were predictable, glad they finally named a real suspect, hopefully the families can receive some type of closure

 

[wendybtn]

I have always believed he was the killer. He was a violent, convicted sex offender before there was a sex offender registry. I grew up in Tulsa and I have never forgotten this crime.

 

[Tony1902]

I'll go out on a limb here and explain that I am not a verified ethno-historian because I never taught. As part of my MA thesis in the late 1990s I had to do a 'differential diagnosis' or a 'rule-out' of which First Nations bi-or tri-groups settled in Louisiana after the purchase in 1803. I'm a Luddite and cannot link, however I'll give references in the extreme difficulties facing any researcher in First Nation genetics.

Beginning with Luís de Moscoso's expetion for the Spanish Crown in 1542, he traveled along the Gulf Coast, probably beginning somewhere near Sarita, Texas. (in JSTOR, 'The Expedition of Luís de Moscoso in Texas In 1542' Southwest Historical Quarterly, vol. 46, No.2')He traveled along the Gulf Coast, inadvertently wiping out an outlying band of First Nation Pacana, when camping somewhere near Buras, LA. When the group left to go further along the coast, the band watched them, and then went to the campsite, having never seen Europeans before. They perished from a lack of immunity to matériele the Expedition left behind, the odd button, broken pipe, plate, what have you. I've no citation, but I can't find my thesis in the over 500 books in our study.

In Luigi Luca Cavali-Sforza's pioneering work on population genetics, he cited 'genetic drift' hindering identification of First Nations in America. Whether through inter-tribal warfare, larger tribes acquiring smaller tribes or bands, or, as in Jared Diamond's work, 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' germs being one of the major factors for tribal mixing.

What I'm trying to say, without making an epistle, is it is extremely difficult to do First Nations genetics. From the initial French purchase of Louisiana to the Spanish Colonial period, over possibly 200 or more tribes had diasappeared. Again, no citation.

 

[Betty P]

I'll go out on a limb here and explain that I am not a verified ethno-historian because I never taught. As part of my MA thesis in the late 1990s I had to do a 'differential diagnosis' or a 'rule-out' of which First Nations bi-or tri-groups settled in Louisiana after the purchase in 1803. I'm a Luddite and cannot link, however I'll give references in the extreme difficulties facing any researcher in First Nation genetics.

Beginning with Luís de Moscoso's expetion for the Spanish Crown in 1542, he traveled along the Gulf Coast, probably beginning somewhere near Sarita, Texas. (in JSTOR, 'The Expedition of Luís de Moscoso in Texas In 1542' Southwest Historical Quarterly, vol. 46, No.2')He traveled along the Gulf Coast, inadvertently wiping out an outlying band of First Nation Pacana, when camping somewhere near Buras, LA. When the group left to go further along the coast, the band watched them, and then went to the campsite, having never seen Europeans before. They perished from a lack of immunity to matériele the Expedition left behind, the odd button, broken pipe, plate, what have you. I've no citation, but I can't find my thesis in the over 500 books in our study.

In Luigi Luca Cavali-Sforza's pioneering work on population genetics, he cited 'genetic drift' hindering identification of First Nations in America. Whether through inter-tribal warfare, larger tribes acquiring smaller tribes or bands, or, as in Jared Diamond's work, 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' germs being one of the major factors for tribal mixing.

What I'm trying to say, without making an epistle, is it is extremely difficult to do First Nations genetics. From the initial French purchase of Louisiana to the Spanish Colonial period, over possibly 200 or more tribes had diasappeared. Again, no citation.

Yes, we understand, thanks. I'm a descendant of 2 NA tribes that no longer exist, no DNA traces.

That part of the DNA analysis isn't as relevant as the fact that 2 different DNA tests done on an old, degraded partial sample still matched Gene Hart's DNA, regardless of ethnicity. The info about NA DNA is not really important.

As LE pointed out, that DNA sample, when compared to numerous other suspects only showed a link to Hart. All others were excluded. Of all the evidence gathered, all of it is linked to Hart.

As an LE mentioned in an interview some years back, Gene Hart's trial was like that of OJ Simpson. The evidence was unequivocal about OJ's (and Hart's) guilt. It was local uproar and pressure in the community that caused the jury to hesitate. In Hart's case, the evidence of his prior violent crimes was not allowed in court. Though NA groups demonstrated outside the court room every day, shouting insults, etc., many of the investigators on the case were NA themselves. They already knew Hart, they knew the remote, rural area, the people who lived there around the perimeter of the GS camp.

It's a non-issue. Just like a minority of people will claim OJ was innocent, they'll do the same for Gene Hart. JMO, MOO

 

[Tony1902]

Merci thanks for your valuable insight. I was just trying to explain, albeit in a different direction, where I saw something from an ethnological perspective.