Found Deceased OK, Veronica Butler 27 & Jilian Kelley 39, Vehicle Abandoned, Texas County, 30 Mar 2024 #5 *Arrests*

[justtrish]

I'm still thinking about a point I raised in my last post. If TA had not called Brune to tell her she wouldn't be needed, then VB would have been alone in her car driving to the meeting place for the child exchange. Well, I guess I don't know that, because I don't know where Brune lives. But I would assume Brune lives closer to TA than to VB, and I wouldn't expect VB to pick up Brune on her way to get the kids, like she picked up JK. Brune would have been with TA and the kids waiting to meet VB that morning, if plans had not changed at TA's request. So VB would've been alone and an easy, vulnerable target for the murderers. And no need to kill JK who had done nothing to them (not that VB had either.)

I thought at first that TA told Brune she was not needed, because she didn't want to put her in harm's way when they killed VB. But now I realized that Brune wouldn't have been riding w/VB, like JK was, so she would've been safely away from the murder scene anyway. Then I thought TA must have thought she had to do it this way to avoid letting Brune in on their evil plan. But that makes no sense either, because if Brune wasn't at the scene, she wouldn't have to be told anything. She wouldn't know who the murderers were. Well, she probably would have, but that's true, whether she'd been told to stay home or not. Whether TA had told VB she had to bring someone with her to supervise the visit this time. Nothing would've been any different, as far as what Brune would have to be told. Brune likely would've suspected it was TA equally the same, whether she was expecting to supervise or not. Whether they were staying w/their original plan or
going to Plan B, as they did.

So I probably am not making this very clear, but I'm just saying, JK didn't have to die for any reason I can come up with. I previously thought she had to die (in the murderers' minds) just because she would have to be riding w/VB, and I guess they didn't want her to be able to identify them (collateral damage). But why did she have to be riding w/VB at that time? I know the supposed reason, because she was to be the visit supervisor since TA's usual person wasn't doing it this time. But why wasn't her usual person there this time? Because TA told her not to be!

WHY?
see what I'm saying?

I think their goal was to get away with this crime.

If the original lady was told to take time off and TA didn't tell VB this so she could get a replacement, then THAT would have came out in the investigation. So if VB and JK just disappeared, then TA doesn't really look suspicious just for telling the original lady to take time off. She could have just been trying to make things more difficult for VB.

I think the original woman couldn't be along because the kids were not going to be along either.

If the car and 2 women totally disspaeared then would we even be where we are right now? I think they wanted both women and the car to be gone. We might still be talking about this years from now thinking they had an accident somewhere and the car was never found. I can see that being what TA thought would happen, but it all went wrong.

 

[sunspun]

RBBM. According to the AA, it was Cora who told her daughter that JK "wasn't innocent" and deserved to die.

But the only reason (in TA's mind) that she wasn't innocent, was because she was with VB, she was on her side. But she didn't need to be. Nobody needed to be with VB at the time they killed VB. VB would've just been alone, driving to the meeting place, where the kids and the normal supervisor would be. They could've "taken her out" (as they did) before she made it there. They would have killed one person, not 2. Shouldn't they have thought that better than killing both?

 

[sunspun]

I think their goal was to get away with this crime.

If the original lady was told to take time off and TA didn't tell VB this so she could get a replacement, then THAT would have came out in the investigation. So if VB and JK just disappeared, then TA doesn't really look suspicious just for telling the original lady to take time off. She could have just been trying to make things more difficult for VB.

I think the original woman couldn't be along because the kids were not going to be along either.

If the car and 2 women totally disspaeared then would we even be where we are right now? I think they wanted both women and the car to be gone. We might still be talking about this years from now thinking they had an accident somewhere and the car was never found. I can see that being what TA thought would happen, but it all went wrong.

But that could've happened without JK being there at all.

 

[tlcya]

yeah, the calling off the regular person still puzzles me. Why involve Jillian at all? If the supervisor met up with VB at the pickup point regularly why NOT simply kill VB prior to her arriving at the exchange location? Reports are that Kelley had not acted as supervisor in the past and was only arranged for AFTER TA called off the regular one she liked and had to pay.

Was paying Jillian going to be VB's responsibility? I am not sure how that works. Was it simply a matter of TA thinking if she said her person was unavailable that VB would not have or want to spend the money to line up her own supervisor? Or did TA think VB wouldn't have time to work out an alternate to supervise on short notice and the planned visit would have to be cancelled that day?

Maybe TA was shocked that VB was able to line up an alternate so quickly and still planned to take advantage of the visit, TA is now livid and needs VB out of the picture before she can get custody back and totally thwart TA's plan of raising her grands.

She had already convinced her motley crew to attempt to kill VB (stalking her to wait for her to leave her house and Wil E Coyote her with an anvil). Now with the visit still looming TA ramps up her crew with tales of the grave danger her grands are in if this visit takes place.

JK may simply be collateral damage for which the crew need have no guilt, after all, she was on VB's side therefore must be just as evil, therefore deserved what she got in the crew's minds.

 

[Warwick7]

I think their goal was to get away with this crime.

If the original lady was told to take time off and TA didn't tell VB this so she could get a replacement, then THAT would have came out in the investigation. So if VB and JK just disappeared, then TA doesn't really look suspicious just for telling the original lady to take time off. She could have just been trying to make things more difficult for VB.

I think the original woman couldn't be along because the kids were not going to be along either.

If the car and 2 women totally disspaeared then would we even be where we are right now? I think they wanted both women and the car to be gone. We might still be talking about this years from now thinking they had an accident somewhere and the car was never found. I can see that being what TA thought would happen, but it all went wrong.

Again I'm a bit confused.
It was a court order for VB to have a supervisor with her when she picked up her kids. They were to stay with all three of them until the visit was over.

Sounds like Bruno (sp) and JK as well as others were pre-approved by the court. Anyway that's what I understood from documents and msm.

 

[Cool Cats]

RBBM. According to the AA, it was Cora who told her daughter that JK "wasn't innocent" and deserved to die.

Thanks. And how would she even know who JK is?

From TA.

Lies from TA.... 2 Cents

 

[MissTilly]

I think the reason Brune couldn’t be used as the supervisor was that TA would need to meet her at Fourways with the children. If that was the scenario then the other ‘misfits’ would need to intercept and kill VB. i think TA was so vindictive that she wanted to inflict pain on and kill VB herself. she was proud to do so…
moo

 

[Baudi Moovan]

But the only reason (in TA's mind) that she wasn't innocent, was because she was with VB, she was on her side. But she didn't need to be. Nobody needed to be with VB at the time they killed VB. VB would've just been alone, driving to the meeting place, where the kids and the normal supervisor would be. They could've "taken her out" (as they did) before she made it there. They would have killed one person, not 2. Shouldn't they have thought that better than killing both?

I dont know a lot about supervised custody. Do the supervisors usually have to show up to the spot where the children are exchanged? Also when TA tells Brune to take a couple of weeks off, does Brune need to notify the state? If answers to both those questions are "yes" then I think we have a pretty close answer to the truth. TA didnt want Brune harmed, but didnt necessarily care about anyone else.

 

[arielilane]

@149Zone7

Today Nancy and Sheryl go deep into the disturbing case of two young Kansas mothers who were kidnapped, bludgeoned to death, and buried in a 10-foot pit on April 17th - the same day one of the victim's children had a birthday.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1783929759245721965

 

[MadMcGoo]

Whether you are new to this discussion or have been posting here a while, I encourage you to read through the first page of this thread. Several important instructions from our Admin/Mod team are posted there.

Members should be familiar with this link, but it’s never a bad idea to refresh your memory from time to time.

Have a good weekend!
Mad

 

[sunspun]

Also when TA tells Brune to take a couple of weeks off, does Brune need to notify the state?

sbm

I don't know, but the way it turned out was that she "notified" authorities when they interviewed her post-murder. That's when she told them TA told her she wasn't needed this time.

 

[Warwick7]

@149Zone7

Today Nancy and Sheryl go deep into the disturbing case of two young Kansas mothers who were kidnapped, bludgeoned to death, and buried in a 10-foot pit on April 17th - the same day one of the victim's children had a birthday.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1783929759245721965

Ok I haven't listened to it yet, but my question is who's birthday was it?
JK's child? Or VB's child?

 

[stormymama]

Why wouldn't Brune have ridden with Veronica? Can non-custodial parents who require supervision be allowed to drive with the kids to some place to have the supervised visit and meet up with the supervisor? Or would Brune have taken the kids to Veronica?

 

[MyBelle]

@otto raises interesting points.

<modsnip: quoted post was removed/snipped>

Also otto points out that it is peculiar that TA would choose a birthday party Saturday to commit murder because what this does is alert the entire family when VB doesn't show up, which is exactly what happened and it caused LE to get on the case quicker.

<modsnip>

Why on earth do it on a birthday party Saturday? This makes no sense. Maybe it was the only Saturday all 5 could do it?

Must be a reason.

2 Cents

It is very possible TA didn't know about the birthday party plans. VB would have no reason to tell her.

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

It is very possible TA didn't know about the birthday party plans. VB would have no reason to tell her.

JMO

Good thinking outside the box

 

[Warwick7]

@149Zone7

Today Nancy and Sheryl go deep into the disturbing case of two young Kansas mothers who were kidnapped, bludgeoned to death, and buried in a 10-foot pit on April 17th - the same day one of the victim's children had a birthday.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1783929759245721965

I can't get this to play. Someone please help! Lol!!
Which child had the birthday party??!

 

[Rixey]

Why wouldn't Brune have ridden with Veronica? Can non-custodial parents who require supervision be allowed to drive with the kids to some place to have the supervised visit and meet up with the supervisor? Or would Brune have taken the kids to Veronica?

It isn't clear in the official documents, but it appears Brune would have met TA & the kids at Four Corners and then stayed with VB & kids for the duration of the visit and then returned with them to Four Corners to give the kids back to TA. The court mandated supervised visits, not just supervised exchanges.

Whether Brune would have driven her own car to/from her home to Four Corners or would have been picked up/dropped off by TA & kids is unknown, however her very presence at Four Corners would have required TA to either come up with more lies, or to be there, with the kids & Brune "waiting". And if TA was "waiting" at Four Corners she would have not only missed out on (at least) the ambush/kidnap but perhaps she worried the others might not follow through without her there.

Also, I would think Brune would have suggested calling family/LE or even driving the route to find out why VB didn't show up. Nope, better to just have Brune stay home and let JK be a second victim. For whatever reason TA did not want to kill/involve Brune and did not care about the life of whichever supervisor VB brought.

JMO
Its all very sad and very evil.

 

[MyBelle]

RBBM. According to the AA, it was Cora who told her daughter that JK "wasn't innocent" and deserved to die.

I think that is why I have a problem referring to TA's "cult" as an "anti-government religious group." JK was the wife of a Christian minister. There is no justification whatsoever for her brutal murder.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

@149Zone7

Today Nancy and Sheryl go deep into the disturbing case of two young Kansas mothers who were kidnapped, bludgeoned to death, and buried in a 10-foot pit on April 17th - the same day one of the victim's children had a birthday.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1783929759245721965

I don't believe the child's birthday was on that day. iirc, the party was going to be held because VB had supervised visitation on that day.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I dont know a lot about supervised custody. Do the supervisors usually have to show up to the spot where the children are exchanged? Also when TA tells Brune to take a couple of weeks off, does Brune need to notify the state? If answers to both those questions are "yes" then I think we have a pretty close answer to the truth. TA didnt want Brune harmed, but didnt necessarily care about anyone else.

I don't know how it works in Oklahoma, but in Illinois, the father of my granddaughter had supervised parenting time in my daughter's home, and he was supervised by a friend her mother also knew well. The couple was never married, and the arrangement was set-up by the parents' attorneys.

There is a lot we still don't know about this case, but it sounds like we know Brune's name because she spoke to LE.

JMO