AL AL - J.B. Beasley, 17, & Tracie Hawlett, 17, Ozark, 31 July 1999 #2

[xtinawing]

I also wanted to thank you all for the welcome - I'm certainly not an expert sleuther, but I'll do my best to add ideas and thoughts if I feel I have anything valid to add. Thanks again.

Sent from my A846L using Tapatalk

 

[TedMac]

Whether or not either girl was or was not a virgin is both irrelevant and frankly, as Jackie said, no one's business. Hot Rod, you seem so sure about police involvement. I thought that was probably the most plausible scenario at one time, but when I found out JB's license was not found on the dash, but rather placed there and photographed by the police, that theory seems less likely to me. I don't mean to be argumentative, but as I recall, one of the suspects was named Roger. (Initials were RC if I remember correctly). Hotrod, that is not you, is it?
Easongt brought up the theory that this was not random, and the girls were in Ozark for a reason. My question is who did the girls know in Ozark? When I was in high school I knew only a couple of people in the next town. Most of my friends went to school or church with me, but I did have a couple of friends/ acquaintances in the next town. Jacqui, do you know if JB had any male friends or acquaintances in Ozark?

BBM I agree 100% with Easongt that this was not random and the girls were in Ozark for a reason. I don't know that Tracie knew anyone there or not, but Beasley did.

Going from memory here, but I believe that Beasley lived in Ozark for a while when she was a child. Also, her mother went to school there. Beasley was involved in dance most of life and been to Ozark several times having friends and fellow dancers that lived there.

 

[TedMac]

I also wanted to thank you all for the welcome - I'm certainly not an expert sleuther, but I'll do my best to add ideas and thoughts if I feel I have anything valid to add. Thanks again.

Sent from my A846L using Tapatalk

We are glad you are here and jump in any time you would like. We welcome anyone that can contribute more information.

 

[TedMac]

You bring up some good points... and I'm sure they did have friends/acquaintances in Ozark and surrounding towns. I personally didn't know too many people outside Dothan, but as us high school kids got older, had access to driving, etc, I knew a lot of people who frequently went to parties, etc. out of town.

I almost feel a little embarrassed for thinking too much into the LE theory. Although I'll say it wasn't really the license thing that led me to believe that anyway...I just doubt if LE was involved, they would have been dumb enough to make it look that obvious.

I guess that theory stuck with me, and many other locals for so long, is that the crime was so so unthinkable...this kind of thing just didn't happen in our little SE AL world. And to teenagers, especially...we were invincible!
And the fact that it's gone so long without being solved, that also just seems insane to me. How? So a coverup all of a sudden seemed to make perfect sense...if that makes any sense. I just can't imagine them knowing anyone our age that could do something so horrific.

I did want to ask one question regarding LE and the night it happened that's always bugged me. Why/how did the Dothan officer at the BP recall seeing them around (10:30, is that correct?)? Even though Dothan isn't huge, it just seems weird that a random LE officer would remember seeing two HS girls just stopping into a convenience store...unless there is something they did to draw his attention, and I find that unlikely. That's what led me to believe that the theory they knew/hung out with officers...otherwise, why would he have noticed them? But, it could absolutely, and probably be, just a coincidence.

Other than the above question, I suppose that theory isn't very plausible, and as I said before, I feel a little embarrassed for thinking that it was anything more than a botched investigation.

I also just don't think this could have been random, either. I think they did know their killer(s).
I also, chillingly, think whoever did this probably does lurk this board.
I've also read all the old Wiregrass forums, and there certainly were a few people posting there that gave me the absolute creeps.

I apologize for rambling; just a few thoughts that came to mind.

Sent from my A846L using Tapatalk

BBM Not that it much matters, but I believe the Police Officer you are referring to was Headland PD and not Dothan.

 

[xtinawing]

BBM Not that it much matters, but I believe the Police Officer you are referring to was Headland PD and not Dothan.

Oh, thank you for the correction!

Sent from my A846L using Tapatalk

 

[Soulmagent]

Anything from that site is questionable yes but the same goes for everywhere there is discussion about this case on the web. Soulmagent simply brought us a link to some very real looking documents and I'm quite sure the poster is not implying we should take everything we read as gospel. Thanks for the link Soulmagent.

Thanks. I still have not read up on this case but I will heed the warning about the site and JC.
I know WS'ers can call BS when they see it . I didn't look into the source but it does not hurt to have the link posted so all the info discussed is available , even if it is not a good source it seems to be a source of contention in the case so it helps the readers follow along with the flow of things.

Things like this make me wonder about the gaps the sleuther's, who may be reading here or archives from here or in a 100 years from now will have. I envision facebook like games named things like '' How many cases from websleuths can you solve in an hour?" or '' Were they right or nawhh?". My real dream is that there will be a huge media report the every case listed on WS is solved.

Some people know every detail and others do not but the more information a person has and knows the better prepared to sleuth.

 

[somequestions]

The real question should be, "How after almost 17 years do you solve a case like this?"

So lets focus on what is known: J.B. Beasley and Tracie Hawlett were kidnapped sometime between 11:30pm- 2?? in the morning. This was a Sunday morning. They were reported missing and the car was found around 8 am. Their bodies were not discovered in the trunk of the car until I think around 1-2 pm. So how do you include or eliminate suspects?

When officers went around the neighborhood later knocking on doors did they ask who went to church that Sunday? I think there is a good chance you can eliminate those people. Did anyone answer the door looking tired or did not answer the door at all? Did police knock on every door in a mile radius of where the car was found? There is no way of knowing whether the killer was local. He could have just been passing through, but you start with what seems most likely and work from there.

The mud on the car from the pictures I have seen looked like a car that had traveled down a gravel road. I thought that because my car looked the same around the wheel well after I drove in a gravel parking lot with puddles. But there could be other explanations as well.

Sometimes the best way to solve a cold case is to go back to the beginning and make sure nothing was missed.

 

[LR1]

Thanks. I still have not read up on this case but I will heed the warning about the site and JC.
I know WS'ers can call BS when they see it . I didn't look into the source but it does not hurt to have the link posted so all the info discussed is available , even if it is not a good source it seems to be a source of contention in the case so it helps the readers follow along with the flow of things.

Things like this make me wonder about the gaps the sleuther's, who may be reading here or archives from here or in a 100 years from now will have. I envision facebook like games named things like '' How many cases from websleuths can you solve in an hour?" or '' Were they right or nawhh?". My real dream is that there will be a huge media report the every case listed on WS is solved.

Some people know every detail and others do not but the more information a person has and knows the better prepared to sleuth.

No problem. The case is pretty straightforward for the most part, it gets convoluted when the rumors and whacked out theories start to pile up. That tends to happen when the years roll by without resolution and with at least the appearance that nobody's even trying.

Mistakes were made, evidence misconstrued and apparently much time spent and likely wasted early on with suspects that by the looks of it had no role in what happened that night. There are people who've made a career out of not solving this case.

There is/was plenty of evidence in this case. DNA, prints, possibly ballistics, witnesses who saw them shortly before their murder, a pretty narrow timeline, the bodies themselves, and what should be a smallish potential offender pool. All we need now is for someone who can walk and chew gum at the same time to put all the pieces together but at this point I'm not holding my breath.

I've never been under any illusions of us solving any of the cases here, which by the way is probably less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the cold cases that exists from the last 30+ years. I see our role being if nothing else, organizing the facts, dispelling the rumors and to brainstorm theories and in some cases consider possible connections to other cases, basically keep cases in the public eye.

In this particular case some involved in the investigation and "in the know" will tell us that we have things/facts wrong but will not take the time to clear things up. This pisses me off. These are the same people who flubbed the case from the start. From our start we wanted to get the facts that CAN be put out straight and in order, nothing more nothing less.

I think the best we can hope for is for someone who may have some information that they thought wasn't important to come forward after seeing our very public discussion and it triggering a memory.

 

[easongt]

I think our biggest responsibility here on this board is to try to keep the case as active as possible. The bottom line is we are attempting to put together a puzzle with too many pieces missing from the box. All of your points were valid points and concerns but we do not have access to that information.

The first question that must be asked is was this random or was it premeditated? If random then the suspect list could be unlimited. If premeditated then it could be limited to those with possible motive or gain and can be linked back to being a relative or an acquaintance of the victims.

None of this that I mentioned is exactly a revelation of course. In order for this case to be solved comma I feel strongly it will take someone confessing out of guilt or fear. Someone confessing possibly to their knowledge or involvement to lesser charges on an unrelated crime. I feel strongly that no new evidence will be discovered that the police do not already have. And if they haven't solved it with what they have now, I fear they never will without someone talking.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Goldfinch]

LE hasn't released much information to the public as far as clues or theories but have they released a "profile" of who may have committed these murders? The only time I remember a profile was in the Haunted Evidence video.

 

[Bulldog23]

I remember reading that FBI helped develop a profile early on (I think it was referenced in some of Dime Detective's early posts. As I recall, it didn't seem particularly helpful). The jest was that it was a young male who could be described as a loner.
The only other mention of a profile that I have seen is on the wiregrass.com site. A poster says that he was questioned because he was friends with JB and fit the "silly" FBI profile, but didn't mind because he had nothing to hide. That dude is creepy, though. Just my opinion.
Easongt said he believes the only way the case will be solved is if someone talks out of guilt or fear. I, too, think that is the most likely scenario, but I haven't given up on the DNA evidence either.
I wonder how many locals DNA were taken and compared to the profile. I've read that B.S. and the man from Michigan were both excluded, but I still wonder about the self described friend and suspect mentioned in my 2nd paragraph.

 

[Bulldog23]

Also, one more thing. According to reports, JB called her friend Jana, who was hosting the field party, and said she had something to tell her. I believe that the person I mentioned above may have had a connection to Jana as well as being a self-described friend of JB. (The guy was older and I think he might have been dating Jana's mother). I'm not sure where I'm getting this from- so please take it with a grain of salt. I have done a lot of reading on old sites and sometimes things seem to run together. Can anyone either confirm or refute this information?

 

[TedMac]

Also, one more thing. According to reports, JB called her friend Jana, who was hosting the field party, and said she had something to tell her. I believe that the person I mentioned above may have had a connection to Jana as well as being a self-described friend of JB. (The guy was older and I think he might have been dating Jana's mother). I'm not sure where I'm getting this from- so please take it with a grain of salt. I have done a lot of reading on old sites and sometimes things seem to run together. Can anyone either confirm or refute this information?

You are correct on everything you wrote, especially concerning the creepy friend.

 

[somequestions]

I aspect of the case I have trouble understanding from the murderer's perspective is light. There is the possibility that the killer used the lights from J.B. Beasley's car at the actual crime scene, but because of the briars found on their clothes, the light might have had trouble shining through the weeds. Maybe there is a big light on the property were this crime took place? Did police get the electric bills for people in the area where the car was found?

Another aspect of the case was whether or not J.B. Beasley and Tracie Hawlett ended up in Ozark, AL by accident or because they were meeting someone. I think it is likely they were lost if only because that is what Tracie Hawlett told her mom on the phone. When I read that J.B.'s little sister birthday was the next day, maybe J.B. Beasley had some sort of surprise for her sister's birthday? But what would it be that she would not tell anyone else in her family?

Maybe these are foolish ideas but it is April Fools day.

 

[Goldfinch]

I remember reading that FBI helped develop a profile early on (I think it was referenced in some of Dime Detective's early posts. As I recall, it didn't seem particularly helpful). The jest was that it was a young male who could be described as a loner.
The only other mention of a profile that I have seen is on the wiregrass.com site. A poster says that he was questioned because he was friends with JB and fit the "silly" FBI profile, but didn't mind because he had nothing to hide. That dude is creepy, though. Just my opinion.
Easongt said he believes the only way the case will be solved is if someone talks out of guilt or fear. I, too, think that is the most likely scenario, but I haven't given up on the DNA evidence either.
I wonder how many locals DNA were taken and compared to the profile. I've read that B.S. and the man from Michigan were both excluded, but I still wonder about the self described friend and suspect mentioned in my 2nd paragraph.

I followed the Wiregrass chat site for a long time until several posters began to "sling mud" & it seemed to dissolve. I think you're speaking of the person that posted under a name meaning "truth". He was an instigator..... There was a lot of interesting comments posted on that board. I'm not a wiregrass local but had a relative that lived in Ozark.

 

[December]

I think there is another explanation for the DNA.

If it was from a boyfriend, he would have come forward a long time ago (whether we knew about it) and the DNA would be eliminated as evidence.

If it was directly tied to the murder, it should have hit on someone by now. But, all it has been used for is to eliminate suspects!

 

[December]

Also, the stupid driver's license rumor is 100% responsible for the LE angle. She never took her DL out, it is irrelevant. Thus, about 85% of posts trying to figure that out turned out to be irrelevant because they hinged on her getting her license out to show someone... Which never happened. Maybe 15% of posts about that might still contain some good points, but it is so frustrating that became a "fact" in the case when it never was.

Another "fact" was the hopelessly lost angle. Again, lots of time wasted. They drove to Ozark on purpose. So, did they even really ask for directions at the closed store? Or did they just ask something else? Maybe a similar question, but not exactly the same.

 

[somequestions]

Also, the stupid driver's license rumor is 100% responsible for the LE angle. She never took her DL out, it is irrelevant. Thus, about 85% of posts trying to figure that out turned out to be irrelevant because they hinged on her getting her license out to show someone... Which never happened. Maybe 15% of posts about that might still contain some good points, but it is so frustrating that became a "fact" in the case when it never was.

Another "fact" was the hopelessly lost angle. Again, lots of time wasted. They drove to Ozark on purpose. So, did they even really ask for directions at the closed store? Or did they just ask something else? Maybe a similar question, but not exactly the same.

I agree with you. I have never understood why others think that even if she did meet up with some man that night, he would never have been mentioned to anyone and therefore not tested against his DNA. Standard police practice you would think would be to eliminate boyfriends from the conversation.

As for the license, I have always taken that to be fact because of this forum. I never believed it was actually a police officer though because however J.B. Beasley and Tracie Hawlett were kidnapped, the fact of the matter is "What did this individual do with his own vehicle?" Police cars are very noticeable.

But your post about theories becoming fact shows why it is so difficult to be a "websleuth".

 

[TooCurious]

Also, the stupid driver's license rumor is 100% responsible for the LE angle. She never took her DL out, it is irrelevant. Thus, about 85% of posts trying to figure that out turned out to be irrelevant because they hinged on her getting her license out to show someone... Which never happened. Maybe 15% of posts about that might still contain some good points, but it is so frustrating that became a "fact" in the case when it never was.

Another "fact" was the hopelessly lost angle. Again, lots of time wasted. They drove to Ozark on purpose. So, did they even really ask for directions at the closed store? Or did they just ask something else? Maybe a similar question, but not exactly the same.

This is the first time I have ever read they were in Ozark on purpose besides the "cop party" they allegedly attended. So if the police angle is not correct, why did they intentionally go to Ozark? How did you verify they went there on purpose? From Jacqui I believed we learned they were to meet someone around the Midland City area that night, not Ozark.

 

[easongt]

I'm not willing to guarantee that they went there on purpose. What I do know is I have been told by multiple people who knew JB and Tracey that they would not have gotten lost in Ozark. I have also been told by reliable sources that they knew people in Ozark. Therefore it is logical to conclude they may have gone there intentionally or a party or to meet someone.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk