Resolved FL - Port St Joe, 2 Children 96UMFL & 66UFFL, bound & gagged in photo, Jun'89

[sony12]

Thanks Gravity Well. I can't believe I didn't look at that photo on Tara's wiki page closer than I did. I have looked at it before but didn't look it over long enough to notice it was a much clearer image that really painted an entirely different light on the scene. Pretty much all the images you see of this pic when you do image searches for it is of the zoomed in version where it looks much darker and you can't tell light is coming in from the back.

That's exactly what I thought that bag might be that the boom box is sitting on. Also that blue book is sitting on something. You can't tell what it is from this image but I would imagine it is more bags (likely a suitcase).

Also here is something else.

[video=youtube;NbjIlroom-c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbjIlroom-c[/video]

This is a 1986 version but as you can see it looks almost exactly like the same version you posted (with there only being one year inbetween models they likely didn't change things that much).

The guy mentioned that a lot of people like to use those vehicles as campers and to be honest that is exactly what looks like is going on with that scene. Also one other key thing is that the cargo area is open to the two front seats. No way these two kids were being kept hostage in a situation where there was a see through window in the back and the cargo area was open to the people driving.

There is bedding, bags, and stuff to entertain the kids. And also looks like they have had access to water. It looks like they are in sleep wear. The boy looks like he is in straight up pajamas and the teen girl looks like she is just choosing to wear shorts and a short sleeve shirt to sleep in (I know I started sleeping in that type of attire when I got into my teens as well).

Now I could totally see them taking this picture as a complete joke and their parents (or whoever they were with) having a little fun with it as well. Chances are several photos would have been taken and one of them easily could have accidentally been misplaced or perhaps deliberately left just to have a little fun (and who knows they may never of found out how much the picture blew up as you really have to know about the Tara Calico case in order to hear about this photo).

The image was found in Port St. Joe.

I did a search for campgrounds around the Port St. Joe area and it looks like it was a popular area for camping (supposedly for people wanting to hang out around the beach) as there are several camping ground areas around Port St. Joe.

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...15.1444.0..35i39k1j0i131k1j0i20k1.eLz71-9OaAQ

 

[Gravity Well]

Great images of the van in that link. Didn't appreciate you can see straight through from the cab into the back.

Sure enough the photo I grabbed from Calico's Wikipedia page is a low gen version (double click on it over there and it gives you details)

There is an even clearer version here


https://www.taracalico.com/from-the-case-file/

This shows a lot more detail, even down to to logo on the boys PJs. This looks like a dog with a fish lying limp in its mouth - surely someone can identify where this is from.

 

[dotr]

Great images of the van in that link. Didn't appreciate you can see straight through from the cab into the back.

Sure enough the photo I grabbed from Calico's Wikipedia page is a low gen version (double click on it over there and it gives you details)

There is an even clearer version here


https://www.taracalico.com/from-the-case-file/

This shows a lot more detail, even down to to logo on the boys PJs. This looks like a dog with a fish lying limp in its mouth - surely someone can identify where this is from.

Thanks, pic.from the link which i hope is fine to post.

 

[sony12]

I think the dog logo that the boy is wearing might be intended to be Spud Mckenzie. He was a popular dog used in commercials during the late '80's (he debuted as a Super Bowl commercial for the Giants/Broncos game in early '87).

I think this is pretty good evidence to make a safe conclusion that this pic was staged (and if it wasn't staged these would be about the dumbest kidnappers you could possibly imagine).

For it to be real these supposed kidnappers would be taking photos of two kids in an open van during the middle of the day where anyone within the general area could see. If they walked by the back of the van they could potentially see what was going on by looking at the back window. If they walked by the front of the van they could see by looking at the front window. And they could potentially see by looking in at the side the people were taking the photos at. If real it would be extremely risky to take an outside photo like this during the middle of the day pretty much anywhere a long the coast of Florida.

I'm no kidnapper but even I know that if you were going to take a photo like this of two kidnapped kids you would want it to be taken in a house and preferrably in a basement somewhere. Not outside in the middle of the day in a vehicle with a back and front window where people could potentially see what was going on. There is a reason why people who do kidnap kids usually lock them away somewhere and if they do let them out they are extremely careful about the circumstances that the kids are alllowed outside in.

I can see why this photo has been darkened quite a bit over the years to the point where you can't see all the light shining in on the scene. The pic is a lot more believable when you can't see everything that was involved with the original. That also could be a reason why nobody has come forward regarding this photo as well. The photo has been altered so much by this point that it pretty much is an entirely different picture than the one that was actually taken.

 

[DQN]

The book is a about a girl in the Victorian Era something this girl would be reading"My Sweet Audrina" A vacation read for a teenage girl.

http://vcandrews.wikia.com/wiki/My_Sweet_Audrina

 

[DQN]

There is a crushed plastic drinking cup under her leg.

 

[Gravity Well]

There is a detailed pod cast that covers the photo analysis that was carried out on the original Polaroid at that link also:

https://www.taracalico.com/from-the-case-file/

 

[jccoa1999]

I definitely think it is a staged picture! But all the stuff about"if they were real kidnappers" they wouldn't take the picture out in daylight because everyone might see them in the van or anything else like that doesn't mean anything to my opinion! Of course if they were "real" kidnappers they definitely could take a picture like that without anyone"seeing"! They could've taken it in their driveway! Anywhere where there isn't people walking around everywhere! And in '89 there was way less people and alot more privacy for sure! Alot of vans set up for camping have blinds or curtains covering the window!

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[Laughing]

The book is a about a girl in the Victorian Era something this girl would be reading"My Sweet Audrina" A vacation read for a teenage girl.

http://vcandrews.wikia.com/wiki/My_Sweet_Audrina

Not sure this is Victorian era?

Horrible story including rape & gaslighting. Not all "kid's books" have kid themes. This is V.C. Andrews book and they are uniformly scary!

 

[jccoa1999]

The only reason this picture is even "well known" is because someone thought the girl looked like Calico. I dont even see a resemblance between the two girls! 5 year age difference at least! I do see a resemblance in the the two siblings in the picture though!the sister got some twisted idea from reading V.C Andrews and thought up a scene or whatever and the kids acted it out, took pics, maybe dropped a couple here and there to mess with their parents because they were mad at their parents or whatever, being bored&ignored!In my head i like to think these siblings read these posts today and laugh about how they fooled the "world"! And they probably want to come forward but have a fear of getting in legal trouble and backlash from it!

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[sony12]

The only reason this picture is even "well known" is because someone thought the girl looked like Calico. I dont even see a resemblance between the two girls! 5 year age difference at least! I do see a resemblance in the the two siblings in the picture though!the sister got some twisted idea from reading V.C Andrews and thought up a scene or whatever and the kids acted it out, took pics, maybe dropped a couple here and there to mess with their parents because they were mad at their parents or whatever, being bored&ignored!In my head i like to think these siblings read these posts today and laugh about how they fooled the "world"! And they probably want to come forward but have a fear of getting in legal trouble and backlash from it!

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

Yeah the only reason this photo is known about at all is because it did get attached to the Calico case. If it never did get attached to the case it likely never would have found its way to the web and would have long since been forgotten about. I agree the girl doesn't resemble Calico much at all but I do understand why the mother would have wanted it to be Tara.

As far as the people who were involved with the making of this photo I think there would be a very good chance they wouldn't have ever found out about it. Even though it has become a widely circulated image you still have to be looking in a very specific area to find out about it (even to this day). It's not one of those things where you can just pull up the news and hear about it or read about it on regular news websites. You have to be looking at missing persons cases (and even more specifically the Tara Calico case) to even hear about it. Also keep in mind that the girl would now be in her mid 40's most likely and the boy in his late 30's and likely don't resemble the two kids in the photos anymore. So it wouldn't be like one of their facebook friends could look at the image and connect the dots. It would almost have to be a direct family member who were familiar with what they looked like then. Even a current spouse might not be able to connect the dots.

 

[jccoa1999]

Wearing an Egghead Software shirt in 1989 tells me a few things! The company started out in California in 1984! In 1989 the stores that were all located in California had a promotion to boost business by giving out a floppy disk with purchase,etc to boost business. IMO the family was from California. I also feel that maybe their father or mother worked for the company but I'm totally guessing! I feel that the family was well off enough to have a pretty new Toyota van, possibly software/computer, etc! I just know in 1989 I didn't know anyone that had a computer or were buying software or even software shirts! Also I am sure they have heard about the picture through internet, friends, family members, considering they were into software in 1989! Just my opinion and thoughts only! And again if it were me and my family I'd be afraid to come clean about the staged little joke in fear of getting in trouble due to wasted resources from police and such!

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[jccoa1999]

Oh and Calico's mother was shown another photo of a different girl years later and again she was sure that girl was her daughter too!

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[Tbone144]

There is a crushed plastic drinking cup under her leg.

Anyone else see a gun under this cup, grip at the back? Is this the squirt gun I saw referenced earlier? Back end looks realistic enough. The muzzle does look off though.

 

[Gravity Well]

The more I dig into this the more I'm convinced it's a prank.

There was a male witness on the day who saw the girl in the convenience store with an older male and didn't look under any duress.

Also he saw the boy in the driving seat of the van playing with the steering wheel!

 

[sony12]

The more I dig into this the more I'm convinced it's a prank.

There was a male witness on the day who saw the girl in the convenience store with an older male and didn't look under any duress.

Also he saw the boy in the driving seat of the van playing with the steering wheel!

Yeah and I am also beginning to wonder if we need to start questioning the validity of the lady who said she found the photo. The report said that her story changed regarding the white van. It changed from her actually seeing it in the parking lot to her just seeing it behind her while she was driving home from the store. Why would she try to connect the photo to the van if it was just a random vehicle she saw on the road while she was driving?

It does make me wonder a bit if she was in on it.

 

[jccoa1999]

The only story I've heard about the lady who found the picture was that she parked her car and where she found the picture in the next spot over there was a white Toyota cargo van pulling out when she pulled in! I haven't heard any other stories about her changing her story!

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[sony12]

The only story I've heard about the lady who found the picture was that she parked her car and where she found the picture in the next spot over there was a white Toyota cargo van pulling out when she pulled in! I haven't heard any other stories about her changing her story!

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

Listen to some of the stuff Gravity Well linked to. She did change her story. She initially did say she saw the white van in the parking lot of the store. However later on she changed it to seeing it on the road while she was driving home.

 

[Gravity Well]

I though that the witness might have more to do with, or even be hart of any hoax.

However, listening to the Q&A session on the link I posted said it wasn't her changing her story but when put under hypnosis the only difference in her original story (of seeing it in the parking lot prior to entering the store) was that she saw it behind her on on her way home.

It sounds like she is probably a credible witness if you take a listen.

 

[Gravity Well]

I'm inclined to believe the Polaroid was left deliberately facedown outside the store for the witness to find. Could it even have been taken quickly outside the store when they spotted a "good victim" to prank? The novelty of using a Polaroid to take an instant picture? Although staged, some of it looks rushed - the first piece of tape that the boy couldn't get to stick discarded in front of him? Her hands too far apart to be bound (3 inches) her feet not bound from their position. The child lock on the door in the "off position"

All a joke, bit of dark humour, drive off laughing. Except it got associated with the tragic case of Tara Calico and that of Michael Henley.

Like others have mentioned, either today they are blissfully unaware of its significance, or possibly fearful of any repercussions from LE.

If it is the latter, LE have stated they just was to bring some closure to the link to Calico if this is a red herring. So much time has passed I can't see the folks behind this been in serous trouble. Also, should they be reading these posts, or listening to those pod casts, coming forward now, even anonymously, would be the right thing to do. If they have kids of their own today I'm sure they can empathise.