oceanblueeyes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 26,446
- Reaction score
- 43,711
I am very comfortable with my opinion now that this was a done by an armed robber caught in the act while in Russ and Shirley's garage.
So I am back to thinking Russ's murder was spontaneous and that is why there was no struggle per Sills. It came out of the blue with no warning. I think a very heated verbal exchange/altercation was taking place between the soon to be killer and Russ. Russ may have told him to not move and he was going to call the cops and that is why the killer killed him right there.
Of course Shirley's murder was definitely premeditated. Imo, he thought of her as nothing more than collateral damage and looked at it as eliminating all witnesses, IMO. He would do whatever he felt necessary to avoid being caught.
So I do not believe Russ's murder was planned. I think when Russ caught him, most likely in his garage trying to steal something, he then killed him in a panic. I think he shot him in the head. I feel he knew the instant he was caught that all hell was going to break loose if S or R were given an opportunity to call the cops. Imo, Russ and Shirley both knew him, and not only knew him by sight, but knew him by name, and maybe even knew his family as well. IMO
He had to murder Shirley because she had seen him not only attempt to rob them, but she saw him murder her husband, and she could ID him too and he knew it.
Imo, he knew if anyone found out he was robbing elderly neighbors he could spend a very long time in prison even up to 25 years to life. And on top of that there is a law now that if violent crimes (armed robbery is considered a violent crime) are committed against anyone 65 years and older the suspect will do more time. I think it is 10 years that is tacked on, iirc.
Once the murders happened he then had to devote all of his time thinking of ways to dispose of Shirley and Russ to get rid of the evidence. Imo, he also did not want to take any items from their home after the murders. He was trying to distance any evidence involved knowing if found it could be tied back to him. So he takes nothing and tries to stage it to look like a hit and an abduction instead of a robbery.
He was quite clever by trying to stage it to look like a sterilized cold hit, but sometime murderers do not take in the big picture. I don't think he knows how investigations really work and are carried out.
He didn't take into consideration that the first people who would be closely looked at is all family members, and I don't think Sills has ever suspected any of them all along. He is in daily contact with them. He says they have been very cooperative, and quickly answers any questions he may have. So imo, the children have long been ruled out. And he did say yesterday that people have been ruled out, but he will never want to publicly rule anyone out by name. He wants to keep the murderer guessing.
Next they would then delve closely into the background and victimology of the victims themselves to see if they had enemies that would do something like this or if they had done something to someone else in their past or present to create such type of enemies. They would also look to see if their children had any enemies. They found nothing, imo. but a couple who had always lived a very clean life who seem to be very close to their children...... so no one had a reason to put a hit out on either of them in the first place.
So when the FBI profilers looked at what was done, how it was done, and to whom it was done to... they knew it wasn't the work of a hit man, but was committed by someone who was trying to protect their own identity from being known that knew the Dermonds on a personal basis even if casually.
FBI profilers and crime scene reconstructionist have devoted their entire lives studying the type of criminals that do these kind of crimes and the way they do them. That is why they get the huge bucks because they are able to look at the evidence clearly, weighing it all in totality, rather than getting bogged down in the weeds by what the killer wants them 'to believe or think.'
I do believe fully that Sills has identifying DNA whether it is hair, fibers, or even tissue samples, but what he does not have is a suspect to compare his DNA evidence to nor does he have this DNA profile anywhere in a data bank system.........He did tell Mark Winne he has evidence in his possession that will help him once the killer is IDd.
IMO
So I am back to thinking Russ's murder was spontaneous and that is why there was no struggle per Sills. It came out of the blue with no warning. I think a very heated verbal exchange/altercation was taking place between the soon to be killer and Russ. Russ may have told him to not move and he was going to call the cops and that is why the killer killed him right there.
Of course Shirley's murder was definitely premeditated. Imo, he thought of her as nothing more than collateral damage and looked at it as eliminating all witnesses, IMO. He would do whatever he felt necessary to avoid being caught.
So I do not believe Russ's murder was planned. I think when Russ caught him, most likely in his garage trying to steal something, he then killed him in a panic. I think he shot him in the head. I feel he knew the instant he was caught that all hell was going to break loose if S or R were given an opportunity to call the cops. Imo, Russ and Shirley both knew him, and not only knew him by sight, but knew him by name, and maybe even knew his family as well. IMO
He had to murder Shirley because she had seen him not only attempt to rob them, but she saw him murder her husband, and she could ID him too and he knew it.
Imo, he knew if anyone found out he was robbing elderly neighbors he could spend a very long time in prison even up to 25 years to life. And on top of that there is a law now that if violent crimes (armed robbery is considered a violent crime) are committed against anyone 65 years and older the suspect will do more time. I think it is 10 years that is tacked on, iirc.
Once the murders happened he then had to devote all of his time thinking of ways to dispose of Shirley and Russ to get rid of the evidence. Imo, he also did not want to take any items from their home after the murders. He was trying to distance any evidence involved knowing if found it could be tied back to him. So he takes nothing and tries to stage it to look like a hit and an abduction instead of a robbery.
He was quite clever by trying to stage it to look like a sterilized cold hit, but sometime murderers do not take in the big picture. I don't think he knows how investigations really work and are carried out.
He didn't take into consideration that the first people who would be closely looked at is all family members, and I don't think Sills has ever suspected any of them all along. He is in daily contact with them. He says they have been very cooperative, and quickly answers any questions he may have. So imo, the children have long been ruled out. And he did say yesterday that people have been ruled out, but he will never want to publicly rule anyone out by name. He wants to keep the murderer guessing.
Next they would then delve closely into the background and victimology of the victims themselves to see if they had enemies that would do something like this or if they had done something to someone else in their past or present to create such type of enemies. They would also look to see if their children had any enemies. They found nothing, imo. but a couple who had always lived a very clean life who seem to be very close to their children...... so no one had a reason to put a hit out on either of them in the first place.
So when the FBI profilers looked at what was done, how it was done, and to whom it was done to... they knew it wasn't the work of a hit man, but was committed by someone who was trying to protect their own identity from being known that knew the Dermonds on a personal basis even if casually.
FBI profilers and crime scene reconstructionist have devoted their entire lives studying the type of criminals that do these kind of crimes and the way they do them. That is why they get the huge bucks because they are able to look at the evidence clearly, weighing it all in totality, rather than getting bogged down in the weeds by what the killer wants them 'to believe or think.'
I do believe fully that Sills has identifying DNA whether it is hair, fibers, or even tissue samples, but what he does not have is a suspect to compare his DNA evidence to nor does he have this DNA profile anywhere in a data bank system.........He did tell Mark Winne he has evidence in his possession that will help him once the killer is IDd.
IMO
I am sticking with it until something tells me otherwise.