IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #25

[JaimeInLA]

Would we go as far as to say that the perp was not only familiar to the girls, but one they were completely comfortable with? Like...they went willingly, never thinking for a minute they were in danger? An abduction close to home IMO would've had to go down that way or it would've been too risky to grab the bikes.

Yes. That is exactly what I think. And that's about all I can say about that!

 

[Anna1964]

Exactly right. This is why in my theory that I posted in an earlier thread theorizes that the girls were lured into a home, a garage or a building there in the neighborhood around the home. Lured in, quickly bound or otherwise secured and the bikes very very quickly taken to the lake. Then this person returned to the home/building for the girls and took them to another (third) location. jmo and all that.

I have always considered this possibility. My grandfather sits outside in his garage all day. He sits in the back, and is not visible from the road. The neighborhood kids stop and speak to him, and some even come into the garage to pet his dogs.

 

[iamnotagolem]

I recall this incident too. And if LE thought the girls were taken close to home, a van would've been just the kind of vehicle they looked for. Plenty of room in the back to throw two bikes.

According to this article, they didn't seek him out because he drove a white van, they didn't seek him out as a witness. They sought him out as someone who might have information on the abduction. Per this article (I'd quote the parts but my device isn't letting me.)

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...case-Van-driver-speaks-authorities-TV-station

 

[hollyblue]

Otto, I know I am choosing to keep the timeline simple because when I add the other bits of info in, it gets confusing for me. That certainly doesn't mean I feel all of those bits of information are wrong, it just means I don't know which sightings LE has confirmed and which sightings LE was asking for help in confirming. Or if maybe LE was throwing out red herrings. When things get too cloudy, I wipe the slate clean and start over. That is basically where I am at now. Asking myself what I've missed. Trying to determine what, if anything, of significance LE knows for sure.

I think they are. Like snowbunny, I believe LE is twisting things and putting out some red herrings. I believe they are trying to get reactions and playing psychological games. Fishing....per se. I don't think they will ever announce a POI, but playing it very close to the vest until the suspect(s) are arrested. I do believe they have a suspect(s) and several POI's and are just filtering the bad info or connections (in/out) to see what's left. The perp(s) are local....we all figure and know that....so anything that gets leaked out or told could be very damaging in the investigation. If there are two perps, then more time will be needed. JMO

 

[palaminodee]

Would we go as far as to say that the perp was not only familiar to the girls, but one they were completely comfortable with? Like...they went willingly, never thinking for a minute they were in danger? An abduction close to home IMO would've had to go down that way or it would've been too risky to grab the bikes.

I thought this as a strong possibility from the beginning;
someone they are familiar with that had an "excuse" to pick them up quickly...eg:
grandma is sick, mom heather has to go to the hospital or whatever story they concocted.
then scenario A or B:
A: they picked them up on Brovan, bikes put in van or pick-up, dumped at lake and taken N to the other park
B: abducted by the lake, told the girls they'll get the bikes later and left at the lake, girls taken N to the other park

Both scenarios the perp(s) could be back in time to help in search.
The park N is far enough away so no one would be searching there anytime soon, remote enough no one goes there in the summertime. Close enough to get back in time to "be seen" helping.

 

[iamnotagolem]

Would we go as far as to say that the perp was not only familiar to the girls, but one they were completely comfortable with? Like...they went willingly, never thinking for a minute they were in danger? An abduction close to home IMO would've had to go down that way or it would've been too risky to grab the bikes.

If the perp is a close relative, someone could have actually witnessed the girls putting their bikes in and getting in the vehicle. If they know the family, they could assume it was a different day. Who would suspect a family member of this heinous crime? Anyone in the area is probably racking their brains over any vehicle or person who was out of the ordinary. Someone in the ordinary wouldn't even register.

 

[StacyMarie83]

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/weird/kids2/index_1.html

this is just an article about "Kids killing kids"

I tend to lean this way in my thinking. It seems to me the girls set their stuff down to play. I know when I was that age I was NOT worried about my purse like I would be now as an adult. Now I know the girls were found far enough away that a 14 year old boy most likely didn't drag them there, but maybe lure??? (although w/ no sightings from the bikes to the place of bodies that is unlikely) Or a child old enough to have access to atv, etc. Just my thoughts

I hope LE has some good ideas and this comes to an end soon!

 

[iamnotagolem]

I thought this as a strong possibility from the beginning;
someone they are familiar with that had an "excuse" to pick them up quickly...eg:
grandma is sick, mom heather has to go to the hospital or whatever story they concocted.
then scenario A or B:
A: they picked them up on Brovan, bikes put in van or pick-up, dumped at lake and taken N to the other park
B: abducted by the lake, told the girls they'll get the bikes later and left at the lake, girls taken N to the other park

Both scenarios the perp(s) could be back in time to help in search.
The park N is far enough away so no one would be searching there anytime soon, remote enough no one goes there in the summertime. Close enough to get back in time to "be seen" helping.

They could have even said "I told grandma I'd watch you so you could keep playing until Misty gets off work." This would keep the girls from asking why they weren't headed to the hospital.

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

According to this article, they didn't seek him out because he drove a white van, they didn't seek him out as a witness. They sought him out as someone who might have information on the abduction. Per this article (I'd quote the parts but my device isn't letting me.)

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...case-Van-driver-speaks-authorities-TV-station

That is very interesting!! Thank you for posting this!

 

[GrainneDhu]

How about this for a sneaky police tactic: give a statement to the media that the manner of death will not be released because it is a fact that only the perp knows, so if anyone knows the manner of death, that person must be the perp.

That would be sneaky except for the fact that it has been used in so many investigations that you'd have to live under a rock not to realise that.

And yet, the proof is in the pudding. Many crimes have been solved because the perp could not resist telling someone either how the crime was committed or that LE was wrong.

It is a wonderment to me that not releasing the exact cause of death still works so often.

 

[georger]

The part of I-380 that goes between Iowa City and Cedar Rapids was built in 1975 and then they started building it north of Cedar Rapids to Waterloo/Cedar Falls after that. I think I-380 went almost all the way to Waterloo by winter of 1978 but I'm not sure.

I know that when Jethro Tull appeared at the Uni-Dome, I took I-380 almost all the way there with a carload of friends. We got to meet Ian Anderson backstage and then we stayed up all night in someone's dorm room arguing feminist theory. And we thought we were all so grown up! LOL!

Did you pass me, or did I pass you? Crosby Stills & Nash 5 Season ...
forget the year. Metallica a few years later in Iowa City. I was the
assigned chaperon... :seeya:

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

You guys all have offered some food for thought today. I hadn't considered the truck thing, but that makes perfect sense. I don't know why I was thinking van or large SUV, but a truck would be perfect. Great sleuthing day here IMO. And all great posts! That is why I try to keep my mind open because we all have different experiences that shape our lines of thinking. Major thanks to everyone!

 

[Sere-nity]

This scenario popped into my head.

The girls are approached by somebody in the parking lot and asks for directions to Meyers lake. The girls say they don't know but can find out. They happen to see employees of a store and decide to ask them. They tell them. The girls rush back to the area and pass the camera at 12:15. Tell the person waiting. He (or they?) ask if the girls can show them how to get there. They do and they are gone forever.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Good morning all playing catch up here.

My theory has long been that LE know exactly who is behind this.

Now with these additional comments, it seems as though this may be the case.

“Part of that is, the only people that are going to know this information are the people who are responsible,” Smock said. “At least until somebody is arrested and we’re comfortable with that, that’s information we’ll keep confidential.”

~sbm~

“It’s not hampering us at all, but it is additional information that we’re looking forward to getting and putting with the case,” he said.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...aths-will-be-kept-confidential?nclick_check=1


I know a lot of people struggle with the concept of forensic linguistics here, but bear with me.

His language is unusual. We all know how careful and close lipped LE have been.

Smock speaks of the people responsible.

If he had no clue, or did not wish to give this away, LE speak is "person or persons responsible".

The fact that he actually said "people" (twice) implies to me that there are suspects, and they are plural.

The statement that they will "ADD" the COD indicates that they already have a case and are working one definite direction.

Put this together with the "we don't even have a gender" speech and I am fairly sure -

There was more than one perpetrator

The girls were not sexually abused.

They have a case, and are just waiting on the ducks to line up in a row.

:cow:

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

That would be sneaky except for the fact that it has been used in so many investigations that you'd have to live under a rock not to realise that.

And yet, the proof is in the pudding. Many crimes have been solved because the perp could not resist telling someone either how the crime was committed or that LE was wrong.

It is a wonderment to me that not releasing the exact cause of death still works so often.

How true! The perp lets slip during an interview that the girls were strangled and is asked how he knows this bit of info. The perp says "I must've read it somewhere". Boom. There's your guy because the police know that info was never released or published anywhere.

 

[georger]

And so it was at 11:30, they asked me if they could go for a short bike ride, and I said yes. And they`ve done this millions of times. And they`ve never, never went that far. I could go outside and yell their names, and they would eventually hear me.-from Nancy Grace transcript. Wylma Cook quoted.

That statement is eating at me for several reasons. The girls asked to go for a short bike ride at 11:30. They knew they had to be back, which is why they say "short" bike ride. We know from 11:30 until they were caught on CCTV that they remained close to home. WHY did they remain close to home and take off shortly before they were due back? Makes no sense to me.

... Was just a report on WMT 1:00 news, saying 'tests are still being conducted in the case and wont be released to protect the confidentiality of the case' ... 'no word on when the tests will be finished' ...

Question: Liz' cell phone. Was it always not working? Did it work and did
she use any time on Jul 13th, especially during the morning? When they
asked to go out for a bike ride had they already been in contact with
someone ? Were they out looking for someone? Maybe someone they
were supposed to meet? All arranged on the cell phone?

 

[palaminodee]

I would love to know if LE thinks the bikes were dropped by the girls or dumped by the killer(s).
If the bikes were dumped, that almost rules out cars and SUV's as the vehicle to be looking for. (Unless a boat or camper attached)
I had both our bikes just tuned up and had to take them separately, they do not fit well in an SUV as Jaimie said.
That makes the vehicle a pick-up or van, if that is the scenario.
JMO

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

Good morning all playing catch up here.

My theory has long been that LE know exactly who is behind this.

Now with these additional comments, it seems as though this may be the case.

“Part of that is, the only people that are going to know this information are the people who are responsible,” Smock said. “At least until somebody is arrested and we’re comfortable with that, that’s information we’ll keep confidential.”

~sbm~

“It’s not hampering us at all, but it is additional information that we’re looking forward to getting and putting with the case,” he said.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...aths-will-be-kept-confidential?nclick_check=1


I know a lot of people struggle with the concept of forensic linguistics here, but bear with me.

His language is unusual. We all know how careful and close lipped LE have been.

Smock speaks of the people responsible.

If he had no clue, or did not wish to give this away, LE speak is "person or persons responsible".

The fact that he actually said "people" (twice) implies to me that there are suspects, and they are plural.

The statement that they will "ADD" the COD indicates that they already have a case and are working one definite direction.

Put this together with the "we don't even have a gender" speech and I am fairly sure -

There was more than one perpetrator

The girls were not sexually abused.

They have a case, and are just waiting on the ducks to line up in a row.

:cow:

I, too, found that odd. It jumped out to me right away because person or persons responsible is generally how it is phrased. IMO, you would be correct about that. People leads me to believe they think more than one person is involved.

 

[Nvgirl]

According to this article, they didn't seek him out because he drove a white van, they didn't seek him out as a witness. They sought him out as someone who might have information on the abduction. Per this article (I'd quote the parts but my device isn't letting me.)

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...case-Van-driver-speaks-authorities-TV-station

Yeah i think there has been so many issues across the world with white vans and the fact there was one close to that time not far away, they are just covering all their bases. I think they are on to something thats why there really isnt alot of articles in the last couple weeks. I dont think they need the community help. I think they are waiting for all tests and watching he/she/them. They just are going to get their ducks in a row and Cross their t's and dot their i's. Hopefully somethn breaks soon

 

[gar]

If those girls and their bikes were transported from close to home, it wasn't done in a small vehicle. It could not have been done in a car, IMO. I have a large car and a GMC Acadia, which is a fairly large SUV. The bikes plus two girls would not fit into my car period. I could easily get the girls in my Acadia. And the bikes would definitely fit into the back of my Acadia, but could this all be accomplished quickly if the two girls didn't want to go with me? Absolutely not. IMO, if this occurred close to home, the vehicle had to be large enough to just throw the bikes in the back after the girls were secured in side. Even with the amount of space in the back of my SUV, I wouldn't be able to just throw the bikes in the back. It would take some maneuvering, especially considering that Lyric had an adult bike.

If the girls did not know this person, they most likely would have given one heck of a fight and this would've been very time consuming to snatch the girls and get their bikes in the back. All without being seen. Unless there were two perps. If I am the perp, am I willing to take the time necessary to abduct two girls in broad daylight against their will AND transport their bikes too? Wouldn't I just take the girls and let their bikes drop where they drop?

Staging the bikes has never made sense to me, either, simply because of the proximity to 380/20. I've driven by Meyers Lake many times and it catches my attention every time (even before the abduction). This highway is long, straight, flat and mostly dull. When you see a nice looking lake with some attractive housing, it's hard not to take note. Especially considering road construction last summer (which I don't remember, but I believe those who've said that to be true), traffic was likely moving slower than normal. Where the bikes were found is SO close to the highway - just down an embankment. Motorists could have easily seen the staging occur. I think it would have been far too risky for the perp.

Someone mentioned some of the trees have been cleared out of this area, so maybe this theory wouldn't have been true last July. But each time I've driven by Meyers Lake since the girls went missing, I thought to myself "how could anyone commit a crime in this location without being seen?"