IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #26

[Ms Pragmatic]

I think that (insert name of my suspect) was well known to the girls. He/she tossed the purse over the fence as the girls walked ahead towards the car. The girls left the bikes on the trail. At some point, either a good Samaritan picked them up and leaned them on the fence, or the searchers picked them up and leaned them on the fence.

Remember, at this point, NOBODY was thinking they had been kidnapped. The searchers were volunteer firemen -- not trained LE. They weren't even full time firemen/city employees. They just thought they were helping look for 2 girls who were probably lost or maybe had fallen in the lake. I think it is likely that they picked up the bikes once they found them. (Of course, this is a HUGE boo-boo, and LE will NEVER admit this to us. Hence, Abben's vagueness.)

I can agree with all of that. Very good points made.

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

If LE were to hold a presser in the near future and announce that they have evidence that this was a sexually-motivated crime, would it change anyone's theory? Personally, I go back and forth on the motivation. Just wondering what everyone else thinks.

 

[JaimeInLA]

If LE were to hold a presser in the near future and announce that they have evidence that this was a sexually-motivated crime, would it change anyone's theory? Personally, I go back and forth on the motivation. Just wondering what everyone else thinks.

Yes. That would blow my theory right out of the water. I don't think this was a sexually motivated crime at all.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I'm here, I'm female, I was a single mother until the spawn flew the coop to live with the deadbeat.

When I first spoke to SierraShelby I thought "this is going to cause confusion" because I used SS for short.

 

[Ms Pragmatic]

Yes. That would blow my theory right out of the water. I don't think this was a sexually motivated crime at all.

Not sure I do either. I would be way more inclined to believe it was sexually-motivated if it were one girl and not both. Not that it doesn't happen, I just have doubts to it being sexually-motivated now.

 

[SapphireSteel]

If LE were to hold a presser in the near future and announce that they have evidence that this was a sexually-motivated crime, would it change anyone's theory? Personally, I go back and forth on the motivation. Just wondering what everyone else thinks.

The thing is, the only people who know the motivation (at present) is the perp.

Even the accomplices may not know the real motive.

There may well have been a sexual element in this. If you're cruel enough to steal two little girls you are cruel enough to stand by while one of your accomplices has some fun.

As for it being the actual motive (eg a pedophile on the hunt) I sincerely doubt it.

There is no way that a rockspider just so happened to be hanging out at a quiet corner of the lake, just on the offchance a suitable child would come past alone. It was school holidays, most children at a lake or park would be with a carer of some sort...let alone the paranoid "stranger danger" hover parents who view every man with suspicion (me).

Just doesn't make sense no matter which way you view it.

Also I remain mindful of the Sheriff's speech about "the people responsible" and "we don't even have a gender", which argues against a sexual assault.

Women can and do become pedophiles, but this is also comparatively rare. Even Tori Staffords female abductor stood by and watched the sexual assault, and did not take part.

:cow:

 

[threecrazykids]

BBM

It could also have happened that way if the girls knew their abductor(s), which is my theory (at the moment:what.

I don't feel this was a random abduction. JMO

In my scenario this is someone they know as well. And the more I think about it it makes sense no one would pay close attention to someone coming to pick up 2 kids from a park even if an adult WAS there blatantly walking them out!

I think about this scenario...

I'm at the park doing my thing. Over yonder I see a man who even BLATANTLY pulled up into a vehicle right in the parking lot (as SS stated he'd seen vehicles in the parking lot). I see him/her casually walk over around the lake to where 2 girls are over next to the pond throwing rocks, playing in the water etc.

I may not see the bikes (depending where they were at the time), but even if he turned around and walked them back to his car I wouldn't think anything of it! I'd actually think they were just there to pick them up. Even if there WAS some sort of commotion I'd probably think the girls were in trouble for being at the lake when they shouldn't have and the parents were out looking all over town for them and were ticked they'd been there alone.

Unless those girls were screaming in a clear indication they were being taken against their will even a bit of hollering wouldn't have made me think of anything at the moment. Now...after the fact? Sure! But...if it happened across the park would I even have paid attention enough to identify the person in detail? Maybe not.

I guess my point is this...this person (if known to them) could have easily told them they were in trouble and their parents were all over town looking and "you'd better get your butts in the car NOW"...and gone.

 

[cluciano63]

I cannot really think of any motives that would not be sexual in some. Murdering two young girls just seems sexually motivated to me, in some way, even if the girls were, for example, specifically singled out.

 

[Marilynilpa]

In my scenario this is someone they know as well. And the more I think about it it makes sense no one would pay close attention to someone coming to pick up 2 kids from a park even if an adult WAS there blatantly walking them out!

I think about this scenario...

I'm at the park doing my thing. Over yonder I see a man who even BLATANTLY pulled up into a vehicle right in the parking lot (as SS stated he'd seen vehicles in the parking lot). I see him/her casually walk over around the lake to where 2 girls are over next to the pond throwing rocks, playing in the water etc.

I may not see the bikes (depending where they were at the time), but even if he turned around and walked them back to his car I wouldn't think anything of it! I'd actually think they were just there to pick them up. Even if there WAS some sort of commotion I'd probably think the girls were in trouble for being at the lake when they shouldn't have and the parents were out looking all over town for them and were ticked they'd been there alone.

Unless those girls were screaming in a clear indication they were being taken against their will even a bit of hollering wouldn't have made me think of anything at the moment. Now...after the fact? Sure! But...if it happened across the park would I even have paid attention enough to identify the person in detail? Maybe not.

I guess my point is this...this person (if known to them) could have easily told them they were in trouble and their parents were all over town looking and "you'd better get your butts in the car NOW"...and gone.

:goodpost:

I agree with you completely.

 

[carbuff]

I have a question about the dogs who supposedly picked up the girls' scents near where the bikes were found.

If the girls had been there earlier, say the day before, but not on the day they disappeared, would the dogs still pick up their scents?

 

[threecrazykids]

I cannot really think of any motives that would not be sexual in some. Murdering two young girls just seems sexually motivated to me, in some way, even if the girls were, for example, specifically singled out.

Typically jealousy or money are two other common motives.

In some cases (not this one necessarily) there are people who benefit financially from someone being dead. Life insurance policies, death benefits,etc. I can't say one way or another if someone had life insurance policies out on either of these girls but if so, I'm sure LE has looked into that aspect as well.

As far as MOO on the life insurance policies go...this family doesn't come across as the type that has the financial means to take out large payout policies. Nothing but my own opinion, but I could be grossly wrong (as I frequently am).

 

[SapphireSteel]

I cannot really think of any motives that would not be sexual in some. Murdering two young girls just seems sexually motivated to me, in some way, even if the girls were, for example, specifically singled out.

The generally accepted motives for a murder are

sexual
profit
revenge

We've spoken a lot about sexual and revenge type motives (there may still be elements!) but ask yourself this -

"who profited from this crime?"

:cow:

 

[SapphireSteel]

I have a question about the dogs who supposedly picked up the girls' scents near where the bikes were found.

If the girls had been there earlier, say the day before, but not on the day they disappeared, would the dogs still pick up their scents?

YES.

The dogs know when someone's been there, but have no way of telling when.

Also, I wonder if the perp went so far as to drag around items of clothing belonging to the girls, which would lay their scent and mislead the dogs.

:cow:

 

[Marilynilpa]

If LE were to hold a presser in the near future and announce that they have evidence that this was a sexually-motivated crime, would it change anyone's theory? Personally, I go back and forth on the motivation. Just wondering what everyone else thinks.

It would change my theory.

I believe sexual gratification may have been a "by product" of the abductions, but it was not the motivating factor. JMO

 

[Marilynilpa]

YES.

The dogs know when someone's been there, but have no way of telling when.

Also, I wonder if the perp went so far as to drag around items of clothing belonging to the girls, which would lay their scent and mislead the dogs.

:cow:

BBM

Assuming the perp had access to items of clothing belonging to the girls, I think it's possible.

But wouldn't that be hard to explain if someone saw this? I know that I might not pay attention to someone escorting two girls to a vehicle, but I would definitely notice someone dragging clothing around. JMO

 

[JaimeInLA]

I have a question about the dogs who supposedly picked up the girls' scents near where the bikes were found.

If the girls had been there earlier, say the day before, but not on the day they disappeared, would the dogs still pick up their scents?

Yes. They pick up the most recent scent.

 

[JaimeInLA]

BBM

Assuming the perp had access to items of clothing belonging to the girls, I think it's possible.

But wouldn't that be hard to explain if someone saw this? I know that I might not pay attention to someone escorting two girls to a vehicle, but I would definitely notice someone dragging clothing around. JMO

Sounds like just another Friday night in L.A. to me! :floorlaugh:

 

[carbuff]

If LE were to hold a presser in the near future and announce that they have evidence that this was a sexually-motivated crime, would it change anyone's theory? Personally, I go back and forth on the motivation. Just wondering what everyone else thinks.

I go back and forth, too.

And as much as I may think certain other scenarios fit the limited evidence better, there's no way to eliminate either a local RSO escalating his perversion or a Christopher Wilder/Israel Keyes type of killer who goes travels widely and just happens to be in town that day to spot an easy target.

 

[hollyblue]

If LE were to hold a presser in the near future and announce that they have evidence that this was a sexually-motivated crime, would it change anyone's theory? Personally, I go back and forth on the motivation. Just wondering what everyone else thinks.

It's more likely it was a sexually motivated crime than a revenge killing, but I do keep in the back of my mind Misty was just previously released and Dan's case was coming up. Two things that had changed in the whole family's environment within a few months. Also, if a revenge, why take Lizzy? The timing...why wait for Lyric to be in Evansdale when she lived in Waterloo. If revenge still..... the perp knew the family's schedule.

I think they may have been taken for child *advertiser censored* or trafficking to pedos since they both were taken...and with all the media coverage things got too hot for the perps....especially with the reward. Too big a chance their customers would recognize the girls and turn them in for the $$....and they prolly would have a network of where they could just go find other girls available and splurge on their perverted ways. Or...it could just be two drug saturated, sicko nutballs taking an opportune moment to satisfy their needs. Other suggestions I'll sit on my hands, but they all need to be investigated until the guilty are found and arrested.

I'd like to know the statistics of Friday abductions and employed perps. I've noticed so many take place on Fridays. Same with many runaways. Maybe we should all make Fridays special awareness day for kids and having our antennae fine tuned?

 

[JaimeInLA]

The generally accepted motives for a murder are

sexual
profit
revenge

We've spoken a lot about sexual and revenge type motives (there may still be elements!) but ask yourself this -

"who profited from this crime?"

:cow:

I know that, at first, all the money being donated to the funds was split between the 2 families. But then, at some point, the entire fund was transferred to Heather and she was named the trustee/executor/whatever.

Do you remember when this happened? Was it after the night in the hotel room and aggressive questioning of Misty/Dan? I think it must have been, because that was the weekend after the abduction/weekend JW was put in jail to "dry out." I think the fund was transferred longer than a week after the abduction.

Do you remember WHY it happened? Was there some misuse of the funds? I remember Facebook rumors and posted photos of nights on the town, manicures, new clothes, etc. But would those things really prompt the bank to switch the account into only Heather's name? I would think it would take something larger than that.

Sorry if this is forbidden -- I will delete and you can ignore. I'm just trying to figure out who LITERALLY profited from the murder.