IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #28

[Dr. Know?]

One case I follow is Haleigh Cummings case. In April 2009, this small county of approx. 74K, immediate are of about 10K, had a $24 million dollar drug bust right after she went missing. It can happen anywhere. The towns of Waterloo, Evansdale & Cedar Falls have approx. 100k people combined. Putnam County SO still have not solved the case but day after day continued to bust all the druggies and lock them up. Not just the famous 5. fwiw I don't doubt any type criminal harming children anymore.

http://staugustine.com/news/local-news/2010-08-17/putnam-county-man-faces-life-sentence-drug-charges

 

[Squeeze]

They are?????? :what:

Let me guess...same church?

That's actually thrown me a bit. I imagined Smock to be totally impartial and only involved on a professional level.

Heather mentioned this at one point. It must have been during the hour long KWWL interview. That he wanted to give them the news of finding the girls personally because they've know each other for a long time. Not necessarily through church. Evansdale is not that big.

 

[chelsea6]

I followed a case where there was a local woman that followed a case very closely. She was posting comments online from work and home. She attended specific local events so she could bump into an officer (an acquaintance) that was on the case because she wanted to get a little more information. She was always making inquiries and trying to get the inside scoop. She then posted that information on a forum.

Police did not appreciate the information that she was posting. They contacted the website owner, obtained the IP addresses of the person making the posts and then paid her a visit at work to discuss the situation with her employer. When her employer discovered what she was doing, and that some of what was posted occurred during work, that woman was fire

I'm not suggesting that this is what is happening here, but I would not want to see a repeat of what I described above. It was a very unfortunate situation for months following the dismissal from work.

In the future, investigators may decide to release a statement, but it will not be a result of someone asking them to make a statement. If a statement is made, it will be because it is part of the investigative strategy. Solving the case is the priority, satisfying the curiosity of people unrelated to the case is not.

Let me ask the inverse ... does anyone actually believe that Evansdale police have decided that they have better things to do than solve the abduction and murder of two children?

You are back at it again. oke:

I'm not suggesting that this is what is happening here,
It's obvious you are by using the scenario you posted as your frame of reference, as well as my post highlighted above it.

I would not want to see a repeat of what I described above. It was a very unfortunate situation for months following the dismissal from work.
If you aren't suggesting that is what is happening here, there would be no reason for you to even mention it. This explains why you asked me earlier "Aren't you concerned that police may visit you at home or work and investigate your interest in the case?" And now you post this scenario.

In the future, investigators may decide to release a statement, but it will not be a result of someone asking them to make a statement.
So you are speaking for investigators now too? :waitasec:You don't KNOW if they won't release a statement as a result of someone asking them to make a statement. You aren't an investigator on the case, you can't speak for them.

 

[Squeeze]

You could be right...however Heather and Drew in many interviews say they don't want details and they are leaving the whole thing in God's hands...that Elizabeth is in a better place. That has been their battle cry since day 1 (that whatever happens is God's will). Dan and Misty have also been silent as far as the media goes.

But that is the family's choice...I'm not degrading how they decide to mourn their child and whether or not they decide to be an integral part of the search for their killers...I'm simply stating I wouldn't behave the way they are. Neither is wrong...just different. Hope that makes sense.

If anyone could point me to a recent statement, article, etc. where the family is continuing to plead with the public to keep the girls in the spotlight I would be thrilled!:great:

No, I understand what you're saying. I would not rest either. Id probably be in the nuthouse at this point. And no they don't want to know the grisly details, but they could very well have more info than the general public. They have done PSAs, although I haven't seen them lately. And they have met with governor regarding reimplementation of the death penalty. That's doing something.

 

[chelsea6]

If someone has a legitimate tip, I don't think that investigators will ignore it ... at least I hope not. However, what I'm saying is something different.

If someone were to drive down the street with the window rolled down, approaching potential witnesses (from shortly before the abduction) and questioning them on what they saw and remembered, that's the sort of thing that gets the wrong kind of attention ... it can appear to be interfering with a police investigation, tampering with witnesses ... I don't know enough about it, but I think it would give the wrong impression.

The legitimate police tip would be: stranger in neighborhood asking unusual questions about the disappearance

Now this, I agree with you. (I like you, Otto, it's just the other things you posted.. I had to post my thoughts about it. )
It was suggested that I ask people, in a certain area.. it wasn't my idea, but I did volunteer. I can see THAT may be interferring, so I've changed my mind. I'm not a detective, I'll leave that up to them. :seeya: Besides, one of them may be the killer!!

 

[Squeeze]

Unless I'm misunderstanding, basically the objective is to have police release more information. They've released a statement that more information will not be released because it may compromise the intergrity of the investigation. Shouldn't we accept that?

We should accept that, assuming that they have all of the information they need. But they've repeatedly asked for the publics help (although not recently, very curious. Maybe they do already have their perp). So if they want our help - and we are certainly more than willing to help - then they should throw us a bone and give us something that might jog memories. Not for our own curiosity and nothing that would jeopardize the investigation, but something that might hell with THEIR investigation. I really think there has to be something they could share.

 

[otto]

You are back at it again. oke:

It's obvious you are by using the scenario you posted as your frame of reference, as well as my post highlighted above it.

If you aren't suggesting that is what is happening here, there would be no reason for you to even mention it. This explains why you asked me earlier "Aren't you concerned that police may visit you at home or work and investigate your interest in the case?" And now you post this scenario.

So you are speaking for investigators now too? :waitasec:You don't KNOW if they won't release a statement as a result of someone asking them to make a statement. You aren't an investigator on the case, you can't speak for them.

BBM

I'm very definitely giving an opinion, not speaker for investigators.

Did I misunderstand what you posted earlier, that you asked media to do a story, and they claimed that police would not release info because it may compromise the investigation ... so police have been asked to give a statement, and the answer is no ... no statement for reasons stated above.

I'm not an investigator, but it does sound like police have actively declined to give a statement ... in order to preserve the integrity of the case. So, if they release a statement, it will most likely be crafted to draw someone out, not to satisfy public curiosity ... an opinion. That shouldn't prevent the newspapers from periodically publishing a brief description of the case.

 

[NWLady]

We all know that lots of things get swept under the rug by LE, especially if they've gained something from it. As hard as it is for all of us to believe, it does happen. I know someone who lives in Waterloo and their church congregation has many people from Evansdale who attend. Also, one of the members of the congregation had been in LE for 35 plus years in another major city close by. Here's some scenarios that have been talked about. What if LE knows who committed a crime but yet to charge someone for the crime would mean that the public would then obviously know, right? Because in turn, LE would have to follow thru with proper court proceedings/hearings and of course if XYZ is found guilty then they would be sentenced to prison and no longer be out on the street. What if XYZ provides LE with lots of information with then in turn results in many, many more arrests of many, many others, which in turn has benefited LE?

How common is it that families of victims do NOT want to know who is responsible for the death of their family member?
It's not uncommon to not want to know details, but to not want to know WHO did it?

Does LE not want the public to know as it may be somewhat of an embarrassment? Especially so if one or more involved are “snitches” and/or “confidential informants?” After all, some of the people who have been questioned have quite extensive criminal histories and charges and/or have associates/friends who have had also. LE would look like fools if all of this played a part in a crime that took the lives of two young innocent children, wouldn't they??

 

[eileenhawkeye]

It happened July 13. It's now February 2. That's almost 7 months. What it looks like to me is that a predator is living in the Evansdale area. In cases where two young girls are abducted and left murdered in a very isolated place, it's usually a bad sign ... like it might happen again ... to another young girl. If the perp is still unidentified in the summer of 2013, I don't think anyone is going to be relaxed.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like a small, formerly safe place and until the perp is caught, it cannot be a safe place ... seems like police cannot let this one go.

I was counting from the day the girls' bodies were found, which was about two months ago. But I do think that if the killer hasn't abducted or killed anyone else by Summer 2013, the case will not be a huge priority anymore for local LE. But that is pretty much standard in any case; none of them stay at the level of having hundreds of LE, many searches, regular news briefings; basically an all-out 24/7 investigation, for more than a few months.

 

[otto]

Now this, I agree with you. (I like you, Otto, it's just the other things you posted.. I had to post my thoughts about it. )
It was suggested that I ask people, in a certain area.. it wasn't my idea, but I did volunteer. I can see THAT may be interferring, so I've changed my mind. I'm not a detective, I'll leave that up to them. :seeya: Besides, one of them may be the killer!!

I'm also curious whether anyone else on Lake Avenue regularly saw the girls riding to the end of the street and circling back. I'm curious whether they circled near the Gilbert, or Arbutus, end of the Lake Avenue. I would also like more information about the timeline.

Asking these questions helps us understand what may have happened, but the answers may communicate to the perp what investigators know, and whether they are closer, ore farther away, from identifying him ... not helpful to the investigation.

 

[otto]

We should accept that, assuming that they have all of the information they need. But they've repeatedly asked for the publics help (although not recently, very curious. Maybe they do already have their perp). So if they want our help - and we are certainly more than willing to help - then they should throw us a bone and give us something that might jog memories. Not for our own curiosity and nothing that would jeopardize the investigation, but something that might hell with THEIR investigation. I really think there has to be something they could share.

Don't they mean the public's help in terms of identifying that neighbor that is a bit off, the person that you see, work with, or live near that might be the perp, might have deliberately injured an animal or person in the past? ... help in terms of an overheard bar discussion, a stranger asking questions with the window rolled down, someone that likes to eat lunch at 7 Bridges County Park?

It seems that no stray jewelry was found at the scene, like with Austin Sigg ... nothing new to share that would advance the investigation. Patience. My only hope is that this doesn't have to happen again to solve it.

Police asked if anyone had missed a meeting ... were any deliveries delayed ... it could be someone that is regularly in Evansdale, but doesn't live there.

 

[chelsea6]

BBM

I'm not an investigator, but it does sound like police have actively declined to give a statement ... in order to preserve the integrity of the case. So, if they release a statement, it will most likely be crafted to draw someone out, not to satisfy public curiosity ... an opinion. That shouldn't prevent the newspapers from periodically publishing a brief description of the case.

I don't get it either. :waitasec:

 

[otto]

I was counting from the day the girls' bodies were found, which was about two months ago. But I do think that if the killer hasn't abducted or killed anyone else by Summer 2013, the case will not be a huge priority anymore for local LE. But that is pretty much standard in any case; none of them stay at the level of having hundreds of LE, many searches, regular news briefings; basically an all-out 24/7 investigation, for more than a few months.

If it doesn't happen again this summer, it is still most likely someone that was living in the area in July 2012 and who knew about both Maiden Lane (first mentioned by Wylma) and Seven Bridges County Park. The perp also knew that 7 Bridges was isolated enough to ensure that the bodies were not found for a very long time.

I'll take a let's wait and see attitude ... see what happens a year from now, whether police and public become relaxed about two murdered female children. Investigators seem to take this case personally, so I doubt they'll sit back on it, but we'll see.

 

[otto]

We all know that lots of things get swept under the rug by LE, especially if they've gained something from it. As hard as it is for all of us to believe, it does happen. I know someone who lives in Waterloo and their church congregation has many people from Evansdale who attend. Also, one of the members of the congregation had been in LE for 35 plus years in another major city close by. Here's some scenarios that have been talked about. What if LE knows who committed a crime but yet to charge someone for the crime would mean that the public would then obviously know, right? Because in turn, LE would have to follow thru with proper court proceedings/hearings and of course if XYZ is found guilty then they would be sentenced to prison and no longer be out on the street. What if XYZ provides LE with lots of information with then in turn results in many, many more arrests of many, many others, which in turn has benefited LE?

How common is it that families of victims do NOT want to know who is responsible for the death of their family member?
It's not uncommon to not want to know details, but to not want to know WHO did it?

Does LE not want the public to know as it may be somewhat of an embarrassment? Especially so if one or more involved are “snitches” and/or “confidential informants?” After all, some of the people who have been questioned have quite extensive criminal histories and charges and/or have associates/friends who have had also. LE would look like fools if all of this played a part in a crime that took the lives of two young innocent children, wouldn't they??

I'm sure that Heather and Drew would attend the trial of anyone charged with the murder of Elizabeth. My understanding is that they do not want to know the gruesome details of the autopsy report, but they want to see a conviction ... and apparently they have advocated for the death penalty.

I don't think that there is any conspiracy amongst officers, where they know the identity of the murderer and they are too involved with drug busts to make an arrest for child murder.

 

[otto]

The release of information during a missing person's case must be significantly different from the release of information after the missing person's remains have been found.

Before the children's remains were found, the families were front and center demonstrating that they were not involved in the disappearance ... to appease public and investigator suspicion. After the remains were found, it's up to investigators to figure out who did it, so the family fades into the background. There's nothing stopping the media from doing a story every day or month. If it's a repeat of the last statement from police that: no information will be released to protect the integrity of the investigation, at least the story is still in the news. Thankfully Heather is on-it with the Valentine Event ... maybe it will be an open door for the media to remind the public about the murdered children.

That said, I still don't think that investigators, under the guidance of FBI, owe curiosity seekers public announcements and case updates. Other than Florida, I can't think of any other place on earth where investigative progress is published prior to an arrest.

 

[georger]

You mean like the general public as private investigators?

No! Like (as in), the public has a vested interest in the case; as written in
the Constitution?

Never mind the idea: no man is an island entire of itself, . . . . . . .

 

[georger]

No, I understand what you're saying. I would not rest either. Id probably be in the nuthouse at this point. And no they don't want to know the grisly details, but they could very well have more info than the general public. They have done PSAs, although I haven't seen them lately. And they have met with governor regarding reimplementation of the death penalty. That's doing something.

What ever happened to the Operation Quick Find(s) that used to air in the
Eastern Iowa Media Market? Were they dropped by the tv and radio stations
that used to run them and why?

 

[georger]

I'm not an investigator, but it does sound like police have actively declined to give a statement ... in order to preserve the integrity of the case. So, if they release a statement, it will most likely be crafted to draw someone out, not to satisfy public curiosity ... an opinion. .[/quote]

This is sounding more like a tv soap opera script than the real world, to me.
Arent most crimes of this type, having run months unsolved, solved either by
a 'tip from the public', or, some accidental event like running a stop sign, tail
light out, and other seemingly unrelated trivial events which lead to an on-the-spot
inquiry on the part of some smart police officer?

Just asking: you're the expert!

Also: isn't Dan's trial coming soon? Maybe LE has been instructed not to release
info on the girls in order not to interfere with prosecution of Dan etal?

:banghead:

 

[superbee]

Now this, I agree with you. (I like you, Otto, it's just the other things you posted.. I had to post my thoughts about it. )
It was suggested that I ask people, in a certain area.. it wasn't my idea, but I did volunteer. I can see THAT may be interferring, so I've changed my mind. I'm not a detective, I'll leave that up to them. :seeya: Besides, one of them may be the killer!!

Yes, that is a worry I had for you out walking around speaking to people. He/she is not going to wear a sign identifying themselves as the killer. They have blended in and evaded capture for this long, they probably don't have horns or fangs. If they felt threatened by you...

Do you belong to any groups or organizations? When you are sitting at the coffee break you could innocently ask folks opinions of the murders without saying too much yourself, maybe you wonder who possibly could do such a thing, and will it ever be solved. Others may be very happy to unload in a safe environment.

But I certainly would not go and talk to anyone alone unless you know them very, very well and are sure there is no way they could be involved. More than once people I know have been horrified to find out a family member or someone they thought they knew had a terrible dark side.

I hope LE has some operatives out and about, here and there, passing on the scuttlebutt they hear. Amazing what hairdressers, barbers, cab drivers, waitresses, bartenders, cleaning ladies, and store clerks overhear!

 

[Tucarra]

We all know that lots of things get swept under the rug by LE, especially if they've gained something from it. As hard as it is for all of us to believe, it does happen. I know someone who lives in Waterloo and their church congregation has many people from Evansdale who attend. Also, one of the members of the congregation had been in LE for 35 plus years in another major city close by. Here's some scenarios that have been talked about. What if LE knows who committed a crime but yet to charge someone for the crime would mean that the public would then obviously know, right? Because in turn, LE would have to follow thru with proper court proceedings/hearings and of course if XYZ is found guilty then they would be sentenced to prison and no longer be out on the street. What if XYZ provides LE with lots of information with then in turn results in many, many more arrests of many, many others, which in turn has benefited LE?

How common is it that families of victims do NOT want to know who is responsible for the death of their family member?
It's not uncommon to not want to know details, but to not want to know WHO did it?

Does LE not want the public to know as it may be somewhat of an embarrassment? Especially so if one or more involved are “snitches” and/or “confidential informants?” After all, some of the people who have been questioned have quite extensive criminal histories and charges and/or have associates/friends who have had also. LE would look like fools if all of this played a part in a crime that took the lives of two young innocent children, wouldn't they??

Those general lines of thinking seem to resonate somehow...

We all understand how priorities change when "in action'...the past is the past, but the now is 'urgent'....so in certain way makes sense for no visible communication from local authorities...

But, this case reached national attention...and for good reasons...

Soooo....?

I don't know...is the FBI still involved..?