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

[Marilynilpa]

More than two months ago, state Sen. Jeff Danielson, D-Waterloo, said he would be introducing legislation similar to a proposed "Cousins Law" during the 2013 legislative session.

He did so Monday, proposing a bill that would remove the statute of limitations on sex offenses involving children.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/

 

[SapphireSteel]

If LE feared for potential witness safety, I would think they would instruct these people to stay silent and never utter another word about times or what they saw and who they saw. I don't think LE would want them to discuss it at all, but if they did, be vague about it.

imo

Which they were.

I'm not quite sure what you are in disagreement with?

:dunno:

 

[roseofsharon]

Which they were.

I'm not quite sure what you are in disagreement with?

:dunno:

Respectfully, I disagree that LE would instruct potential witnesses (witnesses whose lives might be in danger if they told the truth about what they saw and who they saw) would instruct these witnesses to be vague about times and who and what they saw; just imo that I think LE would tell them to stay silent and say nothing at all.
:seeya:

 

[threecrazykids]

Really? I can, especially if LE fear for potential witness safety.

If you watch the clip of Mr C it is very clear he was about to state a definite time before his wife jumped in and said "between 12 and 3".

I am going to play devil's advocate here and say that if LE feared for their safety they would have told them (as well as their immediate family members) to speak to NO ONE about their witness accounts of that day.
And not just in reference to MSM, but also would have included instructions to not participate on websites, etc. not only giving detailed accounts, but answer questions in detail as to what happened that day. :twocents:

I personally don't think LE has told them anything in regards to the case. I think they took both their statements and were on their way. I only say this because I personally don't think EITHER of their accounts are extremely relevant in LE's official timeline...even though they haven't told US that. I think there are major things in this case we aren't aware of at all.

JMO

 

[boneheaded]

Sorry.

From Misty -

What she`s saying is at the end of the U that you were shown, the trail comes around here, the bikes were found here, You come to that end of it, this bridge is out into a wooded area and right here is a big patch of grass where you can pull your vehicles up on to and that`s where we parked our vehicles to get back on the trail and go back this way.

Jim Spellman - I know he's only a journo but he was on the scene at the time -


GRACE: OK, Jim Spellman, joining me there at Meyers Lake, OK, this is the first I`m hearing of a quasi-parking area on a grassy turf near where the bikes were discovered. Would that have been access for someone to park there, dump the bikes and keep going?

SPELLMAN: Yes, it could -- it sort of connects the neighborhood actually quite close to the police station to this back end, that would definitely have to be somebody who was waiting there, because the bike path and the direction that the scent dogs went would lead them down this bike path, someone would have to know that they were there to be on that end, almost ready to intercept them, Nancy.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1207/17/ng.01.html

Disturbing. Spellman seems to thinke the girls must've been literally trapped, like flies in a web...so how did someone know that they were going to bike past that particular spot at that particular time?

I don't believe it was a random lurker, he would've been seen. Or his car would've, right on the grassy informal parking area the locals use.

:cow:

"The area where the bikes were found is fenced on both sides, and it is right where maintenance gate is it is a spot that looks to me like a trap," Dan Morrissey said. "Somebody could have just come along right then or followed them down it would have been the worst spot to be in right there."

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/fbi-dogs-joining-search-iowa-cousins-8-and-10

 

[roseofsharon]

I am going to play devil's advocate here and say that if LE feared for their safety they would have told them (as well as their immediate family members) to speak to NO ONE about their witness accounts of that day.
And not just in reference to MSM, but also would have included instructions to not participate on websites, etc. not only giving detailed accounts, but answer questions in detail as to what happened that day. :twocents:

I personally don't think LE has told them anything in regards to the case. I think they took both their statements and were on their way. I only say this because I personally don't think EITHER of their accounts are extremely relevant in LE's official timeline...even though they haven't told US that. I think there are major things in this case we aren't aware of at all.

JMO

Thank you! I wish I could have said that as well as you did!

 

[RNER]

Respectfully, I disagree that LE would instruct potential witnesses (witnesses whose lives might be in danger if they told the truth about what they saw and who they saw) would instruct these witnesses to be vague about times and who and what they saw; just imo that I think LE would tell them to stay silent and say nothing at all.
:seeya:

Based on personal experience of a family member being a KEY witness to a horrific crime involving murder, I can absolutely tell you that LE and prosecutors will instruct witnesses to release very little, if any information, and will tell them what they can and cannot discuss. My relative's identity and story has been protected and the public has been given altered and limited information by media through collaboration with LE. This has been done for safety of the witness as well as protection of information for prosecution. To my knowledge, in my relative's case, LE hasn't "lied" in order to locate the suspects or gather information, they just haven't released everything about the case.

My relative is well-known in the community, and is an innocent KEY witness, and not a random person that saw someone on the bikepath that ended up murdered. They were advised to avoid internet activities, change anything that publicly identifies them with their last name, change phone numbers, and avoid public events and crowded places, and install surveillance cameras around their property for protection. The name of my relative has not been made public, but it will be known after the pending trial!

LE will protect their witnesses and there is a REAL FEAR among witnesses for their safety and invasion of privacy by media, especially if drugs or murder is involved!

 

[cindersoot]

I looked into that before pitching my theory. I wanted to make sure that if this is what happened, that it wasn't the first time in history, as that would make the theory much less likely.

Here is a list of the youngest killers,

http://listverse.com/2011/05/14/top-10-young-killers/

There is also the recent killing of a young girl who was hidden in a garbage can by two young boys. I can't remember the name of the case?

 

[SapphireSteel]

I believe both men spoke to the press voluntarily in the very early days, before it was even confirmed an abduction.

This would explain their lack of hesitation or apparent alarm then, and the fact that they have dropped off the radar now.

I'm referring to TG who was briefly posting on WS. :sigh:

 

[SapphireSteel]

Based on personal experience of a family member being a KEY witness to a horrific crime involving murder, I can absolutely tell you that LE and prosecutors will instruct witnesses to release very little, if any information, and will tell them what they can and cannot discuss. My relative's identity and story has been protected and the public has been given altered and limited information by media through collaboration with LE. This has been done for safety of the witness as well as protection of information for prosecution. To my knowledge, in my relative's case, LE hasn't "lied" in order to locate the suspects or gather information, they just haven't released everything about the case.

My relative is well-known in the community, and is an innocent KEY witness, and not a random person that saw someone on the bikepath that ended up murdered. They were advised to avoid internet activities, change anything that publicly identifies them with their last name, change phone numbers, and avoid public events and crowded places, and install surveillance cameras around their property for protection. The name of my relative has not been made public, but it will be known after the pending trial!

LE will protect their witnesses and there is a REAL FEAR among witnesses for their safety and invasion of privacy by media, especially if drugs or murder is involved!

Yep.

Hopefully, we'll find out that this is what the BHCSO is doing, too.

God knows they've been tight lipped enough, and have told us a few stories - like when they said they believed the girls were still alive.

 

[otto]

If the cyclist, the manager at the auction house, or the lawn watering man had information that was not to be released to the public, they would have been told to remain silent. By identifying themselves to the media, and voluntarily talking with media, we know that they were not concerned about their safety, that they were not told to remain silent and that whatever they said was meant for public consumption. There are more witnesses that have not broadcast their names in the media such as the jogger, the person that saw the children on Brovan at 12:23, the person that saw the children at Elmer/Gilbert at 12:30-1:00 and perhaps someone that saw them on Arbutus.

None of this relates to the person that committed the murder. All of the information that we have relates to the actions/travels of the children on the day they disappeared ... and I cannot think of a single reason that any of the information regarding the children's activities on that day should be distorted, skewed, or altered. The objective of releasing times/location is to get more information regarding the activities of the children, not to play games with the public regarding where the children were and at what time they were there.

Police have released the times of 12:15, 12:23, 12:30-1:00, 2:00, 3:58. They did not do this to mess with people's heads about the children's timeline.

 

[otto]

Really? I can, especially if LE fear for potential witness safety.

If you watch the clip of Mr C it is very clear he was about to state a definite time before his wife jumped in and said "between 12 and 3".

The cyclist announced to the media that he was on the Evansdale Nature Trail on July 13 at the time that the girls were on Brovan. In what way would he fear for his safety as a result of telling people this?

 

[otto]

Yep.

Hopefully, we'll find out that this is what the BHCSO is doing, too.

God knows they've been tight lipped enough, and have told us a few stories - like when they said they believed the girls were still alive.

The FBI announced that they believed that the children were alive a week after they vanished. There was no evidence to contradict this, so obviously they would assume that the children were alive.

Let's suppose that the FBI announced that they believed that the girls were dead. Everyone would want to know on what they based that opinion. The answer would be that they had nothing on which to base that opinion. Therefore, they would not publicly state that opinion.

 

[roseofsharon]

If the cyclist, the manager at the auction house, or the lawn watering man had information that was not to be released to the public, they would have been told to remain silent. By identifying themselves to the media, and voluntarily talking with media, we know that they were not concerned about their safety, that they were not told to remain silent and that whatever they said was meant for public consumption. There are more witnesses that have not broadcast their names in the media such as the jogger, the person that saw the children on Brovan at 12:23, the person that saw the children at Elmer/Gilbert at 12:30-1:00 and perhaps someone that saw them on Arbutus.

None of this relates to the person that committed the murder. All of the information that we have relates to the actions/travels of the children on the day they disappeared ... and I cannot think of a single reason that any of the information regarding the children's activities on that day should be distorted, skewed, or altered. The objective of releasing times/location is to get more information regarding the activities of the children, not to play games with the public regarding where the children were and at what time they were there.

Police have released the times of 12:15, 12:23, 12:30-1:00, 2:00, 3:58. They did not do this to mess with people's heads about the children's timeline.

Awesome post Otto!!!!!!

 

[neverletgo]

There is also the recent killing of a young girl who was hidden in a garbage can by two young boys. I can't remember the name of the case?

Yes. :frown: That was 12 year old Autumn Pasquale in New Jersey was murdered by two brothers, age 15 and 17. :cry:

 

[RNER]

I believe both men spoke to the press voluntarily in the very early days, before it was even confirmed an abduction.

This would explain their lack of hesitation or apparent alarm then, and the fact that they have dropped off the radar now.

I'm referring to TG who was briefly posting on WS. :sigh:

Absolutely Agree! I also believe that most of the media-released statements from "witnesses" came within the first week of the disappearances, when the girl's were only classified as "missing" and when there was a massive search for them. Once it became apparent that the disappearances were more than just "missing", the witnesses no longer spoke publicly, and LE released less information.

I also don't think the media-released statements were initiated by the witnesses and some of the family members, even though they did speak publicly. In other words, they didn't call a press conference to announce to the world what they saw! Media networks will hunt down anything and anyone pertaining to a high-profile or newsworthy case to "get the story", no matter what. They will fly a helicopter above your house and property, park a news van in front of your child's ball-games, camp out in your driveway, call your house and employment non-stop, contact anyone in the community with the same last name, and broadcast your 9-1-1 calls all over the country until you give them the story or seek the assistance from LE for privacy! This was done to my relative without the name being made public (thanks to a "gag" order by LE)!

If you no longer talk publicly, because your story is irrelevant, you can't tolerate the media and public stalking, or you've been advised by LE to keep quiet, then you are made out to be somehow involved with the crime, or everything about you is aired publicly and scrutinized (IMO what has been done to witnesses and some family members in the girl's case).

 

[RNER]

The cyclist announced to the media that he was on the Evansdale Nature Trail on July 13 at the time that the girls were on Brovan. In what way would he fear for his safety as a result of telling people this?

Within the first week when witnesses, family members, friends, acquaintences, etc came forward, I don't think any of them "feared for their safety" because they were focusing on finding the "missing" girls. As it became apparent over time that the case was more than "missing girls", I think some people who made early public statements probably regretted coming forward publicly and developed a "fear for safety".

I can see the point. If there were missing girls in my community, and I had seen them (or thought I had seen them) or their belongings within the hours of their disappearance or had some infomation that might assist in them being found, I would give the information out publicly and voluntarily to media and LE, in hopes that it would assist in them being located. As all the dynamics unfolded and it became later apparent that there was more to the case than them just "missing", and it was an "abduction" with theories of possible connections to drugs, sexual predators, serial killers, organized crime, trafficking, or retaliation for crimes, I would definately be scared and fearful of my life, and regret that I had INNOCENTLY spoken publicly, and I might even change my story or retract what I had initially stated so I appeared "less of a witness" out of fear! LE might even collaborate with me to no longer appear as a "credible witness" for my safety! I know this is done!

 

[shoregirl]

I haven't been on here for years so I am catching up. Was on another site but I just can't take the horrible things being said and speculated about the family. Needed a break and some new perspective than the same 6 posters with the theory du jour and no evidence whatsoever. Sorry for the rant!

 

[shoregirl]

Absolutely Agree! I also believe that most of the media-released statements from "witnesses" came within the first week of the disappearances, when the girl's were only classified as "missing" and when there was a massive search for them. Once it became apparent that the disappearances were more than just "missing", the witnesses no longer spoke publicly, and LE released less information.

I also don't think the media-released statements were initiated by the witnesses and some of the family members, even though they did speak publicly. In other words, they didn't call a press conference to announce to the world what they saw! Media networks will hunt down anything and anyone pertaining to a high-profile or newsworthy case to "get the story", no matter what. They will fly a helicopter above your house and property, park a news van in front of your child's ball-games, camp out in your driveway, call your house and employment non-stop, contact anyone in the community with the same last name, and broadcast your 9-1-1 calls all over the country until you give them the story or seek the assistance from LE for privacy! This was done to my relative without the name being made public (thanks to a "gag" order by LE)!

If you no longer talk publicly, because your story is irrelevant, you can't tolerate the media and public stalking, or you've been advised by LE to keep quiet, then you are made out to be somehow involved with the crime, or everything about you is aired publicly and scrutinized (IMO what has been done to witnesses and some family members in the girl's case).

ITA. Excellent post. God forbid anyone's name comes up in any relation to this case. Their lives are picked apart, sometimes they are actually physically approached, their property is photographed, their facebook, employment records etc scrutinized and then made public and when they are no longer are of interest to the posters or they have been ruled out no apologies made. No corrections to the information.

 

[foxbluff]

At the risk of sounding repetitive, I have always believed TG's sighting, and that the girls were either taken at the lake or very nearby.

I believe they went to the lake on a mission, and were taken immediately.

I believe the girls may have still been with their abductor in the wooded area of the lake when TG went past.

I believe TG and Mr C and others have been purposely instructed to be vague as to times.

I believe LE would not say the cctv was the girls if it wasn't, and am also mindful that they were the only two on bikes that went past that camera the entire day.

BBM - IIRC Mr. P is the only person who made that statement. (see his quote below)

(I enjoyed rereading the entire article as it has always amused me that Mr. P., IMO, was implying that Mr. G's statement was incorrect! You know as in "my dog's bigger than your dog?") lol

EVANSDALE, Iowa --- A surveillance video showing two bicyclists may be the last glimpse of missing cousins Lyric Cook-Morrissey, 10, and Elizabeth Collins, 8.

The blurry clip, which lasts only a few seconds, shows the figures riding by on Brovan Street away from Meyers Lake.

“It looked kind of grainy to me, I mean just zoom they were by the thing and so it’s very hard to really make much out on the thing,” Black Hawk County Chief Deputy Rick Abben said.

They were less than a block from the Collins’ house, where grandmother Wylma Cook was reportedly watching the girls while one of their mothers had an appointment.

&#8220;They were the only two people to go by on bikes that day to my knowledge,&#8221; said Joe Pahl, who alerted police about the video July 16. &#8220;I&#8217;ve watched it.&#8221; <snipped>

http://wcfcourier.com/news/evansdal...cle_c7394e3c-d6a6-11e1-a4f3-0019bb2963f4.html