Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So I'm assuming it's perfectly okay for us to continue talking about the case as we please, now you've posted those details?
I just have to say here - I don't care how much money Orrin Wood had, he was a habitual pedophile. And that a 'young' girls parents gave him permission to molest their underage daughter doesn't alter that fact. Exactly how 'young' was this particular girl?
(Hey, read the Jimmy Savile thread - no-one in their right mind would stand up for him, and his preferred age range was the same as Orrin's... note that Savile didn't limit himself to that age range or sex, though...like many pedos, he had a range of victims..)
And this habitual pedophile had his presumably teenaged 'girlfriend' insulted by a boy who happened to end up dead by a river that same night... and whose body Wood happened to find a few days later... and for whose family Wood held a long-standing grudge...
I cannot one bit blame anybody for viewing Orrin Wood with suspicion in Lonnie's murder.
Orrin Wood also knew damned well who Lonnie was - I wonder why he'd lie about that at the inquest, then, if he had nothing to hide.
As to the former girlfriend (whom Lonnie had upset that night) swearing "he was with me" - well that's never been concocted as alibi for any criminal at any point in history, has it?
And to Lonnie's previous rape - I am looking at this now as quite possibly (at least, there being somewhat of a chance..) being unrelated to his murder. If he'd been molested badly enough to be taken to hospital for it, then another attack so soon after would likely have left clear evidence. Was there clear evidence? I don't think there was. So if he was not molested the night he was killed -- what was he killed for? Brutally, by the side of a road, by somebody clearly out to execute him quickly?
This is not to say I don't think Cunningham is a good prospect. But Orrin Wood should not be discounted as a possible perp, at all, IMO.
I'd really like to know what the problem between Lonnie's family and Orrin Wood was, exactly...
I am extremely interested that Lonnie was sexually assaulted earlier-I wonder if he was a family friend, if Lonnie told of this, how it was found out. Not so sure Orrin killed Lonnie.
The one thing Orrin Woods actually was not was a habitual pedophile.
Peter, I will respectfully have to disagree with you regarding:
I don't know your personal stance on men in their 30's dating very young teenage girls, but Orrin showed a clear preference for girls under 15, which makes him legally and morally (in my own case, anyway) a pedophile. And -- sorry, but you haven't said -- how old WAS that girl he was dating, with her father's permission?
And I apologise, also -- but how much of what was said about Orrin by his fellow locals was "slander", exactly, and how do you know it was slander? I realise and appreciate that you are clearly very, very sympathetic to this man, but IMO there's clear cause for keeping him on the possible perp radar.
As to laws of physics - we have the word of Wood himself (who I know wasn't shy about lying) that he drove the girl home straight after he left the fair at 12.45 (he says), and the word of the "young" girl he was dating at the time - whom Lonnie obviously insulted, for Orrin to have words with him in the cinema.
How do we know either is telling the truth? I am sorry to say it, but your belief does not make it so. Both would have reason to lie and to corroborate each other's lies IF they had something to hide...
And note that while it was highly probable that Orrin KNEW Lonnie, and KNEW who Lonnie was in the cinema that night, he -chose- at the inquest to leave out the detail of having seen Lonnie at the movies. And lied about not knowing him...
And we already dealt with the proven problems of "truth serum" and lie detector tests earlier in the thread. They are not 100% reliable, let alone that many criminals have admitted to "beating" them, quite easily. This is a fact.
I wonder if they asked him whether he'd seen Lonnie at the fair that night.. and what his answer was...
And according to the girl who was with him, Lonnie went that night in the movie theater on her, not on Orrin. Lonnie backed off when Orrin came.
When I look at Cunningham in comparison to Orrin, one main difference comes to mind. One of them liked to molest little boys, and one of them didn't. That says a lot, imo.
while you are obviously too young and too far away to have been there that night.
When I look at Cunningham in comparison to Orrin, one main difference comes to mind. One of them liked to molest little boys, and one of them didn't. That says a lot, imo.
Yes, it does, katydid. I think Cunningham is a brilliant call. Hopefully there's more info on him and his movements around the area to be found!
But there's reason to doubt Lonnie was raped before being murdered - he had serious existing trauma, which LE apparently didn't know about when examining his body. The autopsy report would be great to clear this up, as there'd likely be details that would confirm whether Lonnie was molested again or not (rectal bleeding, etc).
And if he wasn't, it does leave room for other motives.
Peter, was the witness Mr D, friend of JW ?
Due to the additional info you sent me, Peter, I will for now remove the "habitual" from 'pedophile', there being only one under age girl we definitely know about at this point (the one Orrin took to the fair being the same one involved with his later arrest, as we now know).
There's a few things I'd really like to know regarding the family's accusation of Orrin over the grandfather's death. From what you typed above, I am led to assume that it's been said the grandfather was drink-driving? Is that right? And had an accident of some sort. But Lonnie's family pointed the finger at Orrin as being somehow responsible for that.. simply because he was there?
It doesn't make sense. Seems to me there had to be a bit more to it. And it makes me wonder (if they did immediately point a finger at him) whether bad blood might have already existed.
Were they friendly before that? Knew each other well? How well, exactly?
I'm still trying to make sense of the murder scene, to change the subject slightly - as to why the killer would give Lonnie a fatal wound ten feet from the road, then pose his body further down the incline. If he was indeed posed, and the crime scene thus staged, it says to me the killer wanted Lonnie to be found that way. Or why not simply leave him ten feet from the road, and drive away?
I'd be interested in the details of Cunningham's subsequent rape of the 15-yo, and what his behaviour was toward that boy, if there were threats/hints of deadly violence/ ritualistic behaviours, etc. I think it'd give some good insight into his MO as a pedophile. And a potential perp, for Lonnie.
I'd also think that LE would have zero'd in on Cunningham after he was charged for the rape? And if it was known Cunningham was at the fair, with so many witnesses for a positive ID... and with outside investigator, Harry Savage, working the case (who wasn't related to Lonnie, and not part of any local dramas, one would assume - so if nepotism was a problem in solving this case, as you hint to, Peter, then Savage might have had an issue with that?) -- surely there would have been a thorough investigation of Cunningham at the time?
Did the witnesses who ID'd Cunningham come forward to the cops back then? It just boggles my mind that a convicted rapist seen in the area, etc, might not have been scrutinised - or hey, arrested.
I can see how nepotism of a sort among the local cops (if you're right and it was indeed a factor) might hamper the investigation, but what about Harry? I wonder where both Orrin and Cunningham were on his radar, by November that year.