Lloyd Welch is Person of Interest

[Motherof5]

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=15864643

I've done the family tree and it took over a week. Grandpa Welch married, had kids and his wife died. He then married again and had more kids. Both women were named Gladys Mae and that made the entire thing very confusing. Richard is the only living brother of LLW Sr. So if there is another uncle involved, he'd have to be LLW Sr's brother-in-law,married to one if his sisters or the brother of one of his 2 wives. This family tree makes my face hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AAWJ]

I've done the family tree and it took over a week. Grandpa Welch married, had kids and his wife died. He then married again and had more kids. Both women were named Gladys Mae and that made the entire thing very confusing. Richard is the only living brother of LLW Sr. So if there is another uncle involved, he'd have to be LLW Sr's brother-in-law,married to one if his sisters or the brother of one of his 2 wives. This family tree makes my face hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did you get your info from. I heard the Glady Mae married two diff Welch's. But I maybe wrong.

 

[Richard]

The grab-and-run theory has not be my favorite theory. I am leaning to some sort of con (I am a cop come with us) or seduction by Lloyd (let's drink some beer), but walking to the mall today (then plaza), it did look to me like two or three men could pull it off with a CARGO VAN, to block the view of anyone in the parking lot, assuming the side of Wards was windowless as it (Target) is today. The only risk would be someone walking around either corner. It would take two more lookouts to make sure nobody was walking around either of the two corners.

Today's Target is located in the same space that the Wards store was, but I believe it is a new building, or a total remake of the old one. Wards was a two story store, while Target is one story with a very high ceiling. The main entrance between Target and the mall interior is in the same place as it was when Wards was there. Wards had a rear entrance facing Faulkner Rd, accessable from their rear parking lot. The present day Target Store has just loading docks there and no entrance.

If someone wanted to place a look out by the Wards Rear parking lot, they only had to cover the rear entrance and the south side walk. To the north of Wards was a movie theater. People could come up that side, but would be quite a ways from the Wards back door.

 

[G&AMom]

Today's Target is located in the same space that the Wards store was, but I believe it is a new building, or a total remake of the old one. Wards was a two story store, while Target is one story with a very high ceiling. The main entrance between Target and the mall interior is in the same place as it was when Wards was there. Wards had a rear entrance facing Faulkner Rd, accessable from their rear parking lot. The present day Target Store has just loading docks there and no entrance.

If someone wanted to place a look out by the Wards Rear parking lot, they only had to cover the rear entrance and the south side walk. To the north of Wards was a movie theater. People could come up that side, but would be quite a ways from the Wards back door.

Actually, that Target is two stories: one on the ground level, and one at the basement level. I'm pretty sure it's the same building as the Ward's was in.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

 

[steveP120]

Lloyd, who is uncle to his niece, who is nice enough to visit him in prison, told his niece that he was not involved as described in the article below.
Likely, who was uncle to whom, was confused by the police or the reporter, just as it was to me the first time I read the two uncles. Technically it is "two uncles" but not "two uncles to the same person." "Two relatives" would have been a more accurate description. But it's good to check the family tree can rule others out as either not existing or not being in the area. Do we even know if Lloyd's father was alive or in Maryland at the time?

The following would also explain how Lloyd both 1) placed himself at the scene and 2) was not cooperating with police.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...f4d856-9330-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.html

"Welch’s niece, Debbie Roe, 38, of Dover, Del., said she is the only member of the family who is in regular contact with him. She said she has written letters on and off to him for the past 13 years during his incarceration. She described him as “sweet” and said he is excited when she visits him in prison.

She said that Welch has denied involvement in the disappearance of the Lyon girls but told her that he was at Wheaton Plaza that day.

“The only thing he said he did was walk around the mall,” Roe said. “I think they need to look elsewhere. He doesn’t know where the girls are.”"

 

[steveP120]

I've done the family tree and it took over a week. Grandpa Welch married, had kids and his wife died. He then married again and had more kids. Both women were named Gladys Mae and that made the entire thing very confusing. Richard is the only living brother of LLW Sr. So if there is another uncle involved, he'd have to be LLW Sr's brother-in-law,married to one if his sisters or the brother of one of his 2 wives. This family tree makes my face hurt.

Richard may be the only LIVING brother, but depending on the family tree, would not Lloyd's father also be an "uncle" to the same person that Richard is an uncle to?

Uncle is also used informally as any older, male, family member. In general, an uncle or father would be the one to go to for help getting out of trouble; the uncle might have just been closer. Was the father still alive in 1975? Planning such serious crimes with family members I think is less common, but Richard would know more about this.

But I think the "uncle" was just Lloyd as described in my previous post. With the father now dead from a motorcycle accident in the 70s or 80s?, the police would not worry about ruining his reputation or his life as if he was a living person, and I can't see why the police would not list him as a person of interest if they had even a hunch about him; one of his motorcycle or drinking buddies in theory could come forward say say, "he told me he helped his son bury bodies." Not that decades old hearsay, even if true, is good enough for a court.

I don't think Lloyd Wlech's criminal background would make it into court either. Even knowing what Lloyd was convicted of, many of the people here don't think it's him, much less beyond a reasonable doubt. IMHO, the police have an uphill case against Lloyd assuming his criminal background is inadmissible.

 

[Motherof5]

Richard may be the only LIVING brother, but depending on the family tree, would not Lloyd's father also be an "uncle" to the same person that Richard is an uncle to?

Uncle is also used informally as any older, male, family member. In general, an uncle or father would be the one to go to for help getting out of trouble; the uncle might have just been closer. Was the father still alive in 1975? Planning such serious crimes with family members I think is less common, but Richard would know more about this.

But I think the "uncle" was just Lloyd as described in my previous post. With the father now dead from a motorcycle accident in the 70s or 80s?, the police would not worry about ruining his reputation or his life as if he was a living person, and I can't see why the police would not list him as a person of interest if they had even a hunch about him; one of his motorcycle or drinking buddies in theory could come forward say say, "he told me he helped his son bury bodies." Not that decades old hearsay, even if true, is good enough for a court.

I don't think Lloyd Wlech's criminal background would make it into court either. Even knowing what Lloyd was convicted of, many of the people here don't think it's him, much less beyond a reasonable doubt. IMHO, the police have an uphill case against Lloyd assuming his criminal background is inadmissible.

LE said that the people responsible for this crime are still alive. LLW Sr is dead.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Motherof5]

Where did you get your info from. I heard the Glady Mae married two diff Welch's. But I maybe wrong.

I got my info from a genealogy site. Tilgham Welch married Gladys Mae Dooley and Gladys Mae Overstreet. Had kids with both women. LLW Sr and Richard Welch have the same father and different mothers. A family member contributed the info.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Richard]

....
...I don't think Lloyd Wlech's criminal background would make it into court either. Even knowing what Lloyd was convicted of, many of the people here don't think it's him, much less beyond a reasonable doubt. IMHO, the police have an uphill case against Lloyd assuming his criminal background is inadmissible.

Previous or Subsequent criminal behavior can be very useful information to Police investigators in coming up with potential suspects in a given case. Patterns can be determined, motives, modes of operation, and victimology analyzed.

But I agree with you to an extent regarding whether or not Lloyd Welch's behavior and crimes Post 1975 probably could NOT make it to court under our legal system.

Prosecutors are prohibited from mentioning "misconduct not charged" when presenting evidence and arguments regarding specific charges. Mentioning another crime - even a previous conviction is not done during the portion of the trial that determines whether a person is guilty or not-guilty. To do so might lead to a mistrial and certainly to an appeal. The accused is tried on the merits of the case and specific evidence pertinent to the charges is presented.

During the sentencing phase (after a finding of guilt), other convictions and misconduct CAN be introduced as evidence of aggrivation. For instance, if charged with rape, the allowed sentence might be 10 to 20 years. If this is his first offense, then the lower figure might be requested or considered, but if this is a second or third offense, then the higher number of years would be requested and supported by the previous convictions.

There are, however, limitations to introducing other convictions during sentencing. The PREVIOUS misconduct (that is previous to the crime now convicted of) should be somewhat relevent to the new conviction. For instance a prior conviction for going 10 miles over the speed limit would not be appropriate to introduce in a capital case.

Also, there is a lot of case law which would tend to NOT allow introduction of a previous conviction for misconduct which occurred AFTER the crime for which now convicted. An example of this can be seen with Fred Howard Coffey, Jr. He was convicted in 1986 of molesting (in 1986) three children numerous times. In 1987, he was convicted of the 1979 murder of a 10-year-old girl. During the sentencing portion of the trial, the 1986 molestation convictions were introduced in aggrivation. He was sentenced to death. On appeal, it was ruled that the SUBSEQUENT misconduct could not be considered during sentencing because it was (theoretically) POSSIBLE that he became a molester after the murder and because it would be prejudicial. In a re-trial, the molestations could not be introduced and the jury sentenced him to life in prison.

In regard to Lloyd Welch, I agree that the prosecutors and police will probably have a difficult time making a provable case against him. Not because he isn't a worthy criminal, but because of a number of reasons:

- To prove that Lloyd was responsible for the Lyon Sisters' abduction and deaths, you first have to prove that those crimes took place. You need bodies or other compelling evidence that they were abducted and murdered.

- You have to place Lloyd at the scene. This may be difficult, even if Welch, himself, might have admitted it at some time. He has also denied it.

- LE has prejudiced the case with so many statements about Welch, including his list of arrests (all post 1975), the side-by-side display of his photo with the LHM sketch, (allegedly made in 1975 and kept secret for 39 years), and their numerous claims that they KNOW he was there and how guilty he is, etc. All of this publicity will make it difficult if not impossible to seat an impartial jury.

- Welch's previous mental health issues, his characterization as a liar by many who know him, will make anything he has said in the past suspect.

What you have is a young 18 year old high school dropout with mental problems. He has no drivers license or car (that can be proven) with no previous criminal background.

On top of this, it might be shown that he was trying to do his civic duty by calling in a tip to police on 1 April 1975 - a tip which might not have been followed up on.

The case against him would have to be pretty strong. Even then, his defense attorney seems to have a lot to work with.

 

[Motherof5]

Why would investigators tell Estep that LLW had placed 2 of "HER UNCLES" at the scene if
Estep and LLW are cousins?
Look up under findagrave for Elizabeth Welch Parker, (LLW's aunt who owned the house and property at Thaxton) and you will see who her obituary lists as her "brothers".
Perhaps there was not enough evidence to name a second uncle as a person of interest.

Dollie Estep and LLW are cousins. Dollie's mother,Ruth Welch Justice, is the sister of LLW Sr,Richard Welch Sr and Elizabeth Welch Parker.

There is a LLW JR (our POI and Dollie's cousin) and a LLW Sr(Dollie's uncle and the father to one of our POI's and brother to the 2nd POI)

 

[steveP120]

People misspeak all the time. President Obama misspoke a few times on his religion.

But I would think twice about naming someone at the scene of a double murder (not at the mall/plaza) just because police may have said "two of her uncles" and not "two relatives" and police may have said "the people responsible are still alive, maybe meaning all the people are still alive or some of the people are still alive.

I only glanced at the family tree, but if there are not two living uncles, both statements can't be true, just as President Obama can't be a member of two, mutually-exclusive religions.

 

[AAWJ]

People misspeak all the time. President Obama misspoke a few times on his religion.

But I would think twice about naming someone at the scene of a double murder (not at the mall/plaza) just because police may have said "two of her uncles" and not "two relatives" and police may have said "the people responsible are still alive, maybe meaning all the people are still alive or some of the people are still alive.

I only glanced at the family tree, but if there are not two living uncles, both statements can't be true, just as President Obama can't be a member of two, mutually-exclusive religions.

Maybe he is another POI but they aren't releasing his name cause he is dead.

 

[Motherof5]

People misspeak all the time. President Obama misspoke a few times on his religion.

But I would think twice about naming someone at the scene of a double murder (not at the mall/plaza) just because police may have said "two of her uncles" and not "two relatives" and police may have said "the people responsible are still alive, maybe meaning all the people are still alive or some of the people are still alive.

I only glanced at the family tree, but if there are not two living uncles, both statements can't be true, just as President Obama can't be a member of two, mutually-exclusive religions.

LE said,more than once,that the people responsible for this crime are all living. They were asked point blank during a presser. That does not mean that some of the people are still alive. Again, it may be hard to believe, but LE actually does know more than we do. Twisting facts to fit a theory is pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[j123]

Is it possible that Dollie Estep uses the word "uncle" liberally, such as to refer to an older cousin? I can't actually think of an example now that I bring this up, but I could have sworn that I'd seen it happen before where children, maybe out of confusion, have relatives who are ages different from what they usually are. Such as an uncle your own age, mistaken for a cousin, or vice versa.

Some people also refer to close friends of their parents as Aunt and Uncle, so this isn't necessarily someone in the Welch family tree.

 

[Motherof5]

Is it possible that Dollie Estep uses the word "uncle" liberally, such as to refer to an older cousin? I can't actually think of an example now that I bring this up, but I could have sworn that I'd seen it happen before where children, maybe out of confusion, have relatives who are ages different from what they usually are. Such as an uncle your own age, mistaken for a cousin, or vice versa.

Some people also refer to close friends of their parents as Aunt and Uncle, so this isn't necessarily someone in the Welch family tree.

I've not heard LE say "two uncles". Dollie is the only person that I've heard comment on how many people are involved and how they are related to her. LE has named two POI's,Dollie's cousin and her uncle. They've never said how many total or that there is another uncle involved. I agree that who Dollie considers to be an uncle, may not actually be and who knows if the media reported it right? We'll just have to wait and see what LE does next.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[steveP120]

If there is one thing that every here agrees on, it's that Lloyd Welch is a liar, and I think the original source of the two uncles statement was Lloyd and not the police:

"Estep said investigators told her Welch, a cousin, placed her two uncles at the scene;"

and I think Lloyd meant at the mall which may or may not be the murder scene,
which is all the more reason not to post someone's name at being at the scene of a double, child murder.

Richard posts names of possible suspects all the time, but they are all convicted, usually multiple murders, doing life, with no reputations to ruin, but I would think twice about naming someone just because he is someone's uncle.

 

[steveP120]

The clothing the long-hair man in sketch, likely Lloyd Welch always bothered me since it seemed like white pants, a striped shirt, half white and a light colored peters jacket was a bit fancy for a near-homeless person who walked the back way on train tracks to the plaza.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...est-1975-case-missing-girls-article-1.1609338

The clothing in the sketch is nothing like the dark-jacket he was arrested in a few years later.

White and light-colored clothing obviously gets dirty fast.

Perhaps Lloyd was dressed up to impress girls. Maybe he got a ride to the plaza that day with his uncle. the second person of interest.

I don't know much about police procedure, but if the police were going to eliminate the long-hair man as a suspect, wouldn't they ask to see the cloths he was wearing that day, the jacket, white pants to check for blood stains or rips from a fight?

 

[Richard]

... Richard posts names of possible suspects all the time, but they are all convicted, usually multiple murders, doing life, with no reputations to ruin, but I would think twice about naming someone just because he is someone's uncle.

It is true that I have posted a number of "potential suspects" in these threads. Those individuals were mostly persons who were convicted of such crimes as child molestation, rape, murder, abduction, etc. Also, they usually had some connection to the area, or to crimes against children.

I did name one person as a potential suspect who was never convicted of anything. He was shot to death while in the act of shooting numerous victims in a spree which began at Wheaton Plaza three weeks after the Lyon girls went missing. He was 30 years old, a former soldier who claimed to have been trained in abduction, use of false Identification, and counter intelligence tactics. He had a vehicle, a home in Kensington two blocks from Katherine Lyon's school, and had a remote cabin in western Maryland. He carried a pistol at all times. His name was Michael Pearch.

I have NOT named any persons as Potential Suspects simply on hearsay statements connecting them to the Lyon case (or any other one for that matter).

Naming someone in these threads simply because they were a relative of a "potential suspect" seems unfair and potentially libelous.

 

[steveP120]

I did name one person as a potential suspect who was never convicted of anything. He was shot to death while in the act of shooting numerous victims in a spree which began at Wheaton Plaza three weeks after the Lyon girls went missing. He was 30 years old, a former soldier who claimed to have been trained in abduction, use of false Identification, and counter intelligence tactics. He had a vehicle, a home in Kensington two blocks from Katherine Lyon's school, and had a remote cabin in western Maryland. He carried a pistol at all times. His name was Michael Pearch.

Excuse me for forgetting that one of the murderers that you mentioned was not convicted, because he was shot dead by the police in the middle of a rampage in downtown Wheaton.

Since I visit downtown Wheaton and the mall/plaza a few times a week, I guess I was at the scene of two multiple murders, like 100,000 other people, so don't quote me out of context, as I think the police or reporters did to Lloyd Welch. "Steve admits to being at the scene of two multiple murders." (decades after the crimes)

I would have hoped that the police looked at Michael Pearch and ruled him out if possible for the Lyon sisters. Just because someone likes shooting blacks, does not mean he is not into child murder. But it's obviously hard to ask a dead man where he was that day, so the police may not have been able to clear him? But I would have thought the police would have followed a checklist, and looked at everyone from the long-hair-man in sketch and done other things.

 

[Richard]

...
...I would have hoped that the police looked at Michael Pearch and ruled him out if possible for the Lyon sisters. Just because someone likes shooting blacks, does not mean he is not into child murder. But it's obviously hard to ask a dead man where he was that day, so the police may not have been able to clear him? But I would have thought the police would have followed a checklist, and looked at everyone from the long-hair-man in sketch and done other things.

Steve,

I do not know what MCP did in regard to investigating the Pearch shooting spree. I contacted them by letter some time around the year 2000 to suggest Pearch as a possible suspect in the Lyon case. At that time I was contacted by phone by the investigator assigned to the Lyon case.

He felt that there was no connection, based on victimology. That is, he felt that the crimes were only coincidentally in the same place three weeks apart and the difference in a case involving two missing white girls was significantly different from a mass shooting case in which black adults were targeted as victims.

So, Yes, MCP DID consider the possible connection in 2000 - if not sooner - but probably did not investigate it that closely. I base this conclusion/opinion on my discussion with the investigator.

It is my own feeling that the two crimes (abduction vs mass shooting) are not necessarily unrelated or mutually exclusive.

It is not JUST the fact that Pearch was a mass shooter that I suggested him, but rather because of the other factors mentioned in my previous posts:

- Of all the possible suspects discussed, Pearch is the only one known to have had a house (his mother's) in Kensington at the time the girls went missing. This house was 2 blocks from Katherine Lyon's elementary school and about 6 blocks from the Lyon house.

- He had a vehicle (a green VW) and knew the roads of Kensington intimately.

- He often shopped in the Wheaton area and was a regular customer at a gun store a block from Wheaton Plaza. He very likely drove the roads of Kensington to get to the shopping area from his mother's house.

- Pearch had military training in Counter Intelligence, including the use of false identities, and specifically in abductions. These were claims that he had made when leaving the Army. He actually claimed to have participated in abductions using false identification when stationed in Germany. Even if these claims were not true, it shows that he believed it and that abduction was something that was on his mind.

- Pearch had mental or emotional problems and acted in what most folks might consider a paranoid manner. An autopsy showed that he had a brain tumor, but no definite proof was produced to indicate that it contributed to his shooting spree.

- Pearch's German fiance had recently been killed in a car accident (in Germany) and he suffered from depression about this.

- According to his mother, he was always armed anywhere he went. He had bought her a shotgun and advised her to keep it in her house for protection.

- He had a remote cabin or farm house in western Maryland (Friendsville) that he managed. It was owned by an elderly man who was living in a convalescent home. Pearch lived in that farm house by himself in a hermit-like existence, but often drove home to Kensington to visit and stay with his mother.

- On the surface, his choice of black people as victims would tend to indicate a "hate crime" by a racist, yet not a single person who knew him could support such a conclusion. He never made any racist statements or expressed such sentiment to any of them. He had no criminal record or connections whatsoever prior to the shooting spree and investigators were unable to come up with any explanation or evidence as to why he went on his killing spree.

- Michael Edward Pearch was 30 years old. He was an honorably discharged Army veteran, high school graduate, and had attended college as an art student. He was an ardent reader and a history buff.

- He had long hair and a moustache. Not unlike the sketch of LHM.

- Pearch had been raised by his mother after his father abandoned the family. Pearch tracked down his father in the Pittsburg area and re-connected with him. The father visited his son at the Friendsville farmhouse on one occasion, and commented that he had seen a large "arsenal" of weapons and a shooting range there. Pearch had only a .45 pistol and a knife on him when he was killed, and only two long guns were taken from his mother's Kensington house.

- Two MCP officers did travel to Friendsville in April 1975 where they searched the farm house for a few hours. They claimed to have found nothing there which could shed any light on the mass shooting. NO mention was made of any sort of "arsenal" or of his shooting range. There was no mention in police press releases about any weapons being found there. That land was NOT searched specifically for any evidence in the Lyon case.

Pearch might not be the most likely suspect in the Lyon case, but the above factors should be considered.

The shooting spree was certainly a step out of line for this straight arrow. It was an extremely violent and cold-blooded act which shocked everyone who knew him. It was well planned and methodically executed. Could there have been an earlier "step out of line"? Could the shooting spree have been his way of committing suicide?

Pearch obviously had mental illness issues. Could he have abducted and killed the Lyon sisters? Although the shooting spree might not be directly connected to their disappearance, it is possible that both crimes were the products of the same crazed imagination.