MO - Sherrill Levitt, 47, Suzie Streeter, 19, & Stacy McCall, 18, Springfield, 7 June 1992 #14

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

If “cop buddies “leaked info about an active investigation they should be Fired , And prosecuted ..and that’s not up for debate . This is just moronic .

It’s thoughts they give, they dont work on the case....,the point is, you shmooze, you...win. No cop would ever tell you truth but they offer insights to the case from an investigative pov

 

[Nadal]

If “cop buddies “leaked info about an active investigation they should be Fired , and that’s not up for debate . This is just moronic .

I'm more focusing on him claiming he has interviewed people relevant to the case yet not contributing those interviews. He obviously hasn't i'm just making sure everyone dismisses whatever he claims offhand.

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

I'm more focusing on him claiming he has interviewed people relevant to the case yet not contributing those interviews. He obviously hasn't i'm just making sure everyone dismisses whatever he claims offhand.

Why do you have to “make sure”(people can make up their own minds) ... I don’t have a gun to anyone’s head...please stop personalizing

 

[Nadal]

Why do you have to “make sure”(people can make up their own minds) ... I don’t have a gun to anyone’s head...please stop personalizing

I'm making sure people know your history before they take what you say into account.

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

I'm making sure people know your history before they take what you say into account.

what as the only one whos posted actual sources ?

 

[Nadal]

:Says he has important interviews thus he is right.
:Asks for interviews.
:Told he won't release them.
:Mocks person for clearly making up interviews.

This is the order of events as most people would understand them.

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

:Says he has important interviews thus he is right.
:Asks for interviews.
:Told he won't release them.
:Mocks person for clearly making up interviews.

This is the order of events as most people would understand them.

No..

you said “history” meaning I do something nefarious when anything I state as matter of fact I prove with a Websleuths TOS approved source... the other stuff was a remark to your too-cool for school cynical for sake of being cynical attitude about people on forums not being intelligible enough to solve this crime .... humility is underrated....you have an ego (havent deen much backing the ego up tho ,, just sayin)and always enter threads announcing your presence of how info should be shared and try to dictate...I find it odd...and transparent as heck “bro”

 

[Nadal]

No..

you said “history” meaning I do something nefarious when anything I state as matter of fact I prove with a Websleuths TOS approved source... the other stuff was a remark to your too-cool for school cynical for sake of being cynical attitude about people on forums not being intelligible enough to solve this crime .... humility is underrated....you have an ego and always enter threads announcing your presence of how info should be shared and try to dictate...I find it odd...

How does "history" mean you do something nefarious? What are you even talking about?

You claim you interviewed relevant people to the case yet you've never provided them, you've as much as admitted you base your positions on those interview yet you've never produced them.

I'm cynical towards you because you don't back up your claims in any way.

I'm definitely never solving this case myself, i freely admit that no ego involved. Could you even type that yourself?

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

How does "history" mean you do something nefarious? What are you even talking about?

You claim you interviewed relevant people to the case yet you've never provided them, you've as much as admitted you base your positions on those interview yet you've never produced them.

I'm cynical towards you because you don't back up your claims in any way.

I'm definitely never solving this case myself, i freely admit that no ego involved. Could you even type that yourself?

Now you’re revising... your post before where you listed off events... you said “know my history” which isn’t part of the events you listed.... youre implying something like I make false claims,, would love you see you point to one thing I said false.... that isn’t a “MOO”

 

[Nadal]

Now you’re revising... your post before where you listed off events... you said “know my history” which isn’t part of the events you listed.... youre implying something like I make false claims,, would love you see you point to one thing I said false.... that isn’t a “MOO”

You make empty claims, on this site and the other you've claimed really important interviews to give yourself credibility yet you've never named anyone because you know they'd deny ever talking to you.

I'd love you to name someone you interviewed so we can test your credibility. At no times have i ever claimed credibility in this case (i've staunchly said otherwise to everybody actually, including you), you have lets test your claims?

 

[cherrymeg]

Where is it stated that pedophiles don't target adults?

I'm guessing some sexual predators have varying tastes. It seemed like Woods put himself around middle school aged children. You really don't know.

 

[cherrymeg]

I have no idea why so many see this as an easy case or something that should have been solved by now. The crime scene was contaminated by 18 people, any evidence derived from that scene would be unusable in court. Unlike the Jonbenet Ramsay case this wasn't LE's fault, the contamination happened before they were alerted. The sightings are interesting but they are only backup evidence worthy, it's impossible to build a case on something like that. What's left then? Next to nothing, just suppositions. The idea that LE didn't do enough in this case is nonsensical, the only way this case could be solved is an admission or discovering the bodies. I'd be interested in an explanation on how they've approached that worse than the forum detectives. The forum detectives had Mike and Rusty, they no longer have either, they still have Bartt from time to time but he's understandably apprehensive as hell around them. It's difficult to fail as much as the Online Springfield Three Community has despite less margin for error.

One law enforcement officer has been acting like an expert on TV since 92. He was actually removed from the case in 93 and left SPD in 95. He spread his theories on TV and SPD let him. One bad cop spoils the rest. I hope I'm wrong but from what I've read and heard it sounds like SPD spent a lot of time looking into a drug connection and possibly ignoring what the women were doing the last night or even days of their lives. moo

 

[joejs89]

Agreed. If a victim of choice isn't available some SO's will take any available, vulnerable person. Especially if the offender is doing the act for violence and control. In the case being discussed, I cant help but think two offenders were involved. Larry Hall it was alleged, worked with someone else (not sure if rules allow me to mention any names.)

 

[Alfonsina Storni]

I just wonder what could have happened if Kirby´s mom hadn´t declared that she heard the girls saying they were going to Suzie´s house. She is the person that makes the story told by the last people who saw the girls "credible".
Another thing, if the police knew someone is providing a false alibi for a suspect, what would happen to that person? Would that person be charged with some crime in the United States? And if the person is the suspect´s
wife or any other relative? Can relatives be charged with obstruction for lying? Can witnesses refuse to talk to the police?

 

[Seeker994]

Exactly. So much of the timeline depends on the Kirby’s word. Like it or not if one reads enough you will see that JK changes her timeline.

 

[Bookkeeper2]

I'm making sure people know your history before they take what you say into account.

History? Please explain.

I'd love you to name someone you interviewed so we can test your credibility. At no times have i ever claimed credibility in this case (i've staunchly said otherwise to everybody actually, including you), you have lets test your claims?

A general description of sources has been generously provided. The confidentiality of sources always remains paramount - as a safety precaution against punishment or retaliation of sources. It's unethical and very suspicious to demand the name of a source.

Please post your name as a test of credibility?

BK

 

[arc anjil]

Please end the flame war. Take it to a Conversation/PM/whatever they call it here.

Otherwise we'll get shut down again.

Thanks...

 

[asyousay]

Please end the flame war. Take it to a Conversation/PM/whatever they call it here.

Otherwise we'll get shut down again.

Thanks...

yes exactly


Some posters seem to want to get the thread closed down for their own purposes.

 

[Seeker994]

I've edited my analysis from yesterday and added why I think JK and MH's actions are suspicious. I didn't want to double post so I'll provide a link to my Reddit post.
My Analysis of The Springfield Three. Edited. : UnresolvedMysteries

 

[Nixaeagle]

History? Please explain.



A general description of sources has been generously provided. The confidentiality of sources always remains paramount - as a safety precaution against punishment or retaliation of sources. It's unethical and very suspicious to demand the name of a source.

Please post your name as a test of credibility?

BK

BAITING, TROLLING, INCITING CONFLICT

Additionally, please don't state or suggest that you are privy to inside information, but either can't or won't discuss it.

If you can't post it, don't!


You may want to read the rules .