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

[Nadal]

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

Him posting the interviews would be enough. Framing this as me demanding anything is disingenuous as hell, Arkansas has referred to these interviews several times and has admitted it's his main source. Websleuths has rules against secret sources, either cough them up or stop referring to them and acting like he has more knowledge than the rest of us.

 

[Nadal]

Want to add this what i said to him earlier because i think it's the most important point that he or bookkeeper are unable to address: "you've never named anyone because you know they'd deny ever talking to you."

 

[Hurricane]

Hurricane, I respect your opinion and would like to know which scenario you have.

Was this crime done by one or multiple perpetrators?

I realize that no one not involved would know a certain number. I have come down on the single perpetrator theory as no one has yet rolled. But most others appear to lean to multiple perpetrators. The difficulty lies is that the general public does not know the motive.

Depends on how & where you define the crime to be. Two to get them out of the house; more but I don't believe necessarily some huge number at the party, crime scene #2; & probably only one or two know where the remains are now, if you want to call that crime scene #3. No one will ever roll.

Anyway I'm not interested is discussing further.

 

[Nixaeagle]

Depends on how & where you define the crime to be. Two to get them out of the house; more but I don't believe necessarily some huge number at the party, crime scene #2; & probably only one or two know where the remains are now, if you want to call that crime scene #3. No one will ever roll.

Anyway I'm not interested is discussing further.

Which party are we discussing ? Thanks

 

[Bookkeeper2]

Him posting the interviews would be enough. Framing this as me demanding anything is disingenuous as hell, Arkansas has referred to these interviews several times and has admitted it's his main source. Websleuths has rules against secret sources, either cough them up or stop referring to them and acting like he has more knowledge than the rest of us.

An obligation exists to protect sources AND my credibility with those sources - but not to you. It's suspicious to me that you're continuing to use a poster's credibility as an excuse to malign and extort names.

BTW - It's common knowledge that many forum(s) members work with outside sources.

Want to add this what i said to him earlier because i think it's the most important point that he or bookkeeper are unable to address: "you've never named anyone because you know they'd deny ever talking to you."

 

[Hurricane]

Which party are we discussing ? Thanks

Not talking about the kids & their parties. I'm talking about Crime scene #2 where the women were taken after being removed from the house; the drunken party Garrison talks about.

 

[lisaNYC]

Hopefully when the investigation starts again they focus on Janelle Kirby and Michael Henson. They also need to reinterview the people at the party.

 

[asyousay]

My burning question for Janelle is why were the phone calls so sick in nature that you then forgot to even mention them phone calls in the first statement you gave police.

I know I know she is meant to be a idiot but that’s another big oversight on her part. Them phone calls would definitely stick out as strange.

 

[arc anjil]

As per the prank calls: anyone ever get a prank phone call, hang up on them, and then get called back by the same prankster? Very strange.

Unless I read that wrong and it was a different prankster. But even then, two prank calls, one immediately following the first? And the police never tracked them down?

I'd like to know what the pranksters said...

 

[arc anjil]

@Hurricane: where is the info on this party Garrison spoke about. I'd like to read that.

 

[Hurricane]

@Hurricane: where is the info on this party Garrison spoke about. I'd like to read that.

Really? If you know nothing about Garrison you will want to read about his FIP arrest just wks after getting out of prison, the incident at the hotel when he bonded out, his escape & recapture after the coed rape. It was Garrison's information that allowed LE to secure a search warrant which led to the Webster county dig, the results of which are still sealed by the court to this day, the van south of Fordland, etc. It's all in the NL & just about every other newspaper around the state at the time.

 

[asyousay]

No arrests ever came from Garrisons information. It obviously didn’t progress the case forward or we wouldn’t be here.
IMP

 

[Missouri Mule]

No arrests ever came from Garrisons information. It obviously didn’t progress the case forward or we wouldn’t be here.
IMP

This really torques me off. How long, dear lord, do we have to be fed this line that certain evidence is ALLEGEDLY still sealed after a quarter of a century? I find this incredibly difficult to believe.

As far as Garrison, I am one of the few here who has spoken to him. I have other information about him. To think that this case rises or falls on him is ludicrous. There has to be more to this than we have been told.

I was born, but not yesterday. Something is rotten in Mudville.

 

[Missouri Mule]

The question that has always bugged me , actually two things, is the motive and who was “trusted” enough to be allowed in the house or who could have lured the women out.

There are obvious people who could have done that but there is also the not so obvious possibility that a “business associate” might have been “trusted” and someone we do not know of. Think Jimmy Hoffa.

I am reminded of the “Sopranos” television series where the girlfriend “Adriana” of Tony’s “soldier” “Christopher” ratted out the family and stupidly believed she would be forgiven by the mob family. She foolishly and naively got into one of his lieutenant’s car for a drive in the country before she learned she was going to be executed. I’ll never forget the scene when she realized she had been deceived and the tears flowed down her cheeks. It was too late and she was chased through the woods to be shot dead. I wonder if this might be a scenario worth pursuing. Who would Sherrill have trusted?”

 

[Hurricane]

This really torques me off. How long, dear lord, do we have to be fed this line that certain evidence is ALLEGEDLY still sealed after a quarter of a century? I find this incredibly difficult to believe.

As far as Garrison, I am one of the few here who has spoken to him. I have other information about him. To think that this case rises or falls on him is ludicrous. There has to be more to this than we have been told.

I was born, but not yesterday. Something is rotten in Mudville.

Come on Richard, use your brain. Specific to the Webster dig some of the evidence collected likely links to other crimes. Read the search warrant. Why would the warrant cover the remains of a 50 yr old male? It just so happens that the remains of one of the 3 people killed in the creek was/is still missing. Most people don't even understand the purpose of a warrant; they think it's only purpose is to give them the right to come onto the property. The 50 yr old male had to be included in the warrant in case they encountered his remains.

Same thing at Cassville, There have been other cases of murders/missing people in Cassville, only one of which has ever been solved & prosecuted.

Warrants are routinely sealed until a case is prosecuted.

 

[asyousay]

Yes let’s hazard a guess that somebody knocked at about 3.30am give or take.

Sherrill was security conscious so how many people would anybody realistically let in at that time of the morning?

 

[Missouri Mule]

Come on Richard, use your brain. Specific to the Webster dig some of the evidence collected likely links to other crimes. Read the search warrant. Why would the warrant cover the remains of a 50 yr old male? It just so happens that the remains of one of the 3 people killed in the creek was/is still missing. Most people don't even understand the purpose of a warrant; they think it's only purpose is to give them the right to come onto the property. The 50 yr old male had to be included in the warrant in case they encountered his remains.

Same thing at Cassville, There have been other cases of murders/missing people in Cassville, only one of which has ever been solved & prosecuted.

Warrants are routinely sealed until a case is prosecuted.

I apologize for being unclear. What I meant to say is that nothing that Garrison has produced has amounted to more than a hill of beans, in other words, worthless. Why are we not simply told that whatever evidence there was had nothing to do with this crime so we can move onto other avenues worth exploring.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Yes let’s hazard a guess that somebody knocked at about 3.30am give or take.

Sherrill was security conscious so how many people would anybody realistically let in at that time of the morning?

If I am in her situation, only one person. A cop.

 

[arc anjil]

This really torques me off. How long, dear lord, do we have to be fed this line that certain evidence is ALLEGEDLY still sealed after a quarter of a century? I find this incredibly difficult to believe.

As far as Garrison, I am one of the few here who has spoken to him. I have other information about him. To think that this case rises or falls on him is ludicrous. There has to be more to this than we have been told.

I was born, but not yesterday. Something is rotten in Mudville.

How much of Garrison is blowhard and braggart? I've read here that he claims "his friend" told him at a drunken party that he (the friend) killed the women. Did he ever mention that to you? Did you ask him about it? Did "his friend" tell him why? Who of his friends is likely to do that, if any?

I don't have access to the info in other posts about a "party 40" or a "second drunken party". I don't know if I just can't find it or it's no longer available.

EDIT: just read your post 1276.

 

[asyousay]

If I am in her situation, only one person. A cop.

Yes I asked mum that question and she just said the same thing as she grew up with me in the house so same situation of you don’t take risks at that time of the morning.