Mystery couple murdered in South Carolina, 1976 - #6

[Sweetluv]

Do we know anything about Lonnie henry? If he did commit the crime, what would be his possible involvement with them, if any?
Personally, I believe this couple was never reported missing..imagine they are easily identifiable since no trauma to face.

 

[Ozoner]

Do we know anything about Lonnie henry? If he did commit the crime, what would be his possible involvement with them, if any?
Personally, I believe this couple was never reported missing..imagine they are easily identifiable since no trauma to face.

We know that he was a truck driver and a severe alcoholic. LE thought he might have killed the couple while drunk and completely forgotten that he had done so. (The lie detector test showed that he was telling the truth about not having killed the couple—and if he did it but didn't remember doing it, then the response would appear to be truthful—but it showed that he was lying in response to other questions.)

 

[Claireishere]

We know that he was a truck driver and a severe alcoholic. LE thought he might have killed the couple while drunk and completely forgotten that he had done so. (The lie detector test showed that he was telling the truth about not having killed the couple—and if he did it but didn't remember doing it, then the response would appear to be truthful—but it showed that he was lying in response to other questions.)

Growing up my best friends mom was a teacher. She had to take a lie detector test and was asked several questions regarding her past. We knew she attended Woodstock and had done a large quantity of drugs. So we asked how she passed the test. She’s said “It’s simple girls. That was the person I was then. I wasn’t that person anymore so I answered for the person I had become” All I’m saying his lie detectors have been wrong both ways before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sherwood Park]

Do we know anything about Lonnie henry? If he did commit the crime, what would be his possible involvement with them, if any?
Personally, I believe this couple was never reported missing..imagine they are easily identifiable since no trauma to face.

Part of the challenge is that this pair might not be from the United States. If they were visitors to the country, they might have been reported missing in their country of origin, but not in the U.S. or their family might not have gotten very far in trying to report their loved ones missing if they were unaware of what state, city, etc. the pair was visiting; this would make it more difficult to report a missing person in 1976.

 

[Claireishere]

Part of the challenge is that this pair might not be from the United States. If they were visitors to the country, they might have been reported missing in their country of origin, but not in the U.S. or their family might not have gotten very far in trying to report their loved ones missing if they were unaware of what state, city, etc. the pair was visiting; this would make it more difficult to report a missing person in 1976.

There was a case a couple months ago of a couple found 12 miles apart at some point in the 70s. They quickly determined they were a couple that hitchhiked together. They were identified a few months ago because a brother of the John Doe had a DNA test done and it hit on this Doe. It turned out he was on the run from jail with his girlfriend. So his and her family always assumed if they turned up somewhere the cops would know it. So they were never reported missing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ilovepierre]

I can't remember if this has been asked/discussed, but has this couple had isotope testing done? That would help narrow down where they may have come from/lived before their murders.

 

[Sweetluv]

I find its interesting that they BOTH wore no underwear..sounds like a cultural thing to me.
If Lonnie henry did the shooting while drunk enough to not remember, I'm impressed....killed both with three precise shots each....??

 

[Claireishere]

I don’t wear underwear and I’m from south Alabama. It’s more of a personal choice. However in their situation I’ve always felt it was due to them being travelers. You don’t have a lot of access to washing clothes and underwear are the first thing to get dirty so you choose to go without them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ilovepierre]

I find its interesting that they BOTH wore no underwear..sounds like a cultural thing to me.
If Lonnie henry did the shooting while drunk enough to not remember, I'm impressed....killed both with three precise shots each....??

IMO, the no underwear thing is because they were traveling. Not many chances to wash undergarments if you're staying at campsites and not staying in the same place too long.

 

[Onaliv]

Actually, yes, we do know that the gun was given to Lonnie Henry before the murders. The gun was traced to the brother through the manufacturer---he was apparently the original purchaser of it--and the brother then admitted that he had given Lonnie the gun four or five years prior. So Lonnie Henry had the gun both before the murders and after the murders.

Based on this... seems illogical that he wasn’t somehow involved. What am I missing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TooCurious]

I don’t wear underwear and I’m from south Alabama. It’s more of a personal choice. However in their situation I’ve always felt it was due to them being travelers. You don’t have a lot of access to washing clothes and underwear are the first thing to get dirty so you choose to go without them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most be an Alabama thing, I am from South Alabama I don't wear them either. It just one less thing to take off, to put on, and to wash.

 

[PaulR]

Based on this... seems illogical that he wasn’t somehow involved. What am I missing?

It stretches credibility but here are some ways he could have not been directly involved:
- he lends the gun to someone, they shot the couple, that person files off the serial number and returns the gun to LH. Filing off a serial number should have been plainly visible so LH should have said "why did you damage my gun" (just like you'd ask what happened if you lent someone a drill or tool and it came back damaged.)
- he lends the gun to someone, they shot the couple, the gun is returned but LH figures out what happened and files off the serial #.
- gun was stolen, and somehow gets back into his possession even though the serial # is how guns are legally traced and returned to burglary victims.

Did the police ever say if LH said "this person had the gun, wasn't me" but they couldn't make a case? It certainly sounds like they couldn't make a case against LH even though he seems like an obvious suspect.

 

[Onaliv]

It stretches credibility but here are some ways he could have not been directly involved:
- he lends the gun to someone, they shot the couple, that person files off the serial number and returns the gun to LH. Filing off a serial number should have been plainly visible so LH should have said "why did you damage my gun" (just like you'd ask what happened if you lent someone a drill or tool and it came back damaged.)
- he lends the gun to someone, they shot the couple, the gun is returned but LH figures out what happened and files off the serial #.
- gun was stolen, and somehow gets back into his possession even though the serial # is how guns are legally traced and returned to burglary victims.

Did the police ever say if LH said "this person had the gun, wasn't me" but they couldn't make a case? It certainly sounds like they couldn't make a case against LH even though he seems like an obvious suspect.

All very good possibilities! I’m thinking that had this taken place in an area with more law enforcement resources there may have been a different investigative outcome. Had the victims been identified and their relatives became involved in pushing, there also might have been a higher level of investigation. “If” the killer(s) we’re determined and fully investigated there would likely have been evidence found to connect them to the crime. IMO there had to have been something the killer(s) wanted in order to do this (car, money, drugs, etc) and there are likely people still alive today that knows something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ozoner]

It stretches credibility but here are some ways he could have not been directly involved:
- he lends the gun to someone, they shot the couple, that person files off the serial number and returns the gun to LH. Filing off a serial number should have been plainly visible so LH should have said "why did you damage my gun" (just like you'd ask what happened if you lent someone a drill or tool and it came back damaged.)
- he lends the gun to someone, they shot the couple, the gun is returned but LH figures out what happened and files off the serial #.
- gun was stolen, and somehow gets back into his possession even though the serial # is how guns are legally traced and returned to burglary victims.

Did the police ever say if LH said "this person had the gun, wasn't me" but they couldn't make a case? It certainly sounds like they couldn't make a case against LH even though he seems like an obvious suspect.

I agree that he was involved somehow.

Sole suspect
About four months after the murders, police in the Darlington County town of Latta arrested Lonnie George Henry for drunk driving. Under the seat of his car they found a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson with the serial number filed off.
Police sent the gun to the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division's forensic lab for tests and later concluded that Henry's revolver had killed the mystery couple. Bullets taken from the bodies matched with the weapon.
When officers asked Henry point blank if he was the killer, his polygraph said he was telling the truth. No, he hadn't pulled the trigger. But several other lie detector tests implied he was lying about something, at least, maybe covering up for somebody. Investigators wondered if someone had stolen his gun and whether a relative or friend of Henry's had killed the couple in Sumter.
But case files say Henry did lie about how he'd obtained the gun, first telling officers that he'd bought it from a truck driver. Days after the purchase, Henry told investigators, he discovered the serial number had been filed off. By then, it was too late to return the item for a refund.
SLED recovered the serial number and investigators tracked the gun from its manufacturer to Henry's brother, who said he gave it to Henry as a Christmas present four or five years earlier.
The gun had been bought, stolen and resold several times before falling into the hands of Henry's brother. But he said the serial number was still there on Christmas Eve.
When confronted with the new information, Henry confessed to filing the serial numbers off himself.
It remains unclear why Henry lied if he was innocent. And it also remains unclear if he really was. Case files say Henry was a recovering alcoholic and had also gotten in trouble with the law for a slew of minor offenses.
At the time, his son had recently drowned in the Pee Dee River. He'd also accidentally killed one of his co-workers, by backing a dump truck over him.
Investigative psychologists even wondered if he'd killed the Sumter couple and simply couldn't remember doing it.

Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/sout...nty-john-jane-doe-1976-a-2.html#ixzz4zHmiFH42

 

[Sweetluv]

Interesting article. I always felt like there were two killers in the car that night. One to drive, the other to keep an eye on our victims. Maybe Lonnie did the driving. He passed the lie detector test because he didn't pull the trigger. I don't buy the..drunk and don't remember story. To put three accurate and precise gunwounds into two different people while drunk? Not so sure...

 

[Brainy]

Interesting article. I always felt like there were two killers in the car that night. One to drive, the other to keep an eye on our victims. Maybe Lonnie did the driving. He passed the lie detector test because he didn't pull the trigger. I don't buy the..drunk and don't remember story. To put three accurate and precise gunwounds into two different people while drunk? Not so sure...

I don't buy the drink and don't remember story either. The murder seems to be well-planned, shots are precise and the lack of evidence at the scene is also pretty remarkable.

 

[Ozoner]

I don't buy the drink and don't remember story either. The murder seems to be well-planned, shots are precise and the lack of evidence at the scene is also pretty remarkable.

It was just one of LE's theories. I tend to agree with Sweetluv: two men or more were involved in the double homicide; Lonnie Henry was one of them, but he wasn't the one who pulled the trigger.
That Henry's son drowned within months of the murders makes my Spidey sense tingle just a little. It could have been a typical early death in a dysfunctional family, but it could be that it wasn't an accident. Maybe the son knew too much, or maybe he was the one who committed the double homicide, and a couple of good ol' boys took care of him because he was a loose cannon. Maybe he killed himself because he thought local LE was onto him; maybe they were, but they buried what they knew once he bought the farm.

 

[information junkie]

I just found this site while helping a college student find more info on the I-95 couple. I just sent an email to the LE suggesting that the couple's DNA be sent to Ancestry.com to attempt to match relatives. I got this idea from watching Long Lost Family. It is a long-shot but could provide a relative. I have not read through all the posts so I don't know if this has already been done.

 

[information junkie]

I find all this information fascinating. I do not understand why LE hasn't solved this case. Does anyone know if a book has been written about this case? I would like to point out a few things LE did not check on. If the couple had fruit/ice cream where did they purchase it and when? The only place I remember that sold ice cream and would have possibly been open 24 hours a day is the Stuckey's. I think LE needs to follow up on every lead no matter how small. Also the campground witnesses stated that the couple had suitcases. Have you ever seen a hitchhiker with suitcases? IF they really did have suitcases, then they must have had a vehicle. In my opinion, they were not murdered at the location that the bodies were found. I think they were just dumped there. I cannot get this off my mind and will continue to research this case.

 

[Claireishere]

I just found this site while helping a college student find more info on the I-95 couple. I just sent an email to the LE suggesting that the couple's DNA be sent to Ancestry.com to attempt to match relatives. I got this idea from watching Long Lost Family. It is a long-shot but could provide a relative. I have not read through all the posts so I don't know if this has already been done.

There is a way to do this but it’s incredibly expensive and a lot of states don’t allow it. It’s called Familial DNA testing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk