OK OK - Girl Scout Murders, Lori Farmer, 8, Michelle Guse, 9, Doris Milner, 10, 1977

[Still_Seek_Answers]

I saw “Someone Cry for the Children", on You Tube; a "must see" for anyone who wants understand the case. It the case was circumstantial and it really wasn't all that strong. It's too bad those items belonging to the camp counselor weren't found on the initial search. They were good evidence but became suspected as "planted evidence" due to the manner they were found. The prosecutions biggest mistake was bringing it to trial at all. Hart had a long prison term to serve. They shouldn't have been in any hurry.

If the analysis of the DNA test was Valid, it pretty convincing that Hart did it. Forensic DNA at the time (the late 80's) was still in its infancy and interpretation wasn't quite as clear as it would be now. Any advocate for Hart's innocence (or someone else's guilt) ought to be able to obtain the actual test result and review the determination

Just to make myself clear, I am not an advocate for anyone's innocence or guilt.If anything I am an advocate for the family to have closure. I also agree that they should not have been in such a hurry to hold a trial. They did not have near enough evidence and time was on their side.
What I am saying is with no doubt, the inconclusive DNA tests simply gave the family's more questions than answers.Their was no need to rush the DNA testing either. DNA that was considered to degraded then might have given clearer answers today, but if it was truly degraded then it may not have. I do not think studying the tests now that were given then would really answer any questions, if it would give a clear answer now then I feel someone would already have released it.
I think these families deserve clear answers....they deserve peace.....they deserve closure.

 

[Betty P]

Right now it is 3:29 a, so I am not at my best. I do however remember reading on one of sites, which I will re-read once I get some sleep, something about this being the only tent with no adult.....don't quote me on that, until I find the actual wording they used.

Thank You for explaining the DNA thing to, but if a profile could not be made, then an exact match could not be made.I refuse also to accept the noise thing as evidence. If a counselor had heard noise loud enough to bother her, she would have surely taken a head count, even then. Since I take that to mean the noise was not loud enough to upset her, so certainly not loud enough to be confirmed as sexual.

I am sorry, I'd love to see this case have real closure...but I do know by experience, that means the I's dotted and the T's crossed, and so far that has not happened here.

BBM

This may help you understand a little better. It's a link to the transcript of the preliminary hearing for the Hart trial, including the testimony of two of the Kiowa camp counselors. They explain a lot about their training and how the camps were set up, as well as the series of events leading up to the discovery of the girls. The counselors had their own tent where they slept. They were awakened on and off throughout the night, dealing with the girls and their first night at camp.

http://www.girlscoutmurders.com/prelim1.pdf

Here's a link to a web page with several maps and overhead photos of the area

http://www.girlscoutmurders.com/CAMP_MAPS.html

Hope this helps clear up a few things.

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

BBM

This may help you understand a little better. It's a link to the transcript of the preliminary hearing for the Hart trial, including the testimony of two of the Kiowa camp counselors. They explain a lot about their training and how the camps were set up, as well as the series of events leading up to the discovery of the girls. The counselors had their own tent where they slept. They were awakened on and off throughout the night, dealing with the girls and their first night at camp.

http://www.girlscoutmurders.com/prelim1.pdf

Here's a link to a web page with several maps and overhead photos of the area

http://www.girlscoutmurders.com/CAMP_MAPS.html

Hope this helps clear up a few things.

I understand they were awakened on and off with a group of excited kids, and the first night of a camping trip. Now, lets discuss what I do not understand....

I do not understand how the killer knew exactly which girl was most mature as they slept in their sleeping bags. He supposedly walked in, killed the two youngest girls with blunt force trauma, and removed the most mature of the three girls....How did he know, while they were still in sleeping bags, what girl slept where? How did he even know what tent she was in? Plus we still have the matter of the counselor who heard the noises.....what person on a camping trip with a bunch of girls, hears noises that are later described as sexual, and does not do a bed check? Nothing about the counselor hearing the noises makes any sense, unless one knew to expect such noises.
I do understand I see things probably different than people did back then, I have been raised in an era where I know the world is full of monsters....so I see ghosts everywhere....
All I am really saying is the families deserve proof positive....I know how badly they need it, to many things were rushed in these cases....I am not casting blame, I am stating facts....sad as that is, if they had waited to try him it may have turned out different.....if they had held off till DNA testing was more progressed, everyone saw it advancing, they waited that many years, why not a few more....
The families deserve peace and closure......they already have my prayers.

 

[wfgodot]

I've recently come upon another couple copies of the book "Someone Cry for the Children" recently, if anyone's interested. While I don't agree with the authors' conclusions, I do find that that it - interestingly - seems to leave things in a bit of doubt about Gene Hart, if one reads between the lines.

Here's what I posted after reading the book a couple years back, for the first time in over 30 years:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Girl Scout Murders, 3 children 7, 8, 9 yrs old

 

[SoSueMe]

*Bump*

 

[Alice Bernadette]

I've just watched the documentary Someone Cry For the Children. Gene Leroy Hart does appear to be the culprit who did this. How many psychopathic rapists are running around in that area? He raped previously and the glasses (that is just too much of a coincidence). Poor innocent little girls and their families. This is an eerie case because of all the Indian spells and the medicine man. The jury must have believed that evidence was planted like the OJ Simpson case. It was lucky that he was sent back to prison for the previous rapes.

 

[wyome]

Right now it is 3:29 a, so I am not at my best. I do however remember reading on one of sites, which I will re-read once I get some sleep, something about this being the only tent with no adult.....don't quote me on that, until I find the actual wording they used.

Thank You for explaining the DNA thing to, but if a profile could not be made, then an exact match could not be made.I refuse also to accept the noise thing as evidence. If a counselor had heard noise loud enough to bother her, she would have surely taken a head count, even then. Since I take that to mean the noise was not loud enough to upset her, so certainly not loud enough to be confirmed as sexual.

I am sorry, I'd love to see this case have real closure...but I do know by experience, that means the I's dotted and the T's crossed, and so far that has not happened here.

bbm

Hello. I've watched only 1/2 of the documentary, and super new to this tragic case. I just wanted to comment that I respectfully disagree about the noise the counselor hearing that night not bothering her. Of course hindsight is 20/20, and she was being interviewed after knowing three children were murdered, but her account to me seemed consistent with someone very much creeped out by the noise. She woke her fellow counselor, asked if she heard the noise, then stepped outside with a flashlight to see if she could see anything. I believe she even commented that she was not a stranger to horror movies (or something to that effect), and since the intermittent noises ceased, she retreated back inside.

I could be wrong, but she seemed to imply that she thought it was an animal of some sorts and it scared her and didn't want to approach it alone. Maybe she was hoping she scared it off by stepping outside with a light. The noises stopped. Maybe that's why she didn't feel the need to check the tents.

 

[rob525]

My first impression is that the girls in the tent either thought the culprit was a counselor or he was in fact one of the counselors. THe hypothesis that first came to mind was that the older girl was the initial target for what ever reason. The guy lures the older girl, Doris Milner, from the tent but inadvertently wakes one or both of the others. Not being in immediate danger of discovery as all the girls think that he is just a counselor and are not alarmed. He knows that once Doris is discovered missing/murdered he will be identified as being in the tent by the younger girls. He returns to the tent and murders the other two. The only thing I can guess is that he had a plan to dispose of one body but three and a cleanup of the blood in the tent took too long. I would not be surprised if the counselor that discovered the bodies was seconds from seeing who the perpatrator was.

 

[Ausgirl]

I've considered a lot of other theories, and even argued them.. but I find it incredibly hard to think of the following as sheerly coincidental, and am stunned beyond belief that Hart was acquitted when all of this points to his clear guilt:

- the perp, like Hart, had a thing for souvenirs - including women's glasses (a highly unusual fetish he'd displayed clearly to his former victims, and Hart was even wearing women's glasses when he was caught)

- the perp, like Hart (in his other crimes, which were not permitted mention at his trial), made 'weird noises' that sounded bestial

- the perp had DNA that matched 1 in 100,000 Native Americans. And it matched Hart.

- the photographs in the cave.. linking the cave (and thus some serious bit of evidence, including the newspaper) to Hart

...and so on. The man was clearly guilty. And how all those people made him out to be some kind of victim and a poster boy for racial discrimination after being convicted for abducting and raping, and then attempting to horribly and sadistically murder those two young pregnant girls just makes me despair for humanity in general.

 

[Daisy1975]

I've considered a lot of other theories, and even argued them.. but I find it incredibly hard to think of the following as sheerly coincidental, and am stunned beyond belief that Hart was acquitted when all of this points to his clear guilt:

- the perp, like Hart, had a thing for souvenirs - including women's glasses (a highly unusual fetish he'd displayed clearly to his former victims, and Hart was even wearing women's glasses when he was caught)

- the perp, like Hart (in his other crimes, which were not permitted mention at his trial), made 'weird noises' that sounded bestial

- the perp had DNA that matched 1 in 100,000 Native Americans. And it matched Hart.

- the photographs in the cave.. linking the cave (and thus some serious bit of evidence, including the newspaper) to Hart

...and so on. The man was clearly guilty. And how all those people made him out to be some kind of victim and a poster boy for racial discrimination after being convicted for abducting and raping, and then attempting to horribly and sadistically murder those two young pregnant girls just makes me despair for humanity in general.

I couldn't have stated it better. Thank you for the post

 

[wfgodot]

Regarding the DNA and c., see

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - NY NY - Girl Scout murders of 3 children (7, 8, 9 years old), 1977


As for referring to the Cherokee as "those people," in essence this duplicates the "blame the nearest Indian" strategy that resulted in Hart's arrest. Hart was never acclaimed by most to be any sort of "poster boy." Was there a concern he was being railroaded? Of course there was; one must understand the historical context.

Hart was found not guilty NOT because of who he was, but because there was a paucity of evidence produced by the prosecution. That he was a bad man is certain, based on convictions for the other crimes. That he killed these little girls is a very different thing. On the balance of evidence at a fair trial in a court of law he was found not guilty.

 

[Ausgirl]

And the courts have never let a killer go free?

Not being snarky, just.. really. A murder site where glasses are notably moved around, with a main suspect with a fetish for .. women's glasses.

I honestly do not think it was 'blame the nearest Indian' as much as 'suspect the nearest violent rapist with a highly unusual fetish that fits the crime scene'.

And I think if his former crimes had been permitted to be disclosed in court, and the glasses thing was allowed into evidence, Hart would be have been put away.

 

[KarlK]

Two days later, two tracking dogs were brought in from Pennsylvania to find the killer's path. Within a week, one died of heat prostration and the other was hit by a car.

I'm surprised no one started a conspiracy theory over the mysterious demise of these dogs.

More seriously, having set their sights on a suitably creepy suspect I have to wonder if the authorities took the time to properly investigate adult and teen supervisors present at the camp. Even though 1977 was not the 1950's it was still a time when scout leaders were considered just as angelic as Catholic clerics...

 

[Alchemist]

I thought I heard that someone has evidence that it wasn't the indian that did the crime, and he knows who did. Has anyone heard of this?

 

[Stella]

Back in February, an Oklahoma City TV station interviewed a producer/director named Russell who began making a film about the murders entitled "Candles"; he promised it would reveal who the killer was. However, I've not been able to find any reference to this film on IMDB.

 

[Stella]

Further snooping shows that YT has the trailer for the movie "Candles" up and running; the film also has it's own website.

 

[KateB]

Back in February, an Oklahoma City TV station interviewed a producer/director named Russell who began making a film about the murders entitled "Candles"; he promised it would reveal who the killer was. However, I've not been able to find any reference to this film on IMDB.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Candles/182385155147098

http://www.news9.com/story/20473989/rogers-county-convicted-murder-dies-in-state-prison

John Russell believes Myers was also the man who molested and murdered three girl scouts at a camp near Locust Grove in 1977.

He's making a movie called "Candles" about the murders.

Russell said Myers confessed to him when they were both in jail together in the late 1970s. Some argue Russell's criminal history takes away his credibility.

Karl Myers, 64, was convicted of killing Cindy Marzano in March of 1996.

Does anyone know why this thread is prefixed NY?

 

[BlithePlum]

Interesting information about the film.

I was also wondering, why is this prefixed NY instead of OK?

 

[Cluelesswaif]

Can someone correct the prefix?

I think it's prefixed NY because the only available news article at the time was from a NY paper, but this happened in OK. I just read about it in the local news today:

Girl Scouts Murder Case From 1977 Gets Another Look

 

[bessie]

Keeping my fingers crossed. lease:

More than 30 years ago, three young girl scouts were raped and killed at Camp Scott in Oklahoma. Their killer was never found. Now, three years after investigators picked the case back up, the community of Locust Grove hopes improved technology leads to justice for the three girls.

Approximately three years ago, the OSBI Cold Case Unit reviewed the case and identified evidence that might benefit from new forensic testing.

http://5newsonline.com/2014/03/12/girl-scouts-murder-case-from-1977-gets-another-look/