Found Deceased PA - Linda Stoltzfoos, 18, Bird-in-Hand, Lancaster County, 21 June 2020 *kidnapping arrest* #3

[Curiosity1234]

On 6/23, JS was no longer there when the responding officer arrived at Harvest Structures. And, the officer would have know way of knowing he had been there on 6/21. As far as we know, no one saw him there on 6/21.

According to the criminal complaint (item#22):

"...on 7/10/20 FBI agents assisting in this investigation used cell phone records to show that the cell phone belonging to Justo Smoker was in the general area of 3104 Harvest Drive in Ronks PA on 6/21/20 between 1432hrs and 1535hrs." BBM

Cell phone records don't pin point exact locations.

I am sure, in hindsight, the responding officer wishes he had tracked down JS and talked to him.

Your right cell phone ping shows within 20 mile radius.

 

[Niner]

Thanks from me too Hereshecomes75. I thought I could get a piggy back ride from Niner. No such luck.

I don't understand the bold - ??

 

[Curiosity1234]

Updated timeline

Timeline: Linda Stoltzfoos Abduction

12:20 p.m., Sunday, June 21: Linda Stoltzfoos leaves church on Stumptown Road, Bird-in-Hand, PA, to walk to her home on Beechdale Road. Linda was wearing a tan dress and white apron and black head kerchief, which signified she was unmarried. She went home barefoot and carrying her shoes and stockings.

--22 minutes elapse--

12:42 p.m., Sunday, June 21: 600 Beechdale Road, Bird-in-Hand, a man intercepts Linda Stoltzfoos walking home; she gets into red car with him.

--45 minutes elapse--

1:30 p.m., Sunday, June 21: Several witnesses report seeing an Amish female in passenger seat of a red car (later identified as matching JS’s car) traveling on Amish Road, which is north of Gap. No direction was provided. Amish Road is a 15-minute drive from Linda’s home.

--60 minutes elapse--

2:32 - 3:35 p.m., Sunday, June 21: records show Smoker’s cellphone in the general area of 3104 Harvest Drive in Ronks.

June 23: “…another person had called police about a suspicious vehicle in a business lot at 3104 Harvest Drive, near the village of Ronks, about 5 p.m. and someone looking in windows and doors as if to see if there was anyone there. The driver left, but returned later that evening. This site is about three miles away from the Stoltzfoos home.

The car in question had left before Pennsylvania State Police answered that call, but the caller had taken the license plate: It matched Smoker’s car. Police noted the caller also took photos of the inside of the vehicle, though arrest records did not state what they showed.

It’s also not immediately clear when police linked that call to Stoltzfoos’s disappearance.”

LINK to article

July 8: Investigators review initial video footage of 500 Beechdale Road. Authorities ID car as a red Kia Rio, PA Reg KYB9713, belonging to Justo Smoker, 34, of Paradise. LE identify his workplace as a business in Gap (Dutchland, Inc.). Authorities drive to the business, see the red Kia Rio and see that the plates match the car in the video. Police note the car leaving around 5:25 p.m. and later find it at JS’s apartment at 3250 Lincoln Highway.

July 9: FBI issue Missing person notice LINK

July 10: LE views FBI-refined video surveillance and see Linda get into the car. Justo Smoker arrested at his place of employment in Gap. Red Kia Rio impounded. Appeared before Magisterial District Judge B. Denise Commins for a preliminary arraignment. Charged with felony kidnapping to inflict injury/terror & misdemeanor false imprisonment. Denied bail. Bail Action Reason: Due to the nature of the charges & ongoing investigation into the status of the victim. Preliminary hearing scheduled 7/21/20.

July 10: LE find LS clothing buried behind Harvest Structures next to Amtrak train tracks.

July 12: Searches begin in Welsh Mountain area.

July 13: Affidavit released (link no longer working)

July 16: Lancaster County DA/LE press conference: believe LS did not know JS; still tracking JS activities in days leading to abduction; believe LS was harmed; search locations are private as each could be a crime scene; reward offered for tips; FBI agent used the word ‘recovery’.

July 20: Preliminary hearing postponed.

July 27: Hearing rescheduled for August 5th. No attorney has been assigned yet.

PA Unified Judicial System link: Pennsylvania's Unified Judicial System

Great timeline TwoBlueJays, thank you so much. Unfortunately the abduction worked in JS favor to some degree because Linda Stoltzfoos family did not realize until after 11 pm. on June 21 that she never showed up at youth group. Her father reported her missing some time (maybe early morning hours) on Monday June 22.

 

[RumorMonger]

It was posted here that LE believed she had been harmed. Wasn't that after bra and socks were found buried ? Or before ? Besides, LE might have thought she was believed to have been harmed because she never came home so they might have thought she was unable to come home due to injury. Everyone, family and friends said she would never just disappear. Additionally, I think (I could be wrong) LE can put out a statement based on what they believe without having to produce evidence. With the courts however, they are legally required to back up what accusations they make with evidence. Rocky1 our legal expert would know.

Yes, the statement that LE believed she had been harmed happened after the clothes were found. The reason that harm was suspected was never specified. Obviously, her missing status would be sufficient but, IMO, its weird not to be more specific. I don't know what would be gained by holding back the specific reasoning. One other note: all the statements I can find say something to the effect of "police believe she WAS harmed" as opposed to "police believe she MAY have been harmed."

Here is an example.
Search for Linda Stoltzfoos continues in East Earl Township

 

[Curiosity1234]

Yes, the statement that LE believed she had been harmed happened after the clothes were found. The reason that harm was suspected was never specified. Obviously, her missing status would be sufficient but, IMO, its weird not to be more specific. I don't know what would be gained by holding back the specific reasoning. One other note: all the statements I can find say something to the effect of "police believe she WAS harmed" as opposed to "police believe she MAY have been harmed."

Here is an example.
Search for Linda Stoltzfoos continues in East Earl Township

Criminals who sexually assault and even kill their victims often take trophies such as a bra or panties. I think JS trophy was Linda Stoltzfoos bra and stockings. I believe he might have taken them home if it were not for the fact he was in the process of or newly moved in with his brother; I think that's why he buried them. I don't think most sexual assault/ killers bury their trophies. The finding of intimate personal clothing may be why LE believed she had been harmed. There could also be evidence on the stock(ings that she was choked; possibly DNA evidence. This is JMO.

 

[RumorMonger]

My question is, how soon after they were taken did the police know who he was ? Were they ever tailing him and when did that begin ? Why didn't they interrogate him about trespassing at Harvard Structures ? By not interrogating him, they might have missed an opportunity.

The affidavit references tracking his cell phone location. IIRC it doesn't specify that LE tailed him, but they were tracking him movements before the arrest. That said, IMO cell phone tower data doesn't give a pinpoint location.

 

[MsMac]

Criminals who sexually assault and even kill their victims often take trophies such as a bra or panties. I think JS trophy was Linda Stoltzfoos bra and stockings. I believe he might have taken them home if it were not for the fact he was in the process of or newly moved in with his brother; I think that's why he buried them. I don't think most sexual assault/ killers bury their trophies. The finding of intimate personal clothing may be why LE believed she had been harmed. There could also be evidence on the stock(ings that she was choked; possibly DNA evidence. This is JMO.

See text I bolded above. I have not heard this. Do you have a source?

 

[Rosiebones]

Criminals who sexually assault and even kill their victims often take trophies such as a bra or panties. I think JS trophy was Linda Stoltzfoos bra and stockings. I believe he might have taken them home if it were not for the fact he was in the process of or newly moved in with his brother; I think that's why he buried them. I don't think most sexual assault/ killers bury their trophies. The finding of intimate personal clothing may be why LE believed she had been harmed. There could also be evidence on the stock(ings that she was choked; possibly DNA evidence. This is JMO.

I agree this could be the case but I also think he could simply have found those items later after he had disposed of her body and was checking the care and found them under the front seat or down between the door and her seat. He had to get rid of them. I think her shoes are with her wherever she is. MOO MOO MOO

 

[MsMac]

The affidavit references tracking his cell phone location. IIRC it doesn't specify that LE tailed him, but they were tracking him movements before the arrest. That said, IMO cell phone tower data doesn't give a pinpoint location.

They checked his cell phone records after he gave them his cell phone number during questioning on 7/9. See items # 17 and 22 in the criminal complaint. I don't think they were 'tracking him,' so to speak.

 

[MsMac]

I agree this could be the case but I also think he could simply have found those items later after he had disposed of her body and was checking the care and found them under the front seat or down between the door and her seat. He had to get rid of them. I think her shoes are with her wherever she is. MOO MOO MOO

This is actually interesting to think about. I believe there is ample evidence from witnesses and family members that it was normal for her to remove her stockings and shoes as she walked. So we know where the stockings ended up. What happened to the shoes she was carrying? Did he have her put them back on? Why?

 

[Auntie Cipation]

I believe the owner at Harvest Structures took pictures of the interior of the car not because he saw something suspicious relating to LS but to document nothing that he owned was in there.

The mention of something white on the passenger side of the red car was in reference to what is seen in the released pictures. Speculation is that it was something belonging to LS on the seat (not sure how or who would have been close enough to see what was below window level to see this)

That's why I was asking if the white object was seen while the car was parked and an observer could approach and look down into the seat, or was it while the car was passing on the street where an observer would normally not be able to see below window level. If LS was sitting in the passenger seat then anything white she was wearing from the waist up could have been seen as the car went past.

 

[Maplesyrup]

What Google do you have ? I only have street view.

Satellite image is available, just zoom in.

I agree this could be the case but I also think he could simply have found those items later after he had disposed of her body and was checking the care and found them under the front seat or down between the door and her seat. He had to get rid of them. I think her shoes are with her wherever she is. MOO MOO MOO

I think you are correct. The fact that he buried those clothing items leads me to believe he also buried Linda in a shallow grave...or put her somewhere out of view...but my gut feeling is he buried her somewhere. The easiest ground to dig is shaded dirt [a wooded area] because it is moist...even better is moist ground near a creek because it is soft and easy to shovel making for a much faster job. The one thing you don't want is ground covered by weeds! That is hard to shovel due to the roots of the weeds and grass. Plus, a body will decay much faster in moist soil than in bone dry soil. So I suspect she is in a wooded area, where the dirt is always moist and easily shoveled. This would also provide "cover" for him while he worked so no one would see him. It would seem that he needed to bury the evidence of what he did...out of sight and out of mind...making what he did less real and "easier" to block out of his mind and forget. No body, no crime. Just move on and pretend it never happened.

 

[MsMac]

Satellite image is available, just zoom in.


I think you are correct. The fact that he buried those clothing items leads me to believe he also buried Linda in a shallow grave...or put her somewhere out of view...but my gut feeling is he buried her somewhere. The easiest ground to dig is shaded dirt [a wooded area] because it is moist...even better is moist ground near a creek because it is soft and easy to shovel making for a much faster job. The one thing you don't want is ground covered by weeds! That is hard to shovel due to the roots of the weeds and grass. Plus, a body will decay much faster in moist soil than in bone dry soil. So I suspect she is in a wooded area, where the dirt is always moist and easily shoveled. This would also provide "cover" for him while he worked so no one would see him. It would seem that he needed to bury the evidence of what he did...out of sight and out of mind...making what he did less real and "easier" to block out of his mind and forget. No body, no crime. Just move on and pretend it never happened.

But did he know all of this a head of time about wooded areas vs creek areas vs ground covered by weeds? Or did he learn all this by trial and error during the hours/days after he did his deed? I am not sure.

 

[Maplesyrup]

But did he know all of this a head of time about wooded areas vs creek areas vs ground covered by weeds? Or did he learn all this by trial and error during the hours/days after he did his deed? I am not sure.

I think a lot depends on how much life experience he had working outdoors. If he worked on a tree farm, or for a nursery or doing lawn care or a farm, for example...he would be more informed and aware. The other thought I had was the convenience of tree branches, weeds, leaves and logs that would have fallen prior to a visit by him into the woods. So many naturally occurring barriers he would have to help hide freshly turned dirt and foot tracks. All he needs is a few heavy rains and growth of ground cover and the site will be covered up. Once autumn comes the leaves will add another blanket of deciduous matter. I think it would be wise to watch for a tell-tale area of fresh green plant growth that looks to be thriving. Sadly, decaying organic matter supplies plant life with needed nutrients for robust growth. The most likely hope of finding her is having a search dog stumble over the grave [if that is indeed what has occurred]...or less likely, for him to talk and tell LE. All IMO.

 

[Trackergd]

If she is in a shallow grave (less than 12" of dirt), carrion eating wildlife will dig her up and re-distribute the remains on the forest floor.

 

[Ashildir]

I have been thinking about the items of clothing that they have found, well more about the items they haven't found tbh, I find it strange to bury the stockings and not the shoes with them - what would he have done with them - has he not buried them with other articles as they are more likely to indicate they belong to LS (only thinking this as I also wanted to ask do the Amish wear a specific type/style of shoe?) than a pair of stockings or a bra?

eta - imo he had enough presence of mind (not that this is being questioned) to bury what (he thought) would be less likely to be identified as belonging to LS

 

[Curiosity1234]

Satellite image is available, just zoom in.


I think you are correct. The fact that he buried those clothing items leads me to believe he also buried Linda in a shallow grave...or put her somewhere out of view...but my gut feeling is he buried her somewhere. The easiest ground to dig is shaded dirt [a wooded area] because it is moist...even better is moist ground near a creek because it is soft and easy to shovel making for a much faster job. The one thing you don't want is ground covered by weeds! That is hard to shovel due to the roots of the weeds and grass. Plus, a body will decay much faster in moist soil than in bone dry soil. So I suspect she is in a wooded area, where the dirt is always moist and easily shoveled. This would also provide "cover" for him while he worked so no one would see him. It would seem that he needed to bury the evidence of what he did...out of sight and out of mind...making what he did less real and "easier" to block out of his mind and forget. No body, no crime. Just move on and pretend it never happened.

Thanks Maplesyrup. I had no idea it is easier to shovel in a shaded area because soil is moist or that moist soil promotes decay. I would have thought bones would take a long time to decay in any environment.

 

[Rocky1]

But did he know all of this a head of time about wooded areas vs creek areas vs ground covered by weeds? Or did he learn all this by trial and error during the hours/days after he did his deed? I am not sure.

Or perhaps under some crushed stone where once back filled would not show any signs of ground disturbance at all, including footprints? Say for example along a railroad bed?

 

[Rocky1]

Yes, the statement that LE believed she had been harmed happened after the clothes were found. The reason that harm was suspected was never specified. Obviously, her missing status would be sufficient but, IMO, its weird not to be more specific. I don't know what would be gained by holding back the specific reasoning. One other note: all the statements I can find say something to the effect of "police believe she WAS harmed" as opposed to "police believe she MAY have been harmed."

Here is an example.
Search for Linda Stoltzfoos continues in East Earl Township

Saying LE believes she "was harmed" means they have evidence, and can charge him with Felony Kidnapping.
Saying LE believes she "may have been harmed" means they have no evidence to support a "Felony Kidnapping" charge.

 

[Rocky1]

The affidavit references tracking his cell phone location. IIRC it doesn't specify that LE tailed him, but they were tracking him movements before the arrest. That said, IMO cell phone tower data doesn't give a pinpoint location.

What if LE wasn't using cell phone data from phone towers, but instead were using a Stingray?