miles_draken said:
That is your impact Ken? I have given u the benefit of the doubt on this stuff and reserved final judgement, but that is absolutely a thin lead, theory, whatever, it's anorexic. Watch the entire interview with Sgt. Mike Owen where he debunks the method and equipment this man is using. Looks like a laptop on a golf club dolly to me. A university expert said this equipment wasn't large enough to be what the individual says it is. Also, there is almost a year time discrepency between the women going missing and the construction of the area in question, according to the Sgt. in the interview.
He basically says this is more psychic leads that give little info but nothing one can use. Sound familiar?? Every psychic out there just happens to get visions like this. Prophets, psychics, Bible codes, it makes for good television, but this is an actual investigation into three once living people. Hope they didn't miss a good lead while searching through this vision.
I was actually expecting more. Ken this was nothing more than what you've been saying for months rolled up into a minute and half news segment. Janis McCall herself says she's heard from hundreds of psychics who tell her the ladies are dead, their alive, but nobody says they are here or there. From now on all psychics should have to attend a Geography class before they can give a vision. "They are near water." "They are in concrete." "They are happier now." Come on. I sure as hell hope I never go missing and the police call one of the psychics lending their vague visions to this case and ask where I'm at.
Sorry if this seems like a bit of a rant, but why would anyone say to get ready for a shocker or whatever. I suppose this feels like validation to a vision, but it's nothing more than a waste of time. There's a reason the police aren't digging up Cox South, and it sure as hell isn't because they are hiding something. Do you think an entire police department could keep a secret about the actual location of these women for fear of being ridiculed because they didn't act sooner or protecting someone?
Lee Harvey shot Kennedy in a Lincoln. Elvis died on the crapper. And that is where this theory belongs, in the crapper. Let's flush this turd before it wastes any more time please.
I've never been a big fan of this garage theory myself. However, let me relate two things I can speak from personal knowledge so let there be no question as to what I know to be true. This is not hearsay nor is it speculation.
In the original "48 hour" piece, Sgt. David Asher showed the rolodex file of Sherrill Levitt's customers and said that every one of those individuals would be contacted. I believe he estimated them at about 400. It later turned out to be 250 customers. Well, I happened to work with two of those individuals and nothing was ever asked of them by the police. How do I know? Because I asked them. Furthermore, one of those customers had her hair done two days prior to the abductions and there was nothing out of the ordinary about their conversations that would indicate there was anything going on in Sherrill's life. They discussed their respective daughter's upcoming graduations.
The second thing I can speak from personal knowledge is that I saw on the corner of South Jefferson and St. Louis Street sometime in the middle of the fall a van of identical vintage. It was dark blue (appeared to be freshly painted) and the time was about 7:30 AM. I went into the city square and left my wife off for work. Behind me pulled up a Springfield Police cruiser and I motioned him over to the corner where I could report the sighting. I provided the description of the van and the license plate that my wife had written down. He went off in quick pursuit. But the story doesn't end there. It just so happened that I had come into knowledge of a man in another nearby town who had let us say a "checkered past." I was able to obtain two copies of his mug shot; and one of which was personally delivered by myself to the lead investigator on the day I received it in my personal mail. I retained one copy for my records and had it in my desk at work and showed it to an interested co-worker. We discussed the case many times. On the day I saw the van, my co-worker came up to me and said "did you see him?" I said I didn't know what she was talking about. She said it was "him", the photo in the mug shot. Well "him" also matched the description of the so-called transient pictured in the News-Leader shortly after the abduction who appeared near the home and was seen to be out of place. At that point I contacted my long time contact in this other county and said "you'll never believe what happened." She asked me if I had the plate number and I said I did. Bear in mind that I didn't ask for the owner or address but she came back with it in a matter of a couple of minutes. Now thinking it might be useful to the patrol officer to have this information, I immediately contacted the police station and asked to speak to the patrol officer. Instead, the lead investigator came on the phone and asked me to wait a minute while he went to his office. Then the connection was good and quiet. At this point he threatened me in very threatening language that he would have me "fired from my job." I told him I was merely providing him information that I had come in to. He was not interested in listening but continued to threaten my job several times in a most threatening way. I thought I was talking to "Tony Soprano." What does this former detective say today? Well, I am told that he doesn't remember who I am. Well, I was born, but not yesterday.
I ask you. If the Springfield Police Department welcomes leads, why do they employ people who go so far as to threaten a person's employment? I'm in a position not to be "fired" from my job. I'm retired, receiving social security. Had I to do it over I would have marched into the police department and raised holy hell. I nearly contacted internal affairs about this but had an appointment out of town and never followed up until recently with the police department.
Finally, I saw that van again. I saw it in the Springfield City Library. I instantly recognized it as the plates matched. It was dark blue but appeared to have originally been white. It was white on the inside. It is by all accounts a Dodge A-108 long bed van. They are still highly popular and sold today on ebay.
During our discussion over at the other site, the van has been described at various times as being "moss green", "brown", "dark blue" and "dirty white." And according to the K.C. Star a van meeting one of those descriptions was seen at 4:30 AM near the Levitt residence. Since the sunrise was at about 5:53 AM on that morning, twilight was an immediate problem therefore those women had to be subdued and abducted and the perps out of "Dodge" before anyone else could positively identify that van.
That I know from personal fact. Not hearsay. Fact!
Tell me once again why I or anyone else should believe the Springfield Police Department or that they are open to new information.
And I'll also tell you something else. There is a person right now, anxious to talk to the police. They have her telephone number, and her e-mail address and has wanted to relate her story for 15 years. Have they talked to her even one time? The answer is no. Not one time. Fact!
So tell me again why I should believe Officer Owen. I've had a bellyfull of the footdragging and incompetence and I'm like Peter Finch's character in "Network" when I say "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any longer." I suggest everyone else who feels this way take the same attitude and demand this case be solved.
