The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #4

[Hurricane]

Dale -- document this cruise for me. When exactly did she take this cruise? Did she take this cruise sometime after purchasing the house in April, or does the time frame go back to during the year that she lived in the apartment with Suzie? Or perhaps even before that? How has this been documented to be true?

 

[dale417]

Hurricane, the cruise took place before she moved into Delmar and I believe before she moved into the apartment with Suzie. I would have to do some personal questioning to get the exact time frame for you. My personal documentation is an artifact that was brought back from the cruise. I don't have ticket numbers, cruise line, etc. but I do have these items represented as being from that time. That's the best I can give you presently.

 

[Hurricane]

Hurricane, the cruise took place before she moved into Delmar and I believe before she moved into the apartment with Suzie. I would have to do some personal questioning to get the exact time frame for you. My personal documentation is an artifact that was brought back from the cruise. I don't have ticket numbers, cruise line, etc. but I do have these items represented as being from that time. That's the best I can give you presently.

So this cruise was taken when she lived in Holiday Hills, prior to March 1991? Could it go all the way back to when she was married to and living in Holiday Hills with Don Levitt, prior to say June 1988?

 

[dale417]

Hurricane, off the top of my head, that is the time-frame I recall. As I stated earlier, I would have to ask some others to get the exact date.

 

[Hurricane]

Hurricane, off the top of my head, that is the time-frame I recall. As I stated earlier, I would have to ask some others to get the exact date.

Well an approximate date would be helpful in trying to determine if this cruise event had anything to do with the abduction 15 plus months later.

If she and Don Levitt took such a cruise prior to spring 1988 or so, during their marriage then that would help to explain how it was paid for even though we know that he had some debt problems.

After their divorce Sherrill tried desperately to hang on to the house in Holiday Hills, even to the point of bartering haircuts with neighbors for services such as lawn mowing & trimming. She took in Oliveras as a boarder in her home for 18 months in an effort to keep from losing it or having to sell it. Oliveras would know if Sherrill took such a cruise as someone’s guest during that time. She has said that Sherrill didn’t date. Perhaps she even went with Sherrill on a cruise. They not only lived together but worked together also, but it still wouldn’t explain how the cruise was paid for or how it had any bearing on the abduction.

 

[dale417]

Hurricane, I have given the approximate date for the determination or rather you have in previous posts. I agree with you and have determined this cruise event did not have any bearing on the possible abduction or whatever it is (no one can exactly label and THAT IS A PROBLEM!). I do not care to elaborate on who she might have gone with on the cruise, except to say it was not her husband, nor Suzie, nor any "gentleman" friend. I don't know who Oliveras is exactly. The cruise could have been paid for by herself,cruises are NOT that expenses nor limited to the stereotypical RICH & Famous. A month's wage could probably take you half-way around the world if you should desire to go. Do I believe the cruise has anything to do with this case? NO! Do I believe the cruise had anything to do with the abduction? NO! Do I feel I have answered Monkeyman's inquiry ( according to your last post p. 10, post #226) YES, more than sufficiently. My sole and only purpose was to answer a question purposed by Monkeyman and addressed by Missouri Mule this morning, to which I have information that corroborates the position.

 

[Hurricane]

Hurricane, I have given the approximate date for the determination or rather you have in previous posts. I agree with you and have determined this cruise event did not have any bearing on the possible abduction or whatever it is (no one can exactly label and THAT IS A PROBLEM!). I do not care to elaborate on who she might have gone with on the cruise, except to say it was not her husband, nor Suzie, nor any "gentleman" friend. I don't know who Oliveras is exactly. The cruise could have been paid for by herself,cruises are NOT that expenses nor limited to the stereotypical RICH & Famous. A month's wage could probably take you half-way around the world if you should desire to go. Do I believe the cruise has anything to do with this case? NO! Do I believe the cruise had anything to do with the abduction? NO! Do I feel I have answered Monkeyman's inquiry ( according to your last post p. 10, post #226) YES, more than sufficiently. My sole and only purpose was to answer a question purposed by Monkeyman and addressed by Missouri Mule this morning, to which I have information that corroborates the position.

Dale, I am in agreement with you here. These things continually come up in discussion of this case and dangled out there as if they have some meaning. We are supposed to be looking at the evidence of this case. I fail to see if Sherrill did go on a cruise 15 or more months prior to the abduction how it has any bearing on what happened. Nor do I care who she might have went with except to disprove that her actions had anything to do with what would eventually befall her and the two girls.

Perhaps she treated herself to a cruise shortly after going thru her divorce from Don Levitt. A reason for trying to pin down the time of the cruise is simply from the money angle. All indications are that from shortly after her divorce up until the abduction money was in tight supply. If the choice was between a $500 cruise and next month’s house payment most people would choose to make their payment when they are trying to keep from losing their home of several years. To some degree this cruise could be explained away if she went shortly after her divorce was final, before she knew just how tight things would become.

 

[monkeymann]

Alright....First of all Dale 417...You haven't answered anything "More then sufficently". The objective in solving any crime is to rule out all of the possabilities, and for you to imply that GC and Sherrell being on the same cruise has no possable implications regarding the 3MW's disapearance, just because it may or may not have happened close to the timeframe of their disapearance....is not looking at the problem objectivly enough. Sorry...but I'm not dismissing any possabilities. And further,with the past history of GC, as well as the charges he's currently being held on for the JJ murder theres absoutely no way he's being ruled out. To do so would not be good investigative deduction. Until someone can rule him out based on "FACTs" then NO ONE (Dale417) should rule him out as a suspect. Just because the disapearance's may or may not have happened with in a short time period of the cruise...doesn't mean that GC couldn't have been lurking in the background somewhere...look at the guys history for the love of pete. I'm not saying he did it, but without more solid evidance/facts he cant just be so flipantly ruled out. Period.

 

[Indianagirl]

Alright....First of all Dale 417...You haven't answered anything "More then sufficently". The objective in solving any crime is to rule out all of the possabilities, and for you to imply that GC and Sherrell being on the same cruise has no possable implications regarding the 3MW's disapearance, just because it may or may not have happened close to the timeframe of their disapearance....is not looking at the problem objectivly enough. Sorry...but I'm not dismissing any possabilities. And further,with the past history of GC, as well as the charges he's currently being held on for the JJ murder theres absoutely no way he's being ruled out. To do so would not be good investigative deduction. Until someone can rule him out based on "FACTs" then NO ONE (Dale417) should rule him out as a suspect. Just because the disapearance's may or may not have happened with in a short time period of the cruise...doesn't mean that GC couldn't have been lurking in the background somewhere...look at the guys history for the love of pete. I'm not saying he did it, but without more solid evidance/facts he cant just be so flipantly ruled out. Period.

G.C. could very well be one of the 12 on the suspect list. We don't know. However, IMO this doesn't fit his MO. In the J.J. case, he was sloppy and left a load of forensic evidence behind. In 92, I don't think a lot of people really understood what DNA evidence was. With that said, IMO if it were G.C. he would have been sloppy and left forensic evidence behind, as he still hadn't been tied to the J.J. case through forensic evidence at the time of the 3MW abduction. Just my 2 cents on the matter.

 

[Missouri Mule]

I feel compelled to come to Dale's defense here. He has told what he knows and can tell. One should not assume that everything that could be told has been told. As one who personally has seen GC literally dozens of times; perhaps 100 or more times in my own office and who I have heard others constantly beat the drumbeat that he was the one I haven't seen a scintilla of evidence that would link the two together.

Now we know that there were some 223 known clients of Sherrill's who must at one time or another have heard Sherrill speak of anyone she may have been seeing. The police assured us that everyone in the rolodex would or should have been contacted and people being people it seems highly unlikely that nobody would not have heard his name come up at least one time. During that time half of Springfield would have taken their own action being so frustrated over the foot dragging on the JJ case. If anyone had any evidence tying him to Sherrill I am relatively certain it would have seen the light of day early on in the investigation.

Here is what I think. Until and unless we get access to the names of those 12 agreed upon suspects we are just shooting in the dark. Probably the only three certain known suspects would be the three GJ suspects but that went nowhere. The grave robbing case died on the vine as soon as Suzie disappeared. According to information I believe to be 100% reliable two individuals linked to that case were cited by two different officers as being high on the suspect list. For certain Cox is on the list. So I count six. But if a gun were held to my head, would I put GC on the list? I would not. And if a second round were in the chamber and held to my head I would put Cox and "X" at the very top of the list; no question.

 

[Hurricane]

Alright....First of all Dale 417...You haven't answered anything "More then sufficently". The objective in solving any crime is to rule out all of the possabilities, and for you to imply that GC and Sherrell being on the same cruise has no possable implications regarding the 3MW's disapearance, just because it may or may not have happened close to the timeframe of their disapearance....is not looking at the problem objectivly enough. Sorry...but I'm not dismissing any possabilities. And further,with the past history of GC, as well as the charges he's currently being held on for the JJ murder theres absoutely no way he's being ruled out. To do so would not be good investigative deduction. Until someone can rule him out based on "FACTs" then NO ONE (Dale417) should rule him out as a suspect. Just because the disapearance's may or may not have happened with in a short time period of the cruise...doesn't mean that GC couldn't have been lurking in the background somewhere...look at the guys history for the love of pete. I'm not saying he did it, but without more solid evidance/facts he cant just be so flipantly ruled out. Period.

Monkeymann, you probably should be PO’ed at me and not Dale. He only asked a question about why I limited my time frame of the cruise search to the prior 10-12 months before the abduction. Dale has been the only one who may in fact be able to document that Sherrill was on a cruise, more than 15 months prior.

“The objective in solving any crime is to rule out all of the possabilities” that are not supported by the evidence. There are no facts in the public record that indicate Carnahan as a possible suspect long term. For all we know, Carnahan may have been living in China 9-10 months out of the year in June 1992, as he had been prior to his arrest in the Jackie Johns murder. It’s not publicly known exactly when he moved to China for the company business. You can bet one thing; during his incarceration he has probably been interviewed and grilled about what he might possibly know about a lot of crimes. No charges have been filed against him in the 3MW case. But until you bring forth some facts that indicate him as a suspect you can’t expect anyone to spend a lot of time discussing him in this case.

 

[monkeymann]

Monkeymann, you probably should be PO’ed at me and not Dale. He only asked a question about why I limited my time frame of the cruise search to the prior 10-12 months before the abduction. Dale has been the only one who may in fact be able to document that Sherrill was on a cruise, more than 15 months prior.

“The objective in solving any crime is to rule out all of the possabilities” that are not supported by the evidence. There are no facts in the public record that indicate Carnahan as a possible suspect long term. For all we know, Carnahan may have been living in China 9-10 months out of the year in June 1992, as he had been prior to his arrest in the Jackie Johns murder. It’s not publicly known exactly when he moved to China for the company business. You can bet one thing; during his incarceration he has probably been interviewed and grilled about what he might possibly know about a lot of crimes. No charges have been filed against him in the 3MW case. But until you bring forth some facts that indicate him as a suspect you can’t expect anyone to spend a lot of time discussing him in this case.

Oh...I'm not PO'd by any means...He just sounded a little condescending, thats why I might have sounded PO'd. But really I'm just trying to help sort things out with this case as everyone else is. And when someone states that GC and Ms. Levett were on the same cruise...I'm sorry, with GC's past history it can't help but send up a red flag to me....and I quite frankly can't understand how it couldn't to anyone else. It definatly connects the two in a way that no other suspect other then poss. the grave robbers might have. IE. Proof of Direct or Indirect Connection between these suspects and the 3MW. All you have with the others is mere speculation. Even though the above mentioned theoretical possability could also fall under mere speculation, the difference is the "Direct or Indirect Connection". Ie. Grave robbers knew one at least one of the girls, and GC was on the same cruise ship as Ms. Levette. No one else has ever shown to have had any direct or indirect contact with any of them...except for Bart...He would have to also be included in the people who had proven direct contact with 3MW.

 

[Hurricane]

Oh...I'm not PO'd by any means...He just sounded a little condescending, thats why I might have sounded PO'd. But really I'm just trying to help sort things out with this case as everyone else is. And when someone states that GC and Ms. Levett were on the same cruise...I'm sorry, with GC's past history it can't help but send up a red flag to me....and I quite frankly can't understand how it couldn't to anyone else. It definatly connects the two in a way that no other suspect other then poss. the grave robbers might have. IE. Proof of Direct or Indirect Connection between these suspects and the 3MW. All you have with the others is mere speculation. Even though the above mentioned theoretical possability could also fall under mere speculation, the difference is the "Direct or Indirect Connection". Ie. Grave robbers knew one at least one of the girls, and GC was on the same cruise ship as Ms. Levette. No one else has ever shown to have had any direct or indirect contact with any of them...except for Bart...He would have to also be included in the people who had proven direct contact with 3MW.

The condescension was directed at me, not you. That’s what keeps everyone sharp and on point here. I would say that most everyone who posts here wants to deal only in what can be proven as fact. That is why you don’t see posts here like you would see on Topix, etc. Everyone who participates here knows the facts of the case fairly well. It’s sort of like Jim Rome says on his national sports talk radio program when he allows callers to come in, “Have a take but don’t suck.”

You are accepting as fact what you have read on another forum or blog; that Carnahan and Sherrill were seen on a cruise ship together approximately 6 weeks prior to the abduction. Dale said that he can document as fact that Sherrill went on a cruise with someone other than a gentleman friend, more than 15 months prior to June 1992. Nowhere has it been established that Carnahan was on that same cruise ship. How does that connect the two?

If you were to pursue the possibility that Carnahan was present then I’m sure that everyone would listen to your facts.

 

[dale417]

Whoa! Boy did I come across in a major manner that I definitely did not intend! My apologies to each of you. Hurricane, I didn't mean to sound condescending (which on a re-read comes across as being). My only intent was to state as much as I possibly could regarding the cruise issue with what I personally knew. I was also trying to work within a perimeter of keeping confidential others who could validate, as I cannot, in good conscience speak for them. Again I apologize for the stink.

 

[Hurricane]

Whoa! Boy did I come across in a major manner that I definitely did not intend! My apologies to each of you. Hurricane, I didn't mean to sound condescending (which on a re-read comes across as being). My only intent was to state as much as I possibly could regarding the cruise issue with what I personally knew. I was also trying to work within a perimeter of keeping confidential others who could validate, as I cannot, in good conscience speak for them. Again I apologize for the stink.

Dale, no apology necessary. No offense taken on my part.

 

[monkeymann]

The condescension was directed at me, not you. That’s what keeps everyone sharp and on point here. I would say that most everyone who posts here wants to deal only in what can be proven as fact. That is why you don’t see posts here like you would see on Topix, etc. Everyone who participates here knows the facts of the case fairly well. It’s sort of like Jim Rome says on his national sports talk radio program when he allows callers to come in, “Have a take but don’t suck.”

You are accepting as fact what you have read on another forum or blog; that Carnahan and Sherrill were seen on a cruise ship together approximately 6 weeks prior to the abduction. Dale said that he can document as fact that Sherrill went on a cruise with someone other than a gentleman friend, more than 15 months prior to June 1992. Nowhere has it been established that Carnahan was on that same cruise ship. How does that connect the two?
If you were to pursue the possibility that Carnahan was present then I’m sure that everyone would listen to your facts.

Now wait a minute...I wouldn't be talking about GC if it wasn't stated earlier by others on "THIS" forum that it had been proven that GC was on that cruise. I was by no means relying on anything that was posted on topix, however I will say that regardless of what forum information might be posted on, every piece of it needs to be examined. Also, I have been following this case pretty much since it happened in 92 and I'm fairly versed in the known facts of the case as well as most of the angles. Sometime I just see something that I think needs to be looked at closer or from a different perspective

 

[Hurricane]

[/font]
Now wait a minute...I wouldn't be talking about GC if it wasn't stated earlier by others on "THIS" forum that it had been proven that GC was on that cruise. I was by no means relying on anything that was posted on topix, however I will say that regardless of what forum information might be posted on, every piece of it needs to be examined. Also, I have been following this case pretty much since it happened in 92 and I'm fairly versed in the known facts of the case as well as most of the angles. Sometime I just see something that I think needs to be looked at closer or from a different perspective

Here’s Dales post concerning Carnahan as a suspect:

Correct Trooogrit. Sherrill took a cruise. GC was not linked to the cruise, but was looked at as a suspect. Post #278, page 12 of this thread by dale417.

 

[Trooogrit]

[/font]
Now wait a minute...I wouldn't be talking about GC if it wasn't stated earlier by others on "THIS" forum that it had been proven that GC was on that cruise. I was by no means relying on anything that was posted on topix, however I will say that regardless of what forum information might be posted on, every piece of it needs to be examined. Also, I have been following this case pretty much since it happened in 92 and I'm fairly versed in the known facts of the case as well as most of the angles. Sometime I just see something that I think needs to be looked at closer or from a different perspective

Well one thing that I can tell you is factually you will find no better place to get background information than right here. If we eliminate the rumors through known fact we can keep focus. There is a lot of information out there that is simply a waste of time, nothing substaniates it. Having a theory or a suspect is fine, but getting factual information to back it up is necessary to make it vialble. Then you should expect to be scrutinized, beccause this case has nine kinds of rumors that have grown in 17 years. Gerald Carnahan was a bad guy, Robert Cox was a bad guy, the AB has a lot of bad guys, there are others in the area that never have been mentioned, but what ties them to this case?

 

[monkeymann]

Ok...When I read some of the earlier posts I saw where it said that the cruise was valid. I didn't see where it was mentioned that it hadn't been confirmed that GC was on the cruise. I thought they were saying that it had been confirmed that he had been on the cruise...I didn't realize when I read it the first time that they were talking about Sherrell.

 

[mae]

Well one thing that I can tell you is factually you will find no better place to get background information than right here. If we eliminate the rumors through known fact we can keep focus. There is a lot of information out there that is simply a waste of time, nothing substaniates it. Having a theory or a suspect is fine, but getting factual information to back it up is necessary to make it vialble. Then you should expect to be scrutinized, beccause this case has nine kinds of rumors that have grown in 17 years. Gerald Carnahan was a bad guy, Robert Cox was a bad guy, the AB has a lot of bad guys, there are others in the area that never have been mentioned, but what ties them to this case?

Trooogit, do you/anyone else know about the veracity of the eagle connection? I posted awhile back, but I got no response. I can repost.