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

[_mb_]

Thanks, Mule!

I should have been a little more clear--I meant to say drugging was the only way that I could see a single stranger taking all three women. Having one of the three help tie up the others is a possibility as well, but I just can't see there not being a struggle in that situation. I've never been in that situation, but I am a big believer in doing everything in your power to not get into a car/secluded area with someone trying to take you hostage--gunpoint or not--if they're going to kill you, they're going to kill you regardless. I also have a problem with a mother watching this unfold and not doing anything and everything in her power to stop it.

Someone was already inside the house when the girls returned.
There were multiple abductors (the chances of them all keeping quiet about this after all of these years seems low, though)
They were drugged--chloroform? drinks?
Someone they not only knew of, but knew well and trusted did this.

The Florida call is also something that I have wondered about. From research I have done on the case, this person seems like someone that they might want to question again. At least check into their addresses for the time of the call.

Did they ever bring cadaver dogs into the residence?

 

[Missouri Mule]

Thanks, Mule!

I should have been a little more clear--I meant to say drugging was the only way that I could see a single stranger taking all three women. Having one of the three help tie up the others is a possibility as well, but I just can't see there not being a struggle in that situation. I've never been in that situation, but I am a big believer in doing everything in your power to not get into a car/secluded area with someone trying to take you hostage--gunpoint or not--if they're going to kill you, they're going to kill you regardless. I also have a problem with a mother watching this unfold and not doing anything and everything in her power to stop it.

Someone was already inside the house when the girls returned.
There were multiple abductors (the chances of them all keeping quiet about this after all of these years seems low, though)
They were drugged--chloroform? drinks?
Someone they not only knew of, but knew well and trusted did this.

The Florida call is also something that I have wondered about. From research I have done on the case, this person seems like someone that they might want to question again. At least check into their addresses for the time of the call.

Did they ever bring cadaver dogs into the residence?

I'm only speculating but I would guess the inclinations of most victims is to acquiesce to the demands of the perpetrators believing that if they go along with their demands they will ultimately be released and if they resist they could be killed on the spot. In general I believe it is axiomatic that once an abductor has the victim in their possession that the chances of surviving are greatly reduced. I would say that it would be best to resist even to the point of violence to avoid being taken by the abductor although I personally have never been in that position.

I do not know if cadaver dogs were ever brought into the residence. To my knowledge that subject has never been broached.

 

[wfgodot]

Happy birthday to Missouri Mule, by the way!

 

[wfgodot]

Initial investigation questioned in 3 missing women case
Too much media access, too many hands in the investigation

SPRINGFIELD, Mo.-- More movement in Springfield's biggest and most mysterious case, three women who disappeared after a high school graduation party 18 years ago.

On Tuesday, there was a meeting of the minds with Springfield's new police chief, and others who were involved in the case back in 1992.

Investigators are not releasing exactly what was discussed behind closed doors, just that law enforcement, the prosecutor, and others are reviewing the cold case and deciding what their next move is.

Meanwhile, some on the case detail the difficulties that lie ahead in solving this thing.
---

article w/video at
http://www.ky3.com/news/ky3-initial-investigation-question-121410,0,5284528.story

 

[Missouri Mule]

Initial investigation questioned in 3 missing women case
Too much media access, too many hands in the investigation

SPRINGFIELD, Mo.-- More movement in Springfield's biggest and most mysterious case, three women who disappeared after a high school graduation party 18 years ago.

On Tuesday, there was a meeting of the minds with Springfield's new police chief, and others who were involved in the case back in 1992.

Investigators are not releasing exactly what was discussed behind closed doors, just that law enforcement, the prosecutor, and others are reviewing the cold case and deciding what their next move is.

Meanwhile, some on the case detail the difficulties that lie ahead in solving this thing.
---

article w/video at
http://www.ky3.com/news/ky3-initial-investigation-question-121410,0,5284528.story

Thanks for the post. This case is moving at glacial speed but it does appear to be moving a little bit. The officer in the story was one of the finest officers to look at this case. He is now a police chief in an outlying county. I'd take what he says as gospel.

 

[Missouri Mule]

This case has lain dormant for a long time here but recently a hypothesis was advanced by the reporter who has covered this case for years which I think should be discussed here. It covers a mystery which I have puzzled over many times but I believe it answers a vital question that could explain what happened.

Firstly, I will state that until I see better evidence and information that Robert Cox was the sole perpetrator of this crime. He could have done this by himself and it would fit the account of the "porch lady" as he hid behind the inboard engine of the vintage van sighted a short distance from the Levitt home.

What the reporter suggested likely happened and to which I agree is that the purses were left on the step down steps in Suzie's sunken bedroom, not because the crime scene was staged, but because the purses were simply forgotten.

Once the women were loaded into the van, it was the intention to go and retrieve the purses. Having done so would have led the people who came to the home to believe that the women were actually out and about in the neighborhood. It is nearby a very well-to-do area where I have walked from time to time while in Springfield. It is my understanding that most women will take their purses with them especially if they were to have left the house unlocked and would have had to have been with them if they had gone to a nearby eatery. By leaving the purses behind it would have led an otherwise normal reacting person to believe something was not as it should be. In other words it was not in the interest of the perp(s) to have left the purses behind because it should have raised suspicions that not all was as it should be.

Most likely, the last victim was carried out the front door, and in the process, kicking and screaming, knocked the globe to the porch breaking it. Sensing that the scene would soon be discovered by passersbys, with the likely noise, the perp would have wanted to effect a quick get-away and in the haste did not go back into the house to recover the purses and the significant amount of cash. In the haste the door was left unlocked and the light left burning. There was only about a 2.5 hour envelope of opportunity to grab the victims before sunrise shortly before 6 AM.

What I think more likely than not occurred was that somehow Cox gained entry to the house and in the process had one of the victims to tie the others up and tape their mouths with duct tape. Then he hog tied them to make it easier to carry them to the van. He then subdued Suzie, the alleged driver of the van and took her to the van. He then left the other two victims on the floor of the van, untied Suzie and told her to drive while hiding behind the engine bay inside the van.

The question which has no answer is that we don't know how he would have gained entry. This is where I believe the caller from Florida comes into play. If we can believe the accounts given by the police, this caller held information known only to the police and was deemed highly critical. Unfortunately that caller, for unknown reasons, chose not to call back so what information he or she had was never conveyed to the police. It is possible that he or she was the one who was indirectly responsible for getting Cox into the home. Once inside the home Cox had no real difficulty in carrying out the crime.

 

[Hurricane]

This case has lain dormant for a long time here but recently a hypothesis was advanced by the reporter who has covered this case for years which I think should be discussed here. It covers a mystery which I have puzzled over many times but I believe it answers a vital question that could explain what happened.

Firstly, I will state that until I see better evidence and information that Robert Cox was the sole perpetrator of this crime. He could have done this by himself and it would fit the account of the "porch lady" as he hid behind the inboard engine of the vintage van sighted a short distance from the Levitt home.

What the reporter suggested likely happened and to which I agree is that the purses were left on the step down steps in Suzie's sunken bedroom, not because the crime scene was staged, but because the purses were simply forgotten.

Once the women were loaded into the van, it was the intention to go and retrieve the purses. Having done so would have led the people who came to the home to believe that the women were actually out and about in the neighborhood. It is nearby a very well-to-do area where I have walked from time to time while in Springfield. It is my understanding that most women will take their purses with them especially if they were to have left the house unlocked and would have had to have been with them if they had gone to a nearby eatery. By leaving the purses behind it would have led an otherwise normal reacting person to believe something was not as it should be. In other words it was not in the interest of the perp(s) to have left the purses behind because it should have raised suspicions that not all was as it should be.

Most likely, the last victim was carried out the front door, and in the process, kicking and screaming, knocked the globe to the porch breaking it. Sensing that the scene would soon be discovered by passersbys, with the likely noise, the perp would have wanted to effect a quick get-away and in the haste did not go back into the house to recover the purses and the significant amount of cash. In the haste the door was left unlocked and the light left burning. There was only about a 2.5 hour envelope of opportunity to grab the victims before sunrise shortly before 6 AM.

What I think more likely than not occurred was that somehow Cox gained entry to the house and in the process had one of the victims to tie the others up and tape their mouths with duct tape. Then he hog tied them to make it easier to carry them to the van. He then subdued Suzie, the alleged driver of the van and took her to the van. He then left the other two victims on the floor of the van, untied Suzie and told her to drive while hiding behind the engine bay inside the van.

The question which has no answer is that we don't know how he would have gained entry. This is where I believe the caller from Florida comes into play. If we can believe the accounts given by the police, this caller held information known only to the police and was deemed highly critical. Unfortunately that caller, for unknown reasons, chose not to call back so what information he or she had was never conveyed to the police. It is possible that he or she was the one who was indirectly responsible for getting Cox into the home. Once inside the home Cox had no real difficulty in carrying out the crime.

What changed your mind on the staging of the crime scene? The idea that the purses were simply left behind was proposed as early as my post of 7/15/2007, Thread #1, Page 18, Post 439:


QUOTE:

“I know time was short for the abductors but I almost think it was a mistake on their part to have left behind the purses, cigarettes, shorts and all of the other evidence to indicate an abduction. Had they taken those things with the women, turned off the TV, lights, and locked the door we would probably be debating today if a crime had even been committed or if the women had left on their own!”

END QUOTE

To which you replied about staging of the crime scene in your Post 440:

QUOTE:

“Actually, on this point I think you are wrong. Had the house been locked up, it is likely the police would have been called in sooner and certainly the crime scene would not have been so badly contaminated. I think it is a hard case to make that they just decided to pick up and leave for no apparent reason. It would have been far better if the door had been locked. As it was many, many hours were lost to the investigation and the crime scene horribly contaminated. This argues that the crime scene was staged. By leaving the purses in place it appeared (or was said to appear) that the women had simply decided to take a walk through the neighborhood. And the television was on. This would naturally have caused someone to believe they would return shortly. At what point does one say too much time has elapsed? All of this bought time for the abductors and worked to their advantage.”

END QUOTE

 

[pittsburghgirl]

What is indisputable is that the house being open allowed the parade of friends, relatives, and neighbors compromised the house as a crime scene. To my mind, the presence or absence of the purses could both be interpreted as mysterious; if the purses were gone, then the question woukd be, where did they go? We would not know if they had been forced to leave the house, taking their purses, or whether they had taken to purses because they went out to George's or some other place and were abducted from there. The purses tell us that either at some point all 3 women were there or the perpetrator went BACK to stage the place--that would seem to be a terrible risk for someone to run. So the purses most likely point to the house as a crime scene, whether they were left as staging or not.

It doesn't surprise me at all that any of our viewpoints have changed over the years; that is the necessary result of research and debate. Actually, it is likely that many of our pet ideas would turn out to be somewhat insignificant if we could somehow know exactly what happened. The purses might have been needed to find car keys to move vehicles but may not have mattered beyond that. So many abducted women's effects are left in cars, apartments, or tossed out on the side of the road. Taking that stuff would just mean more stuff to hide or destroy. It would be weird, for example, for all the cars to be there but the purses to be GONE. I wouldn't take my purse on a walk or on trip over to see a neighbor. And to do those things, I might leave the house unlocked. The whole thing could have been far more random and we just confuse ourselves trying to interpret the uninterpretable. That's why it's good to try out different scenarios, not to get too fixed on one solution.

 

[Hurricane]

What is indisputable is that the house being open allowed the parade of friends, relatives, and neighbors compromised the house as a crime scene. To my mind, the presence or absence of the purses could both be interpreted as mysterious; if the purses were gone, then the question woukd be, where did they go? We would not know if they had been forced to leave the house, taking their purses, or whether they had taken to purses because they went out to George's or some other place and were abducted from there. The purses tell us that either at some point all 3 women were there or the perpetrator went BACK to stage the place--that would seem to be a terrible risk for someone to run. So the purses most likely point to the house as a crime scene, whether they were left as staging or not.

It doesn't surprise me at all that any of our viewpoints have changed over the years; that is the necessary result of research and debate. Actually, it is likely that many of our pet ideas would turn out to be somewhat insignificant if we could somehow know exactly what happened. The purses might have been needed to find car keys to move vehicles but may not have mattered beyond that. So many abducted women's effects are left in cars, apartments, or tossed out on the side of the road. Taking that stuff would just mean more stuff to hide or destroy. It would be weird, for example, for all the cars to be there but the purses to be GONE. I wouldn't take my purse on a walk or on trip over to see a neighbor. And to do those things, I might leave the house unlocked.

The whole thing could have been far more random and we just confuse ourselves trying to interpret the uninterpretable.

That's why it's good to try out different scenarios, not to get too fixed on one solution.

Bingo! I’ll withhold my other comments to some of your points to make this one: I think this was a random act by career burglars and rapists who were in the area of the wealthy estate homes just to the west looking for opportunities to burglarize that night. When nothing presented itself they were frustrated. I firmly believe that this crime would never have happened if Sherrill had closed her window and window blinds that night, and had turned on that new central air unit. Everyone wants to make this a big, complicated crime with a smoking gun out there somewhere when it is not. Remember the KISS principle.

But what do I know; I’m told I’m just a 3rd rate intellect. Welcome back pittsburghgirl.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Thanks, Hurricane. It's nice to be back.

This might well be a crime of opportunity, but I don't think your average burglary ring would shift focus to pull off a triple abduction/homicide. I am thinking of that pair of evil morons who pulled off that home invasion in which they attacked a family of four, badly wounding the husband, forcing the wife to take money from their bank account, raped and murdered the women, then burned the house down. That's a kind of static spree crime. I suppose it could have happened here, but those crimes are pretty rare. I've always argued that stranger burglary is unlikely because there were 3 cars in the driveway, late coming and goings, lights on and all. I think the women were the motive from the get-go, as the graduation night might have suggested to a predator that there would be opportunities to find victims. And the Cox letters suggest to me that he is involved and rape/murder is his thing. But I really need to read 18 months of thread before I say much more; I am clearly behind. I am not sure, then, that the crime itself was random, although it might have been a crime of opportunity (someone saw the girls go in the house, or knew who lived there, followed them from George's, etc.). What might be random are the things that look like clues (nervous dog, the purses, the broken globe, the TV, the order or disorder of certain rooms, what was taken or left behind). The only thing the abductor HAD to do was make the bodies disappear--as Cox had reason to know.

 

[Hurricane]

Thanks, Hurricane. It's nice to be back.

This might well be a crime of opportunity, but I don't think your average burglary ring would shift focus to pull off a triple abduction/homicide. I am thinking of that pair of evil morons who pulled off that home invasion in which they attacked a family of four, badly wounding the husband, forcing the wife to take money from their bank account, raped and murdered the women, then burned the house down. That's a kind of static spree crime. I suppose it could have happened here, but those crimes are pretty rare. I've always argued that stranger burglary is unlikely because there were 3 cars in the driveway, late coming and goings, lights on and all. I think the women were the motive from the get-go, as the graduation night might have suggested to a predator that there would be opportunities to find victims. And the Cox letters suggest to me that he is involved and rape/murder is his thing. But I really need to read 18 months of thread before I say much more; I am clearly behind. I am not sure, then, that the crime itself was random, although it might have been a crime of opportunity (someone saw the girls go in the house, or knew who lived there, followed them from George's, etc.). What might be random are the things that look like clues (nervous dog, the purses, the broken globe, the TV, the order or disorder of certain rooms, what was taken or left behind). The only thing the abductor HAD to do was make the bodies disappear--as Cox had reason to know.

There might not have been 3 cars in the driveway when they went in. They could have already been inside with Sherrill when the girls returned to the house.

 

[wfgodot]

Yes, welcome back pittsburghgirl, and, despite your absence, you're still well ahead of the game compared to someone like me, who, even though he has faithfully read along with the thread, is still left with his unsubstantiable jumble of theories involving m/c hitmen hired to silence one of the three, with the getaway vehicle containing the bodies buried at a local scrap yard, the whole matter somehow drug-related, etc. etc. etc.

Merely being here doesn't guarantee that one has a logical thought process and a clear-cut theory based on sustainable facts, and I'm Exhibit One to prove it.

 

[Indianagirl]

Thanks, Hurricane. It's nice to be back.

This might well be a crime of opportunity, but I don't think your average burglary ring would shift focus to pull off a triple abduction/homicide. I am thinking of that pair of evil morons who pulled off that home invasion in which they attacked a family of four, badly wounding the husband, forcing the wife to take money from their bank account, raped and murdered the women, then burned the house down. That's a kind of static spree crime. I suppose it could have happened here, but those crimes are pretty rare. I've always argued that stranger burglary is unlikely because there were 3 cars in the driveway, late coming and goings, lights on and all. I think the women were the motive from the get-go, as the graduation night might have suggested to a predator that there would be opportunities to find victims. And the Cox letters suggest to me that he is involved and rape/murder is his thing. But I really need to read 18 months of thread before I say much more; I am clearly behind. I am not sure, then, that the crime itself was random, although it might have been a crime of opportunity (someone saw the girls go in the house, or knew who lived there, followed them from George's, etc.). What might be random are the things that look like clues (nervous dog, the purses, the broken globe, the TV, the order or disorder of certain rooms, what was taken or left behind). The only thing the abductor HAD to do was make the bodies disappear--as Cox had reason to know.

I've always thought the women were the motive as well. One major reason I discount the robbery theory is because of the money left behind in Sherrill's purse. I also find it highly coincidental that two young attractive women are out late at night and disappear that same night. One possible scenario could be they were spotted driving home by the perp/s and were followed home. When I first read about this case, that was the first thought that came to mind.

However, I will say that over time I have now started to think that maybe there is a good chance that the women knew the perp/s. It seems like a majority of the cases we read about on here, the victim and perp know each other in some fashion. So far from what I've read on this case, there is no one that has been publicly identified as knowing the women that I believe was involved (i.e. family members or friends that saw them that night). Also, it seems like a perp known to any victim has more of a reason to make them disappear than if neither knew each other. However, this could just be one of those random cases where the women were at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Overall, I agree with LE that sexual assault was the likely motive.

P.S. Glad to see everyone posting again and this thread back in action!

 

[pittsburghgirl]

There are several reasons to move sexual assault victims:

1) The perpetrator does not feel comfortable committing the planned assault in the place where he finds the victim/s, either because he might be interrupted or he doesn't want to leave evidence at a crime scene--including the best evidence, the bodies of the victim(s).
2) The perpetrator wants to control the time line of the investigation by first requiring an investigation into a disappearance, rather than a clear-cut murder, which in this case has run the clock into more than a decade.
3) The perpetrator has learned that leaving the bodies might lead to discovery, arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment, e.g., Robert Cox in Florida.
4) The perpetrator may want one or more of the victims to remain alive for a length of time, which cannot happen in the victims' homes.

Just some thoughts. I am not sure it matters whether the victims knew the perpetrator if he planned to kill them from the beginning. It may be that KILLING is the point of the crime, and thus he is better off if the bodies just disappear. As Joran van der Sloot's father once said, "No body, no crime."

 

[Indianagirl]

There are several reasons to move sexual assault victims:

1) The perpetrator does not feel comfortable committing the planned assault in the place where he finds the victim/s, either because he might be interrupted or he doesn't want to leave evidence at a crime scene--including the best evidence, the bodies of the victim(s).
2) The perpetrator wants to control the time line of the investigation by first requiring an investigation into a disappearance, rather than a clear-cut murder, which in this case has run the clock into more than a decade.
3) The perpetrator has learned that leaving the bodies might lead to discovery, arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment, e.g., Robert Cox in Florida.
4) The perpetrator may want one or more of the victims to remain alive for a length of time, which cannot happen in the victims' homes.

Just some thoughts. I am not sure it matters whether the victims knew the perpetrator if he planned to kill them from the beginning. It may be that KILLING is the point of the crime, and thus he is better off if the bodies just disappear. As Joran van der Sloot's father once said, "No body, no crime."

Oh, I completely agree. You make valid points. I was just trying to point out that statistically, victims are more likely to know their attacker vs a random attack. IMO, that seems like an extra incentive to make them "disappear" and leave people wondering what happened to them and question if they are even dead.

 

[Trooogrit]

Yea it is hard to determine exactly what happened. I was never a fan of the single perp theory, but that is more possible than I once thought. After reading a book on the East Area Rapist in California I came to that conclusion. I still think this was carried out before the girls got home at least gaining entry. The intention was rape, then the girls came home, the perps/perp were trapped trying to keep silent. Something happened to set them off, Suzie going to the room to check on her mother possibly, or the dog making noise. The women were subdued. The intention changed after the girls came home. Rather than flee the scene they decided to take all three for whatever reason.

 

[MaryLiz]

Thanks, Hurricane. It's nice to be back.

This might well be a crime of opportunity, but I don't think your average burglary ring would shift focus to pull off a triple abduction/homicide. I am thinking of that pair of evil morons who pulled off that home invasion in which they attacked a family of four, badly wounding the husband, forcing the wife to take money from their bank account, raped and murdered the women, then burned the house down. That's a kind of static spree crime. I suppose it could have happened here, but those crimes are pretty rare. I've always argued that stranger burglary is unlikely because there were 3 cars in the driveway, late coming and goings, lights on and all. I think the women were the motive from the get-go, as the graduation night might have suggested to a predator that there would be opportunities to find victims. And the Cox letters suggest to me that he is involved and rape/murder is his thing. But I really need to read 18 months of thread before I say much more; I am clearly behind. I am not sure, then, that the crime itself was random, although it might have been a crime of opportunity (someone saw the girls go in the house, or knew who lived there, followed them from George's, etc.). What might be random are the things that look like clues (nervous dog, the purses, the broken globe, the TV, the order or disorder of certain rooms, what was taken or left behind). The only thing the abductor HAD to do was make the bodies disappear--as Cox had reason to know.

I agree..welcome back, pittsburghgirl..I've missed your views on this case and others. It's good to see that people are able to merely voice opinions once again and speculate about what happened in this case.

 

[MaryLiz]

Even though it is hard for me to believe in the 3MW case that it was a case of robbery that got out of hand, it does happen, as shown by a case here in Ohio. Below is the WS thread on the case and an article from the Columbus Dispatch stating that the perp in the case, Matthew Hoffman, pleaded guilty to charges and admitted he was in the house robbing it when confronted with the two adult women who were murdered. So in this case there was a definite escalation of the crime that started out as a robbery and ended up in kidnapping, rape and murder. This just happened in November and it's over already since he decided to plead guilty and forego a trial.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten...llings-grief-rage-fill-courtroom.html?sid=101

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119851&highlight=Matthew+Hoffman

 

[wfgodot]

It's going to take me awhile to reckon with Cambria now being MaryLiz, and with a Marlo Thomas avatar into the bargain!

 

[gaia227]

I agree robbery is certainly a possibility but there are some issues w/ it as there are with all the scenarios. Some q's is raises for me are: Why would someone decide to rob a house where it is obvious there are people home? Cars in the driveway, lights on, etc. It would be much easier to target a home where it appeared it was empty. Also, the fact there wasn't really any signs of a struggle. If a robber happened in on three women it seems pretty likely a struggle would have ensued as they confronted eachother and as he tried to subdue them. And the decision to take them out of the house rather seems pre-meditated. If a robber is surprised his reaction most likely is going to impulsive and he will attack right then and there. It takes some organization to remove three women from a home, leave no sign you were there and not be seen by anyone.

I have always thought entry was made after the girls got home. It doesn't make a lot of sense if entry was made earlier in the evening why the perp would stay in the home holding Sherrill hostage. There was evidence that the girls had started to get ready for bed - if the girls came home to find their mother being held captive it is very doubtful they would have gone on with their nightly routine. Perhaps Suzi did not lock the door when they came in and the perp(s) were able to walk right in while htey were getting ready for bed, he surprised them and that element of surprise allowed him to gain control of the situation quickly. There has been speculation that maybe Sherrill had opened the door for someone and what kind of rules that out for me is I doubt Sherrill would have opened the door late at night while she was home alone. Maybe earlier in the evening but that leads in to the issue of her then being held captive for hours. Unless, the perp(s) took Sherrill and then came back for the girls. My two main theories is that either Suzi and Stacey were the initial targets and that they were followed home by someone maybe from the party they were at or by someone(s) who was out trolling, spotted them, then followed them and was able to make entry by an unlocked door or by ambushing them from behind outside and forcing them in OR They were abducted by someone they knew and trusted, someone they felt comfortable letting into their home, it was a thought-out, organized attack with the focus on Suzi and Sherrill and Stacey was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.