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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well Cox is just a blowhard in my book, until someone puts something out there that would convince me differently I wont waste my time on him. Its evident the SPD isnt pressing him anymore either, they havent talked to him in 15 years.
 
Trooogrit said:
Well Cox is just a blowhard in my book, until someone puts something out there that would convince me differently I wont waste my time on him. Its evident the SPD isn't pressing him anymore either, they haven't talked to him in 15 years.
Click to expand...
Perhaps he is a blowhard. Many people hold to that view and it is reasonable to have that opinion. I'm not sure that it has been 15 years since they had contact with him. I assume you have verified that period of time. I'll accept that as fact, however. Do you have a better suspect or suspects in mind? You needn't name them if you don't feel comfortable. And could you provide a scenario that would tie this person or persons to the case. As you may recall we used to discuss this and the possibility of a burglary was opined. In view of the fact that the money was left behind, do you still believe that is more likely the probability?

If you don't like Cox as a suspect, and apparently you do not, would you accept the idea of an unknown serial killer operating in the area that night? That is a scenario I could embrace if we could only eliminate Cox.
 
I could go either way with Cox as a suspect, but Mule you’ve certainly painted a good case against him (the State might hire you as a consultant if he’s arrested). But, with Cox, and what we know of the house, robbery doesn’t appear at all very likely. Forget money in the purses, why keep the purses there…throw them in the truck, sort out what‘s in them later. Don’t think they would have done an inventory inside the purses on the spot, just take them. Don’t know what kind of brand they were (probably not the class of the girls on Sex in the City), but, they could probably get a few bucks on the black market. But, the house had a TV left (as we have been told in every account ‘left on’). I presume the stereo was left and any other electronics of interest. Granted this in the day before ubiquitous devices of today, i-whatevers, laptops, desktops, cell and, of course, ‘big screen TV’s. I haven’t heard of anything of real value missing after this event, so robbery doesn’t appear very likely.

Mule, you’ve told us Mr. Cox modeled himself after Ted Bundy, a loner himself who worked his magic on women by using BS. Playing the ‘victim’ and asking for help with something. That would play into this, as a ruse to get the women ‘disarmed,’ and unguarded. I’m not sure if Bundy ever took in three women at once during his ‘career,’ but I’m also reminded of the case of Richard Speck, the eight nurses in Chicago, July 1966. Only one nurse escaped, but he was able to subdue eight (it’s unclear if just lost count of the ninth, but she wiggled free and escaped to tell the tale). Could, and I stress with ’mind/body and wit’ COULD any of the others managed to have escaped as well ? I would argue it’s an element of human nature that has aided evil perps throughout history. The belief, ‘it can’t be that bad, he won’t do that, this will all come out in the end.’

Extending that here, in this case, accepting Suzie as the ‘driver’ gives rise to much of this thinking. There would have been a LOT of things she COULD have done to derail the inevitable; flip the truck over, run into another car, run into any brightly lit area with any people around, get out running at the porch lady scene (it’s still possible even if we disagree on time and detail seen, although I presume the truck turn around was close to her). Yes, I’ll agree Cox, and other perps could subdue three women. Just that PART of this success is and HAS been due to the fact of disbelief of the ugly inevitable. Just a touch of conciliatory passivity is a deadly thing. By the way, in ANY of these cases as well as others similar, I’m placing NO blame on the victims for their fate, just offer a possible explanation.
 
former central time said:
Extending that here, in this case, accepting Suzie as the ‘driver’ gives rise to much of this thinking. There would have been a LOT of things she COULD have done to derail the inevitable; flip the truck over, run into another car, run into any brightly lit area with any people around, get out running at the porch lady scene (it’s still possible even if we disagree on time and detail seen, although I presume the truck turn around was close to her). Yes, I’ll agree Cox, and other perps could subdue three women. Just that PART of this success is and HAS been due to the fact of disbelief of the ugly inevitable. Just a touch of conciliatory passivity is a deadly thing. By the way, in ANY of these cases as well as others similar, I’m placing NO blame on the victims for their fate, just offer a possible explanation.
Click to expand...

This has troubled me for a long time. It is a truism that a victim should never go with an abductor expecting to be released later. Most of the time they are killed or nearly killed. Hindsight is always 100%. If I were Suzie I would have sideswiped a telephone pole somewhere along the way and made an escape. However, she may have been concerned about her mother and Stacy in the back.

I'm not necessarily wedded to Cox as the suspect although I believe the preponderance of public information points to him as the best suspect.

If he were eliminated it would not disappoint me. I don't think that we have looked closely enough at Chris Revak who committed suicide a couple of years ago. He had connections to Battlefield and not coincidentally to Iowa where Jodie Huisenstruit was abducted and believed killed. It has been speculated that he was a serial killer.

http://www.truecrimereport.com/2009/08/christopher_revak_emt_serial_k.php

Comment from the site above:

Angel of Death said:

"In my mind Chris was the person i saw in 1992 talking with a young woman (3 missing women)at Delmar and Glenstone in Springfield Mo. I looked directly into his face from 6ft away. The good looks, the super blue eyes ,the time between 11pm and midnight. I am 66 this week, i will go to my grave knowing I finally saw the person that most likely was responsible. Peace of mind at last."

Posted Tuesday, August 18, 2009, at 8:48 pm

http://www.findjodi.com/
 
I have never considered Revaks a viable suspect in this crime. If you look at that statement the timeline makes it impossible.
 
Trooogrit said:
I have never considered Revaks a viable suspect in this crime. If you look at that statement the timeline makes it impossible.
Click to expand...
You may be right. But can you expand on that how to place the timeline that he couldn't have carried out this crime? I haven't really changed my mind about Cox but trying to have an open mind I wanted to be "fair" to include Revak as well. I'd appreciate if you would help me eliminate Revak.
 
This is a FYI: Just checked my Dish's programming guide. Channel 192, Investigative Discovery -- On march 7, 2011, 8-9 PM CST it shows "The Springfield Three", Described as follows: "A violent criminal knows where three women are buried which stirs up more questions than answers on their disappearance. New."
 
Another FYI...true to form on these cable channels, there are multiple showings of this program. The first on Monday March 7th at 8 PM Central. Then the replay (I guess for the West Coast) at 11 PM Central. Another showing on Sunday March 13th at 5 PM Central (don't forget to 'Spring ahead' by then). That should cover everyone for DVR, recording conflicts.

Interestingly enough, like the other episodes, it's 'TV-PG,' but unlike the other shows, remarks (L) Language in addition to what the others have of (V) violence.


http://investigation.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=141.15379.132227.40769.x
 
former central time said:
Another FYI...true to form on these cable channels, there are multiple showings of this program. The first on Monday March 7th at 8 PM Central. Then the replay (I guess for the West Coast) at 11 PM Central. Another showing on Sunday March 13th at 5 PM Central (don't forget to 'Spring ahead' by then). That should cover everyone for DVR, recording conflicts.

Interestingly enough, like the other episodes, it's 'TV-PG,' but unlike the other shows, remarks (L) Language in addition to what the others have of (V) violence.


http://investigation.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=141.15379.132227.40769.x
Click to expand...

I hope the (L) for language doesn't mean that we are going to see a lot of rehash from the 48 Hrs program. I think a lot of people are getting their hopes up on this program, just for a let down.
 
Ah, I was coming here to post the upcoming show on Disappeared. What bothers me about the advertisments for the show next week is they only refer to two highschool girls disappear the morning after their graduation and shows a picture of Stacey and Suzi. There is no mention of Sherrill at all which I think is kind of weird. Anyone familar with the case and anyone who lived in Springfield in '92 has always known it as 'the three missing women.' Not to mention the simple fact that Sherrill disappeared that night too. Regardless, I am very happy to see they are profiling the women. I have said so many times they were perfect for the Disappeared format.
 
What gaia said. The commercial is really odd--I didn't even know it was for the Springfield Three case until I saw the girls' pictures. But I am interested in seeing what they put together. And, in addition to repeat showings, Comcast has Disappeared on demand, so it should be possible for many cable customers to watch or re-watch the show at their convenience.
 
Hopefully the show firms up some areas of disagreement. The timeline, the vandalism at the cemetary and its importance. Maybe they will clarify some of the digs that were done. Then again it might not. If you consider the 48 hours show was the first 3 weeks of the crime, this is likely to be a history of sorts. If it follows what has occurred in other cases on the show. Hopefully, it is balanced, they have a lot to cover in an hour.
 
A brief preview was shown tonight on ID Invesigations. It had a brief excerpt of Jannelle talking and a shot of two girls "disappearing" into the mist. Hard to say how this will handled. No mention of Sherrill.
 
First and foremost I think this program will be about their ratings and not too much in the way of new info will be released. We will probably get a heavy dose of the Cox parking garage theory; some on Robert Cox; perhaps some on Garrison, but nothing that isn't already known by those of us here. I doubt if they go into the background of any suspect to any degree, and especially anyone who hasn't been publicly named before. I would be very surprised if anything new is revealed by LE or the PA's office.
 
So what did everyone think of the show tonight? I thought it was actually done quite well. It didn't focus too much on Cox or Cox Parking Lot which I was worried would be dominately highlighted. I liked that Bartt took part. Any suspicious feelings I had about him were pretty much disolved. I think he seemed sincere, genuine and believable.

What I found most interesting was the erased message from the unknown male; it is almost pointless to even begin to speculate as we will never know. Also they gave more info about the grave-robbing situation than I personally knew. Interesting the comment Mike (can't recall his last name) made about wishing 'those *****es were dead.'

One thing that occured to me which I really had not considered very thoroughly was the possibility they went missing in the morning. Janelle stated both Sherrill and Suzi's beds looked slept in, we know the girls had made it home, removed make-up, took of clothes. In highschool I would not have thought twice about sleeping in my t-shirt and undies with one of my good girlfriends. Sherrill may have been an early riser, like a lot of women her age (I would be an BIG exception to that....), she could have gotten up at 6:30am, 7:00am and something could have happened then. I don't recall ever hearing where her cigarrettes were located. She was a chain-smoker so she most likely took her pack in the bedroom with her at night when she went to bed and if she was up early in the morning her cigarrettes would most likely be in the kitchen or living room.

I have to admit I was re-intrigued by the Cox parking lot scans. The man who did them is obviously well regarded, having been used at the WTC site and he knows how to decipher the images on the screen. It is definitely worth a look. Which reminds me - congrats to Kathee for being part of the program!
 
My first impressions of the contribution the Disappeared episode makes to understanding of the case:

1. There was no mention of the supposed prank caller during discussion of the obscene calls to the Delmar St. house that Janelle heard whe. she picked up the phome. So, either the producers/ editors didn't turn up that information, or LE didn't link that calls to the man arrested later, or the producers/editors decided to leave that string hanging.
2. There was mention, however, of an earlier call to the house in which a message may have been left that some got erased, a call that LE was very interested in. Would love to know more about that.
3. I didn't know (or I had forgotten) that Bartt passed a polygraph; his comments that male relatives/friends are looked at makes me wonder who else may have been polygraphed.
4. Looking at the porch and porchlight, I wonder if someone smashed the globe to get someone to look outside, or perhaps open the door. That ruse have worked very well in the morning, when people are less afraid of what might be outside. No doubt someone on the porch smashing somehing would have started the dog barking. Was it possible to easily remove the globe without smashing the light, or was it one of those where the light bulb has to come out first? I don't think a struggle would have broken one and not the other.
5. Was there no mention of the AMW caller? I was briefly interrupted, so I might have missed that.

Bartt, you did a fine job. I'm very glad to see the case get renewed attention, even if we got
mostly stuff we (on this board) have rehashed before. Certainly for most people, this is new information. I sure hope the broadcast leads to finding your mom and Susie and to justice for them and you.

Kathee and the GPR operator do indeed come across as sane, sensible, and credible.

gaia, I agree with your response, especially in regard to Bartt and how he was represented. Now, how about LE resolving the garage issue, once and for all?
 
I recorded it and "protected" it so it can't be erased for future viewing. I think the program was far too short to focus on all the questions we continue to have. I did note the following however:

1) It has evidently been confirmed that Cox and Stu McCall did in fact work at the same car dealership. I think that has been speculated on but not answered. I wasn't sure where this dealership was located but it is near what is/was the old Wal-Mart Store/formerly "Crazy Cecil's" and near the large auto auction house on West Sunshine. I don't know whether this was the location of the store at the time the women went missing. I have speculated that if Stacy came by that a roving eye of a Robert Cox might have seen her and this set in motion what came later.

2) Not sure of why Mr. McCall was not in the program.

3) Bartt acquitted himself very well. I found his version of events quite compelling and convincing.

4) I'm less enamored of some of the other people in the program.

5) A minor point but it is accurate to note that Missouri State University was then known as Southwest Missouri State University and considerably less expensive at that time.

6) I didn't get any sense from the interview that Cox gave anything up. However his alibi is as now evidently worthless.

7) (I heard) The SPD made three trips to Texas. Previously I had thought it was two.

8) Don't know anything about Detective Neal who was identified as the "lead investigator." Whatever, he didn't tip his hand if he had any information that he possesses. Sheriff Webb was a primary detective back in 1992. He is now the police chief of Marionville, west of Springfield. I have always regarded him highly.

9) I too share the view that emphasis on the parking lot garage was downplayed and I believe that was a good thing. It is also relevant that Norland's credentials were played up with reference to the 9/11 terrorist attack.

10) No mention was made of Garrison. Don't know what to make of that.

11) If I heard correctly, both grave robbers are still classified as "persons of interest" although I believe it is correct to say that the chief of police essentially ruled them out. (I probably need to view the program again.)

12) In reading the earlier published accounts of witness statements I don't exactly see they coincide with earlier accounts. I remain concerned with these apparent inconsistencies.

13) There seemed to be an inaccuracy in that the AMW caller was said to have introduced Cox as a primary suspect. I believe my memory is correct that the Zellers contacted the police within a week of the women going missing. And I also believe that the Zellers have denied being the caller to AMW. I don't know who that person was who had "prime knowledge" of the case.

Note: On the globe it had 1/8" of clearance to fall free of the bulb if it was one of the enclosed types. There would have been three difficult to tighten thumbscrews that would have held it in place. It could easily have been knocked off when leaving the house. If the globe was not enclosed, then there was more than adequate room to fall free to break and shatter. The program tends to show a much thinner walled globe but don't know if that is accurate. I tend to think not.

Michael Clay was the second person involved in the grave incidents.
 
Hi, MM.

I knew you would notice the car dealer confirmation. That comes down to the possibility that Stacy was the target, not Sherrill or Suzie. If Stacy was the target, then the abductor/murderer woukd have necessarily followed the girls home from somewhere or would have seen that the two girls were togsther earlier in the evening and then just checked their houses until he spotted them. It could also be that the girls stopped for cigarettes or snacks on their way home and were noticed. So it is possible that Stacy might have attracted Cox's atte tnion that night, somehow.

I am really thinking about gaia's point. What if Janelle's early calls were either during the abduction or JUST AFTER? That is, it would be much easier to understand how someone got in if it was daylight or nearly so. A knock at the door might have been assumed to be Mike and Janelle (and other friends). Sherrill answers the door, sees a van and a youngish man at the
door, and assumes it is the kids coming for the girls. Or Sherrill lets the dog out and sees the van and assumes people are waiting for the girls. She goes back inside but doesn't relock the door--it's morning and the girls will be leaving. Once the door is unlocked, the bad guy is in.
Stacy is still in her t-shirt and panties because she and Susie aren't up yet. Five minutes later they are in the van and "disappeared."

I tried to look at the original police report link but all the old articles are off the newspaper site and are now "for pay." I will have to dig them out of my files. Really the whole time line depends on Janelle--when she says the girls left, when she says she started calling. And we can't really assume that getting no answer means that the wome.pn were already gone.
 
pittsburghgirl said:
Hi, MM.

I knew you would notice the car dealer confirmation. That comes down to the possibility that Stacy was the target, not Sherrill or Suzie. If Stacy was the target, then the abductor/murderer woukd have necessarily followed the girls home from somewhere or would have seen that the two girls were togsther earlier in the evening and then just checked their houses until he spotted them. It could also be that the girls stopped for cigarettes or snacks on their way home and were noticed. So it is possible that Stacy might have attracted Cox's atte tnion that night, somehow.

I am really thinking about gaia's point. What if Janelle's early calls were either during the abduction or JUST AFTER? That is, it would be much easier to understand how someone got in if it was daylight or nearly so. A knock at the door might have been assumed to be Mike and Janelle (and other friends). Sherrill answers the door, sees a van and a youngish man at the
door, and assumes it is the kids coming for the girls. Or Sherrill lets the dog out and sees the van and assumes people are waiting for the girls. She goes back inside but doesn't relock the door--it's morning and the girls will be leaving. Once the door is unlocked, the bad guy is in.
Stacy is still in her t-shirt and panties because she and Susie aren't up yet. Five minutes later they are in the van and "disappeared."

I tried to look at the original police report link but all the old articles are off the newspaper site and are now "for pay." I will have to dig them out of my files. Really the whole time line depends on Janelle--when she says the girls left, when she says she started calling. And we can't really assume that getting no answer means that the wome.pn were already gone.
Click to expand...

The police report and other articles are now for pay???? I have a hard copy of that, Cox's letters and most of the other relevant articles printed out for ready reference.

What I noticed immediately was there was no discussion of the intervening period when other people were in the home prior to Mrs. McCall being alerted to the fact the girls were nowhere to be found. As I heard her talking about it tonight it was as though she was the first one after Jannelle and her boyfriend/husband to enter the home or that was the impression I was left with.

As I said, I need to view it again to see if I heard everything correctly. I runs again in another hour or two and again later on this week or next.

If I have said it one time, I've said it ten thousand times. But let me say it for the 10,001th time so there is no question. The ONLY way that something cannot be beneath that slab at the garage is if the garage was already there when they went missing. For some reason, which eludes my understanding, there seems to be the impression that the women cannot be there because the garage was built AFTER they went missing. The ONLY way that the garage floor can be eliminated is if it were built BEFORE they went missing. I really don't understand why this is still an issue. I'm not speaking to you but others have discounted this because of the time issue. It is not a problem as the bodies could have been refrigerated (as has happened before). I really don't get why the foot dragging goes on about that garage.

There is only one plausible reason for this delay I can think of and that is because the investigators are not wanting to play their ace in the hole and give up a suspect who no one would consider. That might make sense. But not now based on what we know. The dig should commence with a mere $400 coring fee and drop a probe into the hold and let's eliminate the garage one way or another and be done with it.

You make a good point. We can't assume that the women were gone when Jannelle placed her first phone call. It would be more difficult to reconcile this with the "porch Lady's" account however, as that took place between 6:00 AM and 6:30 AM as I recollect. Of course, her account has always had some element of doubt attached to it. It is really unfortunate that we have no way to see what phone calls and what time those calls came to the home.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 120 more.
Total: 2,471 (members: 121, guests: 2,350)

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
2,351
Total visitors
2,472
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,730
Messages
18,098,762
Members
230,917
Latest member
CP95
Back
Top