The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #5

[HmmWhoKnows]

Are you refering to the post I just posted regarding the Steve Garrison/Grave Robbers Sighting by LE "Rumor".

or

Kimos List?

Kemo's list.

Also Kemo, you have several misspellings of names in your list. It'd be nice to get these things right. Thanks.

Kathee makes a good point about everything hinging on Janelle's timeline. EVERYTHING. So we need to start there. List Janelle Kirby, Michael Henson, and Bartt Streeter suspects. Prove them innocent or guilty, then move out to grave robbers and Suzie and Stacy's friends/boyfriends.

 

[monkeymann]

Kemo's list.

Also Kemo, you have several misspellings of names in your list. It'd be nice to get these things right. Thanks.

Kathee makes a good point about everything hinging on Janelle's timeline. EVERYTHING. So we need to start there. List Janelle Kirby, Michael Henson, and Bartt Streeter suspects. Prove them innocent or guilty, then move out to grave robbers and Suzie and Stacy's friends/boyfriends.

Its true.....Everything (Pretty Much) revolves around JK & MH's timeline. The only thing that doesn't is the phone call Sherrill revieved from her friend around I believe 11:15 ish. Does anyone now who that friend was? And....I wouldn't feel so iffy about my feeling about the timeline if JK & MH's actions the next day weren't overly suspicious, as well as the two videos that JK did both of which raise suspicion as well.

 

[Hurricane]

I'm not sure what it is that revolves around Janelle's timeline exclusively except for a few hours early Sunday morning. Everything else can be verified by other witnesses. Just because it hasn't been given to the media other witnesses verify the timeline of the activities from the night before and certainly the 18 people who entered the house (and particularly the mothers of Suzie and Stacy's friends who were in the house) have verified that timeline. So the only thing open to verification is the early morning hours on Sunday.

MonkeyMan, you have been most critical of Janelle and her "tells" that you see on video tape. I will agree with you on one point; that she knows more than she has told. Did you ever stop to think that she knows things that SPD has asked her (and other witnesses as well) not to speak of? The problem is she has been asked questions in interviews by the media and the public that she was ill prepared by LE to answer. That is why she appears uneasy and why she has given various answers to the same old questions. As an example she has given various answers to the questions on where the broom & dust pan came from, and what happened to the glass shards after they swept them up. Clearly SPD recovered the glass shards and didn't want it known that they had them in their possession (and wouldn't have known at that point if they potentially held any evidentiary value or not) but didn't provide her with a cover story to say as to what happened to the shards after they swept them up. And thaty is why she has given various answers when asked those questions.

We all are guilty of pulling small details from a statement or interview someone made out of context and fishin with it. There are many witnesses (casual and otherwise) with observations made leading up to the abductions and the events that followed. Perhaps that is where you should start with your questions.

 

[HmmWhoKnows]

Hurricane, with all do respect, I don't buy that the SPD cops told Janelle to be hush-hush when Terry Knowles was broadcasting tips every night on the newscast. Sure he could have been releasing information to throw off what he thought were the true perpetrators, but then what was all the van stuff about?

Read the original incident report Hurricane. It is completely and entirely in Janelle's perspective. And only Janelle. She had control of the crime scene for as long as she wanted. Do not just assume 18 year olds cannot commit this crime. There's a reason Janelle was brought in so much for the next 2 years during the initial investigation. There's a reason Bartt was questioned so many times as well.

It's dumb to make assumptions. We know Bartt had the motive and the opportunity.

There's also a rumor about a well owned by boozy Mike Henson's family where the women were thrown down.

 

[Hurricane]

Hurricane, with all do respect, I don't buy that the SPD cops told Janelle to be hush-hush when Terry Knowles was broadcasting tips every night on the newscast. Sure he could have been releasing information to throw off what he thought were the true perpetrators, but then what was all the van stuff about?

Read the original incident report Hurricane. It is completely and entirely in Janelle's perspective. And only Janelle. She had control of the crime scene for as long as she wanted. Do not just assume 18 year olds cannot commit this crime. There's a reason Janelle was brought in so much for the next 2 years during the initial investigation. There's a reason Bartt was questioned so many times as well.

It's dumb to make assumptions. We know Bartt had the motive and the opportunity.

There's also a rumor about a well owned by boozy Mike Henson's family where the women were thrown down.

Drake, I addressed one specific issue where Janelle has given different answers to the same general line of questions: concerning the glass shards. To my knowledge Knowles or SPD never made any confirmation or denial that they had the glass shards, only that they would have liked to have seen them as they lay on the porch. And obviously if they do have the glass shards any evidentiary value they may have is not enough to make the case for an arrest by that evidence alone. Perhaps SPD hoped the perp would assume they had the glass shards and the shards contained their prints or blood evidence on them and turn themselves in; sort of like the FBI's statement about someone not feeling good about what they know, and/or the statement always being thrown out by posters that the first one in avoids the needle.

So please list other issues from Janelle's view point that is not substantiated by other witnesses other than what occurred early Sunday morning from her first phone call up until other friends and their mothers were notified that something was apparently wrong at 1717, because I don't know of any.

I believe you were the one critical of friends and classmates not coming forth to help see this case solved. You have no idea of how many have tried to do that very thing anonymously but have been driven off by all the BS on these boards. How would you like to grant an interview trying to help only to read on one of these boards the next day about how your eye twitched when you answered a question; therefore you must be lying?

Good luck running down rumors on the well.

 

[monkeymann]

Drake, I addressed one specific issue where Janelle has given different answers to the same general line of questions: concerning the glass shards. To my knowledge Knowles or SPD never made any confirmation or denial that they had the glass shards, only that they would have liked to have seen them as they lay on the porch. And obviously if they do have the glass shards any evidentiary value they may have is not enough to make the case for an arrest by that evidence alone. Perhaps SPD hoped the perp would assume they had the glass shards and the shards contained their prints or blood evidence on them and turn themselves in; sort of like the FBI's statement about someone not feeling good about what they know, and/or the statement always being thrown out by posters that the first one in avoids the needle.

So please list other issues from Janelle's view point that is not substantiated by other witnesses other than what occurred early Sunday morning from her first phone call up until other friends and their mothers were notified that something was apparently wrong at 1717, because I don't know of any.

I believe you were the one critical of friends and classmates not coming forth to help see this case solved. You have no idea of how many have tried to do that very thing anonymously but have been driven off by all the BS on these boards. How would you like to grant an interview trying to help only to read on one of these boards the next day about how your eye twitched when you answered a question; therefore you must be lying?

Good luck running down rumors on the well.

Well.....Lets See: I guess you could start from the time the girls supposidly left Janelle Kirbys at aprox. 2:00am according to Janelle Kirby, and go all the way up until aprox. 9:00pm when the McCalls Arived at 1717 Delmar.
Between those two times 2am and 9pm the timeline is established by JK & MH and what they say they found, when they found it, at what time they found it, etc. There are no witness's to their actions at the house that morning. Or through out the day for that matter. And I'm sorry...but their actions that day are more than suspicious.

Where was MH that night after he left JK's? Where did he go? Where did SA go? He was presumably there when they parted company at JK's house.

 

[monkeymann]

So......anyone have anything to add?

 

[monkeymann]

Check....Check....Test......Are we dead in the water here? Where did everyone go?

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Hi, I for one am here and thinking. Just saw the Disappeared piece. What bothers me about a lot of the tv pieces is that the break no new ground at all; they don't ask interesting questions that aven't been asked a hundred times. What might a real investigative reporter do with this case?

Like you, monkeyman, I would start with Janelle, who establishes the whole timeline from "last seen," to the first phone call to the Streeter home, to the discovery and cleanup of the broken glass, to walking in someone else's home when they don't answer the door. (I have taken a pounding about my views on people walking into the Streeter home, listening to and erasing phone messages, and who knows what-all. That whole sceanrio is mind-boggling--just walking in and listening to someone's phone? I never have understood why They wouldn't just wait on the porch, since the cars were in the driveway, or just open the door and "Yoohoo." And we have no idea what Janelle and Mike did in the house.

For that matter, I'm not comfortable with the timeline of when the girls left Janelle's and why.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

The convenience store was definitely debunked. You can rule that out.

The "48 hour" tape is no longer available. You might find it on ebay. I know someone who has a DVD of that and perhaps I could round up a copy for you. Also, a national syndicated columnist has it as well because I sent it to her. I've asked for it back but never got it. And then I being the non-techie overwrote the remaining "48 Hour" tape. So I don't have it either.

I've seen this discussion about the various parties over the years and maybe I'm just being dense but I don't see what is at issue here. If they left the Hanover address at 1:50 AM and drove back 57 blocks west to Battlefield, the leaving there would have been right about 2:20 AM regardless of whether they left from either address in Battlefield; being virtually next door. I believe they were
last reported leaving from the Kirby residence. What am I missing here?

Hi. MM. Hope you are well and enjoying the holidays. You were responding, above, to someone asking about the 48 Hours video, so I thought I would see what's on the links thread.

For those who want to look at this earlier msms account, check the "links" thread above. Both the
48 Hours and Disappeared are linked on that thread. If the links don't work, look on Youtube. (I will check it--should have done so while I was there but got interested in reading what all we had posted back then.)

The links thread has lots of basic information, including links to msm sources and references to basic facts from early threads. These are valuable resources for those new to WS or the 3MW case--and to refresh all of our memories. Finally, I would say, regarding questions about Janelle, that we can't
necessarily hold her accountable for "inconsistencies" based on what isreported in the media. Reporters can make mistakes, misquote, or create emphasis by how a story is told, what details are left out. etc.

For example, there is a recent (December 7) missing persons case in Pittsburgh, for which timelines have been posted based on what friends told LE that the friends say are NOT accurate representations of what THEY told LE. No one has bad intentions here, as everyone want to find this
missing young adult. It's just that everyone (police, reporters, family, friends and witnesses) hears
and understands and tells a story differently. In the Disappeared episode, there is that moment when the narrator says that Cox has an alibi because he was at church with his girlfriend. Then the episode chugs along chronologically, more or less. Anyone who stopped watching would
think Cox STILL has an alibi. It's not until later that the narrator says Cox's alibi fell apart. So what
someone who watched this show "knows" about Cox would depend on how much of the show he or she saw. That's the drawback of narrative storytelling, and why the loss of investigate magazine and newspaper reporters is such a huge loss.

This is not to say that I don't have questions about Janelle, her mother, Mike and what they have said or what they know. It's just that I think anyone interested in a case reported widely in the
media has to factor in the the "media" is literally between us and police, witnesses, victims, etc.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Hi. MM. Hope you are well and enjoying the holidays. You were responding, above, to someone asking about the 48 Hours video, so I thought I would see what's on the links thread.

For those who want to look at this earlier msms account, check the "links" thread above. Both the
48 Hours and Disappeared are linked on that thread. If the links don't work, look on Youtube. (I will check it--should have done so while I was there but got interested in reading what all we had posted back then.)

The links thread has lots of basic information, including links to msm sources and references to basic facts from early threads. These are valuable resources for those new to WS or the 3MW case--and to refresh all of our memories. Finally, I would say, regarding questions about Janelle, that we can't
necessarily hold her accountable for "inconsistencies" based on what isreported in the media. Reporters can make mistakes, misquote, or create emphasis by how a story is told, what details are left out. etc.

For example, there is a recent (December 7) missing persons case in Pittsburgh, for which timelines have been posted based on what friends told LE that the friends say are NOT accurate representations of what THEY told LE. No one has bad intentions here, as everyone want to find this
missing young adult. It's just that everyone (police, reporters, family, friends and witnesses) hears
and understands and tells a story differently. In the Disappeared episode, there is that moment when the narrator says that Cox has an alibi because he was at church with his girlfriend. Then the episode chugs along chronologically, more or less. Anyone who stopped watching would
think Cox STILL has an alibi. It's not until later that the narrator says Cox's alibi fell apart. So what
someone who watched this show "knows" about Cox would depend on how much of the show he or she saw. That's the drawback of narrative storytelling, and why the loss of investigate magazine and newspaper reporters is such a huge loss.

This is not to say that I don't have questions about Janelle, her mother, Mike and what they have said or what they know. It's just that I think anyone interested in a case reported widely in the
media has to factor in the the "media" is literally between us and police, witnesses, victims, etc.

I essentially agree with your take on the Disappeared piece but there was one new bit of information not previously discussed (so far as I remember) which was the animal skulls found in one of the grave robber's home. When the police returned, they were gone. What that tells us I'm not sure but I think it needs to be explored.

Of more recent information is the "Vanished" trailer which I believe pointed straight at Robert Cox. And Stacy's mother wanted to talk to one person inside prison and one not in prison. The documentary was never finished but filmed in 2009. See what you think.

Vanished- A Documentary Film on Vimeo

 

[pittsburghgirl]

I was playing this on the iPad and the video cut out; I'll play it again tomorrow. I want to see the faces of the people who are speaking. Is there more of this available?

Cox is on my short list; he's a man who needed to concoct an alibi, which is a pretty decent red flag, and while the Florida court let him go, in my view, he has a track record for abduction/murder. Talking to him would be an exercise in futility, as his interest is in manipulating LE, the families, and probably everyone else, in his own mind, at least. I wonder who else Janis McCall wants to talk to.

Another thing I observed is how condescending JM is about Suzie, as if cosmetology school made Suzie "less than" college-bound Stacy and Stacy would only hang out with Suzie be ause she felt sorry for her. That attitude doesn't fully square with walking into the Streeter hime and listening to phone messages, etc.

And finally, didn't Janelle talk to Janis before they arrived at the Streeter home? I need to look at the timeline again.

 

[CaliMama]

I just wanted to say that I am so grateful that "The Springfield Three" are still being talked about and people still care about what happened to them. I was living in Springfield, MO at the time of their disappearance (I am also a Missouri native). I was going to Southwest Missouri State and was 21 years old when they disappeared. I have thought about them often over the years. I haven't had a chance to read everything in this thread, but the last I heard, people were saying that they were in the concrete at St. John's and that an ultrasound could prove that they were there. Did that ever pan out?

 

[HmmWhoKnows]

I believe you mean what the so-called "psychics" think, that they are under Cox hospital's parking garage. That theory is far out in my opinion. And the cops not doing anything about it proves that. Because they definitely know who committed this crime. And by "ultra sound" you mean ground-penetrating radar. Which is everything but conclusive. It's all a media circus to sidestep the case.

Moving along, I feel like one way or another, the van leads are steering (no pun intended) this case in different directions.

Certain suspects + van make don't necessarily add up...

 

[Missouri Mule]

I believe you mean what the so-called "psychics" think, that they are under Cox hospital's parking garage. That theory is far out in my opinion. And the cops not doing anything about it proves that. Because they definitely know who committed this crime. And by "ultra sound" you mean ground-penetrating radar. Which is everything but conclusive. It's all a media circus to sidestep the case.

Moving along, I feel like one way or another, the van leads are steering (no pun intended) this case in different directions.

Certain suspects + van make don't necessarily add up...

I think you are right. I think they do know who committed this crime or they would have cored the garage, although I would do it nonetheless to take it off the table since the cost of doing so is inconsequential.

From what I gather the documentary trailer makes crystal clear is that the original lead detective, who I believe is still involved, in a non-official capacity, believes in his own mind that Cox is the one who committed this crime and would simply like to know where the remains are to close this case. I've said so many times and several people have taken issue with me believing that Cox is uninvolved. I'm not going to fight that battle again but in what he says and what I have been told by someone now living in Springfield, the detective could be talking about no one else.

I also believe that there is at least one more person connected to this crime and although I am not going to name that person it fits together to provide the elusive motive. I don't know if that person was actually involved in a physical sense but could have instigated the crime. If he chose to come forth and truly be helpful this case could quickly be wrapped up.

If the three major motives for murder is 1) greed, 2) revenge and 3) jealousy and if we exclude drugs (and I've yet to see any evidence of same), then we come down to revenge and/or jealousy, and emotions perhaps spontaneously set in motion although unintended. Therein lies, in my opinion, the logical conclusion of why this crime took place.

 

[HmmWhoKnows]

Asher wanting Cox to talk doesn't mean Cox committed the crime nor does it mean Asher thinks Cox is the perp. If we are to make an assumption here, let's make another that Janis knows what Asher knows (why would she be kept out of the loop?). so from the video, it sounds like there's 2 people narrowed down. My guess is Cox knows something about bodies (at BEST) and someone else committed the crime. If Cox is saying anything truthful, it wouldn't be that HE did it, it would be that he knew WHO did it.

How does Cox even connect to these women? What's the motive? I feel like he's a dead end. Any felon can talk, hell look at Garrison.

Garrison though can be connected because he actually did break and enter and terrorized a young girl. So even if it wasn't him, I could easily see him associated with people who would do such a thing. Did Cox even have friends like this?? Garrison was part of the GGMC or a bike gang similar we can definitely say.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Asher wanting Cox to talk doesn't mean Cox committed the crime nor does it mean Asher thinks Cox is the perp. If we are to make an assumption here, let's make another that Janis knows what Asher knows (why would she be kept out of the loop?). so from the video, it sounds like there's 2 people narrowed down. My guess is Cox knows something about bodies (at BEST) and someone else committed the crime. If Cox is saying anything truthful, it wouldn't be that HE did it, it would be that he knew WHO did it.

How does Cox even connect to these women? What's the motive? I feel like he's a dead end. Any felon can talk, hell look at Garrison.

Garrison though can be connected because he actually did break and enter and terrorized a young girl. So even if it wasn't him, I could easily see him associated with people who would do such a thing. Did Cox even have friends like this?? Garrison was part of the GGMC or a bike gang similar we can definitely say.

I don't believe that I said that Det. Asher said he knew for a fact that Cox did it but I am certain he was speaking of Cox by what he said. I do believe that Mrs. McCall was "in the loop" of information from the SPD. I do not believe that "everyone" was however who had a vested interest in the outcome.

I believe we are in essential agreement on the two person scenario. At most it might be three but two sounds more likely in my opinion. I'm not sure how you draw the conclusion that he is saying he knows what happened but didn't do it. In fact, I don't believe there has ever been a statement on his part that he didn't do it; or stated differently, that he denies being the perpetrator.

It has been said that Cox hasn't been contacted by the SPD since 1996 and therefore it is implied that they have lost interest in him or do not believe him to be involved. Yet, in every new media article or program that comes out always seems to put him at the front of the line. I'll continue to stick with Cox until I see a better suspect.

 

[theforgotten]

After viewing the Vanished clip, I find myself wondering why Suzie was so upset? I mean it's the day of her graduation, one would think she would be happy. So apparently, it was odd for Stacy to spend the night at Suzie's? I just wonder how close of friends they really were. I remember being that age and spending nights over my friends houses all the time!

Would it have been weird for Cox to work with a partner? Three people seems like a lot to handle.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

I don't think predators like Cox need a motive. The crime itself is the motive.

 

[Missouri Mule]

After viewing the Vanished clip, I find myself wondering why Suzie was so upset? I mean it's the day of her graduation, one would think she would be happy. So apparently, it was odd for Stacy to spend the night at Suzie's? I just wonder how close of friends they really were. I remember being that age and spending nights over my friends houses all the time!

Would it have been weird for Cox to work with a partner? Three people seems like a lot to handle.

He wouldn't necessarily have had to have a partner with him physically. Entry could have been gained with a phone call. Once the door was cracked, he simply barged right in. It would have been advantageous to have someone else back the van up to the garage behind Sherrill's car, however.