The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #6

[Missouri Mule]

Monkeymann,

...(Snip) If you have a theory and want to discuss it then bring some circumstantial or known physical evidence in the case to present in support and we can discuss it. I'm no longer interested in presenting evidence against all the "JMO's" and "WAG's" because it never seems to do any good. Too much time has been wasted in the past discussing such theories as Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, professional hitmen / professional cleaners, 117+yr old widows giving money to the wrong hospital, snuff films, hate crimes, Satanic worshipers, BTK (or boogie man of the week), etc. I'm not wasting any more time on that; it's a lost cause...(Snip)

At the time this case first began to be discussed here most people had very little knowledge to work from nor the ability to seek out information or reliable sources to get information from. So all kinds of wild theories have been thrown out that are now seen to be inoperative. When one has nothing, the net has to be thrown wide and far and not narrowly focused on a theory. Witness the recent airliner that went missing.

What is not known or agreed upon is the number of individuals involved in this crime nor how entry was gained into the home. Would you care to speak to that question as there seems to be an on-going argument among some whether one or more individuals were required to abduct the women? I'm in the two or more camp myself. Or do you disagree with Wright's profile which to any reasonable interpretation includes more than one person; perhaps several?

I would add one other thing. In the statement released a year or two ago the police were asking about anyone who knew of someone; perhaps a relative, who had someone close to them whose time was unaccounted for that night. This seems to be at variance in part with the original profile. Since it was so carefully crafted it could have included any number of individuals including Cox, since he had no alibi. But he needed someone to gain entry or the women out of the house. That's at least two people.

And one final question. Would you agree or disagree that a van was used during this crime? I'm in the van camp myself.

 

[Missouri Mule]

(Snip)

...I am not positive it was only one guy but I think more likely than not. The FBI "profile suggests that they thought there were two or more perps. Could be they were just hoping that if there was a second perp, they could get him to "turn". The "sympathetic" description sounds like they are baiting him. The fact that no one has ever "talked", either to Law Enforcement or to some third party who later came forward, is pretty compelling evidence that only one person was involved.

Whether or not it was only one person, I am very sure it involved someone who knew Sherill or Suzie very well. I can't see a "home invasion" type situation with three cars in the driveway and three people inside. He (they) were let in by one of the women. No way any woman would open the door to a stranger at 3:30 AM... (Snip)

I think we could all more or less agree with your plausible conclusions above. I especially like the "baiting" theory. I have thought of that myself but if the individual is a sociopath, it is unlikely to get him to confess. One needs a conscience and sociopaths don't have one.

But leaving all that aside for the moment, let us posit the theory that indeed only one person did this crime. That is plausible IF this person was trusted. I think that is a no-brainer short of the "ruse" entry. And it requires this person to have had the means, the motive and the opportunity although that seems somewhat doubtful but not impossible to me. How does one person incapacitate all three women, move a van (or whatever) and get them to obediently file into the vehicle?

We know that at least one individual did not pass the polygraph. We don't know the name of that individual. If we rule out the crypt incident, as I do, the number of individuals shrinks considerably. Without going into explicit detail, think about Cox and who he might have been friends with or minimally socialized with. I'd look there.

As a final thought, it is my view that anything that is really known is held within a very tight group of investigators within the SPD. So far as I know they are not leaking any information not even to former investigators of the case based on personal knowledge.

 

[monkeymann]

Monkeymann,

When Trooogrit and I started our research together we had a logical theory based on what evidence we thought SPD had, and in keeping with the KISS principle. Our idea was to work that theory and follow the evidence until such time we were to discover that evidence would indicate that things could not have happened in accordance with our theory. We worked the evidence, not the suspect and we didn't change theories daily like you change your shirt. Along the way we did look into a couple of theories that came up thru witnesses we interviewed and helped on a couple of other things. But by & large we stayed the course. Well that time never came. In fact what we have ultimately done in my view is confirm in our minds to a large degree what SPD knows and what their case is. And I believe a couple of other people working together have pretty much arrived at the same end point also. That's how we know only a couple of pieces of evidence are lacking to make a strong, winnable case in a court of law.

If you have a theory and want to discuss it then bring some circumstantial or known physical evidence in the case to present in support and we can discuss it. I'm no longer interested in presenting evidence against all the "JMO's" and "WAG's" because it never seems to do any good. Too much time has been wasted in the past discussing such theories as Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, professional hitmen / professional cleaners, 117+yr old widows giving money to the wrong hospital, snuff films, hate crimes, Satanic worshipers, BTK (or boogie man of the week), etc. I'm not wasting any more time on that; it's a lost cause.

It still amazes me that people can make some of the wildest, slanderous proposals and statements about the victims, their friends and other public figures in this case without any facts or evidence to back it up, drop in a "JMO" at the bottom of the page and that somehow makes everything okay. Sometimes I have wished I was an attorney able to work free gratis. We'd have us a good time then!

I respect what you're saying, but don't you think that solving the problem of all the wild speculation that exists at this point could be solved by, in some way pointing people in the direction of who you're convinced is responsible for the 3MW crime?

By not stopping the wild speculation, as well as participating in "Speculating" with people from time to time as you have Hurricane, don't you feel some responsibility for its perpetuation? Especially since you feel that you know what happened in this case. Could have put a halt to the speculation a long time ago and tried to point people in the right direction.

Who knows, may be if you did that, someone has the "Missing Piece of the Puzzle". It would definitely be more proactive than allowing the wild speculation to persist, when you feel so strongly about your theory about the case.......wouldn't it.

 

[Hurricane]

I respect what you're saying, but don't you think that solving the problem of all the wild speculation that exists at this point could be solved by, in some way pointing people in the direction of who you're convinced is responsible for the 3MW crime?

By not stopping the wild speculation, as well as participating in "Speculating" with people from time to time as you have Hurricane, don't you feel some responsibility for its perpetuation? Especially since you feel that you know what happened in this case. Could have put a halt to the speculation a long time ago and tried to point people in the right direction.

Who knows, may be if you did that, someone has the "Missing Piece of the Puzzle". It would definitely be more proactive than allowing the wild speculation to persist, when you feel so strongly about your theory about the case.......wouldn't it.

No Monkeymann, I don't feel that way. After years of fighting rumors and those proposing crazy and unfounded theories I know it simply doesn't work. How much work does it take to research the theory of the widow to learn that IF she was alive THEN she would be over 117 yrs old, for example?

Why does the point of entry have to be the front door and someone trusted had to coax it open? All LE has ever said is that they LEFT by the front door. It would have been a very easy house to have gotten into that night. The point of entry could be known and that info being held back. Lots of things about the house have changed since 1992.

How can you put bodies inside a waterbed mattress? Inside an open grave before it's closed up forever? Is there enough room in either case? (The answer is no).

All the above are things that should have been addressed before proposing the theory or stating things as if they are facts.

How many of Sherrill's, Suzie's, or Stacy's friends have to come forward saying that there weren't any drugs; Sherrill didn't date or socialize much, she wasn't living large with this huge income; that Suzie wasn't bruised up and stabbed with a knife or fork in a fight with Bartt, that nothing was bothering her on graduation night except a little melancholy and an upset stomach, that she had not been asking anybody and everybody to come back to her house to spend the night; that Stacy did not have an unknown boyfriend, and that she was not drinking much if any that night? You tell me because no matter how many times those things get pointed out it doesn't stop the "JMO's" and the "WAG's". Obviously there are lots of posters sitting behind their computers who must have known these victims much, much better than their friends and coworkers did!

I could go on but won't. And no I don't think you're going to come up with the missing piece of the puzzle by fishing multi screeners on multi forums, posting as a multi screener yourself trying to trick people into telling you anything.

 

[monkeymann]

No Monkeymann, I don't feel that way. After years of fighting rumors and those proposing crazy and unfounded theories I know it simply doesn't work. How much work does it take to research the theory of the widow to learn that IF she was alive THEN she would be over 117 yrs old, for example?

I'm sorry but I haven't heard the story about the 117yr old widow.

Why does the point of entry have to be the front door and someone trusted had to coax it open? All LE has ever said is that they LEFT by the front door. It would have been a very easy house to have gotten into that night. The point of entry could be known and that info being held back. Lots of things about the house have changed since 1992.

I totally agree with you on this point. That's Richard's obsession, not mine and I've tried to tell him to not dwell so much on this issue, because as you say, entry could have been made many different ways. And, how they got in doesn't necessarily point to someone they knew or didn't now. Someone could have left the door unlocked, they could have entered the house a different way, or the door may have just been carelessly opened by someone in the house.

How can you put bodies inside a waterbed mattress? Inside an open grave before it's closed up forever? Is there enough room in either case? (The answer is no).

Well if the hole was big enough, I guess it wouldn't be an issue, however I'm pretty sure the waterbed mattress wasn't missing from the house.
Plus I agree, it would be pretty cumbersome to say the least to try and wrap three people up in a waterbed mattress. Doesn't sound plausible to me either.

All the above are things that should have been addressed before proposing the theory or stating things as if they are facts.

I agree! There are many more important unanswered questions regarding the several different people or groups of people who may have had legitimate motive. And you know as well as I do, that in that group of people, there is enough strange behavior, as well as in the case of others, more personal motives that haven't been completely addressed. Not to the point of "Clearing" some of them of having any involvement in one way or another.

How many of Sherrill's, Suzie's, or Stacy's friends have to come forward saying that there weren't any drugs;

How many times has it been noted, by Law Enforcement and others, that Suzie hung out with a questionable crowd. I think the term they used was a, "Rougher Crowd". Suzies former boyfriend did drugs. And by the looks of his facebook page pictures.....still surrounds himself with people who do do drugs. Weather he does or not I don't know. I just know there is a marijuana pipe in one of his pictures.

So you can't just unequivocally state that we know for a fact that there wasn't any Drug Involvement. You can't just write it off like that based on what friends and family say, when on the obverse we have proof that she was involved with a crowd that admittedly did drugs. Who admitted that they were all "Tripping On Acid" in the Cemetery? Just saying. That goes a little beyond a little Marijuana Indulgence.

Sherrill didn't date or socialize much, she wasn't living large with this huge income; that Suzie wasn't bruised up and stabbed with a knife or fork in a fight with Bartt,

There WAS by Bartt's own admission, a physical altercation between him and his sister. To what level it progressed to, only Bartt and Suzie know for sure, and may be Sherrill did as well.

that nothing was bothering her on graduation night except a little melancholy and an upset stomach, that she had not been asking anybody and everybody to come back to her house to spend the night; that Stacy did not have an unknown boyfriend, and that she was not drinking much if any that night? You tell me because no matter how many times those things get pointed out it doesn't stop the "JMO's" and the "WAG's".

Those statements were ones that the newspapers that covered the story back in the day published. I personally don't know where they originally obtained that information from.

Obviously there are lots of posters sitting behind their computers who must have known these victims much, much better than their friends and coworkers did!

And it would be nice if they would come out and talk about the case. May be we'd have a better idea about what happened that night, and who they hung out with, and be able to establish what was truth about what happened that night, and what was rumor, or misinformation. I personally don't understand why more of their closer friends, and acquaintances haven't been more involved in discussing the case.

I could go on but won't. And no I don't think you're going to come up with the missing piece of the puzzle by fishing multi screeners on multi forums, posting as a multi screener yourself trying to trick people into telling you anything.

Hurricane, I've made it quite clear that I'm not the one playing multiscreen name identity games. I have used a couple different names in the past, because I got annoyed with the multiscreen posters, and did it to mock what they were doing. I made that very clear when I did it, and subsequently many times thereafter. But not once did I ever deny that it was me posting. Not once. Unlike others who like to play games with this case.
I won't mention her name here though. I unhitched my wagon from her and some of her followers months ago after it because undeniably obvious that they had been lying to me about numerous things, and once again playing games with me by not being honest, even though I had never lied to them about anything!. For some reason I guess they figured that I wouldn't eventually figure out their lies. They are using this case for attention seeking purposes at the expense of the 3MW and their families. Some of which, unfortunately just don't seem to get this, even though its been pointed out and proven, time and time again.
And its sad to see the family being "Played" by someone(s) that clearly have some deep seeded issues with being the center of attention. Any first year psychology student who analyzed the posts and actions of this person, would certainly come to the same conclusion.

Especially when some of these people are the same ones who are directly responsible for the perpetuation of a lot of the misinformation, rumor, and outright BS, that is currently out there circulating around.

 

[Missouri Mule]

(Snip)...Why does the point of entry have to be the front door and someone trusted had to coax it open? All LE has ever said is that they LEFT by the front door. It would have been a very easy house to have gotten into that night. The point of entry could be known and that info being held back. Lots of things about the house have changed since 1992....(Snip)

That's a very valid point. We don't know that nor, as you say, has it ever been specifically addressed to my knowledge.

I guess I read too much meaning into the "ruse" theory that was advanced in the early investigation. That suggests that entry was in fact gained through the front door but if the police have not actually said that then it isn't a proven fact as you say.

 

[Hurricane]

I don't think the average person would realize just how difficult it would be to handle and move a dead, limp body. When my son was 17-18 yrs old and still at home we had a male Rottweiler dog who weighed 155# and died of old age in his sleep one night upstairs in my son's room. The two of us together could not carry him down the stairs. We had to strap him to a board, carry him down the stairs and into the garage, and put him on a trailer behind a tractor to take him out on my property to where we buried him. Besides the weight it's the lack of muscle after death that would make a body hard to move & carry by hand. I always recall that experience anytime discussions turn to disposing of human remains.

Monkeymann, the posters sitting behind their computers I am referring to are the posters on these many forums who continually throw out the BS about the victims followed up by their "JMO" qualifier; not the family, personal friends and coworkers who knew the victims best.

 

[wfgodot]

Thumbs up to thread progress.

 

[fullmoon]

Without going into explicit detail, think about Cox and who he might have been friends with or minimally socialized with. I'd look there.

He seems to be a strong suspect for many, though I don't believe him when he says he'll say where the bodies are after his mother is dead. I think he just wanted attention.

don't you think that solving the problem of all the wild speculation that exists at this point could be solved by, in some way pointing people in the direction of who you're convinced is responsible for the 3MW crime?

Thanks, monkeyman. That would certainly help.

 

[Santa Christ]

Recla and Ridel as well as Clay had no idea if they were going to get a plea bargain arrangement until the latter part of 1993 when the case was adjudicated. At the time of the disappearance of the 3MW, none of them knew what was going to happen to them as a result of the Grave Robber Crime.
But there was certainly a Motive. Revenge at the very least, considering that if she had already given LE a statement, it may or may not matter if she was still alive to actually testify in court. It seems perfectly logical to think that one or more may have had a revenge motive, blaming Suzie for "Narking" on them. May be they thought it was all her fault that they got busted.

Dusty and Joe got arrested for the grave yard incident in February of '92. While they were in custody the police offered both of them lighter sentences if they would agree to testify against me. No prosecutor or judge had signed off on the deal yet but they did make the offer. Both Dusty and Joe agreed to the deal at that time and both wrote statements against me.
After Joe was released, we met up and he told me that Dusty had ratted everybody out. We found someone willing to give us a ride to Chicago and left the next day. We were there about a month when I found out from a phone call to my girlfriend that Joe had ratted me out along with a bunch of my friends. They were being harassed by the police that were looking for me and the cops made it known that Joe was the one to give them their names. When I found this out, I left Joe in Chicago and made my way back to Springfield. After about another month of avoiding the police I turned myself in.
After I was assigned a public defender, the first question I asked him was what I was facing? He explained that the charge of institutional vandalism was a class "D" felony, the lowest of 4 classes (A thru D), and punishable by up to 5 years in prison and fines. He told me if I was convicted I would probably do less than 1 year. (I think he was just trying to set up an easy guilty plea so he wouldn't have to do any real work.) He also informed me that Joe and Dusty had agreed to testify against me. That was in April I think. Well before Suzie disappeared.
I hooked back up with Dusty and told him about Joe ratting everybody out. He told me that he had written a statement too but decided he wasn't going to testify against me because his parents had agreed to get him a lawyer and he thought he could get probation since he had no prior convictions.
On a side note: I didn't know that Suzie had written a statement against me until the police were questioning me about their disappearance. I'm not exactly sure when the prosecutors had to disclose all of the evidence against me to my public defender but if he had it before they dissapeared, he didn't let me know.
As for "revenge" for Suzie "narking"; I would have gotten rid of Dusty and Joe before Suzie. I knew they had written statements and at least one of them were going to testify against me. They were the biggest threat to my freedom and both had betrayed me.

 

[Santa Christ]

Need to make a correction to my post. I checked with Dusty because I wasn't sure about the time frame. Apparently we did know that she had talked to the police and had written the statement before they disappeared. I just didn't remember it. I apologize for the bad info and want to make sure it is corrected. I try to keep things as accurate as possible but after 22 years things get a bit fuzzy.

 

[monkeymann]

Need to make a correction to my post. I checked with Dusty because I wasn't sure about the time frame. Apparently we did know that she had talked to the police and had written the statement before they disappeared. I just didn't remember it. I apologize for the bad info and want to make sure it is corrected. I try to keep things as accurate as possible but after 22 years things get a bit fuzzy.

Now see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Thank you for going into more detail about these events. More posts like this from others that knew the girls, or from people who were close to the case, would undoubtedly help dispel and possibly put to rest some of the needless speculation, and rumors.

And thanks for being honest and making an effort to clear up the information you posed the first time, and admitting that you did know about Suzie's Statement prior to the night they disappeared.

Thank You!

 

[Hurricane]

?..... More posts like this from others that knew the girls, or from people who were close to the case, would undoubtedly help dispel and possibly put to rest some of the needless speculation, and rumors.

Many of their friends and classmates have already tried to help Monkeymann, but were driven away by all the baloney. They won't be helping on a public forum any longer. If you want to be taken seriously and as a professional, you have to act like one.

 

[monkeymann]

I agree. I think after all these years, someone would have talked by now. I always thought it was just one person responsible for the abduction. That's why it's been so hard to crack.

Regarding Mike and Janelle, I have often thought about their actions that day. I have to keep reminding myself Janelle was just 18. At that age, you don't think anything bad can happen to you. She probably didn't think there was anything wrong until much later. Unfortunately, too many people, as you noted, innocently compromised the crime scene by walking through the house. But if the authorities believe the crime was a sexual assault, then they must have DNA indicating sexual assault, so maybe the crime scene was not too badly compromised.

Locard's Exchange Principle states: Any time two surfaces come into contact with one another, material from one surface will always be transferred to the surface of the other. It further states that it is impossible to enter into an area or environment, with out changing that area and environment in some way. (Edmond Locard 1877-1966)

 

[monkeymann]

Many of their friends and classmates have already tried to help Monkeymann, but were driven away by all the baloney. They won't be helping on a public forum any longer. If you want to be taken seriously and as a professional, you have to act like one.

In all of the years that I've been reading and posting on various 3MW forums, I have only seen a couple, like two or three at the most, people who have made any reference to either being family members, friends, or acquaintances.

So with that said, the only way someone would know if someone was a family member, friend or acquaintance, is if they had:

1.) Made it directly known in one of the public forums.
2.) Made contact with someone who was posting on one of the public forums.
3.) Or was contacted by private message or other private means, by someone who is posting on these forums who is also investigating this case.

And based on the many "I cant talk about that, they signed a Confidentiality Agreement with me" statements that have been made by a certain someone.....and I think we all know who I'm talking about......I think it would be more accurate to state that people have been told not to talk about the case on forums, and only to talk about the case with "Her", and her group.

Do you think that would be a fair statement?

So in all fairness Hurricane, how can you make a statement regarding professionalism when you are "Bootstrapped" to "Her" and her "Investigation"?

An "Investigation(r)" I might add, that has NEVER EVER conducted itself in a professional manor?

So why are you part of her "Team"?

 

[Hurricane]

In all of the years that I've been reading and posting on various 3MW forums, I have only seen a couple, like two or three at the most, people who have made any reference to either being family members, friends, or acquaintances.

So with that said, the only way someone would know if someone was a family member, friend or acquaintance, is if they had:

1.) Made it directly known in one of the public forums.
2.) Made contact with someone who was posting on one of the public forums.
3.) Or was contacted by private message or other private means, by someone who is posting on these forums who is also investigating this case.

And based on the many "I cant talk about that, they signed a Confidentiality Agreement with me" statements that have been made by a certain someone.....and I think we all know who I'm talking about......I think it would be more accurate to state that people have been told not to talk about the case on forums, and only to talk about the case with "Her", and her group.

Do you think that would be a fair statement?

So in all fairness Hurricane, how can you make a statement regarding professionalism when you are "Bootstrapped" to "Her" and her "Investigation"?

An "Investigation(r)" I might add, that has NEVER EVER conducted itself in a professional manor?

So why are you part of her "Team"?

Monkeymann, I don't know what you are talking about! You don't know anything about what you think you do. I'm not part of anyone's "team". But I will tell you something you do already know; I only work or cooperate with people I can trust!

Starting on your list let's take #1): Other than the common, public names in this case do you think you would really even know who their personal friends and classmates were, who their teachers were, who Sherrill's coworkers were if they even posted and told you so? Many have already come and gone and you didn't even know it! Why don't you see if Janelle will grant you an interview and answer some tough questions. Then you can tell us again how she lied because her eye twitched!

#2): If they have information that needs to remain private or the source of such information needs to remain anonymous for now do you honestly think they would contact you or anyone else thru a PM who constantly leaks information? And you have confidentiality agreements all wrong. I have never asked anyone not to talk about the case to anyone or on any forum; they sometimes ask for confidentiality from me to keep their info and their name out of it for now! And regardless of any agreement I personally will never post any information that could hinder the successful prosecution of this case!

#3): You don't know how many times we have been told by a witness who did post and was then contacted by someone by PM within 10 min of their very first post. I believe the common opening line is something like "I'll bet I know what you are talking about.." and then the fishin begins from there! Fish, pump & browbeat seems to be the MO.

Most people who post on these various forums discussing this case probably don't even do any research. They just want to comment. If you feel like no one will cooperate with you and you have not been given any respect from those who do get out and work then maybe you need to look at yourself for the answer why.

 

[fullmoon]

Most people who post on these various forums discussing this case probably don't even do any research. They just want to comment

People who comment on these boards read newspaper articles about this case, review previous posts, watch documentaries, and then comment. Nothing wrong with that. A lot of people are interested in this case.

 

[monkeymann]

Monkeymann, I don't know what you are talking about! You don't know anything about what you think you do. I'm not part of anyone's "team". But I will tell you something you do already know; I only work or cooperate with people I can trust!

Starting on your list let's take #1): Other than the common, public names in this case do you think you would really even know who their personal friends and classmates were, who their teachers were, who Sherrill's coworkers were if they even posted and told you so? Many have already come and gone and you didn't even know it! Why don't you see if Janelle will grant you an interview and answer some tough questions. Then you can tell us again how she lied because her eye twitched!

#2): If they have information that needs to remain private or the source of such information needs to remain anonymous for now do you honestly think they would contact you or anyone else thru a PM who constantly leaks information? And you have confidentiality agreements all wrong. I have never asked anyone not to talk about the case to anyone or on any forum; they sometimes ask for confidentiality from me to keep their info and their name out of it for now! And regardless of any agreement I personally will never post any information that could hinder the successful prosecution of this case!

#3): You don't know how many times we have been told by a witness who did post and was then contacted by someone by PM within 10 min of their very first post. I believe the common opening line is something like "I'll bet I know what you are talking about.." and then the fishin begins from there! Fish, pump & browbeat seems to be the MO.

Most people who post on these various forums discussing this case probably don't even do any research. They just want to comment. If you feel like no one will cooperate with you and you have not been given any respect from those who do get out and work then maybe you need to look at yourself for the answer why.

Monkeymann, I don't know what you are talking about! You don't know anything about what you think you do. I'm not part of anyone's "team". But I will tell you something you do already know; I only work or cooperate with people I can trust!

So be honest with everyone then. Don't deny the fact that you've worked with the person I've referred to, as well as people who worked with her.

Trust is subjective based on who you deal with, and what the situation is. Just because you deem someone not trustworthy, doesn't mean a thing. All that means is that it's your opinion, which is most certainly your right, but is also is considered subjective. The person may be considered trustworthy, and rightfully so, in many other settings other than a forum in which most have never met. Where one or more people have decided they don't like some one, weather or not that person is worthy. Its a common social dynamic Hurricane, and its unwise to pigeon hole and label someone based on opinion, not fact.

Starting on your list let's take #1): Other than the common, public names in this case do you think you would really even know who their personal friends and classmates were, who their teachers were, who Sherrill's coworkers were if they even posted and told you so? Many have already come and gone and you didn't even know it! Why don't you see if Janelle will grant you an interview and answer some tough questions. Then you can tell us again how she lied because her eye twitched!

With all due respect, I've already adequately outlined the cause and affect involved in the scenario you outline. I did that in my first paragraph.

#2): If they have information that needs to remain private or the source of such information needs to remain anonymous for now do you honestly think they would contact you or anyone else thru a PM who constantly leaks information? And you have confidentiality agreements all wrong. I have never asked anyone not to talk about the case to anyone or on any forum; they sometimes ask for confidentiality from me to keep their info and their name out of it for now! And regardless of any agreement I personally will never post any information that could hinder the successful prosecution of this case!

So you're accusing me of constantly leaking information hunh? Name one time that I have been told to keep something confidential, that I have not legitimately done so? Name ONE!

#3): You don't know how many times we have been told by a witness who did post and was then contacted by someone by PM within 10 min of their very first post. I believe the common opening line is something like "I'll bet I know what you are talking about.." and then the fishin begins from there! Fish, pump & browbeat seems to be the MO.

Or many be you've become too cynical over the years, missing or not caring about the people who contact you that are very sincere, and do want to help. You never know, that person you "Shun", may be the person who solves this case. Point being, don't be too proud of who you are, or your accomplishments, or what ego you may have, to overlook the value and sincerity of others.


Most people who post on these various forums discussing this case probably don't even do any research. They just want to comment. If you feel like no one will cooperate with you and you have not been given any respect from those who do get out and work then maybe you need to look at yourself for the answer why.


And a lot of people like myself DO do their homework. Finding anything and everything I could to study regarding the case. But yet, when I've tried to discuss this case with you, you always act mean and condescending, like I'm not worthy to discuss this case with you. And for the record, I'm by no means the only person who has pointed this habit of yours out to me, and others.


But Hey, I'm here to discuss the 3MW case. I'm not here to fight, or cause any issues. Just defending myself.
This is the 3MW forum.....lets proceed with the proactive conversation.

 

[Hurricane]

.....you always act mean and condescending, like I'm not worthy to discuss this case with you. And for the record, I'm by no means the only person who has pointed this habit of yours out to me, and others.


But Hey, I'm here to discuss the 3MW case. I'm not here to fight, or cause any issues. Just defending myself.
This is the 3MW forum.....lets proceed with the proactive conversation.

As I have said when you have posted this before, Monkeymann, you have really ruined my day! I just hope I have enough scotch & Valium in the house to get thru it now!

As I recall besides the Grave Robbers you were always suspicious of Mike Henson, Shane Appleby, and the events that went on at the Kirby household that early morning. Why don't you start off the discussion by telling us what new information you have uncovered. I'm not looking for a rehash of the "that girl" comment, how Janelle's eye twitched or even whether Kathy Kirby could have heard the girls conversation as she claimed. That's all been run aground. What have you uncovered in your investigation or have you cleared them of any involvement?

 

[monkeymann]

As I have said when you have posted this before, Monkeymann, you have really ruined my day! I just hope I have enough scotch & Valium in the house to get thru it now!

Hurricane, you silly goose, you know as well as I do that I don't hurt your feelings. And I'm hoping that you're just being facetious about the scotch and Valium.

As I recall besides the Grave Robbers you were always suspicious of Mike Henson, Shane Appleby, and the events that went on at the Kirby household that early morning.

Hurricane, lets put this in the correct context, so there is nothing that can be misconstrued. My only interest in Mr. Henson, and Mr. Appleby, is that, There is almost not account in the media, or otherwise regarding either of them.
There has been speculation regarding them by others in the past, every time that I have started conversations about them, no one will talk about them! Period.
I, and a lot of other people would like to hear that nights story from their perspective. Because we've never heard it thus far. And it makes a normal person wonder why? Why TWO of the last people to have seen them alive, have never spoken publically about the case. Doesn't that stride any one else's curiosity?
That's where the interest lies.....as it well should with ANYONE who is seriously looking at this case.
You know as well as I do that this is the case. Their story is important, and we've never heard them tell it, and there hasn't really been hardly any talk of them on any of the boards.....ever. WHY? One claimed Suzie was like a little sister to him, but then, even in the early days of the case.....NOTHING. We don't hear anything out of either of them? Many normal people hurricane, are curious about this very valid question.

I and many others feel that their stories are important, and would be of value to trying to solve the case. Nothing more....Nothing less.

Why don't you start off the discussion by telling us what new information you have uncovered. I'm not looking for a rehash of the "that girl" comment, how Janelle's eye twitched or even whether Kathy Kirby could have heard the girls conversation as she claimed. That's all been run aground. What have you uncovered in your investigation or have you cleared them of any involvement?

You know Hurricane, if I were the only person who had noticed oddities, and textbook bodily reactions, as well as wondered how Ms. Kirby could have heard exactly what the girls said to each other, from her second floor bedroom, in June with her window presumably shut because the Air Conditioning or Heat was on, at the very least because there was company staying at their house that night. And even if she did hear what was said, she never mentions anything about Shane and Mike leaving Janelle's when Janelle go's into her house. We have no accounting of where they went from there.
Its never been talked about. Ever. I am by far not alone on how many other people, even ones close to you, feel about it.
All I ever said is, I thought is seemed strange, and I didn't feel good about the way she was acting. You acted like I thought I was the great spingalli for pointing some of those textbook bodily reactions out. They were pointed out to me by numerous people. So please don't make out like I'm out to lunch, and all alone in my observations, and statements.
Hurricane.....LOL.......If it were just me......I might be worried. But these observations have been supported by many people, so I don't know what to tell you.