Just for the record, I do not believe Janelle and her bf were involved.
It is THEIR timeline. I'm just saying that everything hinges on their timeline, and Janelle has changed times over the years.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just for the record, I do not believe Janelle and her bf were involved.
It is THEIR timeline. I'm just saying that everything hinges on their timeline, and Janelle has changed times over the years.
It is THEIR timeline. I'm just saying that everything hinges on their timeline, and Janelle has changed times over the years.
Was that an assumption on how I should behave in this horrific situation? Thank you for your concern about my strange behavior but I’m doing what needs to be done and that is always making myself available to the professionals that are investigating this crime.
It is THEIR timeline. I'm just saying that everything hinges on their timeline, and Janelle has changed times over the years.
The time they were last see - the time Janelle went over (which has changed over the years,) them leaving Sherill's house and coming back. All I'm saying is it is all based on their timeline.
What are the differences in time that you are referring to? Why is this significant? I believe you have said that everything hinges on the timeline I recall correctly.
For example, if she said she went to the house at 12 noon but in reality it was at 10 AM in the morning I could see the relevance. If she said they arrived at 12:30 PM in the afternoon I wouldn't see the relevance.
What I have been most concerned with is why she felt the need to start calling so early in the morning. At that time they couldn't have had much more than a little over four and 1/2 hours of sleep. Why the rush? It was only about 35-40 miles to Branson.
Did they not make specific plans to muster up at a certain time; say 10 AM? That would have been more reasonable, I should think. So why would she call starting about 8 AM (as I recollect)? Did she have reason to suspect there might be a problem that was concerning to her? Was it something she knew about going on in their lives? Was it something she overheard being said that night? And when they arrived and didn't find them there why didn't she blow the whistle immediately and/or drive over to the McCalls or she could have called the McCall residence from the Levitt home.
Really, all of this business with the timeline is Police Investigation 101. All of the inconsistencies if that is what they were should firmly have been straightened out in the first day. Have the police ever addressed these things? What possible reason could they have not to discuss this openly and especially since by all accounts I know anything of they were never suspects?
She originally stated that she started calling the house at 7:30am (Original Police Report). Then, over the years, it changed to 9-9:30am (Subsequent Interviews) Personally, I would have known darn good and well when I started calling the house, and my story wouldn't have changed one bit over the years. Unless of course, my story was contrived, then I, as others would as well, would probably screw up the details later. But thats just me.
But Kathee is correct.....based on the original police report, and subsequent interviews over the years, the "Entire Timeline" is based on JK & MH's statements. (Beyond the timeline that had been established on Sherrill with the phone call she received from a friend that night).
She evidently called between 7:30 AM to as late as 9:30 AM. While I agree that this is troubling, I still don't understand the statement that "everything" hinges on her timeline. Maybe I'm dense but I'm not getting that part.
There are a couple hard times we have from the timeline. Such as Sherrills friend conversation, completed circa 11:15 PM that previous night. Mrs. Kirbys account of the girls leaving her house at 2:20 AM, a few hours later. Then when have when Mrs. McCall called the Kirby house looking for Stacy, reaching Jannells sister, that was presumably after 11 AM or noon, when Jannelle was at the Levitt house. Then when Mrs. McCall actually went to the Levitt house. These events and times involved other people and fill in some discrepancies.
Im still not clear how long Jannelle and Mike were at the house, if they left and the house was still vacant, what time Mrs. McCall arrived at the house and were there other First Responders there. Jannelle and Mike were the first to arrive at the house and therefor a lot of the burden lies with them, being the First of the First Responders. As someone else mentioned, Saturday was a LONG day for all of them...got started at 9 AM, and went on until 3 AM (judging from Mrs. Kirbys account of the girls leaving). Then, Jannelle is up Sunday morning, bright eye and bushy tailed at 8 or 9 to begin what would be another long day, when some of her contemporaries were still in bed at noon.
Kathee...Im with you on this whole story being a bit...odd. Youve probably seen the primary reports, as well as some others here. Is there anything you can share in her story doesnt jive with other accounts that morning/afternoon ? Curious also, are there any questions she should have been asked but was not ? Just from what Ive read here, Im sure there are plenty of attorneys who could discredit her as a witness or raise enough doubt to a dispassionate jury to lessen her testimony/account. Its not what people here think, its what a unemotional jury would. But, to discredit her doesnt move the ball forward at the investigative stage. Anything you can share ?
I don't disagree with anything said but what I am not understanding is why Kathee believes "everything" hinges on Janelle's timeline. What am I missing here?
Because it really does. Kirby, Henson, Applyby, Kathy Kirby, as well as a couple of the partys that the girls went to and the people who can vouch for their presence at those partys, as well as the woman who called Sherrill that night, were the ones who established the timeline that police at least initially used as a starting point for their investigation.
But most of it was based on the report that was given to police by J. Kirby, Henson, Applybe, and Kathy Kirby (Who vouched for Janelles account by saying that she heard Stacy & Susie say they were going to Susies house), and Shane Appleby stating that, "He watched them walk to their their cars, and thats the last time he saw them"
What other timeline could police have possibly established after they actually started their investigation.....Unless they found something in the course of their investigation that threw into question the validity of one or more of those peoples stories, or based on evidence to the contrary that they found in the house that has never been released to the public.
Could someone please enlighten me about this alleged bloody footprint on the outside of the house? I'm having trouble excepting this.
It seems the consensus is it would have belonged to Stacy McCall since she was barefooted. The obvious conclusion would be that she cut her foot on the broken glass. The thing I'm hung up on is wouldn't there have been a visible blood trail or at least some droplets of blood elsewhere?
I've read nothing that would indicate blood inside the home or blood outside the home except for this lone spot. There wasn't any precipitation reported on June 7th or June 8th in Springfield, so they couldn't have been washed away.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this because I'm leaning toward this bloody footprint as being total bunk?
Ones belief of whether or not the perpetrator entered the home is dependent on the number of abductors one believes was involved.
Is that an accurate statement?
In reading up on this case, I’m of the mind that there was only one abductor. This article from last June seems to indicate the police suspect there was only one abductor too. However, I can’t realistically figure out how one person could have subdued three women without entering the home. There is a theory out there that the reason there wasn’t any physical evidence inside the home is because nothing ever took place inside the home. For starters, there may have been physical evidence left behind. Due to the fact that 18 people may have unknowingly annihilated the crime scene, we have no way of knowing for sure. But putting that aside, I still see problems with that theory, most notably the purses and Stacy McCall.
If the perp didn’t enter the home, there is no rhyme or reason why Sherrill Levitt’s purse is on her daughter’s bedroom floor. From what I’ve read, I get the impression Sherrill Levitt was a “neat freak.” The police were quoted as saying that some things were out of place and shouldn’t have been that way. For me, this points away from the theory that the perpetrator never entered the home.
As for Stacy McCall, I’ve yet to find a logical explanation as to why she would be outside socializing, braless and in her panties, in the middle of the night. If it was someone she knew, I’d think she’d be more likely to throw on some sweat pants and then go outside. To explain this, some have theorized that there was a struggle at the front of the house involving Suzie, Sherrill, or both with the perp and Stacy tried to escape out the back. The problem I see with this is if Stacy escaped from the house how did the perp maintain control of Sherrill and Suzie? If Stacy escapes and the perp chases after her, what’s stopping Suzie from running down to Glenstone Avenue to get help? The reverse of that is the perp is in the process of tying up Sherrill and Suzie, what’s stopping Stacy from calling the police? With breaking porch globes, barking dogs, people running around the outside of the house, and the possibility of a vehicle driving by seeing the mayhem, the perp would quickly lose control of the situation.
The point is one perp would have trouble pulling this off without entering the home. I’m not even sure two perps could have pulled this off without entering the home. Unless I’m reading the situation wrong, I have to conclude the perp DID enter the home.