Theories: Who and Why?

[GetSmart]

I have another question, RPS. Why, in your opinion, do you think it was a crime of opportunity and not planned. I feel very differently about that. I think the killers planned this but maybe didn't know when they were going to do it, just happened to be that day. JMO

Most of the time this is also what I think... but then I can also see if it was a young kid & emotions..anger ect came into play then that would be totally different..:waitasec:

 

[gertrude-gertie]

RPS and GS -- I understand what both of you are say. So many different possiblities. All could have happened. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[Albert18]

I think there are three general circumstances that could describe this crime.

1. The killers were local and something happened that day or this was ongoing and it escalated that day.

2. The killings were a payback for something but it wasn't something the girls had done.

3. The killers were just passing through and something happened that set them off.

If it was option 1, this case should have been wrapped up within a couple of weeks.

If it was option 2, LE should at least know the reason for the killing by now. They don't seem to know why it happened.

If it was option 3, this case will probably never be solved.

There was a case years ago in the Houston area where a girl got off work at a hotel some time after midnight and while she was driving home on a freeway a couple of guys passed her and must have been ogling her. Instead of ignoring them, she flipped them off and so they ran her off the road and killed her. They may have sexually assaulted her too, I don't remember. They caught the guys and that was the reason they gave for killing her.

 

[gertrude-gertie]

I think there are three general circumstances that could describe this crime.

1. The killers were local and something happened that day or this was ongoing and it escalated that day.

2. The killings were a payback for something but it wasn't something the girls had done.

3. The killers were just passing through and something happened that set them off.

If it was option 1, this case should have been wrapped up within a couple of weeks.

If it was option 2, LE should at least know the reason for the killing by now. They don't seem to know why it happened.

If it was option 3, this case will probably never be solved.

There was a case years ago in the Houston area where a girl got off work at a hotel some time after midnight and while she was driving home on a freeway a couple of guys passed her and must have been ogling her. Instead of ignoring them, she flipped them off and so they ran her off the road and killed her. They may have sexually assaulted her too, I don't remember. They caught the guys and that was the reason they gave for killing her.

Hi Albert. I think it could be option 1 or 2. Not 3. I live in a very rural community. Everyone knows everyone's business. People walk the dirt roads all the time and live on those dirt roads. Nothing happens.

That is probably how it is in Weleetka. That is why it is such a shock. My own opinion is, something was or had been going on. Whether with the girls themselves - or - either with the Placker family or the Whitaker family. Since it was such a brutal killing, I still believe someone in one of the 2 families knows why. I just wish I, or all of us, knew why. This is just my opinion, of course. There seems to be a lot of criminal activity in both families. JMO

 

[sheza]

Hi everyone,
I'm not going with the timeline beginning at 4:30 these girls could have been gone hours before and maybe the Glock was never intended to be used.

I'm thinking Taylor was hit with something first, Taylor puts her hand up to her face then the smaller gun is used to shoot Taylor, first shot while her hand was still up to her wound. Skyla turns to run, shooter turns smaller gun to Skyla and shoots her in the side of her face to stop her, turns back to Taylor and uses what bullets are left.
Maybe the glock was never intended to be used but Skyla was not dead and he needed another gun or more bullets, he may have had the glock with him or had to go somewhere (a friends or home) and grab whatever he could get. Shoots Skyla with the larger gun many times, last shot (large gun) going to Taylor.
Just a thought.

RPS could any of this be possible?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Hi Albert. I think it could be option 1 or 2. Not 3. I live in a very rural community. Everyone knows everyone's business. People walk the dirt roads all the time and live on those dirt roads. Nothing happens.

That is probably how it is in Weleetka. That is why it is such a shock. My own opinion is, something was or had been going on. Whether with the girls themselves - or - either with the Placker family or the Whitaker family. Since it was such a brutal killing, I still believe someone in one of the 2 families knows why. I just wish I, or all of us, knew why. This is just my opinion, of course. There seems to be a lot of criminal activity in both families. JMO

You know that would be hard to take and probably didn't happen. I think these killers are locals but we can never say for sure that someone didn't just come off the highway on that road and saw them their alone and vulnerable and they seized the opportunity to do their evil.

We know for a fact that Joesph Duncan was a complete stranger going down rural roads when he came across Shasta and Dylan in their yard. So while it may not have happened I will not discount it until we know who did this.

I am not sure why they would know? How would they know and don't you think if they knew anything at all they would have long told OSBI who it is that would have so much rage and vengeance against them to do something this horrible?

I know Skyla had a brother that was about to be sentenced for 2nd Degree murder but I doubt just because he has a criminal history he knew who did this either. Plus links to feuds or enemies to the family is one of the easiest things for LE to trace because usually many people are aware of it.

imoo

 

[RPS]

Hi everyone,
I'm not going with the timeline beginning at 4:30 these girls could have been gone hours before and maybe the Glock was never intended to be used.

I'm thinking Taylor was hit with something first, Taylor puts her hand up to her face then the smaller gun is used to shoot Taylor, first shot while her hand was still up to her wound. Skyla turns to run, shooter turns smaller gun to Skyla and shoots her in the side of her face to stop her, turns back to Taylor and uses what bullets are left.
Maybe the glock was never intended to be used but Skyla was not dead and he needed another gun or more bullets, he may have had the glock with him or had to go somewhere (a friends or home) and grab whatever he could get. Shoots Skyla with the larger gun many times, last shot (large gun) going to Taylor.
Just a thought.

RPS could any of this be possible?

Yes, I agree to a large extent. I believe that the smaller caliber was the initial weapon, and the Glock was used after. The shooter might have panicked because he thought the girls were still alive. A Glock 40 is a prized weapon, but I believe it was stolen (statistic: 40% of stolen guns do not get reported to the police) and that it was considered as a throw-away weapon ( a toy alomst). When stolen, it had bullets -- but these kind of bullets, are relatively expensive.

The shooter attempted to shoot the 11YO in the face, but she covered up with her arms, and thus received shots to the back of her arms. Another shot missed her, but pierced the sleeve of her shirt.

I think the Glock was stolen and never intended to be used as a murder weapon, but more as a gangsta symbol to show friends.

 

[sheza]

Yes, I agree to a large extent. I believe that the smaller caliber was the initial weapon, and the Glock was used after. The shooter might have panicked because he thought the girls were still alive. A Glock 40 is a prized weapon, but I believe it was stolen (statistic: 40% of stolen guns do not get reported to the police) and that it was considered as a throw-away weapon ( a toy alomst). When stolen, it had bullets -- but these kind of bullets, are relatively expensive.

The shooter attempted to shoot the 11YO in the face, but she covered up with her arms, and thus received shots to the back of her arms. Another shot missed her, but pierced the sleeve of her shirt.

I think the Glock was stolen and never intended to be used as a murder weapon, but more as a gangsta symbol to show friends.

Thank you so much RPS, One shooter could do this? smaller gun first after all bullets used then grab the glock?

 

[sheza]

I'm going with the one shooter only because I believe somebody would have talked by now.

 

[ArizonaGiGi]

Sheza, I agree with you; one shooter. Otherwise, somebody would have talked by now. Well, unless they are dead. Shooter could have offed the 2nd person at a later date.

Welcome Gertie, I love your avitar!
RPS, thanks for your insight.

 

[RPS]

Thank you so much RPS, One shooter could do this? smaller gun first after all bullets used then grab the glock?

That's what I think at least. The initial 6 shots were 3 shots aimed at the face of the 13YO then 3 shots aimed at the face of the 11YO. Having two shooters with this much rage seems improbable.

 

[Mysterylover]

Gertrude-

Thanks for your observations.

The trajectory analysis seems to indicate that this was done by a standing, mobile shooter.

Here is my speculation part where I stretch it a bit. I am working under these beliefs:
- The girls were killed there.
- The shooter knew who the girls were.
- That there was a driver and a passenger, and the passenger did all the shooting after getting out of the vehicle. He returned to the vehicle to get a second gun after the first ran out of bullets.
- The driver was taken quite by surprise by his friend's actions, as they were completely impulsive.
- This was a crime of opportunity, not planned in any way.
- The vehicle was going south to north, probably to Henryetta....

First I'd like to say I have always doubted the 'time-line'...what are the 'odds'?

I think it was one shooter.

Considering the rage the shooter had, I'm convinced something had to occur sometime BEFORE the shooting occurred, minutes, hours, days, weeks or possibly years.

Most people would have to have time to 'build-up' such rage to do such violence, unless they have a 'rage disorder' or on drugs.

I see it happening most frequently when money, drugs and stolen guns are the reason behind the violence.

Even so WHY the girls, walking on the road, on that day? Why not someone else?
Is it normal for most people in Okla. to be carrying 2 pistols on a Sunday evening ?...:bang:

Did the girls have an enemy from days/weeks past?
Did they get in an argument with someone at the bridge, or earlier that day?
Did they throw rocks at someone or a vehicle?
Did they have an argument with whom-ever was on the 4-wheeler that Saturday? Did they call someone that Sunday morning on the land line?

Did they walk to someone's house that Sun. and something bad occurred?
Did a family member have a problem/argument/secret with the girls?
Was it gang related?
Did a family member have the girls carry 'something' to someone at the bridge at 5:00 that day ?
Did they get caught in the middle of a drug deal gone bad?

Did someone hate a P. family member that much?....
The shots to the girls mouth is probably a clue in the murders.

 

[EnvoyDriver61]

RPS, I like your theory; I'm just trying to make it work for what I remember about the case.

If it was a passenger, if the car was going south to north and from the east side of the road, wouldn't the passenger have to have either: 1. shoot through the car, basically through the driver's side window to get to the girls; 2. Actually have sat up in the passenger side window and shoot them over the car; or 3. Have shot them from a pickup truck bed; or 4. Have parked the car and been stationary.

I am also trying to reconcile the fact that early reports stated that tracks had turned around or made a u-turn.

The scenarios I describe above don't work well with logistics or trajectories I don't think. I'm not trying to take down your shot sequence and possible (probable actually) events. I just want to understand how it could have occurred.

I think they did know the girls and possibly couldn have made a few passes on the county road that day. They were shot within 3-4 minutes from Taylor's front door, so the people either had to not care that someone might be home or knew (by passing by and not seeing a specific car in the drive-way) that the parents were out.

At first, I thought it was people in a pick-up who came up behind them, from the north, shot them, and then turned around and went back the way the came. However, your scenario seems more plausible, especially since the autopsy came out.

I am beginning to believe an ambush scenario, where the shooter is dropped off ahead of the girls (ahead meaning between the bridge and Taylor's house) and then someone comes and picks them up again. That last parting shot your describe is so chilling, yet so realistic.

 

[RPS]

RPS, I like your theory; I'm just trying to make it work for what I remember about the case.

If it was a passenger, if the car was going south to north and from the east side of the road, wouldn't the passenger have to have either: 1. shoot through the car, basically through the driver's side window to get to the girls; 2. Actually have sat up in the passenger side window and shoot them over the car; or 3. Have shot them from a pickup truck bed; or 4. Have parked the car and been stationary.

I am also trying to reconcile the fact that early reports stated that tracks had turned around or made a u-turn.

The scenarios I describe above don't work well with logistics or trajectories I don't think. I'm not trying to take down your shot sequence and possible (probable actually) events. I just want to understand how it could have occurred.

I think they did know the girls and possibly couldn have made a few passes on the county road that day. They were shot within 3-4 minutes from Taylor's front door, so the people either had to not care that someone might be home or knew (by passing by and not seeing a specific car in the drive-way) that the parents were out.

At first, I thought it was people in a pick-up who came up behind them, from the north, shot them, and then turned around and went back the way the came. However, your scenario seems more plausible, especially since the autopsy came out.

I am beginning to believe an ambush scenario, where the shooter is dropped off ahead of the girls (ahead meaning between the bridge and Taylor's house) and then someone comes and picks them up again. That last parting shot your describe is so chilling, yet so realistic.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. A thread like this is perfect for exchanging ideas.

To clarify, I think the passenger actually got out of the car and attacked the girls. I don't believe any shots were fired from a car.

That U-turn influenced me for a long time. It was mentioned once in a press article. However, when I saw the visibility looking up north, I felt that the girls could not have been seen from a distance then followed/chased. There is a slight bend in the road that restricts vision down the road for a distance. So my assumption is that the U-Turn was possibly made by an official vehicle related to the case or by the 11YO's Mom. Although the U-Turn makes sense from the perspective that if a local did this, then they did not want to go by the 13YO's house after firing the shots. But ultimately, I was swayed by the selection of grand jury testifiers and who they associate with, and why any of them would be on that road at that time.

If they made a few passes on that road that day, I'm thinking that others would have witnessed that. Or maybe not!

 

[Albert18]

Hi Albert. I think it could be option 1 or 2. Not 3. I live in a very rural community. Everyone knows everyone's business. People walk the dirt roads all the time and live on those dirt roads. Nothing happens.

That is probably how it is in Weleetka. That is why it is such a shock. My own opinion is, something was or had been going on. Whether with the girls themselves - or - either with the Placker family or the Whitaker family. Since it was such a brutal killing, I still believe someone in one of the 2 families knows why. I just wish I, or all of us, knew why. This is just my opinion, of course. There seems to be a lot of criminal activity in both families. JMO

I also think it is option 1 or 2. Which makes me think there is something seriously wrong with the investigation.

Vickie's behavior bothers me. Her behavior seems to reflect option 2 but I think option 1 is more likely, so her behavior leaves me scratching my head. Vickie's behavior makes no sense if it was option 1.

 

[Albert18]

That groin shot to Taylor couldn't have been just a parting shot because of the trajectory of the bullet. The bullet was traveling almost parallel to body. I doubt she was positioned in such a way that a standing person could have made that shot. Somebody had to drop down to get the bullet to travel up her body.

Skyla's wounds should have told LE the number of shooters. It should have been easy to tell which wounds occurred while Skyla was moving and which ones occurred when she was down. If just one larger caliber wound occurred when Skyla was moving then that means there were two shooters.

 

[Albert18]

The reason I think the "style" of Taylor's groin shot is so important is because I think it suggests a juvenile.

I also think the investigation has pretty much determined if there were one or two shooters. I don't know why LE doesn't come out and make a more definitive statement about that.

 

[Ruflossn]

RPS and Albert18~
Thanks so much for posting all the different theories. I have not had time to read through them all, but I will. For someone who has never shot a gun, (does a BB gun count) it is alot to try and understand. Thanks again!

Ruflossn

 

[RPS]

That groin shot to Taylor couldn't have been just a parting shot because of the trajectory of the bullet. The bullet was traveling almost parallel to body. I doubt she was positioned in such a way that a standing person could have made that shot. Somebody had to drop down to get the bullet to travel up her body.

My theory is that that shot occurred when Taylor was already down on the ground, from an upright shooter about 12.5 to 16 feet away.

 

[YellowDog]

The reason I think the "style" of Taylor's groin shot is so important is because I think it suggests a juvenile.

I also think the investigation has pretty much determined if there were one or two shooters. I don't know why LE doesn't come out and make a more definitive statement about that.

I think a person standing could have easily shot Taylor in the groin if they were far enough away from the victim. Just aim the gun down low.

I personally still think this was a "vendetta" type killing for something one or both of the girls were responsible for doing or saying or something they were threatening to tell authorities about.

If that were a surfaced highway, then maybe an ambush type killing, but it was a dirt road not heavily traveled by outsiders.

If both girls were still virgins (which I don't believe was disclosed in the autopsies) then we can probably eliminate a sexual motive by some boys or relatives of the girls.

I believe it was two shooters because of two different types of guns being used. A couple of guys perhaps lying in wait for them to make the return trip back to the Placker house.

I'm still wondering if the girls were gone from the house longer than reported. Originally they reported the Plackers did not hear the shots. Were they even home? Has that ever been officially established?