TX TX - Julie Moseley, 9, Mary Trlica, 17, Lisa Wilson, 14, Fort Worth, 23 Dec 1974 - #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Speaking of outrageous stories...I read somewhere...recently...that FWPD has five boxes containing 18,000 documents. That's the entire case file. OK:
  1. IF each "document" is one single sheet of paper
  2. AND a ream of paper is 500 sheets
  3. 18,000 /500 = 36 reams of paper
  4. IF a case of paper contains 3 reams (15lbs.)
  5. The Single-page-document "theory" is 12 cases/boxes of blank paper, weighing 180 pounds.
  6. Those must be five HUGE boxes.
Yep. I'm back.
Thrilled to see you back , Cat!
 
Thought I'd pop in I have not posted in a couple years but I kept following. <modsnip - discussing fb group> What I wondered about and forgive me if it was posted somewhere is What car are they looking for? The theory sounds feasable but it was like "ok we pulled up the first car, not it .may be the 2nd car. pull up second car , nope not it, can't get 3rd one till spring but we don't think it's it" WTH ? What car are they looking for?

So happy to answer the most important question I ever asked. The answer is: Nobody Knows.
It's this way. Almost 10 years ago I thought, whereas LE is taking the position that the girls most likely got into a car with "someone they trusted", wouldn't that car be crime scene #1? The abandoned Oldsmobile was not a crime scene. It follows that the vehicles owned by, or accessible, to all known family members and POI's would be recorded (a list) in the case file. My question was this: Is that list complete? In other words; is there a vehicle missing from the list? In addition to any vehicle known to police - is there one that was unknown. It's possible. That list was by observation or a result of simple Q & A. I doubt that list was qualified by record search. In short - I believe the girls are still in that car...wherever it is, whatever it is. It would be the most logical explanation as to how they vanished into thin air. The thing is; that question has NOT been answered, because that record search has not been done. I did suggest to LE that if a certain POI made the girls disappear, where I would look. Then I made the mistake of sharing that with the wrong family member. I'll leave it at that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I grew up in Wedgwood and I am familiar with the area also we spent countless hours out at that lake. It was very common for the teens growing up back then that were making their own car payments to get behind. I heard lots of guys claim they were going to dump their car in Benbrook and report it stolen to get relief. I always thought that area of the lake would be full of dumped cars. I wonder if the city or corp of engineers ever brought any out?
 
I grew up in Wedgwood and I am familiar with the area also we spent countless hours out at that lake. It was very common for the teens growing up back then that were making their own car payments to get behind. I heard lots of guys claim they were going to dump their car in Benbrook and report it stolen to get relief. I always thought that area of the lake would be full of dumped cars. I wonder if the city or corp of engineers ever brought any out?
I can't get a straight answer out of any agency you'd think should know. But, in 44 years - the answer has to be yes. Any vehicle recovered from that lake would have been reported to Austin - where VIN#'s go to die.
 
I can't get a straight answer out of any agency you'd think should know. But, in 44 years - the answer has to be yes. Any vehicle recovered from that lake would have been reported to Austin - where VIN#'s go to die.
One more thing...we only need to concern ourselves with vehicles that "disappeared" in the 12 months following 12/23/1974. Any VIN# and/or registration not retired legally, by title transfer, or by salvage, or reported stolen - every vehicle that went off the grid in that following 12 months was owned by someone. That list is the one I want - to compare to the one that should be in the case file.
 
It's time to re-boot. Forty-four years has a way of ruling out many things that could have happened. If we can agree on that; then we can move on by sticking to facts and what may be inferred from them. Speculation is a part of the process. Taking an "if-this-then-that" approach will keep it in within normal limits. I have a two-twist limit on facts. The "I know I'm gonna catch it..." letter is a fact. I'd like to break that one down - tomorrow.
 
If that car is not in that lake, then this trail is too hard to follow. It could be any car and had gone anywhere. Well the car in the lake theory has been pretty much ruled out. No stone unturned, that's true.
 
If that car is not in that lake, then this trail is too hard to follow. It could be any car and had gone anywhere. Well the car in the lake theory has been pretty much ruled out. No stone unturned, that's true.
Not so fast! That car could have been hauled out over 44 years for a variety of reasons. Underwater hazard, etc. The Army Corps has responsibilities. I need their list.
 
The "I know I'm gonna catch it..." letter is a fact. I'd like to break that one down - tomorrow.

A naive translation question, which can be taken on notice for when this discussion gets underway.

I'm Aussie, we have a really casual language (and absorb a lot of US culture) but I've previously never come across this phrase. As I understand, there may have been an area in Texas where the phrase was more common. Is the verb "catch" being used in a similar manner to "get" in the below phrases?

I'm gonna get it | I'm gonna catch it
You're gonna get it | You're gonna catch it
They're gonna get it | They're gonna catch it
 
Not so fast! That car could have been hauled out over 44 years for a variety of reasons. Underwater hazard, etc. The Army Corps has responsibilities. I need their list.
:oops: I had the impression that you had already looked at those that were hauled out...
 
A naive translation question, which can be taken on notice for when this discussion gets underway.

I'm Aussie, we have a really casual language (and absorb a lot of US culture) but I've previously never come across this phrase. As I understand, there may have been an area in Texas where the phrase was more common. Is the verb "catch" being used in a similar manner to "get" in the below phrases?

I'm gonna get it | I'm gonna catch it
You're gonna get it | You're gonna catch it
They're gonna get it | They're gonna catch it
I have been translating it, in my mind, that it means "cop it" (which is not American I guess). Good to clear that up, if someone could explain?
 
Not so fast! That car could have been hauled out over 44 years for a variety of reasons. Underwater hazard, etc. The Army Corps has responsibilities. I need their list.
But if any other as agency did pull out other cars, I would hope they would have alerted authorities to remains in the car. But if the list was available could still maybe tie the vehicle to a poi
 
But if any other as agency did pull out other cars, I would hope they would have alerted authorities to remains in the car. But if the list was available could still maybe tie the vehicle to a poi
So I think safe to say the remains were not in it
 
Army Corp website shows record retention generally 10 years that have value as historical or legal value. Less than 6 for other records. Permanent records are transferred to National Archives and Records Administration.
ER 25-60-1 USACE Records Management Program
 
A naive translation question, which can be taken on notice for when this discussion gets underway.

I'm Aussie, we have a really casual language (and absorb a lot of US culture) but I've previously never come across this phrase. As I understand, there may have been an area in Texas where the phrase was more common. Is the verb "catch" being used in a similar manner to "get" in the below phrases?

I'm gonna get it | I'm gonna catch it
You're gonna get it | You're gonna catch it
They're gonna get it | They're gonna catch it

Yes. My family would say, "gonna catch hell".

It's not at all an unusual phrase.
 
One more thing...we only need to concern ourselves with vehicles that "disappeared" in the 12 months following 12/23/1974. Any VIN# and/or registration not retired legally, by title transfer, or by salvage, or reported stolen - every vehicle that went off the grid in that following 12 months was owned by someone. That list is the one I want - to compare to the one that should be in the case file.

You would probably first have to make your own list of cars owned by people connected to this case, and cars to which they might have had access (via family or friends). Unless LE made a list from their own research and not simply from what they were told.

Not so fast! That car could have been hauled out over 44 years for a variety of reasons. Underwater hazard, etc. The Army Corps has responsibilities. I need their list.

I'm the first to think water burial whenever a person and a car go missing. But another possibility is a car becoming part of the landscape on a ranch or farm. In my rural area, wrecked cars are sometimes hauled in and used in a pasture for a livestock windbreak. And some ranches have a metalyard--like a boneyard, where animal carcasses are discarded, but with all types of metal discarded in a heap, sometimes in a sinkhole, sometimes over the edge of a draw, etc.

Forty years ago, my spouse and I did that with an older car we had, not worth much so we had just liability insurance on it. Wrecked it, bent the frame, among other "injuries." Hauled it to a rancher friend's place, where it remains to this day. And I think the title is still in our files. No report made, and no one ever went looking for info on the car. Friend has since sold the ranch, and I'm sure the new landowner has no idea who left the car there.

Of course, there were no bodies in the trunk, and if LE ever went looking into the car's history, our names wouldn't be hard to find via the VIN and last registration.

But in the meantime, there it sits.

So if a car is indeed missing from someone connected to this case, some in-depth research may be necessary to find it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
282
Guests online
309
Total visitors
591

Forum statistics

Threads
608,749
Messages
18,245,281
Members
234,440
Latest member
Rice Cake
Back
Top