TX TX - Julie Moseley, 9, Mary Trlica, 17, Lisa Wilson, 14, Fort Worth, 23 Dec 1974 #6

[Brightchaser47]

That ad clearly says: factory trained TECHNICIANS. So multiple people.

And we know for sure that there were other guys working at their business at least at some point, cause one of them allegedly pointed out oddity of those 10 or 20k TT gave to CA before he started working.

No easy to find (either cause it's hard or cause it's simply not there) any mention of coworker confirming that TT was at work and left well past 4:00 PM.
But is that cause there was no one there on the 23rd... or cause they were and confirmed so it seemed completely irrelevant to mention, and only sometime later it started to appear crucial?

It's odd. Cause TT's whereabouts are one thing.
But about a week later girls not there. Even if at the time TT was not suspected at all, wouldn't it be kinda obvious to check on the employees wherabouts that day? Not at the angle of being or not being TT's alibi, but in case that one of them could see something or meet the girls?
It's not a next level theory to consider that wife could call husband at work or even show up there. They had to check that.

At this point, I don't believe TT went to work that day. Since it was right before Christmas and CA was taking cancer treatments, it's possible they closed for a few days for the holiday. That eliminates the need for employee "silence", etc. We've been focusing on his (TT) being there, because he claims he was. To my knowledge, we have no real evidence he was at the shop that day.
So, if we assume he wasn't at work, where was he and what was he doing?

 

[T rex]

At times it feels like it's turning into this weird cluedo game with very limited list of suspects and full confidence that surely either one of them did it or some of them (or even all of them) conspired, as there is actually no physical way for anyone else to commit the crime.

One of VI said that Cotton wasn't that nice of a man to give his SIL rides just for the sake of Rachel going shopping.
But in the same time - he could be unaware that's the reason behind it, and do that just out of habit or cause he liked to see how the work is going, just look around or pick up something on the way. We know nothing about his habits.

It's not like the whole ordeal can't be explained in a stupid and mondain way. Let's say:
1. DA was home all day, before she went to pick TT up from bowling alley.
2. CA actually gave TT ride to and back from work cause at the time he hasn't take his treatment YET... or at all. Cause again, we don't know what kind of person he was when it came to healthcare. We know that he didn't have insurance (at all or good enough to cover all the medical bills) so we don't know if he was like "oh, I'm supposed to take it today, so 100% I have to take it today" or more of the type "oh, I'm supposed to take it today, but I don't want to be all sick on Christmas, so we will actually do that on 26th".
3. If the neighbour actually, physically lived NEXT DOOR from A's it'd be pretty hard for her to watch A's driveway.
23rd is not the time to set outdoor decorations. And doing stuff at home would likely require getting pretty close to the window to look outside and check what's going on in the street.
Possible, some people do that - but we don't know if she really claimed that or not. Could be that she only compared usual workdays when FA wasn't around and car wasn't in their driveway most of the day and just missed Fran's brief visit in the workshop in the morning as well as 1,5h long absence later.

At the time when they made all those statements, if innocent, they could have no real clue of how serious it is and that they won't ever see the girls again. There could be some dumb motive behind all this mess - like sudden fear that now it could be all over the newspapers that they say that CA was givin people rides and kinda going to work on the day when he was supposed to be taking treatment. They were likely way less scared than other families cause:
1. Rachel was 17
2. They had experience with DA running away previously, multiple times, and she was coming back safe
so unlike Julie's mom or Wilson's - they had reasons to think/hope that it may be not that serious.

It's all so weird, it all feels so stretched.
But in the same time. Scenario like:

1. Guy is angry and jealous about his teenage wife.
2. He snaps on the day and at the time when he's 100% sure that she's not alone.
3. Finds her
a) in company of two younger girls at the Mall and forces them to go with him... but where?
b) at home, where her sister temporarily lives, with two other people living in their backyard and also with ex and in-laws possibly showing up at random times.
4. Murders her.
5. Murders them too.
6. But he's so lucky that her sister is just there, ready to jump in and help him dispose of the bodies cause they went to highschool together and dated briefly, while he was still married to his ex.
7. They figure that in order to stop LE from investigating anything too soon they need to fake a letter that will explain the sudden disappearance, but they fail to make anything right.
8. His inlaws realize what he did and also jump in to help cover for this triple murder of their daughter, their friends only daughter and one other little girl.

I know that things point at that being completely or partially accurate, but it's too stretched to last 50 years. It sounds like lousy Borgias and so unlike any other crime I ever heard about. Scenarios like that usually make sense just because some important factors are missing.

When it comes to a rage theory it seems like no one ever considers or factors in escalation. He didn't have to be killing mad. He could have just been regular ole mad and then it escalated. In fact he didn't have to be mad at all. Maybe for instance one of the girls let something slip and that's what set him off to start with. Maybe a little glimpse into why the two older girls weren't so keen on having a young child with them? Just saying it doesn't necessarily have to be an ambush or something of that nature.

 

[T rex]

Thread 5, Pg 37, Post 734
Wishyouknew (Verified Family Member of Mary Trlica):"That is not what Richard told me first hand. Cotton has cancer treatment that morning and they didn't leave the house. Fran went next door around noon to see if they needed help setting up for the party. That came from his lips directly to my ears."

And I would take what RW said over anyone. He knew the answers to many of the questions we ask here. I dont think he suspected TT right from the start so he wasn't just jumping to conclusions but he did come to one over the course of many years. IMO.

 

[Pricklykitty]

And I would take what RW said over anyone. He knew the answers to many of the questions we ask here. I dont think he suspected TT right from the start so he wasn't just jumping to conclusions but he did come to one over the course of many years. IMO.

I agree with you regarding RW. His recollections didn't seem to change, and he seemed to have a pretty grounded approach to it all compared to others.
When you read past accounts, old newspaper articles, current accounts even, the only people who have changing, inconsistent stories are the "A" family imo.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

Maybe for instance one of the girls let something slip and that's what set him off to start with. Maybe a little glimpse into why the two older girls weren't so keen on having a young child with them? Just saying it doesn't necessarily have to be an ambush or something of that nature.

That is a scenario that I have considered, also. Someone innocently let's slip that CJG was with them at the Mall and then the situation escalates from there.

 

[Brightchaser47]

And I would take what RW said over anyone. He knew the answers to many of the questions we ask here. I dont think he suspected TT right from the start so he wasn't just jumping to conclusions but he did come to one over the course of many years. IMO.

I think it's significant that it took RW that long to come to that conclusion. It's been stated on many occasions that he was sharp, honest, and determined.
In my mind, that creates the possibility that either he was blinded/swayed by the stories coming from the A clan (at least, for a while), or TT played a lesser role in the girls' disappearance.

 

[Brightchaser47]

If the above scenario happened, it is possible the A family was protecting more than just their daughter. The family business was on very shaky ground financially (it appears) and TT seemed necessary to the business future. So the A family could be protecting their surviving daughter and/or the business by confusing the situation.

If DA was involved or knows something, would she confess after her mother's gone? It could be that she and RA are sworn to secrecy, as long as Mom's alive.

 

[beubeubeu]

When you read past accounts, old newspaper articles, current accounts even, the only people who have changing, inconsistent stories are the "A" family imo.

Inconsistencies are one thing, but for me it really looks like some form of mental-emotional issue with FA.
She just HAS to be in the middle of everything or put someone else there.

She claimed to be at work with TT on that day (possible that nobody noticed that BUT).
She also claimed that she and Cotton were the ones that found the car.
And that she was running through the Mall with her son, askind about the girls, on the 23rd.
And then she told heartbreaking story about CA guarding the car despite of his terrible condition.

The latter three being absolutely incorrect, we know that for certain. Plenty of whitnesses, to everybody's knowledge - including FA. Yet she was still telling her tales. Not once, not twice, many times and about no small stuff, and on the top of everything she was giving it to everyone on paper (in newspapers). For me it all looks more like someone genuinely confused about everything and in deepest shock, possibly combined with somewhat "natural" tendency to describe alternative reality than like honest attempt to lie and sabotage the investigation.

 

[beubeubeu]

When it comes to a rage theory it seems like no one ever considers or factors in escalation. He didn't have to be killing mad. He could have just been regular ole mad and then it escalated. In fact he didn't have to be mad at all. Maybe for instance one of the girls let something slip and that's what set him off to start with. Maybe a little glimpse into why the two older girls weren't so keen on having a young child with them? Just saying it doesn't necessarily have to be an ambush or something of that nature.

It was considered and discussed but it's still hard to digest cause it's almost unheard of to just casually murder two kids to cover up for involuntary manslaughter.

To make this scenario happen two highly unlikely circumstances would have to happen, possibly even three (if we're considering DA's involvement):
1. He'd have to either find or take the girls to the location where there were no whitnesses (why if not having murder in mind? Why prevent Julie and Renee from attending the lunch?)
2. He'd have to find himself suddenly capable to murder a child and teenage girl, at that point it'd have to be an ambush.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

Inconsistencies are one thing, but for me it really looks like some form of mental-emotional issue with FA.
She just HAS to be in the middle of everything or put someone else there.

She claimed to be at work with TT on that day (possible that nobody noticed that BUT).
She also claimed that she and Cotton were the ones that found the car.
And that she was running through the Mall with her son, askind about the girls, on the 23rd.
And then she told heartbreaking story about CA guarding the car despite of his terrible condition.

The latter three being absolutely incorrect, we know that for certain. Plenty of whitnesses, to everybody's knowledge - including FA. Yet she was still telling her tales. Not once, not twice, many times and about no small stuff, and on the top of everything she was giving it to everyone on paper (in newspapers). For me it all looks more like someone genuinely confused about everything and in deepest shock, possibly combined with somewhat "natural" tendency to describe alternative reality than like honest attempt to lie and sabotage the investigation.

I believe some of the eyewitness accounts (particularly the person who visited their house a number of years later) came from FA, also. All mention an abduction at the Mall.

As you have mentioned above some of her statements have been proven to be incorrect.

I don't know what motives were behind this, but I do feel as though they are grounded in keeping the narrative/focus on the Mall, rather than elsewhere. JMO.

If i recall correctly, a poster way back pointed out that the very first articles on the disappearance did not mention an abduction from the Mall, rather that the car was there and they were last seen at the Army/Navy store.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

It was considered and discussed but it's still hard to digest cause it's almost unheard of to just casually murder two kids to cover up for involuntary manslaughter.

To make this scenario happen two highly unlikely circumstances would have to happen, possibly even three (if we're considering DA's involvement):
1. He'd have to either find or take the girls to the location where there were no whitnesses (why if not having murder in mind? Why prevent Julie and Renee from attending the lunch?)
2. He'd have to find himself suddenly capable to murder a child and teenage girl, at that point it'd have to be an ambush.

What lunch ?

I agree point 2 sometimes seems a bit of a reach, but to my mind the potential perp had motive to be mad at one of the girls at least. As has been mentioned before perhaps it was a case that the perp initially thought Rachel was alone and had already acted before realising the two other girls were there (e.g sitting in the car outside).

 

[Brightchaser47]

Inconsistencies are one thing, but for me it really looks like some form of mental-emotional issue with FA.
She just HAS to be in the middle of everything or put someone else there.

She claimed to be at work with TT on that day (possible that nobody noticed that BUT).
She also claimed that she and Cotton were the ones that found the car.
And that she was running through the Mall with her son, askind about the girls, on the 23rd.
And then she told heartbreaking story about CA guarding the car despite of his terrible condition.

The latter three being absolutely incorrect, we know that for certain. Plenty of whitnesses, to everybody's knowledge - including FA. Yet she was still telling her tales. Not once, not twice, many times and about no small stuff, and on the top of everything she was giving it to everyone on paper (in newspapers). For me it all looks more like someone genuinely confused about everything and in deepest shock, possibly combined with somewhat "natural" tendency to describe alternative reality than like honest attempt to lie and sabotage the investigation.

I'd go a step further and say all four (claims) are wrong. As for her actions, she may be a dramatic person by nature (as in, "Oh, Mom, you know that's not how it happened"). However, in taking a closer look, it does seem like she's determined to paint her household in the most favorable light possible, although the evidence clearly says otherwise.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

And I would take what RW said over anyone. He knew the answers to many of the questions we ask here. I dont think he suspected TT right from the start so he wasn't just jumping to conclusions but he did come to one over the course of many years. IMO.

I would agree 100% with this.

According to the Gone Cold podcast his initial suspicion was that CJG was involved, but I get the impression that he dropped that after a while. Like you say, he came to a different conclusion.

Listening to him being interviewed on the Nancy Grace podcast, at least some members of the FWPD seemed have come to the same conclusion also, but were just unable to nail the perp.

 

[Brightchaser47]

What lunch ?

I agree point 2 sometimes seems a bit of a reach, but to my mind the potential perp had motive to be mad at one of the girls at least. As has been mentioned before perhaps it was a case that the perp initially thought Rachel was alone and had already acted before realising the two other girls were there (e.g sitting in the car outside).

Whether he killed Rachel accidentally or purposely, I still feel it was serious overkill to kill the other two. I can believe TT was responsible in some capacity for Rachel's death, but not the other two.
If the other two girls were still in the car, TT could've had DA walk out to the car, give them a story about Rachel having a "freak accident", and DA drive them home, while he cleans up, etc. Unless, they were in the house, RW and JM would have no way to know what really happened.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

Whether he killed Rachel accidentally or purposely, I still feel it was serious overkill to kill the other two. I can believe TT was responsible in some capacity for Rachel's death, but not the other two.
If the other two girls were still in the car, TT could've had DA walk out to the car, give them a story about Rachel having a "freak accident", and DA drive them home, while he cleans up, etc. Unless, they were in the house, RW and JM would have no way to know what really happened.

I totally agree that it is serious overkill. It is the only part of this theory that is somewhat weak.

But if not this, what on earth happened to the girls ? I have yet to see anyone come up with a better theory. I wish someone would.

I find the idea of them being 'trafficked' far fetched.

 

[Brightchaser47]

Where did DA work? And what was her actual job? I've seen a few references to it on here, but the stories conflicted, and her alibi for the 22nd was inconsistent.

 

[Brightchaser47]

Exactly when and how did the "girls were sold/trafficked" theory emerge?

 

[jetsfanjohn]

Exactly when and how did the "girls were sold/trafficked" theory emerge?

Good question, I believe it FA or TT who first suggested it ? Not sure when the theory first emerged, but I get the impression it was not too long after the girls went missing, as opposed to say twenty years later.

 

[FW_Froggy]

Where did DA work? And what was her actual job? I've seen a few references to it on here, but the stories conflicted, and her alibi for the 22nd was inconsistent.

She worked at Gino's on Harry Hines in Dallas ( strip club ). The same man that owned Gino's owned at least 17 other Gentleman clubs in Dallas and Fort Worth at that time. So is Dallas organized crime involved in this? There is only one person out of ALL the suspects who would know the people to make bodies disappear Forever.

 

[beubeubeu]

I believe some of the eyewitness accounts (particularly the person who visited their house a number of years later) came from FA, also. All mention an abduction at the Mall.

I don't think they did. There it wasn't just FA telling stories. It sounded like LE spoke to those people.
I mean clerks who told FA that older woman told them about this possible kidnapping - woman was never idenfitied but clerks were.
Man who "visited" A's home was allegedly brought there by some neighbour after learning about the disappearance during his visit in Fort Worth.

As you have mentioned above some of her statements have been proven to be incorrect.

That's not the most accurate description IMO to say that she was "proven to be incorrect". It seems like she was either giving the press completely alternative version of events, as they went.

If i recall correctly, a poster way back pointed out that the very first articles on the disappearance did not mention an abduction from the Mall, rather that the car was there and they were last seen at th

No reports pointed at possible abduction then, seemed like nobody knew what happened so they were saying as much as they knew = nothing specific.