TX - 'Lori Ruff', Longview, WhtFem UP9863, *General Discussion and Theories* #4

[StarrChance]

http://articles.philly.com/1987-10-29/news/26213527_1_stock-market-insurance-scam-stock-manipulation
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/19...ministration-witness-protection-program-miami



Was this case ever ruled out? It appeared this gentleman had three daughters, one would have been college age in 1987. I did a little digging, but wasn't sure if it was already eliminated.

Just a thought...

So the murder suicide was in 1987, they had been in witness protection. Original name Arthur H Katz then changed to Kane under protection program. I suppose the best place to start would be -

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/19...ministration-witness-protection-program-miami

Kane and his wife, Judith, had three daughters, Lani, who is married to Harry Hollub; Suzanne, a college student; and Shanna, of high-school age.

Cant look now off to sleep here fftobed:

 

[HerStory]

As for trolls... I mentioned it before, & I'll repeat it again -- mostly because I am surprised: as far as I can see, there have been surprisingly few obvious trolls on the LEK-related threads. I don't know if that's because Websleuths closely monitor for that kind of behavior & remove problematic posts quickly & accurately, or trolls just don't find Websleuths a rewarding place to infest. I am not complaining in any way, in case anyone is wondering. I find this absence of troublemakers refreshing, especially in contrast to having to second-guess users on Wikipedia & other online fora.

Awwwww, is this your roundabout way of saying that you like us?

 

[awillis0513]

As for trolls... I mentioned it before, & I'll repeat it again -- mostly because I am surprised: as far as I can see, there have been surprisingly few obvious trolls on the LEK-related threads. I don't know if that's because Websleuths closely monitor for that kind of behavior & remove problematic posts quickly & accurately, or trolls just don't find Websleuths a rewarding place to infest. I am not complaining in any way, in case anyone is wondering. I find this absence of troublemakers refreshing, especially in contrast to having to second-guess users on Wikipedia & other online fora.

I agree--I imagine that that could be indicative of FLEK's identity. Either a family that doesn't have readily available internet access or a family that doesn't want to be found.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sunnynz]

http://articles.philly.com/1987-10-29/news/26213527_1_stock-market-insurance-scam-stock-manipulation
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/19...ministration-witness-protection-program-miami

Was this case ever ruled out? It appeared this gentleman had three daughters, one would have been college age in 1987. I did a little digging, but wasn't sure if it was already eliminated.

Just a thought...

Did you manage to find any pictures of Arthur or his family?

ETA: ok I found two of the daughters, Suzanne and Lani. The Sun Sentinel has them around the wrong way in terms of which one was married to who. Still trying to find Shanna. Lani maybe has some resemblance to FLEK but she and her sister are living a pretty public life on social media so it would be odd for the third sister to feel she had to escape. Who knows though, will do some more digging on her.

 

[WantingToHelp]

Here's another comparison. The unknown girl in the top left corner. And FLEK in the other 3 boxes.

I think like someone else said, the cow lick hair kind of matches with the top right photo of FLEK and this girl.

And the bottom left pic of FLEK really does seem to resemble the unknown girl. They both have the same haircut in both pics.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So I got an initial reply from the Sherriffs Office, letting me know that they were passing my message to Kirk Haddix. This initial contact took less than 3 hours for them to respond. (This was early Saturday morning, June 4th.) I have not heard back yet from Kirk Haddix. Nor have I heard back from Dolly Welch who I also contacted.

I'm going to give it a week to see if Kirk or someone else contacts me for the information that I have found. If after a week, no one contacts me, then I plan on sending another message to the Sherrifs office and just hand over all the pictures and links that I found. I will then wait a few more days after that to see if I get any response to this new information.

If after all that, I still don't hear from anyone, then I will assume my info lead nowhere. And that's when I'll come back here and show everything that I've discovered. Because if this unidentified girl isn't FLEK, there are still way too many coincidences, that maybe someone from here can find a link to FLEK through this family, somehow.

Coincidence??
- picture of girl resembles a young FLEK, about 10-12 yrs old. (Matching cow licks, hair color and hair style.)
- photo taken in 1976 which would give a DOB aprox 1962-1964. (Many speculate FLEK is older than stolen DOB of 1969.)
- 31 people in this FAMILY photo and she (and a boy who is a few years older than her and looks like her) are the ONLY ones who are NOT identified. Their names are listed as 'unknown'. Which is odd since it's a family photo. (Also want to add, that the many family photos that are posted, there is no one in the photos except for family members. I think I found 1 pic that had a woman's significant other in it with her. But that's it. So I find it really strange that this girl and what appears to be maybe her brother, are listed as 'unknown'. Just doesn't make sense.)
- this is a LARGE Jewish family. (Some have speculated that FLEK was Jewish.)
- it's quite obvious looking through all the family photos, that being TALL is a genetic trait. With both men and women.
- FLEK is said to have been heavy into family history and was known to be researching the Ruff heritage. WELL... this website I found is a family ancestry page. Everything on the website is detailed with any and all known info. (Ex: photos taken have.. they say who took the photo, address of photo, who lives at this address, who was in the photo (first and last names), story behind the reason the photo was taken and lastly who scanned the photo and sent it to be posted on the family's website. So obviously this family is serious about their ancestry,
- FLEK was known to like tea. It's mentioned on this website about certain family members who drank tea regularly.
- with a large family, people get married, go to college and move all over the place. The "home" state is not a state that I've heard FLEK being associated with. BUT with family members moving, for one reason or another, they are located in other states. (Florida, Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Washington (state), Hawaii, California and I think I saw Iowa. There may be a few more, but that's all I can think of right now.)
- a family member is named 'Lori Kennedy'.
- a family member is named 'Terry Turner'.


*** There's a lot of info on this family that seems to match FLEK. It could all just be coincidences, but maybe not??

 

[milkymama]

So the murder suicide was in 1987, they had been in witness protection. Original name Arthur H Katz then changed to Kane under protection program. I suppose the best place to start would be -

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/19...ministration-witness-protection-program-miami

Kane and his wife, Judith, had three daughters, Lani, who is married to Harry Hollub; Suzanne, a college student; and Shanna, of high-school age.

Cant look now off to sleep here fftobed:

The name Shanna is actually misspelled (actual spelling Channon) and all 3 daughters seem to be alive and accounted for. And Suzanne was married to Hollub, not Lani. That newspaper didn't double check much. LOL.

 

[milkymama]

The name Shanna is actually misspelled (actual spelling Channon) and all 3 daughters seem to be alive and accounted for. And Suzanne was married to Hollub, not Lani. That newspaper didn't double check much. LOL.

Replying to my own post.

I found another article where the government suspected Arthur of possibly defrauding the SSA by setting up false identities/benefit payments. (Really? Someone involved in fraud might use access to tons of social security numbers, not to mention the SSA computer systems, to commit fraud? Whoa, who would have thought?)

 

[milkymama]

If we could get authorities involved with the findagrave angle, we might have some kind of information to work with.

Findagrave does require a person to create an account in order to leave a "flower". So, whoever left that flower, had to provide an email address and a name at a minimum. ( When you leave a flower, you can leave it "anonymously" and you can also choose to leave a typed personal message or not - but that is separate from the fact that you have to create an account.)

 

[milkymama]

Wait a minute…I was reading that message on findagrave as if it was being signed as “Sandy”….but it may not have been. It may have been someone addressing Lori as Sandy instead. Here’s why. When you leave a flower/note on findagrave, you have to be logged into your account. When you get to the page where you can type a message, you have the choice of 3 radio buttons to control how you sign your note. You can either leave the note as your 1. account name, 2. another name you type in on the fly, or, 3. “anonymous”.

1 If you choose radio button number 1, it shows your account name. Your account name is whatever you signed up under – which isn’t verified. Your email address is verified in that you get a link to click on emailed to it and if you never click on the email, your account is not activated – but you could put your name down as Mickey Mouse and it wouldn’t be verified – there just has to be something in the name fields. Most people would use their real name even if they wanted to be secretive, because you can hide your real name on all your activity postings.
2 If you select radio button number 2 - this overrides the display of your real name, but doesn’t require anything filled in. You can leave it blank.
3 If you select radio button number 3, your name displays as the word “anonymous”.

The findagrave user had to have selected option 2.

If their actual name is Sandy, why didn’t they leave the radio button as #1 (that is the default and therefore easiest)? If they used a fake name to sign up with, why leave their real name on the note? Why choose option 2 if you are just going to put your name in the note?

 

[kimlo]

But if they chose to leave thier name would that not give their first and last name? They might not have wanted to become searchable, you cant find too much with just a first name. You cant even tell if its a female or male Sandy.

I think its their name, if the were adressing flek it would be

I hope you have found peace Sandy.

Instead it was

I hope you have found peace, Sandy.

The Sandy is seperated from message as a sign off by the commer. Thats the way I read it anyway.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[milkymama]

But if they chose to leave thier name would that not give their first and last name? They might not have wanted to become searchable, you cant find too much with just a first name. You cant even tell if its a female or male Sandy.

I think its their name, if the were adressing flek it would be

I hope you have found peace Sandy.

Instead it was

I hope you have found peace, Sandy.

The Sandy is seperated from message as a sign off by the commer. Thats the way I read it anyway.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I would have typed it as two separate lines (as one would do in a letter) if I was leaving my name as Sandy. They certainly COULD have intended to leave their name as Sandy, but why not enter it into the name field? They had to have clicked the 2nd radio button, but then they chose to leave the field blank - yet they signed their name in the text field? It seems out of the normal flow/use of the page and an unusual choice of how to use the page, but certainly possible.

 

[Linda9681]

Wait a minute…I was reading that message on findagrave as if it was being signed as “Sandy”….but it may not have been. It may have been someone addressing Lori as Sandy instead. Here’s why. When you leave a flower/note on findagrave, you have to be logged into your account. When you get to the page where you can type a message, you have the choice of 3 radio buttons to control how you sign your note. You can either leave the note as your 1. account name, 2. another name you type in on the fly, or, 3. “anonymous”.

1If you choose radio button number 1, it shows your account name. Your account name is whatever you signed up under – which isn’t verified. Your email address is verified in that you get a link to click on emailed to it and if you never click on the email, your account is not activated – but you could put your name down as Mickey Mouse and it wouldn’t be verified – there just has to be something in the name fields. Most people would use their real name even if they wanted to be secretive, because you can hide your real name on all your activity postings.
2If you select radio button number 2 - this overrides the display of your real name, but doesn’t require anything filled in. You can leave it blank.
3If you select radio button number 3, your name displays as the word “anonymous”.

The findagrave user had to have selected option 2.

If their actual name is Sandy, why didn’t they leave the radio button as #1 (that is the default and therefore easiest)? If they used a fake name to sign up with, why leave their real name on the note? Why choose option 2 if you are just going to put your name in the note?

View attachment 96214

I also thought this. But... That still is too vague to follow up.. Sigh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda9681]

Also, remember most people have horrible grammar so we can't really assume anything based on the comma :/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Owutatangledweb]

Wait a minute…I was reading that message on findagrave as if it was being signed as “Sandy”….but it may not have been. It may have been someone addressing Lori as Sandy instead. Here’s why. When you leave a flower/note on findagrave, you have to be logged into your account. When you get to the page where you can type a message, you have the choice of 3 radio buttons to control how you sign your note. You can either leave the note as your 1. account name, 2. another name you type in on the fly, or, 3. “anonymous”.

1 If you choose radio button number 1, it shows your account name. Your account name is whatever you signed up under – which isn’t verified. Your email address is verified in that you get a link to click on emailed to it and if you never click on the email, your account is not activated – but you could put your name down as Mickey Mouse and it wouldn’t be verified – there just has to be something in the name fields. Most people would use their real name even if they wanted to be secretive, because you can hide your real name on all your activity postings.
2 If you select radio button number 2 - this overrides the display of your real name, but doesn’t require anything filled in. You can leave it blank.
3 If you select radio button number 3, your name displays as the word “anonymous”.

The findagrave user had to have selected option 2.

If their actual name is Sandy, why didn’t they leave the radio button as #1 (that is the default and therefore easiest)? If they used a fake name to sign up with, why leave their real name on the note? Why choose option 2 if you are just going to put your name in the note?

View attachment 96214

I read it immediately as they were addressing FLEK (referring to FLEK) as "Sandy" as though that was her real name. That is why I mentioned in my prior post that we have all been talking about different "Sandra"s in this thread, such as "Sandra" H. (of the subject family) and I had previously mentioned "Sandra" Hopler as a possible match. The post states "I hope you have found peace, Sandy." I kind of took the comma separation as "Hey, I know the rest of the world doesn't know who you are; but I know who you are Sandy."

JMO

 

[sunnynz]

I also had a quick reply from The Gregg County Sheriff's office saying that my email had been passed on to Lt Kirk Haddix. At least we know someone is reading the emails! To refresh others' memories, my email was the one suggesting the Howder link.

 

[sunnynz]

I had seen the one posted in May, 2015 and because of the timing, I assumed it was posted by Spring/Summer1988 who posted it. We never did figure out if SpringSummer1988 actually did send his information to the investigator or if he did and then Velling retired so no one followed up on it, or someone did investigate it and found no validity in the claim or in the claimant.

The one posted just THIS May could be posted by someone who is trolling our thread. There are Sandy Hs (subject family who we have been investigating here) who have been mentioned here as well as Sandra Hopler. (Who I think greatly resembles her by the way). OR, this post could be totally REAL. Too bad there doesn't seem to be an investigator that is REALLY on this case WHO COULD TRACE THE IP on those two posts.

Ok, so I'm looking at the dates of this new findagrave message, and I'm looking back at the dates that Linda9681 was in touch with Windy, who was then going to get in touch with at least one Howder to ask them. I

s there a Sandy H still alive (sorry I can't remember off the top of my head right now)? Could it be that Windy talking to the Howders about this prompted a Sandy Howder to leave this message? Sorry, I realise this is all kind of a leap but the dates of Linda's contact with the H family, albeit indirectly via Windy, seem like they could time in with the findagrave message. And that would obviously be proof that the H's knew FLEK in some way.

Linda, also sorry to jump in on your lead here, I obviously don't know where you're up to with your contact with Windy.

 

[milkymama]

There is a Sandy H still alive. Also, on a sort of related note...Windy is not Windsong. Windsong is a male. Just FYI. I have confused those two individuals before.

 

[Linda9681]

Ok, so I'm looking at the dates of this new findagrave message, and I'm looking back at the dates that Linda9681 was in touch with Windy, who was then going to get in touch with at least one Howder to ask them. I

s there a Sandy H still alive (sorry I can't remember off the top of my head right now)? Could it be that Windy talking to the Howders about this prompted a Sandy Howder to leave this message? Sorry, I realise this is all kind of a leap but the dates of Linda's contact with the H family, albeit indirectly via Windy, seem like they could time in with the findagrave message. And that would obviously be proof that the H's knew FLEK in some way.

Linda, also sorry to jump in on your lead here, I obviously don't know where you're up to with your contact with Windy.

Oh lawd no! PLEASE go on those leads! I have not had time to do much due to work and school and my practicum!! I feel the Howders are truly a valid lead, but a hard one to follow unless you have some time to figure out their crazy family tree!!!
The time line is interesting. One thing that seemed strange also is when I spoke to Wendy B. She didn't seem surprised at all and she didn't ask ANY questions about who Lori was or why I wanted to know anything. It was very weird like she expected me to contact her.
My second contact was much more inquisitive and also much more helpful with info. Windy was supposed to contact Sandra Howder to see if she knew her... Her response to me when I asked her if she contacted her was " she is very busy right now".... And nothing else so far. My GUESS is Sandra does know her... And told Wendy to drop it like its hot! Then the message... I have a hard time believing it is a coincidence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda9681]

Something else to think on... If FLEK gave up her ID.. Who is to say someone else didn't assume it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[milkymama]

I totally had that thought also! Just because she didn't want to be her original identity, doesn't mean someone else wouldn't want to be.