Gilgo Beach LISK Serial Killer, Rex Heuermann, charged with 7 murders, July 2023 #16

[sunshineray]

I will not be surprised if it's traced back to Rex..I will not be surprised if there is nothing conclusive after years of these items being buried there. now..were the items in bags? boxes? plastic storage containers? or were they just in a layer in the sand 2 feet down...thats not very far down when you think of shifty sand...but perhaps the areas around the beach buildings are less likely to change or move around...I think you have to have an understanding of how sand acts as an environment for buried objects.. sand can be wet and heavy underneath where there is no sun...

I hope we will see some photos of the items. I hope DNA will be discovered . children's clothing too
and none of this stuff sounds like beach clothing , bathing suits, towels , flip flops...no this stuff was weird enough that the cops got called in immediately. mOO

I was reading up about the areas of Jones Beach and erosion. It seems the east side (so I'm taking for granted that includes near the East Bathhouse) is a problem area for erosion and the beach there is "nourished" regularly when it's deemed to be needed. They dredge from the area of Fire Island's jetty and replenish Jones eastern area beach. So over the time from the 80's to present day those items could have been much more well covered than the 2 ft they were found at.

 

[Betty P]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1965237943532224879

Well, I'm confused.

 

[sunshineray]

Well, I'm confused.

So where exactly did this story just reappear/break in Sept 2025? And why? Does anyone know?

 

[AuDHD]

So where exactly did this story just reappear/break in Sept 2025? And why? Does anyone know?

The NY Post broke it as an exclusive 3 days ago, so it’s probably just them drumming up clicks IMO

Exclusive | Gilgo Beach murders probe leads detectives to Jones Beach after disturbing discovery near Rex Heuermann’s former job

Police sources said the items were from the late 1980s and early 1990s. They were buried two feet deep.

nypost.com

 

[sunshineray]

The NY Post broke it as an exclusive 3 days ago, so it’s probably just them drumming up clicks IMO

Exclusive | Gilgo Beach murders probe leads detectives to Jones Beach after disturbing discovery near Rex Heuermann’s former job

Police sources said the items were from the late 1980s and early 1990s. They were buried two feet deep.

nypost.com

And now it's just pre-trial fodder for the defense since it's been released to the public. They would have gotten it in discovery...probably, MO

 

[Barbb]

So are we to believe the journalists just got some bit of info and ran with it to sell news?

 

[AuDHD]

So are we to believe the journalists just got some bit of info and ran with it to sell news?

Web sleuths recently decided to allow NY post articles despite the controversial nature of the outlet. But as for me, I’m on team “I wouldn’t exactly call this journalism…” More like people magazine- a somewhat credible tabloid style outlet. JMO

 

[Barbb]

If it were true I can't get past the oddity of someone burying women's clothes at the beach. That seems pretty suspicious, considering Heuermann did work there. Gilgo is a only a stretch away. Hard to not think there is something to this. I'm not derailed.

 

[sunshineray]

If it were true I can't get past the oddity of someone burying women's clothes at the beach. That seems pretty suspicious, considering Heuermann did work there. Gilgo is a only a stretch away. Hard to not think there is something to this. I'm not derailed.

I wonder, were there no purses then, just women's clothing found?

 

[Barbb]

Well, actually it said they found a bloody glove, weathered purses, and women's clothes some of the clothing items had buttons ripped off, suggesting that they were forcibly torn off. After I made my post I had wished I mentioned this. I wonder if it is true.

 

[snooptroop88]

I was reading up about the areas of Jones Beach and erosion. It seems the east side (so I'm taking for granted that includes near the East Bathhouse) is a problem area for erosion and the beach there is "nourished" regularly when it's deemed to be needed. They dredge from the area of Fire Island's jetty and replenish Jones eastern area beach. So over the time from the 80's to present day those items could have been much more well covered than the 2 ft they were found at.

Great information, grateful!

If it were true I can't get past the oddity of someone burying women's clothes at the beach. That seems pretty suspicious, considering Heuermann did work there. Gilgo is a only a stretch away. Hard to not think there is something to this. I'm not derailed.

Agreed. That Tierney guy is a stickler for shooting down information that doesn't come through LE/authorities. (Not saying this is a bad thing.) He's noted over and over again that he's about what can be proven. He gets really incensed about witnesses going through John Ray, I remember it. If there's nothing "proveable" in terms of the supposed items uncovered in the sand, if there's nothing that's going to result in more charges in the short term (and I mean, how likely is that?), he's going to dismiss it publicly asap, jmo. Doesn't necessarily mean there's nothing there of potential interest, may just mean he's not appreciative of the NYPost letting everyone know there's something in the sand there while he's preparing to put butter lovin' Psycho Monster in prison permanently. I'm sure something had to be at that location, whatever you think of the Post, I'm sure it's not a total fabrication. That Tierney guy seems incredibly cautious and like he wants to retain control at all costs (jmo understandable), so it may just be his way of telling the Post to shut the heck up, lol. But maybe not.

 

[Ruminations]

Web sleuths recently decided to allow NY post articles despite the controversial nature of the outlet. But as for me, I’m on team “I wouldn’t exactly call this journalism…” More like people magazine- a somewhat credible tabloid style outlet. JMO

I agree that the story is of questionable journalistic value. But I am intrigued about its origin and the motivations for getting it to an outlet like the NY Post. Clearly, this is not new news to a few people, and one of those people decided not much earlier than the publication date that about then was a good time to release the info. It was not leaked years ago. It was not kept hidden. What changed and made the publication date the time to leak?

The NY Post's motives are obvious. But they got the story from someone, and THEIR motive is not obvious to me.

The journalistically interesting story is: who wants this information out and why?

MOO

 

[AuDHD]

I agree that the story is of questionable journalistic value. But I am intrigued about its origin and the motivations for getting it to an outlet like the NY Post. Clearly, this is not new news to a few people, and one of those people decided not much earlier than the publication date that about then was a good time to release the info. It was not leaked years ago. It was not kept hidden. What changed and made the publication date the time to leak?

The NY Post's motives are obvious. But they got the story from someone, and THEIR motive is not obvious to me.

The journalistically interesting story is: who wants this information out and why?

MOO

good point, that is the real question isn’t it? Why did someone leak it now?

here’s my uneducated guess:

maybe the items discovered are related to another killer from the area, and the defense leaked this discovery now (before the trial) in order to highlight the fact that he wasn’t the only one using those beaches as a dumping ground?

my opinion only obv

 

[snooptroop88]

I agree that the story is of questionable journalistic value. But I am intrigued about its origin and the motivations for getting it to an outlet like the NY Post. Clearly, this is not new news to a few people, and one of those people decided not much earlier than the publication date that about then was a good time to release the info. It was not leaked years ago. It was not kept hidden. What changed and made the publication date the time to leak?

The NY Post's motives are obvious. But they got the story from someone, and THEIR motive is not obvious to me.

The journalistically interesting story is: who wants this information out and why?

MOO

good point, that is the real question isn’t it? Why did someone leak it now?

here’s my uneducated guess:

maybe the items discovered are related to another killer from the area, and the defense leaked this discovery now (before the trial) in order to highlight the fact that he wasn’t the only one using those beaches as a dumping ground?

my opinion only obv

Whoa, yeah, agreed, BUT they might actually be linked to RH, they simply don't know or can't prove it (maybe can't prove it yet, maybe can't prove it ever). Anything remotely suspicious that's murky or unproveable can be molded to the D's advantage, ambiguity is a D's best friend, jmo.

Unfortunately, post-HK, it's all academic, it's like going through the motions for the D as far as I'm concerned. Like this guy's ever, ever going to set foot outside a prison again? You could have the most inept, most gullible, most incompetent, most negligent, most careless, most downright moronic prosecutorial team possibly of all time representing the state at this point, and he'd still be convicted.

You could have someone walk in with a ventriloquist dummy of Pinocchio and give the closing argument. Same outcome, It's that bad (again, though, it's just my opinion).

 

[snarast]

Whoa, yeah, agreed, BUT they might actually be linked to RH, they simply don't know or can't prove it (maybe can't prove it yet, maybe can't prove it ever). Anything remotely suspicious that's murky or unproveable can be molded to the D's advantage, ambiguity is a D's best friend, jmo.

Unfortunately, post-HK, it's all academic, it's like going through the motions for the D as far as I'm concerned. Like this guy's ever, ever going to set foot outside a prison again? You could have the most inept, most gullible, most incompetent, most negligent, most careless, most downright moronic prosecutorial team possibly of all time representing the state at this point, and he'd still be convicted.

You could have someone walk in with a ventriloquist dummy of Pinocchio and give the closing argument. Same outcome, It's that bad (again, though, it's just my opinion).

Yes, the motivation seems to be to drag up new things to stall the trial. But indeed post-HK everybody who can think understands that there’s more.

But RH has a right to a speedy trial. And so much more importantly - the victims have a right to closure. A right to be able to vent this trauma and be at peace.

”A demon who walked among us.” - paraphrasing the former chief. It’s kind of important to solidify the past tense here.

IMHOO

 

[Inthedetails]

The NY Post broke it as an exclusive 3 days ago, so it’s probably just them drumming up clicks IMO

Exclusive | Gilgo Beach murders probe leads detectives to Jones Beach after disturbing discovery near Rex Heuermann’s former job

Police sources said the items were from the late 1980s and early 1990s. They were buried two feet deep.

nypost.com

I am now thinking some employees found the items and alerted LE but LE determined they were unrelated. Perhaps the employees thought they knew better than LE and/or were attracted to the potential sensation of the find so they alerted a rag (NYPost) that would be more than happy to print "the exclusive."

Sometimes "exclusives" are a great scoop and othertimes they are "exclusive" because no other outlet was interested.

jmopinion

 

[sunshineray]

Great information, grateful!

Agreed. That Tierney guy is a stickler for shooting down information that doesn't come through LE/authorities. (Not saying this is a bad thing.) He's noted over and over again that he's about what can be proven. He gets really incensed about witnesses going through John Ray, I remember it. If there's nothing "proveable" in terms of the supposed items uncovered in the sand, if there's nothing that's going to result in more charges in the short term (and I mean, how likely is that?), he's going to dismiss it publicly asap, jmo. Doesn't necessarily mean there's nothing there of potential interest, may just mean he's not appreciative of the NYPost letting everyone know there's something in the sand there while he's preparing to put butter lovin' Psycho Monster in prison permanently. I'm sure something had to be at that location, whatever you think of the Post, I'm sure it's not a total fabrication. That Tierney guy seems incredibly cautious and like he wants to retain control at all costs (jmo understandable), so it may just be his way of telling the Post to shut the heck up, lol. But maybe not.

And no mention of the purses either? To separate a woman from her purse is usually without her consent. Losing a whole purse, not just an item or two from it, I would think it was done as a crime. Whether it's just a snatch or something more violent is the question. MO

 

[Inthedetails]

And no mention of the purses either? To separate a woman from her purse is usually without her consent. Losing a whole purse, not just an item or two from it, I would think it was done as a crime. Whether it's just a snatch or something more violent is the question. MO

I wonder if the purses where thefts that some perp accumulated over time, or even the same day. I have often wondered if beaches are ripe for theives as people routinely leave their belongings while going in or near the water.

jmopinion

 

[sunshineray]

I agree that the story is of questionable journalistic value. But I am intrigued about its origin and the motivations for getting it to an outlet like the NY Post. Clearly, this is not new news to a few people, and one of those people decided not much earlier than the publication date that about then was a good time to release the info. It was not leaked years ago. It was not kept hidden. What changed and made the publication date the time to leak?

The NY Post's motives are obvious. But they got the story from someone, and THEIR motive is not obvious to me.

The journalistically interesting story is: who wants this information out and why?

MOO

RH's defense team? Just a thought

 

[sunshineray]

Yes, the motivation seems to be to drag up new things to stall the trial. But indeed post-HK everybody who can think understands that there’s more.

But RH has a right to a speedy trial. And so much more importantly - the victims have a right to closure. A right to be able to vent this trauma and be at peace.

”A demon who walked among us.” - paraphrasing the former chief. It’s kind of important to solidify the past tense here.

IMHOO

And on the other hand it's so very sad that some of HIS victims and their families will likely never get closure because they cannot be connected to this monster who took their lives