IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #16

[nikb]

I think they meant that they are praying that today, 8/18, will be the day that whoever has the girls will bring them home and they think that person is someone who knew the girls. I have no idea if they have a specific person in mind or not. I was glad to get a glimpse of what the two of them are thinking about a possible perp.

Me too! I wonder if it has anything to do with the Ride & Drive event I just posted about. It had to be pretty moving to see all those people coming down the road in their pink shirts. Maybe she was hoping this would be a trigger to let the girls go? I have no idea... it's just a thought.

 

[mahoolin]

We had a child molester in our town (sure there are more, this one was just finally charged and prosecuted for it). He came from a good family, or least I thought they were very nice. I knew the parents, they used to go to the same church as me and my family and went to the same school as my father. I did not ever know their child who is now serving 20 years for 7 child sex acts. I don't know how old his youngest victim was, but the one that he is serving time for was 15 at the time. He served as a city councilman and was very active in the Methodist church. He was a pianist and a Sunday school teacher. He worked for the family business. He got away with it for quite a while. Apparently the local kids who were victimized were paid to be quiet. He finally went too far and was starting to molest the children of parents who came from other states to buy watermelons from the family business. An investigation was started and (sunshine law) there were released records previously sealed by a grand jury of previous accusations and how the matter was swept under the rug.

Anyway, I started reading about child molesters and came across some interesting information here: http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/pages/tell_others_the_facts.html

* We want to introduce you to a sexual abuser of children. (they call him George)Keep in mind that far more men than women are abusers. In fact, approximately one out of 20 men, and approximately one out of 3,300 women are sexual abusers of children.

* First of all, he's married, just like 77 percent of the more than 4000 child sexual abusers in the Child Molestation Prevention Study. George is religious, like 93 percent of the abusers. He's educated. More than 46 percent had some college education and another 30 percent were high school graduates. Like 65 percent of the admitted abusers, George was working. Numerous studies of adult victims have sought to link child molestation victims to lower social class and lower family income. All have failed. Child victims and their abusers exist equally in families of all income levels and classes. And, now from the study, we know that child molesters are as equally married, educated, employed, and religious as any other Americans.

Maybe our perp has crossed over from being a molester to a pedophile (think Jerry Sandusky) or perhaps even worse. http://crime.about.com/od/sex/p/pedophile.htm





There's more good information at both links. Just food for thought.

ETA: The molester will only serve about 7 years of the actual 20 year sentence.

BBM
from a friend - their experience with the local perp...he was caught molesting children - male and female, had done so for years. Had a wife and his own children, and anytime any hint of trouble, they moved to another town where he recreated his same set-up as before -close involvement with children. Wife stayed with him all throughout.

He finally went to jail after being chased from community to community where nothing was done. Someone put 2 and 2 together and figured out what was going on by a chance conversation with friends who recognized him from another town. He had a very public job. There were rumors and children speaking out about feeling very uncomfortable around him in his current town. The adults were clueless.

Sad he got away with it for so long.

 

[Tucarra]

Easily. Recreational or touring bicycle riding is considered low impact.

Just kinda thinking, I'd be pretty upset if I were TG, (hope he's not reading this)...poor guy reports something he thought could be helpful...that's it...

Having had back surgery and knee surgeries, bikes are sometimes best way for low-impact stuff...

Anyway...back to trying to find the girls...

Hunch is that someone in this knew them. and their Dad's situation...

 

[Confusion]

I described the timeline in this case and how quickly police were called. My daughter wondered why five adults were immediately called to search for the children and then the police were notified ... without first calling friends. That's what is missing in this case ... the family immediately went to panic mode, mobilized all the parents and soon after the police ... but I don't recall anything about calling friends of the children.

This suggests to me that the family had some sense that something was off right away ... but why.

Actually, experts say they should have reported them missing sooner. Studies have shown that most abducted kids who are murdered too are killed within the first 3 hours (with the highest number within the first hour.) I think they called as soon as they did because the girls didn't normally stay gone that long, and normally were close enough to hear when they were called (and returned home when they were.)

They had been searching a small town for 2+ hours before contacting the police, and these girls are pretty young. It would have taken me a lot less time to call if one of my sons had disappeared when he was 8, but I guess that's just me. I was lost once when I was 10 (I grew up in Minneapolis) with a friend who was the same age. We were gone for at least 3-4 hours, but our mothers never knew we were missing because they assumed we were at the other one's house. It scared me enough that when my son was that age, almost 25 years later, it still bothered me. He hated that he had to check in at least once an hour, always tell me where he was going, and let me know if he decided to go somewhere else before check-in time.

He was allowed to go about the same distance as these girls; down to the end of the street (3 blocks away), as far as the school in the other direction (2 blocks away), to the church on Wednesday afternoons for their youth group (3 blocks away), to a park 1/2 block away or the parking lot of a business across the street. He'd often ride with friends around those areas for hours, making sure to stop by often so I knew he was still around. At 12 he was allowed to go on the local "bike trail" but it was one house away from ours and only a few blocks long. They just liked it because they could ride faster without worrying about cars.

 

[otto]

I had been meaning to watch The Lovely Bones since Morgan Harrington's bones were discovered in a farmer's field in 2010, when the film was first released. I watched it today ... I think it gives insight into the situation that we're dealing with here.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Just pointing out that those closest to the case have no problems envisioning the timeline themselves -

From Nancy Grace

GRACE: Good question. Let`s go to Lyric`s mom, Misty Cook-Morrissey. Also with us, the grandmother, Wylma Cook.

Was that their pattern, Miss Wylma?

WYLMA COOK, MISSING GIRLS` GRANDMA, LAST TO SEE THE GIRLS ALIVE: No, it wasn`t no pattern, because we were always at Heather`s house in the morning and they could have went for a bike ride maybe 9:00, for a short bike ride, and come back. And there was no pattern.

And then another thing I want to say is down by the lake, going, not the bike path, somebody could have snatched them along the road. If there was two people in a van, they could have thrown those kids in their van with their bikes and there`s another way to drive by the houses and get to the end of that trail and they could have chunked the bikes down there with the children.

GRACE: To Misty Cook-Morrissey, explain to me again what Miss. Cook is saying. I think I get it but I want to understand it as it relates to that bike path and where the grandma`s home is.

COOK-MORRISSEY: OK. OK.

GRACE: So what is she saying?

COOK-MORRISSEY: I just started -- I just started the job at Casey`s, so the last five days, Lyric and Elizabeth have been playing at Heather`s every day, taking bike rides, so as far as a pattern, yes, could somebody have been watching them there, and seeing that they play together, that hang out together, this last week. Yes, that could have happened.

What she`s saying is at the end of the U that you were shown, the trail comes around here, the bikes were found here, You come to that end of it, this bridge is out into a wooded area and right here is a big patch of grass where you can pull your vehicles up on to and that`s where we parked our vehicles to get back on the trail and go back this way.

So that`s what she`s saying, that someone could have very well come into that grassy area on the south side of the trail that ends as far as being able to walk or ride a bike.

Neither Misty nor Wylma have any problem with the timeline, nor does Aunt Tammy nor Dan.

If those most affected think that's when and how the girls were taken, it's likely the hypothesis LE are working on.

:cow:

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1207/17/ng.01.html

 

[otto]

Actually, experts say they should have reported them missing sooner. Studies have shown that most abducted kids who are murdered too are killed within the first 3 hours (with the highest number within the first hour.) I think they called as soon as they did because the girls didn't normally stay gone that long, and normally were close enough to hear when they were called (and returned home when they were.)

They had been searching a small town for 2+ hours before contacting the police, and these girls are pretty young. It would have taken me a lot less time to call if one of my sons had disappeared when he was 8, but I guess that's just me. I was lost once when I was 10 (I grew up in Minneapolis) with a friend who was the same age. We were gone for at least 3-4 hours, but our mothers never knew we were missing because they assumed we were at the other one's house. It scared me enough that when my son was that age, almost 25 years later, it still bothered me. He hated that he had to check in at least once an hour, always tell me where he was going, and let me know if he decided to go somewhere else before check-in time.

He was allowed to go about the same distance as these girls; down to the end of the street (3 blocks away), as far as the school in the other direction (2 blocks away), to the church on Wednesday afternoons for their youth group (3 blocks away), to a park 1/2 block away or the parking lot of a business across the street. He'd often ride with friends around those areas for hours, making sure to stop by often so I knew he was still around. At 12 he was allowed to go on the local "bike trail" but it was one house away from ours and only a few blocks long. They just liked it because they could ride faster without worrying about cars.

It's such a different mindset ... perhaps a much safer one.

 

[winterrose]

I'm way behind on the thread, but I finally figured out why calling the police so soon after the girls were last seen just didn't sit well with me all this time. I visited my daughter this afternoon. She has two daughters, aged 9 and 11. I normally don't discuss this hobby with anyone, but I mentioned this case to her ... in part because her four children had gone for a walk in the woods, to a pond and they were expected home by 2:30. It was 3:30 and they still weren't back. I wondered how long they had to be gone before she panicked. She wasn't the least bit concerned that they were taking longer than planned. That seemed normal to me. I guess that's how she was raised.

I described the timeline in this case and how quickly police were called. My daughter wondered why five adults were immediately called to search for the children and then the police were notified ... without first calling friends. That's what is missing in this case ... the family immediately went to panic mode, mobilized all the parents and soon after the police ... but I don't recall anything about calling friends of the children.

This suggests to me that the family had some sense that something was off right away ... but why.

ITA, I think it's why LE kept interviewing the parents, why MM's story was confusing about Lyric's incident four days before. LE knows more, were there threats to any family members, were there people familiar they suspect? I believe Heather's post today gives a clue they might know more and I have no doubt her and Drew would discuss it with LE. Maybe this is why LE isn't telling more, they're working on it.

 

[Confusion]

It's such a different mindset ... perhaps a much safer one.

It wasn't really as restrictive as it sounds, there were a total of about 10 blocks he could go around (unless his 5 year old brother was with him, then it was just to the park or the parking lot). There were 2 playgrounds, a ball field, we had a swing set, slide and sand box in our yard, one neighbor with a child the same age had a trampoline they used at times, etc. I was probably just more cautious because I was raised in a city, and never completely adjusted to small town living. At that time, I was probably one of the few people in town who locked my door every time I left home, even just to make a 10 minute trip to the store.

 

[nikb]

Oh, this hits so close to home for me! I have virtually no memories of anything before I was about 5, but my mother told me so many things that happened, I can "see" them happening, just like I really remember it.

There is such a thing as a false memory. It's hard to explain, but we think we remember things in great detail, but our brains play tricks on us. <snipped for space>

Sorry I know this is a little OT but I do think it's somewhat relevant to the case. That is really interesting info about the memories! Equally strange to me is how far back people CAN remember some things. I heard in college once that a person's earliest memory is often around the same time as their first words - especially something traumatic but even things that aren't.

I will never forget (lol at myself given the topic of memories) describing the wallpaper in my bedroom to my Mom in a house that we moved out of when I was around 18 months old. In detail, and without her ever telling me anything about it. It wasn't anything traumatic, I just remember being on my changing table, looking at the wall, and liking the animals on the wallpaper. She looked very surprised as I was describing it to her, because I was asking her if I was remembering something that made any sense. My logical mind thought "no way do you remember something that far back in that much detail." But I am almost sure I did since there's no other logical explanation for that memory.

Our minds are sure tricky. I don't envy LE having to try to question people without 'leading' them accidentally. And back to this case, thinking along those lines, I can see how someone's memory could easily be fuzzy on what they saw or when they saw it.

 

[nikb]

<snipped>
Mr. C. I think saw them somewhere from 12-1. Not the 3:00 his wife corrected him to say, since she wasn't even home at the time. I'm thinking maybe she was gone doing the newspaper delivering from 12-3 and that's where she got the time from. Even if she was home I'd think it's unusual that she'd be out watering with him unless it's something they do together regularly. Also think it's unusual that he'd even think to mention to her that the girls who apparently ride by regularly (Elizabeth at least) came by that day, until after the news reports started coming out. <snipped>

Oops - sorry, it's too late for me to "edit" but I just wanted to correct myself. I think Mrs. C. may have been home when Mr. C did the watering - I'm not sure if it's confirmed either way. I think the newspaper delivering happened later, and happened to be when LE was at their house. I don't know that it matters just didn't want to add any further confusion.

 

[MotherOcean]

I'm way behind on the thread, but I finally figured out why calling the police so soon after the girls were last seen just didn't sit well with me all this time. I visited my daughter this afternoon. She has two daughters, aged 9 and 11. I normally don't discuss this hobby with anyone, but I mentioned this case to her ... in part because her four children had gone for a walk in the woods, to a pond and they were expected home by 2:30. It was 3:30 and they still weren't back. I wondered how long they had to be gone before she panicked. She wasn't the least bit concerned that they were taking longer than planned. That seemed normal to me. I guess that's how she was raised.

I described the timeline in this case and how quickly police were called. My daughter wondered why five adults were immediately called to search for the children and then the police were notified ... without first calling friends. That's what is missing in this case ... the family immediately went to panic mode, mobilized all the parents and soon after the police ... but I don't recall anything about calling friends of the children.

This suggests to me that the family had some sense that something was off right away ... but why.

I guess everyone is different but I personally don't think it's unusual that HC went to the police when she did. I live in a small town but we do get a fair amount of traffic through town because we are in the same county as a tourist area and much of that traffic cuts through our town. If my kids were not where they were supposed to be for more than about 30 or 45 minutes I would be in contact with LE for sure.

 

[otto]

I guess everyone is different but I personally don't think it's unusual that HC went to the police when she did. I live in a small town but we do get a fair amount of traffic through town because we are in the same county as a tourist area and much of that traffic cuts through our town. If my kids were not where they were supposed to be for more than about 30 or 45 minutes I would be in contact with LE for sure.

It sounds like the family didn't make any calls to friends of the children to see if they'd stopped in for a visit. It's just that calling friiends would be my fiirst thought ... same with my daughter.

 

[MNDad]

We always know where our kids are supposed to be. I think I would go into a panic quickly if they did not return when expected. However, I do think that calls would be made to friends and for all we know, they did call friends from cell phone while driving around looking. I don't think they acted too quickly or too slow. They reacted the way it is fitting for them, given what they know about their girls.

 

[Confusion]

We always know where our kids are supposed to be. I think I would go into a panic quickly if they did not return when expected. However, I do think that calls would be made to friends and for all we know, they did call friends from cell phone while driving around looking. I don't think they acted too quickly or too slow. They reacted the way it is fitting for them, given what they know about their girls.

It's also possible that Drew called their friends while he was home taking care of the other kids. I just assumed (I've been doing that way too much lately) that they had looked at the friend's houses for the bikes while they were driving around looking for them. Since the girls were said to stay within a few blocks, most of the friends must have been fairly close by.

 

[GrainneDhu]

I don't think so either, but it has been speculated here that she was talking about Mr. TG. It's hard to imagine that someone with her training and expertise would not get it right.

I agree. I think if she'd meant a bicyclist, she would have said bicyclist, biker or rider.

It gave me more hope. Clearly this runner has not come forward to the media, so that leaves room for other witnesses that the general public knows nothing about.

Plus, in general, I think it's not a good idea for witnesses to speak to the media unless LE specifically tells them to. It's frustrating for sleuths like us but it can be better for the case if they don't.

Given a choice between the two, I'll pick being frustrated every time. I've lived through worse in my life, I'll survive some frustration.

 

[nikb]

I don't think so either, but it has been speculated here that she was talking about Mr. TG. It's hard to imagine that someone with her training and expertise would not get it right.

The only thing I can think of is she said "regularly runs around the lake" as in "regularly runs [his bike] around the lake." (italics by me) That still doesn't match with a number of other things including the time Aunt T. says she spoke with the person on the trail, but it's the only logical explanation I can think of for why the FBI spokesperson might have said "run" and still meant Mr. TG.

ETA: I don't think the above is what happened. I think there were two separate people, it was just the only thing I could come up with as to how a statement might be misconstrued to make it seem like a "runner" was a "cyclist."

 

[hambirg]

I'm way behind on the thread, but I finally figured out why calling the police so soon after the girls were last seen just didn't sit well with me all this time. I visited my daughter this afternoon. She has two daughters, aged 9 and 11. I normally don't discuss this hobby with anyone, but I mentioned this case to her ... in part because her four children had gone for a walk in the woods, to a pond and they were expected home by 2:30. It was 3:30 and they still weren't back. I wondered how long they had to be gone before she panicked. She wasn't the least bit concerned that they were taking longer than planned. That seemed normal to me. I guess that's how she was raised.

I described the timeline in this case and how quickly police were called. My daughter wondered why five adults were immediately called to search for the children and then the police were notified ... without first calling friends. That's what is missing in this case ... the family immediately went to panic mode, mobilized all the parents and soon after the police ... but I don't recall anything about calling friends of the children.

This suggests to me that the family had some sense that something was off right away ... but why.

See, I don't agree at all. I wonder why they didn't call sooner. I would have. I think it is about patterns of behavior. If it was known that the girls rode their bikes all over town and were gone for long periods of time, then I could see it. But according to the family this wasn't the case. Something was off and not normal. . .and they were right. . .something was terribly wrong.

It's kind of like if you always lock your front door when you leave and you come home and it's open. You instantly know that something might be wrong. . .because it is not the norm. However, if you frequently leave the door unlocked it probably wouldn't seem like a big deal. I think this situation is like the first. . .the door is normally locked.

As for the calling the friends, it simply may not be part of the girls normal behavior. My youngest doesn't have any friends her age in our neighborhood. She doesn't go to friend's houses unless it is some pre-arranged play date. I wouldn't think to call friends because who would I call?

MOO

 

[GrainneDhu]

I'm way behind on the thread, but I finally figured out why calling the police so soon after the girls were last seen just didn't sit well with me all this time. I visited my daughter this afternoon. She has two daughters, aged 9 and 11. I normally don't discuss this hobby with anyone, but I mentioned this case to her ... in part because her four children had gone for a walk in the woods, to a pond and they were expected home by 2:30. It was 3:30 and they still weren't back. I wondered how long they had to be gone before she panicked. She wasn't the least bit concerned that they were taking longer than planned. That seemed normal to me. I guess that's how she was raised.

I described the timeline in this case and how quickly police were called. My daughter wondered why five adults were immediately called to search for the children and then the police were notified ... without first calling friends. That's what is missing in this case ... the family immediately went to panic mode, mobilized all the parents and soon after the police ... but I don't recall anything about calling friends of the children.

This suggests to me that the family had some sense that something was off right away ... but why.

I think families and children differ.

For one thing, both girls apparently knew that grandma was leaving at 1:30 pm. Kids are kids but I don't recall ever being more than half an hour late for something because my attention was on something else. If either Elizabeth or Lyric was usually conscientious about time, I think that would decrease the time before family would get alarmed.

Another factor would be how reliable they were about staying within hearing distance of grandma's call. If they usually or always stayed within calling distance, that would decrease the waiting period before LE was notified.

It's clear to see from the variety of responses posted that people vary widely in how long it would take them to become alarmed.

I know I had permission to roam further at a younger age than my younger brother did because I was very reliable about coming back when I said I would. My brother always had good intentions but he was very prone to getting caught up in something and forgetting about when he was supposed to be home, so he was limited to the range of our mom's voice for longer than I was at the same age.

So many variables.

 

[otto]

See, I don't agree at all. I wonder why they didn't call sooner. I would have. I think it is about patterns of behavior. If it was known that the girls rode their bikes all over town and were gone for long periods of time, then I could see it. But according to the family this wasn't the case. Something was off and not normal. . .and they were right. . .something was terribly wrong.

It's kind of like if you always lock your front door when you leave and you come home and it's open. You instantly know that something might be wrong. . .because it is not the norm. However, if you frequently leave the door unlocked it probably wouldn't seem like a big deal. I think this situation is like the first. . .the door is normally locked.

As for the calling the friends, it simply may not be part of the girls normal behavior. My youngest doesn't have any friends her age in our neighborhood. She doesn't go to friend's houses unless it is some pre-arranged play date. I wouldn't think to call friends because who would I call?

MOO

It was only 4 days earlier when they had a false alarm, and it sounds like they had the same reaction then ... call police. Perhaps they first called friends, then other parents, then police that time too. If I'd had a false alarm and four days later was again calling police about the same child possibly being late ... missing again, I'd want to look harder the second time ... so it may be that they delayed this time. Still, it's a mindset.

My children would go to the park when they were young and I would expect them back at a certain time. If they didn't show up on time, I would give them some slack. If they still didn't show up, I would go to the park. If they weren't there, I would go home, call friend's homes and more often than not, they would be there.