IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #28

[JaimeInLA]

I posted this several posts back:

Chief Smock told KWWL sex offender teams from the state Division of Criminal Investigation are helping interview people of interest, but he says no one has been detained and those interviewed are not any closer to being suspects than anyone else.

On the other hand, he says no one's been cleared of suspicion, either.

http://www.kwwl.com/story/20351247/...chief-squashes-rumors-of-arrest-in-girls-case

This is from December 14th.

But I'm not sure this is means the girls were definitely sexually assaulted - perhaps LE was just covering all their bases while waiting for forensic tests to be completed. JMO

I remember this. But to me this just means they were interviewing SOs all along, not that they "re-interviewed" any after the bodies were found.

 

[Reverie]

Scary how he used social media to troll around, too.

It just further demonstrates why parents must be vigilant about their kids' Internet use.

http://www.startribune.com/local/north/190384081.html?refer=y

 

[otto]

I wasn't aware the bikes and murders were staged to appear like "sex murder".

You know, LE and FBI have never stated that drugs were not involved in this case. Nor have they said it was a random abduction or a planned abduction. So at this point, IMO, one theory is as valid as the next.

By the way, I can see ways in which drugs are involved without the killer being a "drughead". JMO.

I was responding to another comment.

 

[otto]

I remember this. But to me this just means they were interviewing SOs all along, not that they "re-interviewed" any after the bodies were found.

I understood it to mean that on December 14, at the time the article was written, the Division of Criminal Investigation was re-interviewing sex offenders.

 

[tlcya]

If there was no sexual assault, why would the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigations send in sex offender teams to interview POIs?

While I do think this crime may have had a sexual motive, I don't see the sex offenders team being used to question POIs and RSOs as unusual or telling in that way. This is their line of work, dealing with those individuals. They would be best suited to question them I would think. Because they deal with persons such as this on a daily basis and perhaps even already know some of those who were being interviewed.

 

[Marilynilpa]

I was responding to another comment.

Yikes, sorry.:blushing:

 

[threecrazykids]

While I do think this crime may have had a sexual motive, I don't see the sex offenders team being used to question POIs and RSOs as unusual or telling in that way. This is their line of work, dealing with those individuals. They would be best suited to question them I would think. Because they deal with persons such as this on a daily basis and perhaps even already know some of those who were being interviewed.

My main question in all of this, is why are sexual offense experts involved? To me LE isn't telling us the truth behind the fact that SO's were all cleared. If everyone was CLEARED as they stated, there wouldn't have been a need for the sex offense experts being involved, let alone another blitz if they really were cleared within the first few days as they said they were. JMO.

I guess when LE states someone is CLEARED it means they had a solid alibi - one that was VERIFIED, and there is no reason to revisit the subject with that person again, period.

IMO, if they are revisiting ANYONE, they shouldn't have said they were cleared, they should have said they didn't have any particular suspect or person of interest.

"Cleared" should equal "NOT involved, no if's and's, or but's."

"Not a suspect at this time" equals "could very well be defined as a suspect or person of interest at any point in the investigation."

:banghead:

Every day my head spins circles trying to figure out which way is forward.

 

[tlcya]

I agree, cleared should mean we are 100% confident this person or group has no involvement. I don't think all the RSOs are cleared, but then, as I've said, I hear LE use the term cleared less and less in general for just the reasons you stated 3crazykids.

and again, while I feel the girls or at least one of them may have been sexually assaulted, I do not think it is a showing of LE cards that they had people from the SO unit questioning the SOs, who better? Not because it tells us the type of crime that was committed, but because of the type of person being interviewed.

 

[jenandemmie]

I still think, as backed by my textbook from last semester, that if they were out in the woods since July, it would be very difficult to determine definitively if sexual assault had occurred. Further, [Graphic Warning], sometimes the movement of insects can move clothing and create a false face-value appearance of sex assault. A forensic entomologist is usually needed to help identify true SA vs. insects moving down shorts, underwear, and moving shirts up. That said, I still think it was a sex motivated crime based on statistics, the organization involved, etc. but an actual sex act does not have to occur for it to be sexually motivated. Dismemberment, torture, etc. can all be used as a substitute for the sex act in sex motivated crimes.

 

[alliemay]

Re-interviewing SRO's could mean that they are just continuing to interview SRO's, not necessarily re-interviewing the one's they already interviewed. Hope I stated my thoughts correctly in a manner that is understandable lol.

 

[cindersoot]

Here's the interview with the Carpenters.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/Vi...a-girls-Witness-may-have-seen-girls-on-Friday

What caught my attention with what Mr. Carpenter told reporters is that he saw the girls in that area often. Now grandma said they didn't ride that far, but they did. The Carpenters house is very very close to the lakes entrance. He also said that Elizabeth was always talking to people and was very friendly. This is what makes me believe that the girls meet the perp and befriended him on their many bike rides. Someone who rode the trail often.

 

[JaimeInLA]

Facts matter. We do not know that any SOs were RE-INTERVIEWED after the bodies were found. That is one poster's interpretation of a MSM story. That MSM story does not say they were re-questioning anyone. Having SO investigators involved when a young girl (or 2) is murdered is standard protocol. It does NOT mean this was a sex crime. It simply means that LE had to explore it as a possibility.

 

[otto]

My main question in all of this, is why are sexual offense experts involved? To me LE isn't telling us the truth behind the fact that SO's were all cleared. If everyone was CLEARED as they stated, there wouldn't have been a need for the sex offense experts being involved, let alone another blitz if they really were cleared within the first few days as they said they were. JMO.

I guess when LE states someone is CLEARED it means they had a solid alibi - one that was VERIFIED, and there is no reason to revisit the subject with that person again, period.

IMO, if they are revisiting ANYONE, they shouldn't have said they were cleared, they should have said they didn't have any particular suspect or person of interest.

"Cleared" should equal "NOT involved, no if's and's, or but's."

"Not a suspect at this time" equals "could very well be defined as a suspect or person of interest at any point in the investigation."

:banghead:

Every day my head spins circles trying to figure out which way is forward.

I'm under the impression that one investigative tool is to interview people that may know something about a criminal activity. This is done in order to have them commit to a story/alibi/explanation. It's possible that all the registered sex offenders in the Evansdale area provided explanations of what they were doing at the time of the abduction. When new facts emerge, like the discovery of the bodies, investigators need to re-interview people in order to determine whether anyone's story has changed.

For example, while the girls were missing, some misguided person may have provided a false alibi. After it was a fact that the girls were murdered, that person may decide to tell the truth.

It's also quite possible that the person that did this is not a registered sex offender. Austin Sigg was not a registered sex offender when he attacked the jogger in the park nor when he murdered Jessica Ridgeway, so interviewing registered sex offenders would have been a waste of time.

 

[otto]

Facts matter. We do not know that any SOs were RE-INTERVIEWED after the bodies were found. That is one poster's interpretation of a MSM story. That MSM story does not say they were re-questioning anyone. Having SO investigators involved when a young girl (or 2) is murdered is standard protocol. It does NOT mean this was a sex crime. It simply means that LE had to explore it as a possibility.

It is my interpretation that the article on December 14, stating that the Division of Criminal Investigation was again in Evansdale and that registered sex offenders were being interviewed, means that the Division of Criminal Investigation was doing this after the girls bodies were discovered.

The only other way to interpret this is that the Division of Criminal Investigation was in Evansdale after the girls bodies were discovered but that they interviewed registered sex offenders in July ... and their presence in Evansdale in December is unexplained ... which doesn't really make sense to me.

 

[cindersoot]

What needs to be remembered if a RSO wasn't always an RSO.

 

[cindersoot]

It is my interpretation that the article on December 14, stating that the Division of Criminal Investigation was again in Evansdale and that registered sex offenders were being interviewed, means that the Division of Criminal Investigation was doing this after the girls bodies were discovered.

The only other way to interpret this is that the Division of Criminal Investigation was in Evansdale after the girls bodies were discovered but that they interviewed registered sex offenders in July ... and their presence in Evansdale in December is unexplained ... which doesn't really make sense to me.

Oh I'm so sure LE were all over the local sex offenders.

 

[alliemay]

Facts matter. We do not know that any SOs were RE-INTERVIEWED after the bodies were found. That is one poster's interpretation of a MSM story. That MSM story does not say they were re-questioning anyone. Having SO investigators involved when a young girl (or 2) is murdered is standard protocol. It does NOT mean this was a sex crime. It simply means that LE had to explore it as a possibility.

You are right. It is standard procedure, they started interviewing SO's right after they went missing, (did the parents hint something to police, maybe they knew some people that fit into that category), after the bodies were found, they interviewed more. Its been seven months now, if it was not sexually motivated, why don't they just leave the SO's alone. I would not want to pay a detective to keep interviewing on this line of thought.

 

[threecrazykids]

I'm under the impression that one investigative tool is to interview people that may know something about a criminal activity. This is done in order to have them commit to a story/alibi/explanation. It's possible that all the registered sex offenders in the Evansdale area provided explanations of what they were doing at the time of the abduction. When new facts emerge, like the discovery of the bodies, investigators need to re-interview people in order to determine whether anyone's story has changed.

For example, while the girls were missing, some misguided person may have provided a false alibi. After it was a fact that the girls were murdered, that person may decide to tell the truth.

It's also quite possible that the person that did this is not a registered sex offender. Austin Sigg was not a registered sex offender when he attacked the jogger in the park nor when he murdered Jessica Ridgeway, so interviewing registered sex offenders would have been a waste of time.

A false alibi shouldn't have been able to be cleared, I wouldn't think...:banghead: Verified and cleared should be exactly that.

I agree, that this could possibly be a sexual offense by someone who is NOT a registered offender.

 

[threecrazykids]

Also...let's not forget the article where after the computers were confiscated LE had stated that they had "lots of information" but couldn't release any information at the time about what was found. Those reports too were made by the specialists in the sexual offense department as well.

 

[otto]

I think if you type in George Wyth Lake you will find it, its in the Green Briar division of Waterloo, then map it to Myers Lake. Did that a while ago but didn't save it, think its a bit of a distance but can't remember.

Is this Greenbriar Park?