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

[SapphireSteel]

If the perp was befriending the girls days before and pre-planning by following them (if they had biked to Meyers Lake many times previous), he could have asked them where they liked to go once they got there and they might have described the jetty to him (but he was already familiar with Maiden Lane because I believe he is a local person) and knew the jetty was on the other side of the lane.

I can almost see this perp, in the lane, calling out ... so this is where you like to go and then beckoning them towards him because he had to show them something, a pretty butterfly?

Speculation and MOO.

The family says they have never biked that far before.

Even if they had been there before, how was he to know that was their destination this time? They could just have easily have been going to a friends house, yet he still took the risk of driving ahead of them and waiting at the lake on the offchance that was their destination that day under the "stalker" theory.

He took a very big risk for a very uncertain result if he didn't already know they were going to be at the lake, I believe.

I honestly believe the girls died on 13 July, the same day they were taken.

A sexual predator with 2 little girls would most likely keep them for longer than one afternoon, and have somewhere to take them and keep them a bit less public than 7 bridges. Even rock spiders have friends who own houses and like to share.

By the way I found a youtube clip of the area they were found, it is very gloomy and out of the way. It is also on private land, has a house within easy walking distance, and is completely accessible by ordinary car because it is kept mowed right up to where the woods begin so someone could easily have driven right up then walked the girls in or possibly even carried them although this seems unlikely as the undergrowth in the wooded area was very high at the time.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I'm going to change the topic.

I "think" DM sentence was so intense is because he punked out on his plea deal the day before the girls went missing. I forget now, (it's been so long) but wasn't he looking at 15 years instead of 75(?) if he plead? (thereabouts)

So, instead.......... he has cost the justice system hundreds of thousands.....

I don't know, but here in NY authorities do not smile on that. :twocents::twocents::twocents:

just saying............

So wait...Dan had a plea deal set up, then reneged the day before the girls went missing, changed his plea to Not Guilty, then went to trial and pleaded Guilty?

WTF?

So he had 5 years or so set up, rejected it, then put his hands up to everything anyway and is going to get 200 years now????

That doesn't even make sense, why on earth would someone do that?

It seems that his freedom from July to now (8 months) has literally cost him 195 years of his life:??? Am I missing something?

 

[BunnyHop]

So wait...Dan had a plea deal set up, then reneged the day before the girls went missing, changed his plea to Not Guilty, then went to trial and pleaded Guilty?

WTF?

So he had 5 years or so set up, rejected it, then put his hands up to everything anyway and is going to get 200 years now????

That doesn't even make sense, why on earth would someone do that?

It seems that his freedom from July to now (8 months) has literally cost him 195 years of his life:??? Am I missing something?

BBM

You tell me..............

:waitasec:

 

[RNER]

This is getting crazy... This is NOT my theory!

I have never ever believed this was a sexually motivated crime, as everyone knows. I have always believed the girls got either right to the park or very close to it, and were intercepted by someone they knew who knew they would be there.

I was addressing this post -



and this one



and this one.



It's not my opinion at all that it occured this way, and because of this, I thought it would be good to talk further about this theory with those of you who do.

So to be totally clear, I do not believe that the perp was a stalker of the girls.

I do not believe they were taken for sexual purposes.

I believe the perp knew they would be at the lake at the time they were at the lake, because he/she/they planned it that way beforehand
I would like those who support the "watching, following" theory to explain to me how they think it was done because I'm hanged if I can see it.

I agree!

 

[RNER]

I'm going to change the topic.

I "think" DM sentence was so intense is because he punked out on his plea deal the day before the girls went missing. I forget now, (it's been so long) but wasn't he looking at 15 years instead of 75(?) if he plead? (thereabouts)

So, instead.......... he has cost the justice system hundreds of thousands.....

I don't know, but here in NY authorities do not smile on that. :twocents::twocents::twocents:

just saying............

Has he been sentenced yet? Because I thought he was facing a broad range of prison time, from nothing but probation to many years behind bars!

 

[roseofsharon]

If not for sexual purposes, what was the killer's motive?

(Taking drugs out of the scenario).

 

[BunnyHop]

Has he been sentenced yet? Because I thought he was facing a broad range of prison time, from nothing but probation to many years behind bars!

No he hasn't. I'm just responding to previous posts. :seeya:

 

[Bootsctr]

The family says they have never biked that far before.

Even if they had been there before, how was he to know that was their destination this time? They could just have easily have been going to a friends house, yet he still took the risk of driving ahead of them and waiting at the lake on the offchance that was their destination that day under the "stalker" theory.

He took a very big risk for a very uncertain result if he didn't already know they were going to be at the lake, I believe.

I honestly believe the girls died on 13 July, the same day they were taken.

A sexual predator with 2 little girls would most likely keep them for longer than one afternoon, and have somewhere to take them and keep them a bit less public than 7 bridges. Even rock spiders have friends who own houses and like to share.

By the way I found a youtube clip of the area they were found, it is very gloomy and out of the way. It is also on private land, has a house within easy walking distance, and is completely accessible by ordinary car because it is kept mowed right up to where the woods begin so someone could easily have driven right up then walked the girls in or possibly even carried them although this seems unlikely as the undergrowth in the wooded area was very high at the time.

7-Bridges is on private land? That's news to me. I thought this was a wildlife refuge or a county park. I agree it was easily accessible, but never knew it was private land.

 

[otto]

7-Bridges is on private land? That's news to me. I thought this was a wildlife refuge or a county park. I agree it was easily accessible, but never knew it was private land.

It's not private land. It is a former public recreation area that lost popularity because of the collapse of the 270 Street bridge just East of the park.

The shaded areas are private land

 

[alliemay]

I don't necessarily believe it was a trap. It could have been as random as someone sitting in the Meyers Lake parking lot and seeing the girls ride through the parking lot. Perp pulls out and accesses Maiden lane. The girls are already by the water and the bikes are at the gate where they were found. Perp walks to where the girls are. He either lures them back to his vehicle on Maiden Lane or he gets close enough to grab one and pulls a knife or a gun and walks them back to his vehicle, real quiet and quick-like. He quickly ties them and tapes their mouths shut. Shoves them in the floorboard of his vehicle or in the trunk. Then he's out of there. Takes them to where they were most likely killed and then dumps them at 7 Bridges within a few days.

You are reading my mind, I don't think it would have been that hard to follow them, especially if they had jumped off their bikes to explore the nearby wooded area, or the lake.

 

[Bootsctr]

Nice map otto! Thank you. We have discussed several times why 7-Bridges lost popularity. It is a shame the 270 Street Bridge could not have been repaired. The area is beautiful.

 

[Bootsctr]

You are reading my mind, I don't think it would have been that hard to follow them, especially if they had jumped off their bikes to explore the nearby wooded area, or the lake.

:rocker: Exactly! The girls were so into their adventure they did not see anyone following them. In fact, I think they were caught completely off guard. They were so startled they really had no time to react. JMO!

 

[threecrazykids]

Ok...just throwing out a completely different theory here, given some other info that was thrown in the mix earlier in the investigation, and things I noticed:

What if...at some point, maybe even earlier in the week, maybe the day before, they met someone who had been fishing at the lake. Maybe they'd been going to the lake multiple times just in that week and had seen this same person.

We know that LE was looking for someone who was paddle boating (also stating they were NOT considered a suspect) and LE was looking for this person to come forward with ANY information (which they did) about possibly seeing anything.


We also know that the dogs scent went from the trail to the water's edge...and from what I've read, appeared to stop there.

What IF: the girls DID get into a boat with this person...even a John boat with just a little trolling motor that would QUIETLY take the girls from the edge of the water over to the parking lot and into their vehicle. Maybe he pretended that the motor was having issues, etc. and that he couldn't take them back to their bikes via the boat.

The scent trail wouldn't have followed them after the water, the bikes would remain at the gate, and Maybe he told them he'd give them a ride back around to the grassy area to their bikes and never did. He'd have them both in the vehicle, probably not fighting or anything, thinking everything was fine until it was too late.

I am of the fear that even though these girls may have known something was wrong that they were completely TERRIFIED at what was happening and knew they couldn't fight off an adult.

A john boat could EASILY hold all 3 of them, even 4 easily...we fish with my entire family in a john boat and there are 5 of us...3 being kids.

We also know during the first couple of days they had completely dismantled the dock right there at the parking lot. Maybe there WAS info that we aren't aware of, that someone WAS fishing in a boat on the lake that day.

I don't know...I'm just trying to figure out how the scent trail could have stopped at the water (if that is REALLY the case, since we aren't handlers) and the perp could possibly get them out of the park without a scent trail to follow.

If the scent trail did go out into the water, would the dogs have somehow been able to notify their handlers of it?

The truck (or even a CAR can pull a john boat) would be in the parking lot...people could have seen the girls in the area of the parking lot, maybe didn't even pay attention to any vehicles there, etc.

However, one would think that any vehicle that was caught on CCTV that day pulling a boat would have immediately been a red flag to LE. Then I thought maybe they LEFT the boat in the parking lot and just took off with the girls...but that would ALSO be a red flag too...

I don't know, I'm just trying to think of how a boat COULD be involved somehow (since the scent trail stopped at the water's edge).

:waitasec::banghead:

 

[roseofsharon]

Ok...just throwing out a completely different theory here, given some other info that was thrown in the mix earlier in the investigation, and things I noticed:

What if...at some point, maybe even earlier in the week, maybe the day before, they met someone who had been fishing at the lake. Maybe they'd been going to the lake multiple times just in that week and had seen this same person.

We know that LE was looking for someone who was paddle boating (also stating they were NOT considered a suspect) and LE was looking for this person to come forward with ANY information (which they did) about possibly seeing anything.


We also know that the dogs scent went from the trail to the water's edge...and from what I've read, appeared to stop there.

What IF: the girls DID get into a boat with this person...even a John boat with just a little trolling motor that would QUIETLY take the girls from the edge of the water over to the parking lot and into their vehicle. Maybe he pretended that the motor was having issues, etc. and that he couldn't take them back to their bikes via the boat.

The scent trail wouldn't have followed them after the water, the bikes would remain at the gate, and Maybe he told them he'd give them a ride back around to the grassy area to their bikes and never did. He'd have them both in the vehicle, probably not fighting or anything, thinking everything was fine until it was too late.

I am of the fear that even though these girls may have known something was wrong that they were completely TERRIFIED at what was happening and knew they couldn't fight off an adult.

A john boat could EASILY hold all 3 of them, even 4 easily...we fish with my entire family in a john boat and there are 5 of us...3 being kids.

We also know during the first couple of days they had completely dismantled the dock right there at the parking lot. Maybe there WAS info that we aren't aware of, that someone WAS fishing in a boat on the lake that day.

I don't know...I'm just trying to figure out how the scent trail could have stopped at the water (if that is REALLY the case, since we aren't handlers) and the perp could possibly get them out of the park without a scent trail to follow.

If the scent trail did go out into the water, would the dogs have somehow been able to notify their handlers of it?

The truck (or even a CAR can pull a john boat) would be in the parking lot...people could have seen the girls in the area of the parking lot, maybe didn't even pay attention to any vehicles there, etc.

However, one would think that any vehicle that was caught on CCTV that day pulling a boat would have immediately been a red flag to LE. Then I thought maybe they LEFT the boat in the parking lot and just took off with the girls...but that would ALSO be a red flag too...

I don't know, I'm just trying to think of how a boat COULD be involved somehow (since the scent trail stopped at the water's edge).

:waitasec::banghead:

It's almost as though the girls were put inside some type of container at the water's edge and driven out of Maiden Lane. Remember Ollipop saw some sort of tread (I think on Maiden Lane). :twocents:

 

[iamnotagolem]

The family says they have never biked that far before.

Even if they had been there before, how was he to know that was their destination this time? They could just have easily have been going to a friends house, yet he still took the risk of driving ahead of them and waiting at the lake on the offchance that was their destination that day under the "stalker" theory.

He took a very big risk for a very uncertain result if he didn't already know they were going to be at the lake, I believe.

I honestly believe the girls died on 13 July, the same day they were taken.

A sexual predator with 2 little girls would most likely keep them for longer than one afternoon, and have somewhere to take them and keep them a bit less public than 7 bridges. Even rock spiders have friends who own houses and like to share.

By the way I found a youtube clip of the area they were found, it is very gloomy and out of the way. It is also on private land, has a house within easy walking distance, and is completely accessible by ordinary car because it is kept mowed right up to where the woods begin so someone could easily have driven right up then walked the girls in or possibly even carried them although this seems unlikely as the undergrowth in the wooded area was very high at the time.

BBM, I agree with you.

I would think a sexual predator would have a. Kept them alive for quite a while or b. released them alive.

If it was a sexual predator who was grooming the girls, then why kill them? Why not keep molesting them and doing as he saw fit?

Maybe it's wishful thinking that they were killed immediately? But it really does seem that way.

At least right now, this is what I'm thinking.

 

[SapphireSteel]

7-Bridges is on private land? That's news to me. I thought this was a wildlife refuge or a county park. I agree it was easily accessible, but never knew it was private land.

Most of the area is government land but the small "corner" where the girls were found is part of a private property that abuts the edge.

It is quite a spooky out of the way place.

The man who took the reporter out there said that only people known to the family are allowed to hunt there, but he went into quite a lot of detail about the public land, apparently it used to be very popular with picnic benches everywhere, all removed now for some reason.

 

[threecrazykids]

BBM, I agree with you.

I would think a sexual predator would have a. Kept them alive for quite a while or b. released them alive.

If it was a sexual predator who was grooming the girls, then why kill them? Why not keep molesting them and doing as he saw fit?

Maybe it's wishful thinking that they were killed immediately? But it really does seem that way.

At least right now, this is what I'm thinking.

I know most people don't believe the stuff reported on JVM :blushing:
but during an interview on the day after the girls bodies were found:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1212/06/ijvm.01.html

LIEBERMAN: Yes. It`s heart-breaking when you read that quote from the family.

A couple of things that we know. I`m told by police sources that they were able to make an eyeball identification, meaning looking at the bodies and knowing in their heads that it was these two girls, very, very quickly. I`m told is that it didn`t appear that the bodies had been out exposed to the elements for the four or five months since they went missing. That`s No. 1.

Maybe LE DID know the girls were alive. :banghead:

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I want to stop for a second to go to Mike Brooks, HLN law enforcement analyst. How would authorities be able to deduce, looking at -- and you`re seeing some of the wooded areas. The girls were found about 25 miles north from where the lake where they disappeared in this wooded area, which is sort of a county park. And now we`re hearing from our sources that they were not killed there. How would cops be able to deduce that from looking around the crime scene?

MIKE BROOKS, HLN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, they`re not finding certain evidence that should be there because they know -- they probably have a pretty good idea of how the girls died, or at least they most likely do, Jane. But they`re -- things they`re seeing there that wouldn`t -- that aren`t there, that would be there if they had been killed right there in that specific area.

So....take it for what it's worth, but there were reports that the girls bodies may NOT have been there the entire time...who knows.:blushing:

 

[24Roses]

So wait...Dan had a plea deal set up, then reneged the day before the girls went missing, changed his plea to Not Guilty, then went to trial and pleaded Guilty?

WTF?

So he had 5 years or so set up, rejected it, then put his hands up to everything anyway and is going to get 200 years now????

That doesn't even make sense, why on earth would someone do that?

It seems that his freedom from July to now (8 months) has literally cost him 195 years of his life:??? Am I missing something?

IIRC, it's either 5 or 15 years for each count. I think there is 7 counts.

 

[Squeeze]

The family says they have never biked that far before.

Even if they had been there before, how was he to know that was their destination this time? They could just have easily have been going to a friends house, yet he still took the risk of driving ahead of them and waiting at the lake on the offchance that was their destination that day under the "stalker" theory.

He took a very big risk for a very uncertain result if he didn't already know they were going to be at the lake, I believe.

I honestly believe the girls died on 13 July, the same day they were taken.

A sexual predator with 2 little girls would most likely keep them for longer than one afternoon, and have somewhere to take them and keep them a bit less public than 7 bridges. Even rock spiders have friends who own houses and like to share.

By the way I found a youtube clip of the area they were found, it is very gloomy and out of the way. It is also on private land, has a house within easy walking distance, and is completely accessible by ordinary car because it is kept mowed right up to where the woods begin so someone could easily have driven right up then walked the girls in or possibly even carried them although this seems unlikely as the undergrowth in the wooded area was very high at the time.

If its the Youtube video of the older hunter walking with the reporter, I believe we determined that was the wrong location. The bodies were found in the southeast corner, and he was on the northern edge. If not that video, link please?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[otto]

BBM, I agree with you.

I would think a sexual predator would have a. Kept them alive for quite a while or b. released them alive.

If it was a sexual predator who was grooming the girls, then why kill them? Why not keep molesting them and doing as he saw fit?

Maybe it's wishful thinking that they were killed immediately? But it really does seem that way.

At least right now, this is what I'm thinking.

"The Washington State Attorney General’s Office also conducted research on child abduction murders and made the following observations based on its review of over 775 cases between 1968 and 2002:

• in 76 percent of the murders of an abducted child, the child was murdered within 3 hours of the abduction;
• in 89 percent of the cases, the missing child died within 24 hours of disappearing;
• in nearly 60 percent of the cases, more than 2 hours passed between the time someone realized the child was missing and the time police were notified; and
• the primary motive for the abductor was sexual assault"

The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Efforts to Combat Crimes Against Children
http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0908/chapter3.htm