IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #29

[Marilynilpa]

I'm of the opinion that if Lyric was the target, there were ample opportunities for Lyric to be targeted with her grandmother/guardian near home or on her way to school. This happened at Elizabeth's house, and Meyers Lake is where she reportedly regularly cycled.

If I had to speculate on the possibility that only one of the children was targeted, I would assume that it was Elizabeth.

I'm playing catch up with posts today, and I'm glad to see there are several new ones.

otto, I've wondered if Misty met a man at George Wyth, maybe someone who she became good friends with. She and Lyric went frequently to George Wyth, and perhaps he heard all about Heather and Grandma and Misty's new job, etc. I can see both Misty and Lyric being very chatty, and telling their new friend much more than they should have. Maybe he knew that Lyric would be going to Heather's house with Grandma once Misty returned to work.

I am not saying this is my personal theory, but it's one that IMO is worthy of consideration. Especially since there isn't all that much to discuss lately that hasn't been rehashed a dozen times!

I agree with you that if one of the girls was targeted, it most likely was Lizzie. It was her neighborhood, and she was known as a friendly, outgoing child who felt everyone she met was a friend. JMO

 

[SapphireSteel]

You don't necessary follow when you are hunting. You sit in a blind or a stand and you wait. You pick what you think is a good spot and you wait. If you are duck hunting, you have a blind and you use duck calls. If you are hunting deer, you put out deer feeders and feed the deer corn on a regular basis and you plant cover crops that attract deer. You scope out the land, get the lay of it. Least that's what we do here in Texas. If you're squirrel hunting, you go to the woods where the squirrels hang out and wait for one to run by. If you're hog hunting, you use dogs to track'em and hunt'em.

If one was a hunter of human prey, I would think he would hang where children are. . . parks, playgrounds, lakes, swimming pools, schools. This kind of hunter would know where the children are and where they are likely to show up and sometimes he just happens upon one, rare but it happens, no planning required. He would know the area especially if he grew up there or had lived there at one time. He would know about secret hidden places. He would know about Maiden Lane. :moo:

Again, I am speaking of the abductor who "stalked" the girls. He would have no way of knowing they would head to the lake, they'd never been there before.

Two girls on a bike can arguably get places quicker than a car can at times, yet somehow he managed to not only predict in his head that that's where they were headed, he also managed to get there before them? Not likely.

A random perp could literally sit there for a month of Sundays and NEVER entrap a child. Most children these days are accompanied by parents. If he did sit there, he sat there for a while and took a massive risk of being observed.

So why didn't anyone see his car?

If he did trap the girls as it appears, why was there no sign of a struggle?

Then we go to the "he held a knife at someone's throat" explanation - this still doesn't address why his car was never seen.

The statistical likliehood of a predator waiting in some bushes in a public park used more often by adults, for a child victim for only a few minutes before two of them come along, is really out there.

The statistical likliehood of a random creeper waiting in a public park for a child victim and then abducting TWO of them without being seen or heard, is also extremely dim.

A one off, random abductor would take one child in my opinion.

He would be in a place where children are often alone, such as a playground, a school, a popular hang out.

Meyers Lake is none of these.

If he took them at Maiden Lane, it means he took the time to move and rearrange the bikes and purse. What was the point of doing this? A random would grab his prey and get out of Dodge. Staging implies that the crime is being portrayed as something other than what it was.

:cow: :seeya:

 

[roseofsharon]

Now I know nothing about hunting, except I would rather no harm would come to any animal. But, I wonder is there a site to check out that would have a list of Iowa hunters by area? Maybe there is no such thing.

Another list that would be helpful to LE may possibly be the names and addresses of those who purchased firearms from Cornbelt Auctions prior to July 13, 2012. imo

 

[tlcya]

Without a COD it is hard to decide what info would be handy to have or not.

We have no idea if the girls where stabbed, strangled, shot, or what. A lot of what we have to work with are assumptions in lieu of good factual info.

 

[iamnotagolem]

I think both girls were targeted. I don't think either one of them was just unlucky enough to be with the other. I think they were both targeted and that is why they were taken that day vs any other day. I think if only one of them was the target, then only one would be taken. I think the perp could have waited 1/2 an hour for lyric to go home and just nab Elizabeth if she was the target and vice versa.

I see no reason to think one was the target over the other, why would the perp risk so much by taking more than intended?

 

[otto]

I think both girls were targeted. I don't think either one of them was just unlucky enough to be with the other. I think they were both targeted and that is why they were taken that day vs any other day. I think if only one of them was the target, then only one would be taken. I think the perp could have waited 1/2 an hour for lyric to go home and just nab Elizabeth if she was the target and vice versa.

I see no reason to think one was the target over the other, why would the perp risk so much by taking more than intended?

I think it was a random abduction, but if either child was specifically targetted, I would think that Elizabeth was the target based on the fact that the children were at her house that day. No one starts a criminal career by abducting and murdering two children, so I suspect that the predator has done this before.

 

[Mjskit]

Every different theory has a major roadblock which causes me to reject it.

Occam's razor and all.

I really can't see how a random predator is feasible. If the girls had been found in the woods at Meyers Lake, absolutely, random, get lucky, do the deed, disappear.

The fact they were found that distance away, indeed were taken so silently and unseen, implies (to me anyway) that they went willingly with someone in a car, and that someone already knew where they'd be, and when, and was there to intercept them.

I think this was planned to the nth degree and I suspect the two men with poles and dark clothing at the park (on a summer's day...?) were the accompices who staged the bikes after the girls were taken.

:cow:

Would you have a motive you can share?

 

[roseofsharon]

Without a COD it is hard to decide what info would be handy to have or not.

We have no idea if the girls where stabbed, strangled, shot, or what. A lot of what we have to work with are assumptions in lieu of good factual info.

Yes true, however, there is a lot of discussion regarding "hunters" and the girls were found on hunting grounds.

Another theory I have is that the girls were shot by someone they knew. The killer did not want to do it, but in order to save their own butt, they had to. Save their own butt from what ???, ..... unfortunately L and E knew that secret.

IMO, the killer took the girls to Seven Bridges alive, told one of the girls to walk ahead and keep their back turned so they wouldn't witness what was about to happen. IMO, this is the reason the girls were 50 yds. apart.

MOO :moo::moo::moo:

 

[tlcya]

sorry roseofsharon, mine wasn't meant to shut down that line of thinking. Just to express frustration with having so little information

carry on by all means.

I think it perfectly logical to speculate if the perp has some hunting experience whether a gun was used in the killings or not. I cannot discount the fact that one of the many reasons someone may still frequent the area of 7 bridges is hunting.

While I do not feel our perp is a hunter per se, I have no opinion on COD or whether the girls died by gunshot. They may well have been shot.

Even if they weren't the possibility does remain that the location was chosen or known due to hunting knowledge.

 

[otto]

Would you have a motive you can share?

I can't think of any motive for murdering two children that isn't based on avoiding prosecution for the crime of sexual assault - especially since, statistically speaking, "the primary motive for the abductor [in child abductions] was sexual assault."

http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0908/chapter3.htm#81

 

[otto]

sorry roseofsharon, mine wasn't meant to shut down that line of thinking. Just to express frustration with having so little information

carry on by all means.

I think it perfectly logical to speculate if the perp has some hunting experience whether a gun was used in the killings or not. I cannot discount the fact that one of the many reasons someone may still frequent the area of 7 bridges is hunting.

While I do not feel our perp is a hunter per se, I have no opinion on COD or whether the girls died by gunshot. They may well have been shot.

Even if they weren't the possibility does remain that the location was chosen or known due to hunting knowledge.

Statistically speaking, in 52% of child abduction/homicides, the child was left in a rural area. Austin Sigg would fall into this category, having left Jessica in a rural field.

https://secure.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/homicide_missing.pdf

 

[roseofsharon]

sorry roseofsharon, mine wasn't meant to shut down that line of thinking. Just to express frustration with having so little information

carry on by all means.

I think it perfectly logical to speculate if the perp has some hunting experience whether a gun was used in the killings or not. I cannot discount the fact that one of the many reasons someone may still frequent the area of 7 bridges is hunting.

While I do not feel our perp is a hunter per se, I have no opinion on COD or whether the girls died by gunshot. They may well have been shot.

Even if they weren't the possibility does remain that the location was chosen or known due to hunting knowledge.

Also, I was picturing someone who is a hunter(s) at Cornbelt Auctions back parking lot (seeing the girls riding, maybe on more than one occasion) and possibly looking for firearms and then connecting the two, but all spec. on my part.:seeya:

 

[otto]

40% of child abduction/homicide victims are victims of opportunity.
74% of child abductions: first contact is made in the suburbs
47% of child abduction: perp gained control by direct physical assault
11% are murder by firearm, 33% by ligature or manual strangulation

link

If we go with the stats, the perp initiated contact with Lyric and Elizabeth in the suburbs because they were there - victims of opportunity. They were abducted by direct physical assault. They were murdered by ligature strangulation. They were left in a rural area because that's what most often happens.

 

[Marilynilpa]

40% of child abduction/homicide victims are victims of opportunity.
74% of child abductions: first contact is made in the suburbs
47% of child abduction: perp gained control by direct physical assault
11% are murder by firearm, 33% by ligature or manual strangulation

link

If we go with the stats, the perp initiated contact with Lyric and Elizabeth in the suburbs because they were there - victims of opportunity. They were abducted by direct physical assault. They were murdered by ligature strangulation. They were left in a rural area because that's what most often happens.

I can't think of any motive for murdering two children that isn't based on avoiding prosecution for the crime of sexual assault - especially since, statistically speaking, "the primary motive for the abductor [in child abductions] was sexual assault."

http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0908/chapter3.htm#81

I wonder if these statistics would hold true in the abduction/murders of two girls at the same time? Seems to me that might change things up a little. The motive in the rare abduction of two children at one time might not be the same as the motive for snatching one child, and some of the other statistics might change as well. JMO.

 

[otto]

I wonder if these statistics would hold true in the abduction/murders of two girls at the same time? Seems to me that might change things up a little. The motive in the rare abduction of two children at one time might not be the same as the motive for snatching one child, and some of the other statistics might change as well. JMO.

It is not very common for the distance between abduction site and body site to be greater than 12 miles, so the fact that two children were abducted may have played a part in choosing a site 20 miles away.

I don't think that it is less likely that sexual assault is the motive when two young girls are abducted and murdered. I think the fact that two children were abducted and murdered at the same time implies that this is not the perp's first experience with abduction and murder.

 

[Mjskit]

I can't think of any motive for murdering two children that isn't based on avoiding prosecution for the crime of sexual assault - especially since, statistically speaking, "the primary motive for the abductor [in child abductions] was sexual assault."

http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0908/chapter3.htm#81

IMO only since I have not researched this but I have lived it. A young child who is threatened can be sexually assaulted and not tell. A child might not even know they were sexually assaulted they might just know that someone hurt them. So, IMO, if the perp only wanted to sexually assault the girls he would have done just that. Someone with experience as you suggested previously would be an expert at manipulation and not feel the need to kill. However, it seems to me if the perp enjoys the kill the sexual assault would be a secondary thrill.

Has anyone researched this subject?

 

[Bootsctr]

Again, I am speaking of the abductor who "stalked" the girls. He would have no way of knowing they would head to the lake, they'd never been there before.

Two girls on a bike can arguably get places quicker than a car can at times, yet somehow he managed to not only predict in his head that that's where they were headed, he also managed to get there before them? Not likely.

A random perp could literally sit there for a month of Sundays and NEVER entrap a child. Most children these days are accompanied by parents. If he did sit there, he sat there for a while and took a massive risk of being observed.

So why didn't anyone see his car?

If he did trap the girls as it appears, why was there no sign of a struggle?

Then we go to the "he held a knife at someone's throat" explanation - this still doesn't address why his car was never seen.

The statistical likliehood of a predator waiting in some bushes in a public park used more often by adults, for a child victim for only a few minutes before two of them come along, is really out there.

The statistical likliehood of a random creeper waiting in a public park for a child victim and then abducting TWO of them without being seen or heard, is also extremely dim.

A one off, random abductor would take one child in my opinion.

He would be in a place where children are often alone, such as a playground, a school, a popular hang out.

Meyers Lake is none of these.

If he took them at Maiden Lane, it means he took the time to move and rearrange the bikes and purse. What was the point of doing this? A random would grab his prey and get out of Dodge. Staging implies that the crime is being portrayed as something other than what it was.

:cow: :seeya:

If no one saw his car, then why was no one seen staging the scene? Surely someone would have noticed a person with pieces of clothing dragging it along the ground around the lake. It is quicker to stage a scene than snatch two children by gun or knife ? :waitasec: Staging a scene seems like it would involve more than one person.

I guarantee you if as a child I was bent over intent on capturing a minnow or a tadpole or a bug with my cousin helping me, oblivious to the world, when someone suddenly ut em up: grabbed me or my cousin ut em up: I would have absolutely been frozen in fear. I would have done just as I was instructed.

I guess I was an extremely odd child. I was attracted to water not only to swim but for the wildlife: tadpoles, minnows, frogs, snakes, perfume bugs. Spent many an hour capturing minnows and putting them into my "ponds". Also, wasn't there an army tank at Meyer's lake and a horse close by:deadhorse: or a :beagle:? GOSH! What boy or girl would not be attracted to play in an old tank for that matter?

It was my understanding the nearby daycare took their children on a daily walk around the lake. Maybe there was some guy who did watch and get his jollies? They were attended, but that doesn't mean some freak was not there watching.

OCAM's razor to me would be a simple random abduction rather than a staged abduction to nth degree. :scale:

However, if someone thought they were getting their rear out of trouble, I agree it would have been better to take 2 children rather than 1 and better to happen on the other child's turf. :twocents: :seeya:

 

[Marilynilpa]

40% of child abduction/homicide victims are victims of opportunity.
74% of child abductions: first contact is made in the suburbs
47% of child abduction: perp gained control by direct physical assault
11% are murder by firearm, 33% by ligature or manual strangulation

link

If we go with the stats, the perp initiated contact with Lyric and Elizabeth in the suburbs because they were there - victims of opportunity. They were abducted by direct physical assault. They were murdered by ligature strangulation. They were left in a rural area because that's what most often happens.

It is not very common for the distance between abduction site and body site to be greater than 12 miles, so the fact that two children were abducted may have played a part in choosing a site 20 miles away.

I don't think that it is less likely that sexual assault is the motive when two young girls are abducted and murdered. I think the fact that two children were abducted and murdered at the same time implies that this is not the perp's first experience with abduction and murder.

You could be right, but it seems like the rarity of two girls being abducted together might skew the statistics a little.

It doesn't really matter, just curiosity on my part.

 

[pearl]

My thoughts on the possible perp:
Born and raised in the Evansdale area and still has family there.
In his mid-thirties.
A definite loner and incapable of sustaining a relationship with a woman who is around his age.
A transient now who passes through the Evansdale area maybe a couple times a year for a short visit with his family.
Sustains himself with day jobs during his ramblins so he doesn't have a documented work history. Kind of off the radar.
Possibly has an older van which he uses for transportation and as a place to sleep.
Could have been at Meyers Lake to use the bathroom facilities and saw the girls and took them.
Familiar with 7 Bridges because he went there when he was younger. Might also camp there when he is around Evansdale area.
Don't think this is his first crime of this nature--not necessarily killed before, just assault. Don't think he has been caught by LE before so he is not in any database due to his rambling.
His family does not suspect him because he really doesn't spend that much time around them for them to really know much about him. Maybe immediate family is deceased and other family members don't know him that well.
Think he may be familiar with one of Lyric or Elizabeth's family members.
I think he will do it again but maybe not in the Evansdale area.

 

[Marilynilpa]

I've been re-reading transcripts and looking for little bits of info I've overlooked. I found this statement from Wylma that I found interesting:

And so it was at 11:30, they asked me if they could go for a short bike ride, and I said yes. And they've done this millions of times. And they've never, never went that far. I could go outside and yell their names, and they would eventually hear me.

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

BBM

The word "eventually" caught my attention. If the girls were always riding so close to home, it seems they would hear Grandma calling pretty quickly. They wouldn't "eventually" hear her, in others words.

But if Grandma yells their names and the girls "eventually" hear her, IMO it could mean the girls routinely biked outside of their approved area. If they were several blocks away biking towards Lizzie's house, it might take two or three of Grandma's name yellings before they "eventually" heard her.

I'm probably reading too much into one word, but at least it gives me something different to think about.

ETA: Of course, it's always possible the girls just ignored the first couple of calls from Grandma in an effort to stay out a couple of minutes longer. It's been known to happen!!