IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #3

[Ollipop]

You used the image earlier to describe Iowans as being like ducks on the water.

LE is like that only more so.

In most cases without direct evidence of foul play, LE almost universally seems to play it safe by refusing to say what they think happened. In good part, I think it's because they don't want the possible perpetrator(s) to get a clear view of what is going on with the investigation.

I think that LE is working a whole bunch of different possible lines of inquiry right now. I don't think they're at the point of narrowing down the suspect pool, they're still at the point of throwing more names into it.

They're clearly still conducting searches but not the kind of search that can be delegated to volunteers.

To give one example, since meth use has been connected to one of the families, I'm sure they are looking at all those possible angles. Searching the property of a meth dealer is definitely something you can't delegate to a volunteer, not even just walking by and looking at what might be seen from the sidewalk.

Not having seen this much (I'm brand new to this site, don't watch CSI's or what have you), I'd never considered this, and it makes sense. Especially the part about not letting a perp in on where the investigation is or might be headed.

And I'm not saying they should have had volunteers go door to door searching homes, just that I know for a fact there were 500+ ppl willing to call in to work to help in any way possible. I suppose at some point the law of diminishing returns comes in to play there, though.

I guess I'm just frustrated, having expected to have found some answers to some questions by this point, or to have had some credible tip come in by now. After all, we have all the local and county, and the best state and national crime-solvers descended on our little town, and we've got nothing, just repeated press conferences with "nothing new, we're hoping someone calls in to say they saw the girls." It shakes my confidence, I guess, my Iowan comfort zone - broad as it is - feels very violated.

 

[Ollipop]

hey Ollipop, did you not say you were related to one of the victims family?

By marriage. My wife's stepfather is Drew's brother.

 

[BelieveinUFO]

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/ar...dyssey=tab|topnews|text|Frontpage&sf5151918=1

There are nice clear photos on the link.

 

[GrainneDhu]

During the Sandusky arrest and coverage, I remember hearing of a prosecutor in NE, I believe, who'd attempted to go after this group, and just went missing, etc, etc.

SBM

Are you sure it was Nebraska?

There was a prosecutor who went missing but he was in Pennsylvania. Ray Gricar was the district attorney for Centre County, Pennsylvania and went missing in 2005.

In 1998, after one victim's mother contacted LE about Jerry Sandusky, LE had a taped conversation in which Sandusky affirmed that the mother was right to be angry with him. LE was ready to go after him at the time but Ray Gricar declined to do so.

Personally, I doubt Sandusky was part of a ring. He had plenty of access to potential victims and plenty to use to lure them, so what would he gain from being part of a ring? Plus, from everything I've read about him, Sandusky seems to me to be one of those who was in love with his victims. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say he was emotionally fixated on them.

If I am correct, Sandusky would be highly unlikely to participate in "passing around" victims.

 

[Shelby2]

Not having seen this much (I'm brand new to this site, don't watch CSI's or what have you), I'd never considered this, and it makes sense. Especially the part about not letting a perp in on where the investigation is or might be headed.

And I'm not saying they should have had volunteers go door to door searching homes, just that I know for a fact there were 500+ ppl willing to call in to work to help in any way possible. I suppose at some point the law of diminishing returns comes in to play there, though.

I guess I'm just frustrated, having expected to have found some answers to some questions by this point, or to have had some credible tip come in by now. After all, we have all the local and county, and the best state and national crime-solvers descended on our little town, and we've got nothing, just repeated press conferences with "nothing new, we're hoping someoIne calls in to say they saw the girls." It shakes my confidence, I guess, my Iowan comfort zone - broad as it is - feels very violated.

Since the FBI is involved, I think they must have done a neighborhood canvas, and this is not something volunteers could do, it would have to be LE. They have cleared all the RSOs. The police usually don't let on all of the investigation they are doing because they can't risk hurting the investigation.

 

[GrainneDhu]

I thought I read somewhere Srs. are the fastest growing group of Net users or something. I know my 82 yr old Mother and her siblings and friends are all over it. I constantly have to go over and "fix" something as she clicks some thing in her settings that keeps her from doing something. And can't follow directions over the phone. But, gosh they love their FB. At least now she puts things on my FB all day and quit sending me email forwards. LOL

My 84 year old father is an ebay addict (both selling and bidding). Plus a bunch of web forums about his various interests.

"Largest growing" doesn't mean that the majority of the people in that age group are online, however. It just doesn't seem all that hinky to me that Wylma Cook would have a computer she hasn't used in a year.

Actually, when I think about it, we have computers we haven't used in ten years in this household! My husband cannot bear the idea of throwing a computer away, so they take up space in his closet. Obviously it doesn't mean we're not online.

If something happened and LE confiscated all those old computers as well as our current ones, I think I'd be a little bemused as well. I'd just hope LE had monitors to use with them because we have gotten rid of the old monitors and those old computers are too old to use the new flatscreen monitor.

But my husband refuses to get rid of them. I love him and I choose to see it as a charming quirk since they aren't taking up space in my closet. <LOL>

 

[Shelby2]

So the girl's scent was picked up at the docks-could they have been picked up by a boat?
Could someone have carried them from the dock-I wonder if the dogs would be able sense that? Or I'd they could tell how many scents were present when the girls were there?

ETA the scent was picked up 'lakeside', not at the docks, sorry about that.

 

[Ollipop]

SBM

Are you sure it was Nebraska?

There was a prosecutor who went missing but he was in Pennsylvania. Ray Gricar was the district attorney for Centre County, Pennsylvania and went missing in 2005.

In 1998, after one victim's mother contacted LE about Jerry Sandusky, LE had a taped conversation in which Sandusky affirmed that the mother was right to be angry with him. LE was ready to go after him at the time but Ray Gricar declined to do so.

Personally, I doubt Sandusky was part of a ring. He had plenty of access to potential victims and plenty to use to lure them, so what would he gain from being part of a ring? Plus, from everything I've read about him, Sandusky seems to me to be one of those who was in love with his victims. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say he was emotionally fixated on them.

If I am correct, Sandusky would be highly unlikely to participate in "passing around" victims.

I believe you are correct. Perhaps someone was comparing that case, or Sandusky's, to something that had happened in NE.

 

[LizWords]

Gosh! I just hope this was not meth-related. Someone(s) getting back at the father. Surely that would make it a local who would know the area and about the girls and their habits and whom the girls may have come upon while bike riding. Moreover, the girls would recognize/know this person or persons from the area and gone with willingly.

Agreed, if you've ever seen a few meth addicts in your life you know that they usually look worse off than the father does at this time. It's not impossible that he's still doing a bunch of meth, but he certainly does not look or act like he is right now.

 

[GrainneDhu]

Not having seen this much (I'm brand new to this site, don't watch CSI's or what have you), I'd never considered this, and it makes sense. Especially the part about not letting a perp in on where the investigation is or might be headed.

And I'm not saying they should have had volunteers go door to door searching homes, just that I know for a fact there were 500+ ppl willing to call in to work to help in any way possible. I suppose at some point the law of diminishing returns comes in to play there, though.

I guess I'm just frustrated, having expected to have found some answers to some questions by this point, or to have had some credible tip come in by now. After all, we have all the local and county, and the best state and national crime-solvers descended on our little town, and we've got nothing, just repeated press conferences with "nothing new, we're hoping someone calls in to say they saw the girls." It shakes my confidence, I guess, my Iowan comfort zone - broad as it is - feels very violated.

That your comfort zone feels violated makes total sense to me.

From following many cases, most likely the perpetrator's name or evidence pointing directly to the perpetrator will come in within the first 30 days of the case. Unfortunately, that does not mean it will be interpreted correctly.

So LE is probably getting some pertinent answers but whether they can interpret those answers accurately remains to be seen.

Based only on my own experience, it's too soon to tell what LE is doing or not doing. Or even how competent they are.

As a rule of thumb, the most difficult cases to solve are the ones involving perps and victims who are not connected in any way. My hope is that by picking that one particular spot to either grab the girls or dump their bikes and purse, the perpetrator showed detailed local knowledge.

Not exactly comforting for you. I'm sorry.

 

[LizWords]

Agreed, if you've ever seen a few meth addicts in your life you know that they usually look worse off than the father does at this time. It's not impossible that he's still doing a bunch of meth, but he certainly does not look or act like he is right now.

And this was not the quote I chose to agree with, no idea how this quote got in there. My only point was that the Father looks a bit too healthy to be on a lot of meth at this time.

 

[Ollipop]

There are nice clear photos on the link.

That jetty photo gets me. I don't remember it being that big. Maybe my mind remembers before it was built up, maybe the lower water level just makes it look bigger, maybe having my young kids with me back there makes it seem to shrink...I dunno, but it definitely struck me as much bigger than I remember, and its only probably been 2-3 weeks since I was over there.

 

[GrainneDhu]

So the girl's scent was picked up at the docks-could they have been picked up by a boat?
Could someone have carried them from the dock-I wonder if the dogs would be able sense that? Or I'd they could tell how many scents were present when the girls were there?

As a general rule of thumb, dogs can be trained to answer yes/no questions that do not involve quantities.

So, for instance, you can give the dog the scent of 9 people and then ask the dog "is there scent from anyone else in this area?" The dog will tell you yes or no.

I can't think of any way to train a dog to answer "how many scents are present?" Not even if you cheat and ask "are there four scents present?" That's a yes/no question but I don't know any way to train a dog to answer it.

From foxhunting, I know that if you watch hound behaviour carefully, you can often tell if the fox was running on the ground versus when the fox was running along the top of the fence. But it's not reliable and I sure wouldn't bet on it.

If someone were carrying one or both girls, the girl(s) would still be shedding scent particles and so the girl(s) would still be leaving a trail. Whether the handler could tell the difference between the girl(s) walking on their own feet versus being carried is unknown. I doubt it, though.

And for purposes of investigation, I don't think the difference really matters.

 

[nikb]

Wow! When I asked the initial question...I did not think it would lead to us catagorizing her into a defunct and not accurate weight system. I must let you now, my older sister was what you would say "obese" of not perfect. She was a ski racer, an equestrian and ran/swan/rode in triathalons. Let me tell you, she even though, no matter what she does, runs 5 miles a day and still is 5'3" and 250 lbs. She is just a big girl. So, from a medical perspective, we can't assume a "BMI" makes someone intolerable to heat. I asked the question more along the line of bullying, low self esteem and dexterity. Not to bash a child over her body type and such. Please be repsectful as the initial poster was just trying to let us know she was a "big girl". Thanks.

It seemed to me everything was respectful?

 

[Tugela]

In most cases without direct evidence of foul play, LE almost universally seems to play it safe by refusing to say what they think happened. In good part, I think it's because they don't want the possible perpetrator(s) to get a clear view of what is going on with the investigation.

No, the reason is that they don't want to present the defence team with alternative scenarios when they eventually make an arrest. If they come out and say "we think bla bla bla happened", when something else happened, you can be sure that would be brought up in trial to create reasonable doubt.

 

[Shelby2]

As a general rule of thumb, dogs can be trained to answer yes/no questions that do not involve quantities.

So, for instance, you can give the dog the scent of 9 people and then ask the dog "is there scent from anyone else in this area?" The dog will tell you yes or no.

I can't think of any way to train a dog to answer "how many scents are present?" Not even if you cheat and ask "are there four scents present?" That's a yes/no question but I don't know any way to train a dog to answer it.

From foxhunting, I know that if you watch hound behaviour carefully, you can often tell if the fox was running on the ground versus when the fox was running along the top of the fence. But it's not reliable and I sure wouldn't bet on it.

If someone were carrying one or both girls, the girl(s) would still be shedding scent particles and so the girl(s) would still be leaving a trail. Whether the handler could tell the difference between the girl(s) walking on their own feet versus being carried is unknown. I doubt it, though.

And for purposes of investigation, I don't think the difference really matters.

(BBM) But I'm thinking if there was only one trail leading to the dock, which would indicate them possibly being in the water, as opposed to them being carried away from the dock by somebody.

 

[Ollipop]

(BBM) But I'm thinking if there was only one trail leading to the dock, which would indicate them possibly being in the water, as opposed to them being carried away from the dock by somebody.

FTR, I don't remember hearing or reading that the dogs keyed on the dock(s), which are now in a pile on the grass, dismantled and out of the lake. The docks are directly across the lake from where the bikes were found. Perhaps you are confusing the docks with the jetty, which is just thru a gate in the fence, steps from where the bikes were found.

You can approach the docks from the parking lot, boat ramp, or trail, on the northeast corner of the lake...the jetty, however, has one access point, which is thru that gate, and is in the southeast corner.

 

[Shelby2]

In most cases without direct evidence of foul play, LE almost universally seems to play it safe by refusing to say what they think happened. In good part, I think it's because they don't want the possible perpetrator(s) to get a clear view of what is going on with the investigation.

No, the reason is that they don't want to present the defence team with alternative scenarios when they eventually make an arrest. If they come out and say "we think bla bla bla happened", when something else happened, you can be sure that would be brought up in trial to create reasonable doubt.

I think you're both right..they want to catch the perp, but they want to be able to convict him too.

 

[Shelby2]

FTR, I don't remember hearing or reading that the dogs keyed on the dock(s), which are now in a pile on the grass, dismantled and out of the lake. The docks are directly across the lake from where the bikes were found. Perhaps you are confusing the docks with the jetty, which is just thru a gate in the fence, steps from where the bikes were found.

You can approach the docks from the parking lot, boat ramp, or trail, on the northeast corner of the lake...the jetty, however, has one access point, which is thru that gate, and is in the southeast corner.

Sorry, I thought the dogs traced their scent to the docks? Was it just to the lake then?
ETA-yes I just read back and it said their scent was traced to 'the lakeside', thanks for clarifying that. I don't know why I thought it was the docks.

 

[nskapbt]

I think the dogs traced the scent to the jetty. One of the dog handlers is part of my doll makers forum on FB, they have been posting updates about it.

Her dog is a cadaver dog, that is all she has "leaked" per say.

Dogs can track a moving scent that is not say walking themselves. I remember very clearly reading about a bloodhound who tracked a child for over 5 miles, that was inside a truck.

It all depends on how the dog was trained and what scenting training methods were used, being FBI dogs, they would like be multi versed and highly trained.

I think this case is just full of smoke and mirrors!