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

[cluciano63]

Okay but here is the scariest thing...if NOT at all related to anything to do with drugs, court cases, etc...the chances of the girls being alive greatly decreases.

 

[katydid23]

Respectfully, I have to disagree. I would think that the recent rash of abduction attempts, in some cases of more than one child, would be the most likely scenario.
What good would abducting two girls do in terms of revenge or stopping DM from talking to police?

I have to agree with Otto in this matter. I think people are making way too many assumptions based on the parents history drug abuse.

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't both parents take and pass drug tests? So why would they pass tests if they were still in the business of selling or consuming drugs?

Both girls were family members, but maybe they only wanted to target one but couldn't manage that.

I agree that it might have been a random abduction, but a couple of things make me lean against it. One, the very narrow timeline, and two, the fact that a local would be more likely to know that area well.

If the girls were taken from the BignTall parking lot, then I would lean towards random abduction.

But if it was a random perp passing through, I don't think he would try going to that little lake and dumping the bikes. imo

But if the bikes were dumped there, OR if the girls were taken from there, it makes me think a local was responsible. And the very narrow timeline makes me think it was a specific kidnapping by a family acquaintance,

 

[FrayedKnot]

I think you are mis-reading the posts about Lyric being a drug mule. I can't speak for everyone, but I was one who DO think it was possible. However, I don't think she KNOWINGLY did it. I think she was used, because of her age and innocence level. I was not blaming her AT ALL. I just think it's possible that someone said, "Honey, could you please run this gift down to so and so?" And she had NO idea what she was doing. It's also possible that she figured it out, since she fought with Dan a week before her disappearance about having to do a "chore" for him that she didn't want to do. She was so mad about having to do that chore, that she was planning to run away. Could that chore have been delivering drugs? Possibly. Dan doesn't have a car. I'm just saying I don't rule it out. But I would never blame Lyric.

Sure it's possible, but then again, my ten-year-old wants to run away when I tell her to shovel out that pigsty she calls a room. Ugh.

I just think kids balk at authority, some in small ways, some in bigger ways. Even kids from non-felonious families.

 

[Hippy Chick]

I really think a sex offender took these girls. I have from the 1st day. I don't see the father trying to postpone his court proceedings this way. He still knows he has to go to court. Why cause himself this kinda trouble. I don't think the girls were used as drug mules either. Most druggies that I have ever known always tried to stay off the radar with the police kidnapping 2 little girls would bring to much attention to them and their drugging. None of these scenarios make any sense to me. I think the uncle was upset and the "prized possession" remark made by gma was certainty a bad way to put it but I don't see anything particularly nefarious about that either. The only thing that makes sense to me is a sex offender, pedophile lured or followed them and them took them probably had a weapon of some sort and took them before they even realized what was going on. I also don't feel as if they are alive. I pray for them and their families how awful. I think the cops wasted to much time on the family because of their criminal history and the person that did it was long gone. IMO

 

[Mjskit]

bingo!!!!!!!!

Only if the FBI is asking for the purchases on the 13th. Ollipop said receipts for a few days ago.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Okay but here is the scariest thing...if NOT at all related to anything to do with drugs, court cases, etc...the chances of the girls being alive greatly decreases.

Absolutely.

In the early days didn't some ex FBI guy announce that it REDUCED the chances of a sexual motive, because there were two of them?

Not that it means it can't happen of course...there were 2 girls abducted where I live, 30 odd years ago, that were seen going with one man. Back in those days, people didn't question what they saw so he merely led them away.

What disturbs me, and always has done, is the sheer tightness of the time frame.

It is very unlikely that this is a random perp IMO, simply because someone would have seen or heard something. There were quite a few people around the lake that day...one minute the girls were zooming along Brovard St, literally almost the next minute they were gone and their bikes were found dumped, quite a distance away.

I have never believed that they were abducted kicking and screaming. Now it is increasingly unlikely that they even made it to the lake.

There are plenty of factoids being bandyed about that the girls were seen at 2, (this is even on their missing poster) 2.30...but as far as I know LE have not confirmed one of them. (links would be great if I'm wrong). These factoids are coming from the family directly either through Aunt Tammy or MCM or WC, and are very misleading.

:moo:

 

[IAM]

I don't think LE or any of us want to think of a family member doing this, but statistics, statement analysis, body language, evidence and lack or evidence etc cannot be ignored either if everything possible is being done to bring these girls home. They are the most important concern here. Family members will always be looked at strongly. When you add in criminal activity and odd behavior, it just makes looking at them even more necessary. I am sure they are not only looking at family members but covering all bases.

 

[FrayedKnot]

Ollipop is right...you do have to show your ID and sign for anything with ephedrine in it.

I know. I commented on the CO theater shooting thread that the murderer had an easier time getting 6 guns than I have getting Sudafed.

And honestly, the stuff you can get without having to ask the pharmacist doesn't work as good as Sudafed, but you feel so seamy asking for it!

 

[CHERIE.T]

Sure it's possible, but then again, my ten-year-old wants to run away when I tell her to shovel out that pigsty she calls a room. Ugh.

I just think kids balk at authority, some in small ways, some in bigger ways. Even kids from non-felonious families.

NOT normal for a 10 year old to threaten running away.


I raised 5 who didn't balk at authority. They respected authority.

Of course I DIDNOT raise mine when on the puter either....,didnt have one
back them. :moo:

 

[katydid23]

I really think a sex offender took these girls. I have from the 1st day. I don't see the father trying to postpone his court proceedings this way. He still knows he has to go to court. Why cause himself this kinda trouble. I don't think the girls were used as drug mules either. Most druggies that I have ever known always tried to stay off the radar with the police kidnapping 2 little girls would bring to much attention to them and their drugging. None of these scenarios make any sense to me. I think the uncle was upset and the "prized possession" remark made by gma was certainty a bad way to put it but I don't see anything particularly nefarious about that either. The only thing that makes sense to me is a sex offender, pedophile lured or followed them and them took them probably had a weapon of some sort and took them before they even realized what was going on. I also don't feel as if they are alive. I pray for them and their families how awful. I think the cops wasted to much time on the family because of their criminal history and the person that did it was long gone. IMO

At 12:15 they are fine, and riding their bikes. By 12:27, their bikes are abandoned at the scariest part of the bike trail? It seems so 'lucky' that a random stranger would find the girls at that vulnerable location and have a car ready to take them away.

I think only a local would know about that spot on the lake, and that makes it less 'random', imo.

I do think it was a sexually motivated abduction, but I also believe it was someone who had a connection to the family.

 

[sweetpea33]

Respectfully, I have to disagree. I would think that the recent rash of abduction attempts, in some cases of more than one child, would be the most likely scenario.
What good would abducting two girls do in terms of revenge or stopping DM from talking to police?

I have to agree with Otto in this matter. I think people are making way too many assumptions based on the parents history drug abuse.

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't both parents take and pass drug tests? So why would they pass tests if they were still in the business of selling or consuming drugs?

1. DM HAS changed his plea which probably means he is no longer cooperating with authorities in giving up names for their drug investigation. His co-defendant is on the lam.

2. can you provide a link where it says they both passed drug tests, or is this just what a family member has said in the press.

 

[iamnotagolem]

Honestly I think some of us are hoping the family is involved, it makes their being alive more likely, IMO. Random kidnapping by a sexual predator is far scarier, knowing they were probably brutalized then killed. For now, I'm hoping (without any proof or good reason) that the family is involved, just to hope they are alive.

 

[MotherOcean]

Close, but one correction -- Dan is facing 5 counts that carry 45 years EACH. So he turned down a plea deal that would have guaranteed him 5 years -- and now risks 5x45 (225?) years in jail. I'm sure those would be served concurrently, but still - it makes the chance of parole or early release less likely. So again -- WHY?! Dan had to have known that something was going to happen on 7/13. Someone had to have made threats, or given him some other really good reason.

(Of course, then I remember that he was taking a nap when this all went down, so maybe I'm wrong.)

IMO

BBM -

Can you please tell me where this information has come from? I swear I'm not trying to be nit-picky (I'd rather be called "detail oriented" - ). I have read several articles about Dan's legal situation but have not come across this information; i.e., a plea deal would have (possibly?) reduced his time to 5 years. That is not very long considering what he is facing. Thanks for any info.

 

[TxLady2]

I am still confused as to where Dan and Misti's relationship is. He assaulted her months prior and they were separated and Misti had a BF. Then, the girl's go missing, her BF is jailed and we hear her in all the interviews saying, "Dan & I" as if they were a couple. They were also in hotel/motel room together. In one interview they were standing very close/touching and it appeared she even nudged him as he was speaking of the previous disappearance of Lyric with the other cousin. In another video he has his arm ariund her waist. In , yet another, he is holding the media back from her in a very protective way. I am curious as to why the sudden change in their relationship. Or, do you view this as a coming together for their daughter's sake? I just don't know what to make of it. And where is this bf now?

Sometimes even if a couple is divorced, there is still a proprietary attitude towards each other if they've had children together.
My hubby and I have been married going on 30 years, and he and his ex were only married for about 8 years, but she still acts sort of possessive of him when we are around, which is not very often, thank God. It irritates the you-know-what out of me, and it even bothers him somewhat, but not really much I can do about it. They had children together, so there is a bond there that will never go away.
I think sharing a child who goes missing might intensify that bond a little bit.

 

[Hippy Chick]

At 12:15 they are fine, and riding their bikes. By 12:27, their bikes are abandoned at the scariest part of the bike trail? It seems so 'lucky' that a random stranger would find the girls at that vulnerable location and have a car ready to take them away.

I think only a local would know about that spot on the lake, and that makes it less 'random', imo.

I do think it was a sexually motivated abduction, but I also believe it was someone who had a connection to the family.

if all of these abduction attempts going on in Iowa are true I really believe thats what happened, it wouldn't be that hard for a grown man to overpower and take 2 little girls. This is so horrible I feel for them and their family. I raised a daughter and now have a grandson and i can't imagine anything like this happening to either one of them. I would probably never eat or sleep again.

 

[otto]

At 12:15 they are fine, and riding their bikes. By 12:27, their bikes are abandoned at the scariest part of the bike trail? It seems so 'lucky' that a random stranger would find the girls at that vulnerable location and have a car ready to take them away.

I think only a local would know about that spot on the lake, and that makes it less 'random', imo.

I do think it was a sexually motivated abduction, but I also believe it was someone who had a connection to the family.

Have police confirmed that the bike that a man saw lying on the path at 12:27 was one of the bikes belonging to the two girls?

 

[Sunlight]

Both girls were family members, but maybe they only wanted to target one but couldn't manage that.

I agree that it might have been a random abduction, but a couple of things make me lean against it. One, the very narrow timeline, and two, the fact that a local would be more likely to know that area well.

If the girls were taken from the BignTall parking lot, then I would lean towards random abduction.

But if it was a random perp passing through, I don't think he would try going to that little lake and dumping the bikes. imo

But if the bikes were dumped there, OR if the girls were taken from there, it makes me think a local was responsible. And the very narrow timeline makes me think it was a specific kidnapping by a family acquaintance,

12:15 - 3:58 doesn't seem like a narrow timeline to me...it seems huge. The 12:20/27 stuff is not being considered publicly by LE. So it is not narrow at all. JMHO

 

[JaimeInLA]

1. DM HAS changed his plea which probably means he is no longer cooperating with authorities in giving up names for their drug investigation. His co-defendant is on the lam.

2. can you provide a link where it says they both passed drug tests, or is this just what a family member has said in the press.

By the way, the co-defendant has been located. He is no longer on the lam.

 

[SapphireSteel]

At 12:15 they are fine, and riding their bikes. By 12:27, their bikes are abandoned at the scariest part of the bike trail? It seems so 'lucky' that a random stranger would find the girls at that vulnerable location and have a car ready to take them away.

I think only a local would know about that spot on the lake, and that makes it less 'random', imo.

I do think it was a sexually motivated abduction, but I also believe it was someone who had a connection to the family.

12.20, not 12.27.

So that has given them less than 5 minutes to bike from the store, down to the bike path, get on the bike path, and spirited away with no one seeing or hearing a thing.

TG, the witness who swerved to miss the bikes at 12.20, did not notice the wheels still turning...in my opinion, they probably would have been, if the girls had been abducted by surprise this way.


:moo:

 

[Jules71]

What makes it so hard for me to piece together is not knowing for sure if TG's sighting of the bikes just before 12:27 is accurate or not.

12:15 - seen on camera on Brovan St.
12:20-12:27 bikes on path at lake (no girls)

This is possible if times on either end are off a few minutes. Or if the bikes he saw were not theirs - but what are the odds two other bikes would be abandoned at that spot earlier and then the girl's bikes also end up there? Maybe LE is not announcing TG's sighting because he saw the bikes on a very different part of the path. Maybe he saw the bikes on the path near the parking lot area. I think I am going to go with that assumption. He may have seen the bikes that day on the path and had to swerve to miss them - but he did not see them in the spot where they ended up. I don't know. Nothing makes sense with the time frame.