IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, found deceased, Evansdale, 13 Jul 2012 #38

[Considering]

It is very difficult to feel optimistic about the possibility of an arrest at this point.

Sadly, I agree.

 

[dotr]

There is still hope!
Saturday ride marks 7 years since Evansdale cousins' disappearance
Saturday ride marks 7 years since Evansdale cousins' disappearance
Investigation into deaths of Lyric Cook and Elizabeth Colins remains active

Elizabeth Collins (left) and Lyric Cook
“We are still very much involved in the investigation,” said Mitch Mortvedt, assistant director of field operations for the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation.

“There are still several agencies that are actively working this case — the Evansdale Police Department, the Black Hawk County and Bremer County sheriff’s offices, and the FBI — and we get together regularly to review information and evidence and evaluate new information,” he said. “It’s a group effort, and the investigation still is very much on the front burner.”

As technologies and forensic science evolve, investigators go back to the evidence to see if there are new approaches they can use to glean more information, Mortvedt said. They also watch for similar cases elsewhere across the country, Mortvedt said.

Investigators remain hopeful they will find the person or persons responsible for the children’s deaths, he said."

 

[TedMac]

It is very difficult to feel optimistic about the possibility of an arrest at this point.

It is discouraging, but several cold cases have been solved recently. Let’s hope for a miracle!

 

[Hazelnutty]

Hoping for a miracle!

 

[watcher9]

It is discouraging, but several cold cases have been solved recently. Let’s hope for a miracle!

Yes! The girls were only 8 and 10 years old. That alone should make this case a priority.

 

[Ommmm]

There’s quite a few of us who’ve followed this case for many (many) years now.

You all must have opinions. Anyone want to share? What does your gut tell you? Me:
1. I’ve never stopped thinking about that group of road construction workers who were living in the campgrounds down the road.
2. Micheal Klunder. Yes, I know he was cleared. I would like to know how. I’m skeptical.
3. Someone close to the family who may have been trying to cover up prior abuse. Not necessarily someone who was driven to kill, and may never do so again.
4. I’ve never been on board with the drugs / retribution theory.

MOO.

 

[TedMac]

There’s quite a few of us who’ve followed this case for many (many) years now.

You all must have opinions. Anyone want to share? What does your gut tell you? Me:
1. I’ve never stopped thinking about that group of road construction workers who were living in the campgrounds down the road.
2. Micheal Klunder. Yes, I know he was cleared. I would like to know how. I’m skeptical.
3. Someone close to the family who may have been trying to cover up prior abuse. Not necessarily someone who was driven to kill, and may never do so again.
4. I’ve never been on board with the drugs / retribution theory.

MOO.

1. Possibly, but no evidence of it. I tend to think it was not a stranger.
2. Agreed. I too, would like to know how he was cleared.
3. Again possible, but not aware of anyone like this.
4. Agreed. Even though I have wondered if maybe one of the drug "associates" may have been a pedophile as well.

 

[Ommmm]

1. Possibly, but no evidence of it. I tend to think it was not a stranger.
2. Agreed. I too, would like to know how he was cleared.
3. Again possible, but not aware of anyone like this.
4. Agreed. Even though I have wondered if maybe one of the drug "associates" may have been a pedophile as well.

What’s your leading theory (or theories) @TedMac?

 

[watcher9]

There’s quite a few of us who’ve followed this case for many (many) years now.

You all must have opinions. Anyone want to share? What does your gut tell you? Me:
1. I’ve never stopped thinking about that group of road construction workers who were living in the campgrounds down the road.
2. Micheal Klunder. Yes, I know he was cleared. I would like to know how. I’m skeptical.
3. Someone close to the family who may have been trying to cover up prior abuse. Not necessarily someone who was driven to kill, and may never do so again.
4. I’ve never been on board with the drugs / retribution theory.

MOO.

Not family or drug related.
A stranger to the girls. If not Klunder, then someone with the same tendencies as he had.
I think the perp saw the girls on the way to the lake and followed behind them.
Using fear or authority, he forced the girls to his truck and took them away to Seven Bridges. I'm not sure if he killed them before or after he arrived there. He may have sexually violated one or both of them.

 

[TedMac]

What’s your leading theory (or theories) @TedMac?

Don't really have a leading theory. I have followed the Beasley/Hawlett case very closely and was almost certain they were killed by someone they knew. A person has been arrested (after almost 20 years) and he evidently was unknown to them. LE also admitted that the person accused was never on their radar until he was identified through DNA.

But, to answer your question, I believe the killer was someone who at a minimum, had seen them around the lake and/or their home and was familiar with and had possibly interacted with them in some manner. By that, I mean someone who had been to their home or had seen them at the lake and had talked with them enough to make them unafraid of him and gained their trust. He is or was in the area frequently and is "hiding in plain sight."

I also believe he was familiar with the area where the bodies were found and in all likelihood killed them there. He knew to get them out of the immediate area and take them somewhere the trees and high weeds gave him cover to do whatever he did to them. MOO

 

[LaborDayRN]

It is very difficult to feel optimistic about the possibility of an arrest at this point.

I feel the same way. I want so badly for the killer to be brought to justice.

 

[Kell1]

In almost all of these cases, the killer is in the area of the abduction for legitimate reasons, they usually live , work, or travel through the area with some regularity.

Its only slightly more common that the killer is a complete unkown (stranger) 44.4% to the victim(s), than an aquaintence 41.9% of the time.

So its highly likely this was someone from the area, that they possibly knew of , though the numbers would tend to lean more toward a stranger being involved.

Not too much should be made of the fact that both girls left their bikes that could indicate either someone they knew or a complete stranger, who talked them out of the area or someone who threatened to hurt them if they didnt come along .

The killer usually has the most familiarity with the body recovery site this is where he stands the greatest risk of discovery.

The murder scene is usually within 200 feet of where the bodies are recovered .

 

[Kell1]

An investigative area of consideration in these cases, which most in LE already knew, but are now confirming through cold unsolved cases, being solved through the use of geneology sites is that these criminals usually go on to commit further crimes almost always of a sexual nature, however short of murder in many cases,

They often continue sexual assaults and are often already incarcerated for these crimes, when DNA is re-submitted by cold case teams who then get a hit .

However , In these cases MO usually varies very little which is unique amongst most crime in general

Therefore if you have a case that seems similar, but perhaps isnt identical , (Victim lived or escaped etc..) it sould be scrutinized, very thoroughly .

 

[TedMac]

An investigative area of consideration in these cases, which most in LE already knew, but are now confirming through cold unsolved cases, being solved through the use of geneology sites is that these criminals usually go on to commit further crimes almost always of a sexual nature, however short of murder in many cases,

They often continue sexual assaults and are often already incarcerated for these crimes, when DNA is re-submitted by cold case teams who then get a hit .

However , In these cases MO usually varies very little which is unique amongst most crime in general

Therefore if you have a case that seems similar, but perhaps isnt identical , (Victim lived or escaped etc..) it sould be scrutinized, very thoroughly .

@ Kell1...Do you believe these murders involved a sexual assault as well? While I don’t recall LE ever acknowledging this, I have always felt that sexual assault was a strong possibility since the girls were moved to a location a good distance away from where the abduction occurred giving him (assuming the killer is a male) more time with the victims. MOO

 

[watcher9]

An investigative area of consideration in these cases, which most in LE already knew, but are now confirming through cold unsolved cases, being solved through the use of geneology sites is that these criminals usually go on to commit further crimes almost always of a sexual nature, however short of murder in many cases,

They often continue sexual assaults and are often already incarcerated for these crimes, when DNA is re-submitted by cold case teams who then get a hit .

However , In these cases MO usually varies very little which is unique amongst most crime in general

Therefore if you have a case that seems similar, but perhaps isnt identical , (Victim lived or escaped etc..) it sould be scrutinized, very thoroughly .

Are you familiar with Michael Klunder who took two young girls in Dayton IA after getting off a bus on their way home from school? Using a ruse of money to cut grass, he took the girls to a hog farm where he killed one of them. The other girl escaped. He committed suicide before LE could get him. This was a little over 100 miles from where Elizabeth and Lyric were taken so he became our prime suspect in this case. LE could not link him to this location so they no longer considered him a suspect. Do you think he should still be considered a suspect?

 

[Kell1]

Are you familiar with Michael Klunder who took two young girls in Dayton IA after getting off a bus on their way home from school? Using a ruse of money to cut grass, he took the girls to a hog farm where he killed one of them. The other girl escaped. He committed suicide before LE could get him. This was a little over 100 miles from where Elizabeth and Lyric were taken so he became our prime suspect in this case. LE could not link him to this location so they no longer considered him a suspect. Do you think he should still be considered a suspect?

Well aware of Michael Klunder, read quite a few articles on him, and how he was cleared remins a mystery to me , especially since he was housed for a time in an area not far from where the girls bodies were located , and had the dubious distinction of having abducted multiple victims on me than one occasion which in and of itself is rare.

A few things that sway me from Klunder (aside from him already being cleared as a suspect) was that he lived something like 4 hours away from where the girls were abducted .

These types arent "usually" your traveling criminal types, they usually operate close to home (where ever that is at the time since they move freequently) . Though its not "impossible" it seems a bit improbable even though he fits as an ideal suspect.

My suspect if I were creating a profile :

-White Male
-Single
-Approximately 27 years old (Between 20-31 on average) at time
-Lives or works in the area
-Unemployed or under employed at time of abduction (time of abduction seems to bolster this)
-Most likely works in some form of unskilled or semi-skilled labor most often in the construction industry (this is attributed to their transient nature)
-Familiar with area where bodies were recovered
-Most likely lives with parents, or Guardian figure (possibly alone)
-Victims were that of opportunity
-Stranger to the victims for the most part
-Motivation was sexual
-History of behavioral issues (often multiple disorders usually Sociopathic)
-Has past attempts (or convictons) of sexual crimes most likely involving children
-Most likely has subsequeent crimes following this one, to a lesser degree than murder. (ex possession of child ), however in this case subsequent murder(s) would NOT be out of the question .
-MO in subsequent crimes will most likely be similr to the MO in this crime
-Considered odd, most likely suspected of the crime by someone already
-Freequent change of residence in the past, usually 1 within a year prior to the incident
-Direct Physical assault is the most common means to aquire a victim, (I personally beleive he grabbed one and told the other to come along , he may have bradished a weapon which would explain being able to control multiple victims, If he used a ruse, I feel youd see their bicycles closer to the road .)
-May have returned to body recovery site prior to their bodies being discovered.
-Showed at some point either an unusual abundant interest, or an obvious palpable discomfort when someone was discussing the case .
-May have confided in someone concerning his involvement.
-May have moved soon after the interest in the case died down
-Victim(s) likely killed not far from where they are found .

Heres where it gets icky

Of all the Killer types that exist, those who abduct children for the purpose of sexual exloitation, rape and murder them, have the highest propensity of all killer types, to become Serial offenders .
In this case an individual who boldly snatches not 1 but 2 adolescent girls in broad daylight, takes them sexually assaults one or both (details being withheld by police) kills both victims, then purposely leaves their bodies where they may never be found, is feeding some type of deviant psychologial need.

STRONG liklihood of re-offending .

 

[watcher9]

Well aware of Michael Klunder, read quite a few articles on him, and how he was cleared remins a mystery to me , especially since he was housed for a time in an area not far from where the girls bodies were located , and had the dubious distinction of having abducted multiple victims on me than one occasion which in and of itself is rare.

A few things that sway me from Klunder (aside from him already being cleared as a suspect) was that he lived something like 4 hours away from where the girls were abducted .

These types arent "usually" your traveling criminal types, they usually operate close to home (where ever that is at the time since they move freequently) . Though its not "impossible" it seems a bit improbable even though he fits as an ideal suspect.

My suspect if I were creating a profile :

-White Male
-Single
-Approximately 27 years old (Between 20-31 on average) at time
-Lives or works in the area
-Unemployed or under employed at time of abduction (time of abduction seems to bolster this)
-Most likely works in some form of unskilled or semi-skilled labor most often in the construction industry (this is attributed to their transient nature)
-Familiar with area where bodies were recovered
-Most likely lives with parents, or Guardian figure (possibly alone)
-Victims were that of opportunity
-Stranger to the victims for the most part
-Motivation was sexual
-History of behavioral issues (often multiple disorders usually Sociopathic)
-Has past attempts (or convictons) of sexual crimes most likely involving children
-Most likely has subsequeent crimes following this one, to a lesser degree than murder. (ex possession of child ), however in this case subsequent murder(s) would NOT be out of the question .
-MO in subsequent crimes will most likely be similr to the MO in this crime
-Considered odd, most likely suspected of the crime by someone already
-Freequent change of residence in the past, usually 1 within a year prior to the incident
-Direct Physical assault is the most common means to aquire a victim, (I personally beleive he grabbed one and told the other to come along , he may have bradished a weapon which would explain being able to control multiple victims, If he used a ruse, I feel youd see their bicycles closer to the road .)
-May have returned to body recovery site prior to their bodies being discovered.
-Showed at some point either an unusual abundant interest, or an obvious palpable discomfort when someone was discussing the case .
-May have confided in someone concerning his involvement.
-May have moved soon after the interest in the case died down
-Victim(s) likely killed not far from where they are found .

Heres where it gets icky

Of all the Killer types that exist, those who abduct children for the purpose of sexual exloitation, rape and murder them, have the highest propensity of all killer types, to become Serial offenders .
In this case an individual who boldly snatches not 1 but 2 adolescent girls in broad daylight, takes them sexually assaults one or both (details being withheld by police) kills both victims, then purposely leaves their bodies where they may never be found, is feeding some type of deviant psychologial need.

STRONG liklihood of re-offending .

Thank you for your insight on what a profile would look like.
Thank you also for validating the belief that Klunder would have been a logical suspect even though he was since cleared by LE as a suspect.

By the way, according to this article, Klunder was living in Stratford IA which is 110 miles from Evansdale, less than a 2 hour drive.

Neighbors: Michael Klunder lived a double life

 

[Kell1]

There’s also a chance albeit slightly less that this was someone the girls were at least vaguely familiar with and THAT was the reason he needed to abduct both kids

Because they could identify him

 

[Ommmm]

There’s also a chance albeit slightly less that this was someone the girls were at least vaguely familiar with and THAT was the reason he needed to abduct both kids

Because they could identify him

I agree 100%. In the case of an acquaintance I think he’d previously had contact with one or both of the girls and his motivation was that he was afraid he was about to be caught. Which also makes me think it had to not only be someone the girls were familiar with, but the family too. If the girls knew him but he were a complete stranger to the parents he probably wouldn’t have felt as cornered. MOO.

 

[Kell1]

I agree 100%. In the case of an acquaintance I think he’d previously had contact with one or both of the girls and his motivation was that he was afraid he was about to be caught. Which also makes me think it had to not only be someone the girls were familiar with, but the family too. If the girls knew him but he were a complete stranger to the parents he probably wouldn’t have felt as cornered. MOO.

Not usually at least in terms in terms of "contact", but someone known from around the neighborhood etc.... the old "people in your neighborhood" thing

Usually would be described as "odd" or "weird"

Someone they may know as a local, "hey thats..."

I havent read anything to make me thing the individual has had any previous contact with the victims, prior to their dissappearance.

I lean more toward a stranger abduction in this case.