IL IL - Dermot Kelly, 16, Oglesby, Jan 1972

[Ciriii57]

Thank you very much for all these insights!

22 you're likely carrying the box.

If it was found, it was not mentioned. Maybe it wasn't considered important? But if there was no shell box, does that strike you as strange for someone out shooting? I suppose he may possibly have already used them all and discarded the box?

And -- in many places, you don't need a paper target. People leave trash -- cans & food wrappers -- in the woods. Today, many people who go hike/walk in wooded areas carry bags & take trash out.

In my own mind I'd always imagined him just shooting at cans, trees or something out in the wild. When he left home after the "disagreement" with his father it sounded like he just grabbed the gun and left. I don't see him also taking paper targets etc.
How long would it usually take to set up your targets and then spend some time doing target practice? Dermot had walked about what, 1.5 miles from his home. He was out for only 90 mins before the search began. Did he have enough time to walk this distance through snowy and icy forest and do some target practice?

don't know the habits of the Kelley family -- did family members go out plinking? Did Dermot? Was Hunting an Acceptable Activity to Mr. Kelley, causing Dermt to grab the most visible prop -- the rifle -- and leave for Target Practice in order to take a walk by the river?

I think that's an excellent question. I'd be very interested to know if hunting was a regular activity. It seems like the gun was easily accessible to Dermot and since his father didn't stop him I guess he was experienced using the gun. Although they only allowed 90 mins before panicking so maybe not...?
It's funny because Dermot himself doesn't seem like the kind of kid who'd be interested in guns and hunting. It sounds like he'd rather listen to music and read a book, he was interested in the hippie movement and (I don't know for sure) but I imagined that particular group would be anti weapons?

Did someone else dump the rifle, sight removed, and invent the story about Dermot?

Honestly, the scene is so odd that I'm starting to feel like it was staged by someone like me; with very little knowledge about guns and hunting. Because some things just don't make sense.
Possibly his Dad staged the scene (coincidental how the boots and gun were found, the two things that back up his story from when Dermot left the house...also I notice for years he came across as the caring father telling him to wear warm boots, only later does it come out they'd have a bug argument!)
But maybe also his mother or a friend helped him get out out of there and staged this weird scene.

 

[Laughing]

Telescopic sights are usually called scopes.

Removal of telescopic sight: oh yeah, these are expensive & may cost more than the rifle. Many older .22s work great -- my favorite was purchased in 1988. Rifles don't change much, scopes do change, improved scopes work on new rifles & older rifles. Most scopes are left on one rifle, but they are not that hard to move -- but you'd need to re-sight on the 'new' rifle.

My 1988 .22 has has gold bead sights (bet @Richard knows which Ruger now) & has never held a scope. The built-in sights are great for most casual shooting.

Competition shooters -- different story. Did anyone in the Kelley family participate in this sport, in any of the forms?

Long ago, when I shot with high accuracy I also cross-country skied. Still love watching Biathlon in the winter Olympics!

 

[Richard]

You don't normally remove a scope in the field, unless there is something wrong with it and you want to continue hunting or shooting with the rifle's iron sights (which all rifles had back then).

If a scope is removed from the rifle, you would have to re-attach it and then sight it in all over again before using the rifle for hunting.

 

[Laughing]

So Dad says the rifle had a scope when Dermot left the house with it?

Sold it to buy a train ticket?

 

[Ciriii57]

So Dad says the rifle had a scope when Dermot left the house with it?

Sold it to buy a train ticket?

Yes definitely it had one when he left the house, but not when it was found.
So interesting, I had no idea these things were so valuable! It does make you think he took it to sell.
Any idea what the resale value of a scope would be in 72 and what that could get you?

 

[Ciriii57]

At some point Dermot had shares in Duke Energy Corp. These are his unclaimed dividends. Was it normal for a a teen his age to be a shareholder? The company still exists but doesn't seem to have a presence in Illinois as far as I can tell?

The oddest thing, these were transferred to the State in 2002. I couldn't find specific information but is it normal for a company to retain unclaimed dividends for 30 years?? Banks turn over abandoned funds in either 3 or 5 years depending on the state. Paychecks are to be turned over in 7 years. 30 years seems a very very long time.
Does anyone else know more about property retention times? If not I can always ask this company for info.

Search Illinois' database to find unclaimed property owed to you!

Illinois Unclaimed Property – Official State Site

 

[Laughing]

At under $100, family might consider it too much trouble to reclaim?

 

[Ciriii57]

At under $100, family might consider it too much trouble to reclaim?

I'm not sure the family were aware of them. It's unlikely Dermot had a will so his shares would have automatically passed to his next of kin in probate. His Dad being a lawyer, he would probably know how to claim them easily if he wished.

But I was much more interested in a 16 year old owning shares in an energy company and the huge length of time that company kept them for before transferring to the State.

Someone else may have more insight in this.

 

[Laughing]

I'm not sure the family were aware of them. It's unlikely Dermot had a will so his shares would have automatically passed to his next of kin in probate. His Dad being a lawyer, he would probably know how to claim them easily if he wished.

But I was much more interested in a 16 year old owning shares in an energy company and the huge length of time that company kept them for before transferring to the State.

Someone else may have more insight in this.

Confident this all happened under Illinois' Unclaimed Property procedures.

Anecdotal, but my sibs & I have owned stock since the '70's.

jmho ymmv lrr

 

[Satch]

So Dad says the rifle had a scope when Dermot left the house with it?

Sold it to buy a train ticket?

Where was this mentioned?

All I recall was when the divers brought the gun up from the water and ice, the scope was gone. I also don't know anything about guns. In what other ways can you use a dis-attached gun scope?

Satch

 

[Satch]

Guys,

On the stocks and bonds thing, sometimes families and relatives would buy shares of company stocks and bonds for Christmas and Birthday gifts. If the Kelly clan had investors in the family who were interested in stocks and bonds companies each one of the Kelly kids could have gotten say $100 bond for some special occasion. I don't know how long it would take for the stock/bond to fully mature, or what it would be worth at maturity.

Satch

 

[Ciriii57]

Guys,

On the stocks and bonds thing, sometimes families and relatives would buy shares of company stocks and bonds for Christmas and Birthday gifts. If the Kelly clan had investors in the family who were interested in stocks and bonds companies each one of the Kelly kids could have gotten say $100 bond for some special occasion. I don't know how long it would take for the stock/bond to fully mature, or what it would be worth at maturity.

Satch

Thank you. That explains it. I know nothing about these things and wasn't aware you could give them as gifts. Thank you!

Where was this mentioned?

About the scope, I guess since they thought it was Dermots gun minus the scope, someone must have confirmed to LE that it had a scope when he left the house with it? Otherwise they'd just assume it never had a scope, make sense?

 

[Richard]

Bumping thread up.

 

[theshadow45]

Dermot has been missing for 52 years today.

 

[LucyOso]

Bumping for Dermot.

 

[theshadow45]

Today is Dermot’s birthday.

 

[theshadow45]

Dermot has been missing for 53 years today.

 

[theshadow45]

Bumping, today is Dermot’s birthday.

 

[Richard]

Dermot Kelly has been missing for 54 years.

 

[snooptroop88]

The footprints, were they bare footprints or inside shoes? If they were your usual standard prints, with shoes, they may not even be his footprints. If they're bare footprints, considering the shoes by the riverbank, they're likely his, though, jmo.

It sounds like Dermot was a very serious and sensitive young man. I don't see this at being at odds with his use of a gun, guns are quite common in the area in which he lived. Also think the cryptic comment made at one point about a clash in values in terms of Dermot, the parents and the school-- that could have its root in a lot of different matters. It does sound like something was definitely bothering him, but what exactly it was... I mean it could relate to so many different issues at that age.

We don't know what he was hospitalized for. I wouldn't be positive it was something related to mental health, physical ailments for a person that age can also cause a lot, lot of issues, depending on what it was. And depending on what it was, that might account for why the parents were on the phone so quickly to LE, but agreed, the fact that in all these years, it's still not revealed would lead one to believe it may be something of a more private, delicate nature. I don't think that's necessarily the reason why it's never been released, however. (Also agreeing with @Cubby on the point about it being so frigid that day, the parents might have been quite concerned and that prompted the timing on their phone call.)

But if suicide or accident, jmo, think they'd have found the body. In theory, is it possible they might not have, though? Undoubtedly there could be circumstances where it's possible, but I don't think it's likely, and the whole thing smacks of such a cryptic, mysterious nature that I wonder if something else wasn't going on there. My hope would be that he just got out of there and did what he said he would do, and he struck out on his own. I don't know why he removed the jacket and boots, if he were that concerned about making sure the body didn't rise to the surface, he could have weighted himself down. And where is the sight off of that gun?? I have no doubt that's his gun because his boots and jacket are nearby, but why's the sight missing? And I know there are no return prints, but we'd have to see exactly what the site was like there near where they found the gun; depending on particulars with terrain and ice, it's probably entirely possible he could have managed to exit the scene without leaving a trail. Why, though, remove the boots and jacket? That to me is the most perplexing part of this in any scenario. The jacket... If he was meeting someone with a vehicle, he's in his own turf, that jacket with black and white is likely going to jump right out and draw attention to him; such a jacket might be good in an area where others might also be doing target practice so he stands out, but if he's now leaving and doesn't want his parents catching up with him, he might have switched to a different jacket either already there or one someone brought to him. The boots, though... If there were some part of that terrain that was usually frozen over, he might have changed into different footwear so he could walk on ice, maybe with cleats or studs? If he was wearing layers, he might have had the separate footwear concealed among the clothing layers. And the sight, why's it off? If a meeting had been arranged, he may have wanted just the sight to spot that individual and/or vehicle, who'd be near some distinctive feature.

The thing that really, really makes me wonder on all of this is that time he had spent recently up in Chicago, and the fact that he was supposedly spotted up there, and by someone who knew him well in 1973. Could he have met someone up in Chicago that he went back to? I am NOT implying there's a connection in what I'm about to say, but there's a girl missing from Chicago, she went missing shortly after Dermot did, Edna McIntyre, she went missing 2/20/1972, less than three weeks after Dermot. 17yo, 5'3" 125lbs, white fur coat and desert boots, she attended Schurz HS, a high school briefly attended by Gacy. Schurz also had a Catholic hospital very nearby, Gacy used to dress up as Pogo and entertain kids at Chicago hospitals. And Bruno's Restaurant where Gacy worked, if he worked at the one on Central in Chicago, that's quite close to Schurz. NO, I am not saying Gacy had anything to do with this, or that this scenario had any link with missing Edna. But there is always the possibility that Dermot did, indeed, go back to Chicago for some reason as of now completely unknown. If he did, jmo it was planned and he had help, and I would hope he's still alive. Am still hopeful this young man took off and had a happy life. But there are all kinds of possibilities in the cryptic set of clues left behind.