MO - Sherrill Levitt, 47, Suzie Streeter, 19, & Stacy McCall, 18, Springfield, 7 June 1992 #11

[Scooby Doo 4U]

And you can Guarantee that Police told NO ONE who actually passed or failed their polygraphs from the 3MW investigation.

If they said "You Passed", It meant Nothing. It's not like they are going to just let everyone know the truth about who passed or who failed.

It would be like tipping their hand in a game of poker. They'd never do that. They may say, "You passed". But again, it means nothing, because the police have no obligation to be honest about that information, and, releasing that information would certainly jeopardize their investigation and overall case.

 

[irisheyesofblue]

I don't think they polygraphed anyone in the "Grave Robbing Incident". Why would they?
They polygraphed people in the 3MW investigation. But there wouldn't be any reason to even ask someone to be polygraphed in the Grave Robbing Crime. By Mikes own admission, Joe gave everyone up.
They had a copy of Dustin's ID from the pawn shop where the teeth were sold.
They had Susie's statement.

So, I don't believe that story. Sorry.

Polygraphs in the 3MW investigation= YES
Polygraphs in the Grave Robbing Crimes= HEAVY NO

Try Again.

And you are 100 percent wrong because they did when they asked them about the three missing women. Also for statements Dusty was the first to give one, then Joe and then Suzie. She only gave one because they asked her if she knew anything about it because she was with Dusty the next day.

I don’t feel the need to post it here. I’ve shared it with a couple on here that I actually know who they are and we discuss various theories together. Not going to share public to people I do not know who they are and some that are not the nicest to me or my husband. I find in those cases it really does not matter anyway. They will just say that lie detectors don’t matter anyway so why bother.

 

[cherrymeg]

I don't think they polygraphed anyone in the "Grave Robbing Incident". Why would they?
They polygraphed people in the 3MW investigation. But there wouldn't be any reason to even ask someone to be polygraphed in the Grave Robbing Crime. By Mikes own admission, Joe gave everyone up.
They had a copy of Dustin's ID from the pawn shop where the teeth were sold.
They had Susie's statement.

So, I don't believe that story. Sorry.

Polygraphs in the 3MW investigation= YES
Polygraphs in the Grave Robbing Crimes= HEAVY NO

Try Again.

Why are we talking about polygraphs again. They did them to Mike, Dusty and Joe for the missing women. There isn't a need for the vandalism case accept if they asked about occult ties which is one thing they believed could connect both cases. This article talks about Mike and Dusty. It clearly says they passed for the missing women case. Regardless of how you feel about polygraphs it's worse to spread misinformation. In the early days of the case they were trying to figure out what happened to these three women.

 

[cherrymeg]

Does anyone think Roger Craig Cox may have been the abductor in this case? He was name a POI by LE and worked at Stacy's dad's business, so he would have been familiar with at least her. He past criminal history (documented in this video) plus his training as an Army Ranger would have given him the skills to pull this off. Then, add in his creepy statements he made to the interviewer (also in the video) about knowing the 3 women are dead arouses my suspicions.

Anyone have any thoughts on this guy?

I think he probably committed the crime Florida, I don't think he killed these women. I could be wrong. If I was his mom I would have paid another inmate to kick his butt before he claimed he was waiting for my death to give people answers. I would have gone there myself even. He seems to want attention.

 

[cherrymeg]

Does anyone think Roger Craig Cox may have been the abductor in this case? He was name a POI by LE and worked at Stacy's dad's business, so he would have been familiar with at least her. He past criminal history (documented in this video) plus his training as an Army Ranger would have given him the skills to pull this off. Then, add in his creepy statements he made to the interviewer (also in the video) about knowing the 3 women are dead arouses my suspicions.

Anyone have any thoughts on this guy?

What do you think of Cox?

 

[cherrymeg]

And you can Guarantee that Police told NO ONE who actually passed or failed their polygraphs from the 3MW investigation.

If they said "You Passed", It meant Nothing. It's not like they are going to just let everyone know the truth about who passed or who failed.

It would be like tipping their hand in a game of poker. They'd never do that. They may say, "You passed". But again, it means nothing, because the police have no obligation to be honest about that information, and, releasing that information would certainly jeopardize their investigation and overall case.

Polygraphs work on most people. Some people can pass when guilty and fail when innocent. It's not how they would rule out people but a polygraph and an alibi for that night would help. The police took the vandalism case seriously because Dusty had dated Suzie and they might have worked together. They always look at boyfriends. It just so happened he was involved in vandalizing a graveyard with two friends. If you argue that playing in a graveyard makes you capable of murder, than you have never gotten high or drunk in a graveyard. It's safer than driving around in a car.
If you think the 3 guys are into some drug conspiracy than why pawn gold fillings? Why attract attention? If you are selling drugs you shouldn't need filling money. If you are buying drugs than you are like everyone one else. Most people aren't that close to their dealers.
So how does this work out in your head. Because in mine there is no way it makes sense. They aren't suspects.

 

[cherrymeg]

What are the questions about this case that drive you crazy?

 

[irisheyesofblue]

And you can Guarantee that Police told NO ONE who actually passed or failed their polygraphs from the 3MW investigation.

If they said "You Passed", It meant Nothing. It's not like they are going to just let everyone know the truth about who passed or who failed.

It would be like tipping their hand in a game of poker. They'd never do that. They may say, "You passed". But again, it means nothing, because the police have no obligation to be honest about that information, and, releasing that information would certainly jeopardize their investigation and overall case.

Exactly why I won’t post it publicly. Also yes they will give the results to some like lawyers and guess what we have his lawyers files.

 

[cherrymeg]

Exactly why I won’t post it publicly. Also yes they will give the results to some like lawyers and guess what we have his lawyers files.

When they say someone has passed a polygraph and it's a case that is unsolved after 27 years I don't think they are luring people into a false sense of security.

 

[Scooby Doo 4U]

Polygraphs work on most people. Some people can pass when guilty and fail when innocent. It's not how they would rule out people but a polygraph and an alibi for that night would help. The police took the vandalism case seriously because Dusty had dated Suzie and they might have worked together. They always look at boyfriends. It just so happened he was involved in vandalizing a graveyard with two friends. If you argue that playing in a graveyard makes you capable of murder, than you have never gotten high or drunk in a graveyard. It's safer than driving around in a car.
If you think the 3 guys are into some drug conspiracy than why pawn gold fillings? Why attract attention? If you are selling drugs you shouldn't need filling money. If you are buying drugs than you are like everyone one else. Most people aren't that close to their dealers.
So how does this work out in your head. Because in mine there is no way it makes sense. They aren't suspects.

Well it works out in my head, based on what I posted as. Polygraphs are not admissible in court, Police use them as an investigative "TOOL", but don't rely on them for the evidence they need to prove their case. Only to help narrow down the suspect pool, and then gather "Admissible Evidence" afterwards.
I didn't say they were SUSPECTS. Not sure how what I posted morphed into you making that statement.
What I said was, Police have no obligation to inform anyone of their "True Polygraph Results" and probably would not have, if they're conducting their investigation correctly.
Why would they want to tell everyone who they were focusing on investigative wise? That......would make no sense.

 

[Scooby Doo 4U]

And you are 100 percent wrong because they did when they asked them about the three missing women. Also for statements Dusty was the first to give one, then Joe and then Suzie. She only gave one because they asked her if she knew anything about it because she was with Dusty the next day.

I don’t feel the need to post it here. I’ve shared it with a couple on here that I actually know who they are and we discuss various theories together. Not going to share public to people I do not know who they are and some that are not the nicest to me or my husband. I find in those cases it really does not matter anyway. They will just say that lie detectors don’t matter anyway so why bother.

And if you read what I wrote, I clearly stated, that I would believe that they may have been given polygraphs for the 3MW case. But I don't believe they would have done so in the Grave Robbing Case. They would have had no reason to. And Mike CLEARLY STATED Joe sold them out. Narked on them. Ratted them out. They would have NEVER given them polygraphs for just the Grave Robbing Case. 3MW case yes. Grave Robbing Case NO. Why would they, they already had their evidence, and had their suspects.

May be you're conflating the two incidences, and making the statement that they were polygraphed for the 3MW crime, but not the Grave Robbing Crime.

Because that is exactly what "I" was stating.

 

[cherrymeg]

Well it works out in my head, based on what I posted as. Polygraphs are not admissible in court, Police use them as an investigative "TOOL", but don't rely on them for the evidence they need to prove their case. Only to help narrow down the suspect pool, and then gather "Admissible Evidence" afterwards.
I didn't say they were SUSPECTS. Not sure how what I posted morphed into you making that statement.
What I said was, Police have no obligation to inform anyone of their "True Polygraph Results" and probably would not have, if they're conducting their investigation correctly.
Why would they want to tell everyone who they were focusing on investigative wise? That......would make no sense.

People that take the polygraphs and their lawyers do get results. No one talking about polygraphs and how they can clear people. They were brought up when Ozarks said Mike Clay lied about Joe passing his. Mike didn't lie. That was the point.
The police might mean what they say. Maybe they don't want to have time wasted with 30 years of calls about tips that are from the first month the women went missing.

 

[irisheyesofblue]

And if you read what I wrote, I clearly stated, that I would believe that they may have been given polygraphs for the 3MW case. But I don't believe they would have done so in the Grave Robbing Case. They would have had no reason to. And Mike CLEARLY STATED Joe sold them out. Narked on them. Ratted them out. They would have NEVER given them polygraphs for just the Grave Robbing Case. 3MW case yes. Grave Robbing Case NO. Why would they, they already had their evidence, and had their suspects.

May be you're conflating the two incidences, and making the statement that they were polygraphed for the 3MW crime, but not the Grave Robbing Crime.

Because that is exactly what "I" was stating.

Then why are you arguing about us having them? I said they were given AFTER the women went missing so they were about that. I also said that they included the vandalism in the questions so therefore his lawyer had them. The whole occult thing was one of the main reasons they were looking at them.

 

[cherrymeg]

People are focusing on polygraphs but what about the people that saw Suzie and Stacy last. I think JK is leaving something out that may or may not be important.

 

[Talullah]

I don't think they polygraphed anyone in the "Grave Robbing Incident". Why would they?
They polygraphed people in the 3MW investigation. But there wouldn't be any reason to even ask someone to be polygraphed in the Grave Robbing Crime. By Mikes own admission, Joe gave everyone up.
They had a copy of Dustin's ID from the pawn shop where the teeth were sold.
They had Susie's statement.

So, I don't believe that story. Sorry.

Polygraphs in the 3MW investigation= YES
Polygraphs in the Grave Robbing Crimes= HEAVY NO

Try Again.

I realize police didn’t need polygraphs to get to the bottom of the teeth stealing but questions related to those charges made the results relevant to their case.

 

[Talullah]

What are the questions about this case that drive you crazy?
It drives me crazy that we know so much about Suzie and hardly anything about Stacy. Suzie’s acquaintances or decisions may be why the women disappeared but after all this time nothing has panned out so maybe we should look elsewhere. I’m not suggesting Stacy was a bad person. Maybe the only reason she followed Suzie home was Suzie needed a friend but considering how people described their relationship I can’t help thinking there was more going on.

 

[irisheyesofblue]

[QUOTE="Talullah, post: 15466147, member: 129620"
What are the questions about this case that drive you crazy?

It drives me crazy that we know so much about Suzie and hardly anything about Stacy. Suzie’s acquaintances or decisions may be why the women disappeared but after all this time nothing has panned out so maybe we should look elsewhere. I’m not suggesting Stacy was a bad person. Maybe the only reason she followed Suzie home was Suzie needed a friend but considering how people described their relationship I can’t help thinking there was more going on.
][/QUOTE]

I agree and have talked about this with others. Just because you question someone does not make them a bad person. I think with Stacey because her mom is very front and center it makes people hesitant. Suzie and Sherrill don’t have that.

 

[cherrymeg]

[QUOTE="Talullah, post: 15466147, member: 129620"
What are the questions about this case that drive you crazy?

It drives me crazy that we know so much about Suzie and hardly anything about Stacy. Suzie’s acquaintances or decisions may be why the women disappeared but after all this time nothing has panned out so maybe we should look elsewhere. I’m not suggesting Stacy was a bad person. Maybe the only reason she followed Suzie home was Suzie needed a friend but considering how people described their relationship I can’t help thinking there was more going on.
]

I agree and have talked about this with others. Just because you question someone does not make them a bad person. I think with Stacey because her mom is very front and center it makes people hesitant. Suzie and Sherrill don’t have that.[/QUOTE]

Stacy's actions that night are as important as anyone else's. Pretending she didn't have agency and just slept over to be nice after a late night of possible drinking. I think the reason they went to Suzie's or seemed to is important.

 

[JenNJ]

I agree and have talked about this with others. Just because you question someone does not make them a bad person. I think with Stacey because her mom is very front and center it makes people hesitant. Suzie and Sherrill don’t have that.

Stacy's actions that night are as important as anyone else's. Pretending she didn't have agency and just slept over to be nice after a late night of possible drinking. I think the reason they went to Suzie's or seemed to is important.[/QUOTE]

That last sentence is one of my top questions. All of their stuff was there, but is there anything in print stating that they have Stacy’s fingerprints at Suzie’s house? I can’t find anything on it other than speculation. I wonder if the house was set up to look like they made it home, to avoid police searches at one of the last places they were reported to be(Kirby or Joy). Whoever did this could have also wanted to make sure this was in Springfield P.D. jurisdiction. I really wish they would disclose a little more information on this part.

 

[cherrymeg]

Stacy's actions that night are as important as anyone else's. Pretending she didn't have agency and just slept over to be nice after a late night of possible drinking. I think the reason they went to Suzie's or seemed to is important.

That last sentence is one of my top questions. All of their stuff was there, but is there anything in print stating that they have Stacy’s fingerprints at Suzie’s house? I can’t find anything on it other than speculation. I wonder if the house was set up to look like they made it home, to avoid police searches at one of the last places they were reported to be(Kirby or Joy). Whoever did this could have also wanted to make sure this was in Springfield P.D. jurisdiction. I really wish they would disclose a little more information on this part.[/QUOTE]

I think Stacy maybe wanted to go there, thinking Suzie had more freedom and she could park her car or meet a guy at the house and possibly go out from there. This is just a theory. I think Stacy's dating life might be worth checking into especially after 27 years