MO - Sherrill Levitt, 47, Suzie Streeter, 19, & Stacy McCall, 18, Springfield, 7 June 1992 #14

[Valiant]

If you want to solve the case, figure out the motive. Lots of possible theories, but no one really knows what the motive was.

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

If you want to solve the case, figure out the motive. Lots of possible theories, but no one really knows what the motive was.

that's why I think "silence" is the best motive...

Suzie talking to cops or at trial spooked some people (because she or her mother might reveal illegal activities certain people they knew were doing) and they went out to make sure that didnt happen......stacy was collateral damage for showing up.....she may have been what changed the plan from abducting/scaring to murder. IMO

 

[lisaNYC]

If you want to solve the case, figure out the motive. Lots of possible theories, but no one really knows what the motive was.

The motive could have been simply that the opportunity presented itself. For example Sherrill could have been at the gas station to get cigarettes at the same time the girls returned home. Someone could have followed the girls home and entered the house through an unlocked door or window. One of the girls could have been in the bathroom and the killer strangled or suffocated the other girl and did the same to the girl who was in the bathroom. Sherill could have arrived home and walked into Suzie's bedroom dropped her bag when the intruder approached and killed her. Suffocating and strangling doesn't leave blood. At least I don't think it does.

Some things (amongst others) that don't sit well with me:
Janelle taking it upon herself to walk into the house.
Janelle answering answering the phone which provided the cops with a potential mystery suspect. Also, who makes prank calls at 9am?
LE's basing their timeline upon Janelle's statements.

 

[Valiant]

that's why I think "silence" is the best motive...

Suzie talking to cops or at trial spooked some people (because she or her mother might reveal illegal activities certain people they knew were doing) and they went out to make sure that didnt happen......stacy was collateral damage for showing up.....she may have been what changed the plan from abducting/scaring to murder. IMO

That's what I lean toward as well. I think here likely was a link between people in Suzie's circle and people who were afraid one or all of these three women knew something. I also think it is very possible that something that happened earlier that night may have made someone feel it was necessary to act ASAP. I also think it's possible that all three had to go based on suspicions that were raised that night.
If were an organized crime hit, the motive to move and hide the victims wouldn't have been a factor. They'd have been killed on he spot and left there there as an example.
The silence motive seems clearer than a sexually motivated crime.

Just my opinion. It's not worth much as I sure can't prove anything.

 

[Catmommy]

A sexual motive would be carried out by a sexual deviate. This is hard for non deviates to even imagine and why they look for a more logical answer. A couple of fresh young girls might seem like the perfect target but sexual crimes are about power and control with sex used as a weapon. Sherrill could have been the target. The girls were just incredibly unlucky in their choice of where to spend the night and the time they got there. MOO

 

[Bartt Streeter]

bottom line is no SPD, current or former, will divulge info about an active case (its not even cold).. they’ve been instructed not to do so by the chief and former to current DAs. Basic protocol

Asher, Webb, Neal, and Bookout (and any LE on 48 Hours, Crime Watch Daily, Disappeared, etc.) have only given cursory info that was already public knowledge...nothing that would hurt an active case. That’s why I know Asher is telling the truth.allen Neal one Disappeared is probably the most decorated detective to work this case...i say his word carries lots of weight....

 

[Bartt Streeter]

I apologize, I was trying to write think edit... While my mouth is open in awe at reading the things people are still trying to spread as factual and the whole idea that anybody thinks they're capable of solving this case with the multitude of misinformation that they are exposed to and trying to use falsehoods as a springboard into solving the case... it just baffles my mind...still amazed at the crap the same few people are pushing out into the public. That's enough of this strange little rabbit hole thanks for the reminder. Wow...

 

[Missouri Mule]

The motive could have been simply that the opportunity presented itself. For example Sherrill could have been at the gas station to get cigarettes at the same time the girls returned home. Someone could have followed the girls home and entered the house through an unlocked door or window. One of the girls could have been in the bathroom and the killer strangled or suffocated the other girl and did the same to the girl who was in the bathroom. Sherill could have arrived home and walked into Suzie's bedroom dropped her bag when the intruder approached and killed her. Suffocating and strangling doesn't leave blood. At least I don't think it does.

Some things (amongst others) that don't sit well with me:
Janelle taking it upon herself to walk into the house.
Janelle answering answering the phone which provided the cops with a potential mystery suspect. Also, who makes prank calls at 9am?

LE's basing their timeline upon Janelle's statements.

The story about Sherrill being at that particular gas station was debunked early on. She may have gone to a gas station to buy cigarettes but it wasn’t that one. The News-Leader cleared this up in 1992 but it keeps resurfacing.

So far as I know there is nothing known about Sherrill after about 11:15 PM when the last known caller is documented.

The rest of your post is plausible.

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

The story about Sherrill being at that particular gas station was debunked early on. She may have gone to a gas station to buy cigarettes but it wasn’t that one. The News-Leader cleared this up in 1992 but it keeps resurfacing.

So far as I know there is nothing known about Sherrill after about 11:15 PM when the last known caller is documented.

The rest of your post is plausible.

did you actually talk to the APCO Clerk and hear his side and why he was certain he saw Sherrill?....

You do know a gas station down the street also claimed to have saw her and time was close to the time Steve Thompson claimed to have seen her...

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

A sexual motive would be carried out by a sexual deviate. This is hard for non deviates to even imagine and why they look for a more logical answer. A couple of fresh young girls might seem like the perfect target but sexual crimes are about power and control with sex used as a weapon. Sherrill could have been the target. The girls were just incredibly unlucky in their choice of where to spend the night and the time they got there. MOO

All FBI statements and SPD releases point to this being planned and...IMO... was going to happen one way or another..... bad luck entered their lives (maybe not Stacy) before June 7, 1992...IMO

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

I apologize, I was trying to write think edit... While my mouth is open in awe at reading the things people are still trying to spread as factual and the whole idea that anybody thinks they're capable of solving this case with the multitude of misinformation that they are exposed to and trying to use falsehoods as a springboard into solving the case... it just baffles my mind...still amazed at the crap the same few people are pushing out into the public. That's enough of this strange little rabbit hole thanks for the reminder. Wow...

which false hoods specifically are you talking about?

I think I know how to separate the wheat from the chaff....in terms of what cops say on shows, etc. Gotta just research it on the other end and verify

 

[Valiant]

The motive could have been simply that the opportunity presented itself. For example Sherrill could have been at the gas station to get cigarettes at the same time the girls returned home. Someone could have followed the girls home and entered the house through an unlocked door or window. One of the girls could have been in the bathroom and the killer strangled or suffocated the other girl and did the same to the girl who was in the bathroom. Sherill could have arrived home and walked into Suzie's bedroom dropped her bag when the intruder approached and killed her. Suffocating and strangling doesn't leave blood. At least I don't think it does.

Some things (amongst others) that don't sit well with me:
Janelle taking it upon herself to walk into the house.
Janelle answering answering the phone which provided the cops with a potential mystery suspect. Also, who makes prank calls at 9am?
LE's basing their timeline upon Janelle's statements.

The problem is that while suffocation or strangulation may not leave blood at the scene, it's a very violent thing and would have likely left other signs in the residence.

 

[lisaNYC]

The problem is that while suffocation or strangulation may not leave blood at the scene, it's a very violent thing and would have likely left other signs in the residence.

Thanks- I didn't know that. I'll take your word for it because I don't want to Google suffocation and/or strangulation. ⊙０⊙

 

[asyousay]

I apologize, I was trying to write think edit... While my mouth is open in awe at reading the things people are still trying to spread as factual and the whole idea that anybody thinks they're capable of solving this case with the multitude of misinformation that they are exposed to and trying to use falsehoods as a springboard into solving the case... it just baffles my mind...still amazed at the crap the same few people are pushing out into the public. That's enough of this strange little rabbit hole thanks for the reminder. Wow...

Why not point out the lies then?


<modsnip>

 

[Missouri Mule]

did you actually talk to the APCO Clerk and hear his side and why he was certain he saw Sherrill?....

You do know a gas station down the street also claimed to have saw her and time was close to the time Steve Thompson claimed to have seen her...

The News-Leader had a lengthy article having to do with this reported sighting on August 3, 1992. The woman came forward and identified herself. Sherrill simply was never there. I just read it to be sure.

The police presented a long list of questions and answers to unresolved issues. This was one of those issues.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Thanks- I didn't know that. I'll take your word for it because I don't want to Google suffocation and/or strangulation. ⊙０⊙

This is true. If you have had the unpleasant experience of seeing a pet being euthanized it would be nearly impossible for those women to be taken after being killed without leaving evidence behind. There had to be a second unknown crime scene.

 

[Bartt Streeter]

<modsnip: quoted post was modsnipped>

No one said cops were infallible.... but that Asher isnt going to state falsehoods about details that would jeopradize the case.

for example him saying you were "sloshed" or whatever.... is irrelevant. it doesnt jeopradize the case because he doesnt actually think youre guilty/doesnt expect you to be called as any kind of real witness. otherwise you would have been when the grand jury members were subpoenaed..

at any rate, you dont have to believe Asher. not my job...

If Asher is lying...that's a HUGE deal. So is he lying? Or is Clay lying? Its really that simple and I dont see why no one is in a hurry to get to bottom of this

<modsnip>

:Taking this personal:

Yes, I do take this very, very, very personal. And my judgement is definitely swayed.

: Vendetta against Asher...:

No, I don't think "Vendetta" is an apt description of what I feel.

Asher, Irks me..I don't like being irked, I don't like people coming at me sideways, especially in such a sloppy transparent way.

Once again a public attempt to neutralize my input, blah blah.

He's lies are actually having an inconvenient and painful temporary effect in limiting some of my income and social options.
(Now that does piss me off, because everyone knows it's my job to limit my options )

:My bro crush with former detective Neal:

I liked former detective Neal....I find him to be incredibly skilled.
He always presented himself as caring, intelligent, knowledgeable and professional.

We have not always seen eye-to-eye. However I believe he understood and respected my right and obligation to voice frustrations concerning the handling of this case. (Like a lot of other people, I believe he disagreed with my approach)

Neal was the end of an era...he was there in 1992, he knows our case from first hand experience.

Shortly after the 2012 lunch meeting with Neal. I came to yet another sad realization that detective Neal will in all likelihood be the last Springfield detective I will talk to, until there is something substantial or a resolution and that inforation doesn't have to come from the Springfield Police Department it can come from anywhere and be verified elsewhere.


<modsnip: personalizing>

:No one said cops were infallible....:

Agreed.. it was not plainly stated... but it is now and we agree (look at us, in agreement again...we are more capable than the US Senate.).
:Asher isnt going to state falsehoods about details that would jeopradize the case.:

I wholeheartedly disagree.
Let me start with a small point, but be prepared for more..

Most of us know of the deep concerns voiced by the district attorney early in the investigation, that the prosecution of the case would be very difficult due to a number of issues with procedures, practices and actions of the SPD.



To imply or category state that Asher wasn't part and partial to what could be considered a legal quagmire and enept and unprofessional behaviors would be foolish on anybody's part.

My second point, simply a reference to the 1991 Springfield abortion clinic shooting and a News Leader story from December 2016. Just a few short paragraphs about a detective and an interview with a witness and an accusation of a false police report, an intentional, misleading and manipulative report that could have resulted in an arrest warrant being issued for a completely innocent person.

Third point. He's trying too hard.

In December of 1991 he was investigating a crime that received national attention, cameras in his face kind of attention and he publicly failed to solve that crime.

Fourth point . In June of 1992 just six short months later, another horrific crime with national attentions, bang the cameras are back in his face, the die was cast his manipulation begun and it has continued both privately and publicly for 27 and a half years.

:sloshed" or whatever.... is irrelevant:

I disagree, it is relevant, especially as that is not all he said.

<modsnip: bickering and personalizing >

 

[Barbieshell]

I'm currently watching a documentary about this on the ID Channel in the UK called "People Magazine Investigates" "The Springfield 3". Seems the crime scene was a bit tainted due to loads of people being in the house when the cops turned up after it became apparent they were missing.
The fact these 3 women just left the house without a load of kerfuffle means they could have been ushered out quietly by a gunman or under some kind of ruse by someone they knew.
Odd case, tragic that it's 3 folks gone that have left a hole in their loved ones' lives and nobody knows what the hell happened to them.

 

[ArkansasTimeTraveler]

<modsnip>

:Taking this personal:

Yes, I do take this very, very, very personal. And my judgement is definitely swayed.

: Vendetta against Asher...:

No, I don't think "Vendetta" is an apt description of what I feel.

Asher, Irks me..I don't like being irked, I don't like people coming at me sideways, especially in such a sloppy transparent way.

Once again a public attempt to neutralize my input, blah blah.

He's lies are actually having an inconvenient and painful temporary effect in limiting some of my income and social options.
(Now that does piss me off, because everyone knows it's my job to limit my options )

:My bro crush with former detective Neal:

I liked former detective Neal....I find him to be incredibly skilled.
He always presented himself as caring, intelligent, knowledgeable and professional.

We have not always seen eye-to-eye. However I believe he understood and respected my right and obligation to voice frustrations concerning the handling of this case. (Like a lot of other people, I believe he disagreed with my approach)

Neal was the end of an era...he was there in 1992, he knows our case from first hand experience.

Shortly after the 2012 lunch meeting with Neal. I came to yet another sad realization that detective Neal will in all likelihood be the last Springfield detective I will talk to, until there is something substantial or a resolution and that inforation doesn't have to come from the Springfield Police Department it can come from anywhere and be verified elsewhere.


<modsnip: personalizing>

:No one said cops were infallible....:

Agreed.. it was not plainly stated... but it is now and we agree (look at us, in agreement again...we are more capable than the US Senate.).
:Asher isnt going to state falsehoods about details that would jeopradize the case.:

I wholeheartedly disagree.
Let me start with a small point, but be prepared for more..

Most of us know of the deep concerns voiced by the district attorney early in the investigation, that the prosecution of the case would be very difficult due to a number of issues with procedures, practices and actions of the SPD.



To imply or category state that Asher wasn't part and partial to what could be considered a legal quagmire and enept and unprofessional behaviors would be foolish on anybody's part.

My second point, simply a reference to the 1991 Springfield abortion clinic shooting and a News Leader story from December 2016. Just a few short paragraphs about a detective and an interview with a witness and an accusation of a false police report, an intentional, misleading and manipulative report that could have resulted in an arrest warrant being issued for a completely innocent person.

Third point. He's trying too hard.

In December of 1991 he was investigating a crime that received national attention, cameras in his face kind of attention and he publicly failed to solve that crime.

Fourth point . In June of 1992 just six short months later, another horrific crime with national attentions, bang the cameras are back in his face, the die was cast his manipulation begun and it has continued both privately and publicly for 27 and a half years.

:sloshed" or whatever.... is irrelevant:

I disagree, it is relevant, especially as that is not all he said.

<modsnip: bickering and personalizing >

One thing I DO know...

Asher and Clay say conflicting statements about your sister's car and Dusty's alibi. There's not wiggle room where both can be right or wrong. One is clearly right and one is clearly wrong. That changes the whole face of the investigation one way or another. This isn't a case a of a cop having bad "cognitive abilities" to put it in your words......these are two fundamental facts that play a role in the motive......

Bartt,, haven't you always wondered why the papers say Joseph Riedel was in town but Michael Clay says he was in IL and Clay came to MO on his own? Why do four different papers and articles say this information?? With Cpl. Doug Thomas's investigation convincing a jury, a DA, and a judge to sign off on subpoenas.... don't you think there's a link to Garrison and Mike and/or Dusty and/or Joseph??.....especially if your sister was seen at parties with this group (RS verifies this)

 

[Bartt Streeter]

One thing I DO know...

Asher and Clay say conflicting statements about your sister's car and Dusty's alibi. There's not wiggle room where both can be right or wrong. One is clearly right and one is clearly wrong. That changes the whole face of the investigation one way or another. This isn't a case a of a cop having bad "cognitive abilities" to put it in your words......these are two fundamental facts that play a role in the motive......

Bartt,, haven't you always wondered why the papers say Joseph Riedel was in town but Michael Clay says he was in IL and Clay came to MO on his own? Why do four different papers and articles say this information?? With Cpl. Doug Thomas's investigation convincing a jury, a DA, and a judge to sign off on subpoenas.... don't you think there's a link to Garrison and Mike and/or Dusty and/or Joseph??.....especially if your sister was seen at parties with this group (RS verifies this)

I do have some questions and I will share those with you later but I'm going to post my thoughts on a point you made earlier.. I need to get off this form for a couple days.
Below underlined was your post as part of your earlier post.
.....it doesnt jeopradize the case because he doesnt actually think youre guilty/doesnt expect you to be called as any kind of real witness. otherwise you would have been when the grand jury members were subpoenaed..


In roundabout way I think you're making a point, that I need to bounce around the old melon for a while.



Asher knows, I had nothing to do with this crime, after all he investigated me.



He knows I passed the polygraph, he was standing directly outside the door when I finished it.Hell, I thought he was going to give me a hug.



He knows I made myself available at every opportunity I could. He knows I did everything I possibly could to be of assistance because I was concerned and hopeful that II might have seen or heard something of value in those previous nine months I was in town. He also knows that the so-called friends angle doesn't make any sense because I told him about EVERYBODY in my life.



Then he goes on TV in 2019 and puts forth a ridiculous theory, one where I was too drunk (sloshed) to commit the crime yet sober enough at some point to psychoticly plan a crime with other psychotic individuals and then after the crime was committed, and I took a polygraph I was too drunk at the time of planning to actually recall it... that's why I passed the polygraph.



Did I get that right ?



That's cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs



27+ years later..that is some seriously delusional thinking, an inability to accept his professional failures, or maybe just a continuing scramble to cover up and keep peoples focus on the scapegoats.





Pokin at it, pokin at it...



On the same TV show suddenly Asher divulges something that has never been made public before, now most of us have speculated about it. But for some reason the police have never directly informed the public on the matter. Hell II publicly asking it in a posting on Streeter Family Blog years ago "was my sister supposed to testify" and "was her car used when the gold was pawned.?"



And the reason that I asked that question years ago was I knew that if either one of those questions were true. That my mother would have gone into Mama Bear mode there would be a paper trail of my mother and sister speaking with someone at the SPD or another law enforcement agency soon after the robbery and a continuing paper trail of conversations with some form of LE until their abductions.