OK OK - Girl Scout Murders, Lori Farmer, 8, Michelle Guse, 9, Doris Milner, 10, 1977

[huxley72]

I was looking at Ted Bundy making sure he hadn't escaped and somehow made it to Oklahoma that year. He had actually escaped a few days earlier but was captured and locked up. The reason I was looking at Bundy was the Soriety house murders and beatings he did in early 78. He attacted 4 women in less than 15 minutes killing 2 and almost killing two more at 3am in the morning. All in a place that police say had over 30 people that should have heard it but no one heard a thing. Makes me think of what happened at Camp Scott. Any seriel killers that could be linked during that time, someone that was a professional murderer?

 

[MaryG12]

I was looking at Ted Bundy making sure he hadn't escaped and somehow made it to Oklahoma that year. He had actually escaped a few days earlier but was captured and locked up. The reason I was looking at Bundy was the Soriety house murders and beatings he did in early 78. He attacted 4 women in less than 15 minutes killing 2 and almost killing two more at 3am in the morning. All in a place that police say had over 30 people that should have heard it but no one heard a thing. Makes me think of what happened at Camp Scott. Any seriel killers that could be linked during that time, someone that was a professional murderer?

I thought about that - but for some reason my instinct tells me this was an inside job - have been reading the recent posts about the case - I think it might explain why things were "hushed up" within those at the camp, and the focus being on GLH.

 

[wfgodot]

I'm sure this has been posted, perhaps more than once, but abandonedok.com's look at Camp Scott does not lose interest over time.

 

[adeedra]

I was looking at Ted Bundy making sure he hadn't escaped and somehow made it to Oklahoma that year. He had actually escaped a few days earlier but was captured and locked up. The reason I was looking at Bundy was the Soriety house murders and beatings he did in early 78. He attacted 4 women in less than 15 minutes killing 2 and almost killing two more at 3am in the morning. All in a place that police say had over 30 people that should have heard it but no one heard a thing. Makes me think of what happened at Camp Scott. Any seriel killers that could be linked during that time, someone that was a professional murderer?

But what makes you think that was "professional"? It doesn't look like it. Ted Bundy wasn't interested in kids.
I can't imagine that serial killer on raged spree would stop at three kills, since all the girls and adults there weren't really protected. And if that was pitch dark forest with tents relatively far from one another...
Also - how could someone totally strange knew that they have time till morning cause nobody will check on girls through the night?
That person must knew how it looks like over there. So my guess would be that was someone local or related to someone local.

 

[Ven]

Another theory with something to it are the suspects that a later Hayes County Sheriff tried but failed to indict by grand jury.

Sonny James and Bill Stevens both fit the profile. Sonny James was 16 at the time of the murders and Bill Stevens was 20. A waitress testified at G Hart's trial that she saw Bill Stevens with bloody boots at a diner the next morning. Sonny James is reportedly a short man and could have been the tennis shoe perp swinging from the latrine door. Sonny James is in jail for another murder and Bill Stevens was later imprisoned for rape and kidnapping, where he either committed suicide or was murdered, depending on what story you want to believe. They are variously associated with other suspects, including Sonny's uncle who was 40 at the time of the GS murders, another man who was in his 20s that Sonny James later killed himself, and even Gene Hart. The two sheriff's had a different list of three, but I think Sonny James and Bill Stevens are at the absolute top of this suspect list IMO.

Gene Hart had a friend who lived near Camp Scott and who neighbors had seen out late at night along the property line in the past with a gun. He could be another one to look at, if he wasn't already mentioned, but LE never released his name.

 

[Ambitioned]

I thought about that - but for some reason my instinct tells me this was an inside job - have been reading the recent posts about the case - I think it might explain why things were "hushed up" within those at the camp, and the focus being on GLH.

I believe you are right. I'm interested in the dogs. I used to hunt with them in Fort Sill and they were never wrong. Am I correct in that the dogs tracked the scent around the counselor's tent and then stopped there? They never did follow a scent out of the camp correct?

I also agree and think the case can be solved today without DNA. I think someone out there knows what happened and can come forward.

 

[Ambitioned]

Gene Hart had a friend who lived near Camp Scott and who neighbors had seen out late at night along the property line in the past with a gun. He could be another one to look at, if he wasn't already mentioned, but LE never released his name.

I think they mentioned him offhand on the Yuku board under list of suspects.

If GLH did it he had to have an accomplice for sure. I don't see one person doing this.

 

[Betty P]

I believe you are right. I'm interested in the dogs. I used to hunt with them in Fort Sill and they were never wrong. Am I correct in that the dogs tracked the scent around the counselor's tent and then stopped there? They never did follow a scent out of the camp correct?

I also agree and think the case can be solved today without DNA. I think someone out there knows what happened and can come forward.

No, the dogs tracked the scent to areas on Twin Bridges Rd, which ran just west of the camp. Check the pre-trial testimony of various LEO's on Day 10 and Day 11 of the hearings. Several described this path for the scent trail:

From Kiowa unit north through woods

From woods to the road on the north border of Camp Scott

West on that road to Twin Bridges Rd

South on Twin Bridges Rd to Jack Shroff's farm

From Jack Shroff's farm to woods behind it where cave was located

It was assumed that trail was how they got into Kiowa unit, as bodies were found on the south edge of Kiowa, near the gate to the back of the property

There's more testimony about other dog searches, but I haven't read that far yet. It would be logical that scent trails would be all around the Kiowa unit, including at the counselors tent. Recall, counselors had items stolen from their tent that night - a purse, some sunglasses w/ case and CarlaW's extra pair of eyeglasses, which GLH was found to be wearing when he was later arrested.

I agree with you that there are people living today who know who killed the girls, possibly even some who were part of the murders. Some who know probably still live in the area.

 

[Betty P]

I forget, were there cicadas that night? A child in distress would be hard to pick out if there were. The noise can be deafening. OTOH, not to be mean but DE and CW weren't very attentive IMO. DE thought the blood was a nosebleed and CW thought one of the kids started their period. Come on. CW saw a dead body and sleeping bags and thinks the blood is from a period? No wonder they wrote off the screams as animal sounds or excitement from the first night/ ghost stories.

I'm going through transcripts too and DE can't remember what color the towel in the counselor's tent was or what the imprint on the bottom of her own shoes looked like. DE says she didn't peek outside because all the flaps were down. CW says all flaps were down except the front ones. :gaah:

I think the counselors were in deep shock immediately after discovering the bodies. If you've never seen people murdered before or a bloody crime scene, your mind may reflexively go to the most safe and logical answer to what you're seeing. Similar to when people find dead bodies they often assume it's a mannequin, not a real person. These counselors were young women 17-19 years old, years before people became desensitized to seeing lots of gore and violence in movies, tv and on the internet. As counselors who spent time around a lot of girls in scouting activities, seeing blood on a bed your mind would first jump to blood from menstruation.

 

[Betty P]

And what about the other Girl Scouts in the other tents at Kiowa? If Lori, Michelle and Doris were screaming for help when the perp(s) entered their tent, did that noise not wake up the other girls? Were they sound asleep?

From the autopsy reports and evidence in the tent, it was determined that Lori & Michelle were killed immediately, while they were still asleep. Doris may have been threatened or stayed quiet out of fear.

 

[Betty P]

Hi Betty I couldn't help but notice that on the first diagram tent 7 is turned differently? Is that just a glitch or was the tent turned in a different direction?

From the photos, the front of Tent#7 was facing the center of the camp, as he others were.

Here are some photos of the tent from the internet.
















The aerial photo posted earlier of Kiowa shows the tent facing the center of the camp. As you all know, there are quite a few maps, diagrams and photos related to this case online that have some inaccuracies.

 

[Betty P]

Forgive me here, I'm casting a wide net in order to look at all possibilities.

Testimony of SE, Counselor at Kiowa unit:

She testified that her boyfriend/fiance arrived at the camp with her.
Question: What was his age? His initials were RH, correct? How thoroughly were these two investigated?

Counselor SE then testified she went on a short, secluded hike together with her bf and he departed before the girls arrived. She was the counselor who said "don't worry, that's just my boyfriend" when someone else had remarked about a suspicious man being on the grounds.

Question: Was the "don't worry, he's just my boyfriend" incident earlier that day, June 12th, or did it occur during orientation week?

Unlike most of the counselors that I have read about so far, who had been doing GS for years, Counselor SE testified that she had been to Camp Scott one time, ten years earlier.
Question: What made her want to come back and be a counselor for these girls that summer? Was she ever asked to provide that answer?

Counselor SE testified that after dinner and putting the girls to bed, she left Kiowa unit at 9 p.m. and returned at approximately 10 p.m. She testified that she was not on duty, so that she was allowed to go to the staff house and that's where she went.

Question: Did other staff or counselors corroborate her account that she was at the staff house for most of the time between the hours of 9 p.m. and 10 p.m. that night? She did not meet with anyone else that time?

Counselor SE testified that when she returned to Kiowa unit appox. 10 p.m., some CITs were there visiting with the other two counselors, CW and DE. This was corroborated in the testimony by one of the CITs that I read in Volume 8. These other girls all knew each other, but Counselor SE said herself on the record that she was an outsider. She didn't really know any of these people there.

Statement: Nothing wrong with that, but worth noting. I would again like to come back to the question, why did she decide to serve as a Counselor at Camp Scott in 1977?

After the CITs departed, Counselor SE testified that she went to bed shortly after, around 10:30 p.m. Unlike all of the other counselors at Kiowa Unit and other nearby units, who testified they were awake for awhile afterwards dealing with the roudy girls, Counselor SE testified that after going to bed at 10:30 p.m., the next thing she remembers was being woken up at 6:00 a.m. by CW's alarm.

That is a very sound sleep.

Upon being woken up by CW's alarm, Counselor SE testified that she groaned and then rolled over and tried to go back to sleep. The next thing she remembers was being roused by CW who returned to the tent. CW told her that something was wrong, and they needed to check on the girls. Counselor SE put on her glasses and boots, and then accompanied or joined CW outside. They started by checking Tent 1 first, and had proceeded to Tent 3. At that time, DE--who had started at Tent 7, alerted the other two counselors that those girls were missing.

Question: Counselor SE said in the testimony that the three of them had decided to start checking at each end of tents and meet in the middle. How did that discussion play out? Who was the second person to join CW on the search, or did both Miss E's step outside at about the same time? Did Counselor SE take action to avoid Tent 7? Were her actions to join CW at Tent 1 normal? Did she express any reticence to beginning her check at the other end? Did she specifically suggest that Counselor DE start her search at the other end? I'm sure some of you will get my point.

Later, Counselor SE testified that she went down the path and saw the body of DM herself. She didn't get too close, turned around, and screamed. She returned to Kiowa unit, entered her tent, and changed out of her boots and into her tennis shoes. She also put her contacts in.

Question: why did Counselor SE change out of her boots and into her tennis shoes? Do we know what shoe size SE was on June 12/13, 1977? Was this angle on her thoroughly investigated? Were her shoes checked before she left Camp Scott?

I ask these questions because it was her towel that was found to have been used to clean up blood from Tent #7. And her purse, which she testified she slept with partially under her--turned up missing. Of course, the possibility has to be considered that *IF* she were involved, and I'm not saying she was, personal items could have gone missing because they had accumulated blood splatter on them. Why a pursue would have blood splatter on it given the events is beyond me however.

I think if you go back and re-read all the testimony of SE, CW, DE and the others who were at the crime scene that day, most of your questions will be answered. LE was very scrupulous in examining and recording info about the clothing, possessions and tent of the counselors. They paid very close attention to the towel hanging out the front of the tent that had blood on it. They surmised that SE's purse, sunglasses, etc. were easily reached from outside the tent, under her bed. SE's boyfriend was also questioned, IIRC and had an alibi. He was obviously an easy person for LE to focus on at the beginning of the investigation. I have a hard time believing that OSBI & FBI didn't examine his activities very carefully. Had they found incriminating evidence against him, it would have been presented at the pre-trial hearing.

It's still impossible to know all the details of this case, since the evidence, reports, etc. and testimony from the actual GLH trial still haven't been released to the public.

For those who think SE's boyfriend could have been the killer, can you offer some kind of scenario or motive in which all LE, including the FBI, would have conspired to cover up or overlook incriminating evidence about SE's boyfriend, SE or any of the other counselors or other staff at Camp Scott? TIA.

Gene Leroy Hart had an extremely good attorney in Garvin A Isaacs. If you read the transcripts, you know he was a tough defense attorney, a real pit bull. He's so good that he's now head of the Oklahoma Bar Association.

http://www.okbar.org/members/BarJournal/archive2016/JanArchive2016/OBJ8702McDaniel.aspx

Through his questioning in the pre-trial hearings, it was very obvious that he was working hard to create as much doubt and suspicion as possible about the counselors and employees of Camp Scott. He needed to do that to be able to cast doubt in the minds of potential jurors, he needed a "red herring". If there was any chance that some kind of evidence could cast suspicions on SE's boyfriend, don't you think he would have brought that up? Don't you think he would have called the guy in for questioning? Don't you think he would have investigated the boyfriend's background, as his team did other potential suspects not related to Hart?

 

[missgulfsouth]

I agree with you that there are people living today who know who killed the girls, possibly even some who were part of the murders. Some who know probably still live in the area.

That would be truly shameful and appalling.

 

[Ven]

I think if you go back and re-read all the testimony of SE, CW, DE and the others who were at the crime scene that day, most of your questions will be answered. LE was very scrupulous in examining and recording info about the clothing, possessions and tent of the counselors.

I did read SE's testimony, and that's what prompted my further questions. Maybe the investigators asked those questions and they aren't in the record. Maybe they didn't. For instance, Counselor SE says she was not asked about the tennis shoe until the following year. How do you explain that?

For an unsolved case, I think it's reasonable to go back and look at every possible person. Do you know how many cold cases there have been where the investigators were sure they knew who did it, but just didn't have enough evidence, or they had narrowed it down to 2-3 prime suspects, and then decades later DNA testing implicates one of the family members or the neighbor's son or the best friend's brother who was never even considered? It's happened so many times.

(modsnip)

Through his questioning in the pre-trial hearings, it was very obvious that he was working hard to create as much doubt and suspicion as possible about the counselors and employees of Camp Scott. He needed to do that to be able to cast doubt in the minds of potential jurors, he needed a "red herring". If there was any chance that some kind of evidence could cast suspicions on SE's boyfriend, don't you think he would have brought that up? Don't you think he would have called the guy in for questioning? Don't you think he would have investigated the boyfriend's background, as his team did other potential suspects not related to Hart?

No, why would he? His job was to get his client acquitted, not to find the murderers. Casting suspicion on a bad guy with a criminal record is going to play better with a jury than accusing the whole town or a college-aged girl and her friends.

 

[huxley72]

I did read SE's testimony, and that's what prompted my further questions. Maybe the investigators asked those questions and they aren't in the record. Maybe they didn't. For instance, Counselor SE says she was not asked about the tennis shoe until the following year. How do you explain that?

For an unsolved case, I think it's reasonable to go back and look at every possible person. Do you know how many cold cases there have been where the investigators were sure they knew who did it, but just didn't have enough evidence, or they had narrowed it down to 2-3 prime suspects, and then decades later DNA testing implicates one of the family members or the neighbor's son or the best friend's brother who was never even considered? It's happened so many times.

I think it's reasonable to go back and ask about the counselors, the ranger's children, Bill Stevens, Sonny James, any teen to early 20s boys and girls who lived or worked in the area. I understand the WS policies and I'm not suggesting their names should be posted or their info should be dug up, but I do believe it's permitted to discuss their testimony and actions regarding the case as they are known to the investigation. In the case of Counselor SE, she and her boyfriend may have very well not been involved, but I think it's fair to ask the questions that I asked. She had only done Camp Scott one time ten years earlier as a little girl. Why did she never go back? If she didn't like it much, why did she return to work as a counselor there as a young adult? There may be a perfectly good explanation.

I just found it curious that all of the other counselors talked about how they had kept going there as girls for 5-10 years, and now they were grown up and coming back as Counselors. All or most of the others seemed to have friends there. They were attentive to the girls, staying up with them for hours after bedtime, checking on them. Probably getting annoyed and wishing they would quiet down and go to sleep too, yes of course.

But Counselor SE says she slept soundly from 10:30 p.m. - 6:00 a.m. Do you know there are scientific studies that show people have a hard time sleeping in unfamiliar locations? She wasn't a regular there and it was first night with a lot of commotion. I find her account very strange.

Since she teamed up with CW to start the check at Tent #1, she was obviously taking a passive role in investigating the tents for missing girls. That could be perfectly explainable--maybe she was passive in everything she did at the camp out of deference to CW and DE who were obviously more experienced. I just thought the questions should be asked.

I'm not singling her out as the most likely person to be involved. I just think everyone should be given another look. Sometimes the bad guys are the ones we suspect. The people who "look" scary and have long criminal records. Sometimes they are hiding in our midst.



No, why would he? His job was to get his client acquitted, not to find the murderers. Casting suspicion on a bad guy with a criminal record is going to play better with a jury than accusing the whole town or a college-aged girl and her friends.

I think DE seems the most suspicious of the three because she assigned tents and left the last tent to the three girls, even after the other unit noticed a girl by mistake she said to wait til the next day. She said she was the head of the unit and in charge. Also she never even looked at the bodies if you read her testimony, and she went straight to tent number seven when CW said to count girls. Then after hearing SE scream she ran past the place and told SE to be quiet while she got in a car to go get someone. Which makes no sense since Carla had went before to get help. But I really don't believe any of the counselors did this but if you were looking to look at anyone in particular I believe DE is your person according to the pre lim testimony which is all we have. Also we had a lot of gag orders issued by lawyers and the Girl Scouts because of the civil suit which really sucks when trying to figure out who killed these girls. If it were an employee that was a suspect you can bet it would be covered up for financila reasons.

 

[Betty P]

No, why would he? His job was to get his client acquitted, not to find the murderers. Casting suspicion on a bad guy with a criminal record is going to play better with a jury than accusing the whole town or a college-aged girl and her friends

I guess I'm missing the part about Isaacs casting suspicion on a bad guy with a criminal record. To my knowledge none of the staff or their family members/boyfriends had criminal records. Can you clarify? TIA

The defense attorney's job is to get his own client acquitted and the most common way to do that, as Isaacs did, was to cast doubt and suspicion on others known to the victim or near the crime scene and call evidence into question.

There were no bad guys or convicted criminals at Camp Scott that night, so his only options were:

1. Raise suspicion and highlight evidence to imply that Hart had an accomplice.

2. Raise suspicion about the staff and their acquaintances, cast suspicion about their activities.

3. Poke holes in witness testimony and chain of evidence and police procedure.

He did succeed at the first strategy. He was able to convince enough members of the jury that Hart had an accomplice.

But strategy #2, implicating staff at Camp Scott was used as well. If Isaacs had any kind of information that indicated SE's boyfriend had no alibi that night, he would have used it. It would have been presented at the pre-trial hearings. Isaacs did the best he could by implying the counselors were lying or covering something up.

We've seen those kinds of tactics before. They worked. Isaacs should be proud of the clever job he did. But he also owes those staffers an apology. JMO.

ETA: You also don't appear to understand the rules here at WS as you just violated them in your post.

 

[Ambitioned]

You all raise some very good points. I'm pulling double shifts the next two days so I want to read more testimony in between.

I did wonder why DE made a beeline for Tent #7. But CW says she asked DE to check #7 and they'd meet in between with the head count.

I agree though every single person should have fresh pairs of eyes on them. That's the whole point of coming together on here

 

[Betty P]

You all raise some very good points. I'm pulling double shifts the next two days so I want to read more testimony in between.

I did wonder why DE made a beeline for Tent #7. But CW says she asked DE to check #7 and they'd meet in between with the head count.

I agree though every single person should have fresh pairs of eyes on them. That's the whole point of coming together on here

They split up the tents to check them quickly. Carla went to the first, DE went to the other end. Nothing to see there.


The counselors were never considered suspects by LE. They were questioned, their possessions carefully examined. They gave hair, fingerprint and blood samples and some gave polys. There was no evidence, motivation or any other reason to link them to the crimes. Are you aware of some other evidence that links them?

 

[HoneyWest]

I guess I'm missing the part about Isaacs casting suspicion on a bad guy with a criminal record. To my knowledge none of the staff or their family members/boyfriends had criminal records. Can you clarify? TIA

The defense attorney's job is to get his own client acquitted and the most common way to do that, as Isaacs did, was to cast doubt and suspicion on others known to the victim or near the crime scene and call evidence into question.

There were no bad guys or convicted criminals at Camp Scott that night, so his only options were:

1. Raise suspicion and highlight evidence to imply that Hart had an accomplice.

2. Raise suspicion about the staff and their acquaintances, cast suspicion about their activities.

3. Poke holes in witness testimony and chain of evidence and police procedure.

He did succeed at the first strategy. He was able to convince enough members of the jury that Hart had an accomplice.

But strategy #2, implicating staff at Camp Scott was used as well. If Isaacs had any kind of information that indicated SE's boyfriend had no alibi that night, he would have used it. It would have been presented at the pre-trial hearings. Isaacs did the best he could by implying the counselors were lying or covering something up.

We've seen those kinds of tactics before. They worked. Isaacs should be proud of the clever job he did. But he also owes those staffers an apology. JMO.

Great post, Betty.

Isaacs out-lawyered the state prosecutors. The book "Tent Number 8" gives some good insight into the actual trial, the styles of the defense & prosecution and is very well documented.

 

[Betty P]

I'd like to politely ask everyone to review the WS rules. Some of us have put a lot of work into this thread in recent weeks and it would be a shame to see it shut down for problems with violation of TOS.

Thanks in advance for your help!

Link to WS Rules:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/misc.php?do=showrules