This has to be someone very close to the family. I have to keep reminding myself that there are no cell phones so whomever called the parents that night to tell them that it might be their son in an accident had to call from a home phone. So, either the kidnapper was at the scene and saw the parents, likely spoke to the parents and found out that Heidi was home alone and determined that the parents would be at the scene for some time. Or, whomever called the parents about the accident called someone else and during the course of conversation mentioned the girl being home alone. Someone random watching the house / seeing the parents leave would likely have no idea where they were going or how long they would be gone. Had to be someone very close.
PA PA - Heidi Morningstar, 12, murdered, Beaver County, 1976
- Thread starter windmill
- Start date
-
Blaine Owen age 17 went missing 9/22/25 runaway inspired by Into the Wild
- Latest: #bringhomeBlaine
This has to be someone very close to the family. I have to keep reminding myself that there are no cell phones so whomever called the parents that night to tell them that it might be their son in an accident had to call from a home phone. So, either the kidnapper was at the scene and saw the parents, likely spoke to the parents and found out that Heidi was home alone and determined that the parents would be at the scene for some time. Or, whomever called the parents about the accident called someone else and during the course of conversation mentioned the girl being home alone. Someone random watching the house / seeing the parents leave would likely have no idea where they were going or how long they would be gone. Had to be someone very close.
Yeah. It's too crazy. I've gone over the possibilities in my head a million times. If it was a person - say a peeping tom - who saw the parents leave, how did they get Heidi out? She was 5'4" and weighed 145 lbs - the size of an adult woman, and I'm sure could have put up a fight. If it was a burglar, why didn't they flee for fear of being seen and caught? I feel like most burglars don't also abduct children on a whim - those are two different types of criminals. If it was a person who lived in the building, why did they accidentally break open a window that led to a shared bathroom on the first floor but didn't connect into the Morningstar's apartment? If it was a person at the scene of the accident or otherwise saw the Morningstar parents there, were they just so overcome with a desire to kidnap that child that they raced to the Morningstar residence?
Let's build out a circle of who knew that Heidi was alone:
Center - no inferred information: Mr. and Mrs. Morningstar knew she was alone.
Center: An unknown person, prowling around that particular building at that specific time could have seen the Morningstar parents leave the property while leaving the children alone and therefore known that the children were vulnerable.
Ring 1: A person in the building who was awake and heard the Morningstars leave likely could have inferred that the Morningstar children were alone.
Ring 1: A person who lived on that block who knew the Morningstar family and was awake at that time and saw the Morningstars leave could have inferred that the children were alone.
Ring 2: Some of the people at the scene of the accident likely could infer by the presence of Mr. and Mrs. Morningstar that their children were likely alone.
Ring 3: A person that was called by a person at the scene of the accident and was told that the Morningstar parents were present.
I just don't know.
Let's build out a circle of who knew that Heidi was alone:
Center - no inferred information: Mr. and Mrs. Morningstar knew she was alone.
Center: An unknown person, prowling around that particular building at that specific time could have seen the Morningstar parents leave the property while leaving the children alone and therefore known that the children were vulnerable.
Ring 1: A person in the building who was awake and heard the Morningstars leave likely could have inferred that the Morningstar children were alone.
Ring 1: A person who lived on that block who knew the Morningstar family and was awake at that time and saw the Morningstars leave could have inferred that the children were alone.
Ring 2: Some of the people at the scene of the accident likely could infer by the presence of Mr. and Mrs. Morningstar that their children were likely alone.
Ring 3: A person that was called by a person at the scene of the accident and was told that the Morningstar parents were present.
I just don't know.
But , the big question with the peeping tom, neighbor, etc. is How did they know that the parents would be gone long enough to get into the apartment and get her out? What could've been open in 1976 at 2:00 am? Maybe there was nowhere that the parents could have been going for a quick trip. I keep going back to the one other person that knew where they went and how long they would likely be gone. Heidi. Maybe she was being groomed by a neighbor etc. that saw the parents leave the house ( I would assume that the parents woke Heidi to tell her they were going out to the accident) and convinced her to sneak out for what she thought was going to be a few minutes?
That's a pretty reasonable assessment I think. It could very well be that she had an unkown relationship with an person in the area who was grooming her and intended to harm her in some way. That's probably the most reasonable assessment. But if she knew this person and they had a relationship, why didn't she open the front door for them and let them in or why didn't she go outside and meet them? Why did the assailant break in through a window and risk being seen breaking in? Once again this case makes no sense. Nothing seems right.
Was the window broken? I saw that a grocery basket was propped up near the window and police suspected that someone climbed in through the window. I did not see that the house appeared to be broken into but I may have missed it. Perhaps whomever did this merely climbed up to tap on the window? Or just looked in side to get her attention and she left out the front door? The one article says that front door was open and the little brother was still sleeping. How would someone climb in through the window bind and gag the girl and not wake up the child sleeping right next to her?
Another part of the mystery. The shopping cart was below the window and a screen had been moved off the window. I believe I read that the window appeared to be forced open. However, the responding officer didn't notice anything out of place and a struggle didn't appear to have happened in the apartment.
However, another window had been opened and apparently used to enter the property - a window leading to a shared bathroom in the first floor hallway.
This tells me 1) the person was determined to get Heidi 2) the person had probably not been inside the property otherwise they probably would have known that the bathroom does not provide entry to the morningstar apartment 3) the person who did that was likely very bold and confident in their breaking/entering skills.
But that still doesn't tell us much about how the person was able to get Heidi out. If this was a total stranger breaking into the property, they would have probably scared the
out of her, resulting likely in a scream and a commotion as they struggled (I believe i wrote earlier that she was the size of an adult woman) likely resulting in additional witnesses to the crime.
May be you're right - they climbed up to the window to get her attention and get her to open the front door. This would have probably only been accomplished if they had a preexisting relationship. But that doesn't explain the damage to the window (assuming it was done by the assailant and wasn't preexisting) and doesn't explain the entry into the bathroom.
Of course this is all strange and interesting but none of it seems to tell us who did this or why this happened. Clearly the timing shows that this was not opportunistic. The method of entry shows that this person was deliberate and determined in their actions. Maybe that points to an unknown adult who was infatuated with her for some reason? That's the best I can come up with.
However, another window had been opened and apparently used to enter the property - a window leading to a shared bathroom in the first floor hallway.
This tells me 1) the person was determined to get Heidi 2) the person had probably not been inside the property otherwise they probably would have known that the bathroom does not provide entry to the morningstar apartment 3) the person who did that was likely very bold and confident in their breaking/entering skills.
But that still doesn't tell us much about how the person was able to get Heidi out. If this was a total stranger breaking into the property, they would have probably scared the
out of her, resulting likely in a scream and a commotion as they struggled (I believe i wrote earlier that she was the size of an adult woman) likely resulting in additional witnesses to the crime. May be you're right - they climbed up to the window to get her attention and get her to open the front door. This would have probably only been accomplished if they had a preexisting relationship. But that doesn't explain the damage to the window (assuming it was done by the assailant and wasn't preexisting) and doesn't explain the entry into the bathroom.
Of course this is all strange and interesting but none of it seems to tell us who did this or why this happened. Clearly the timing shows that this was not opportunistic. The method of entry shows that this person was deliberate and determined in their actions. Maybe that points to an unknown adult who was infatuated with her for some reason? That's the best I can come up with.
You have to remember in the old days, LE wasnt as advanced, or experienced, in investigating cases, like these.
When investigating a cold case, you have to start all over, look at the evidence again, sometimes you find errors in the investigation itself , that often lead to a suspect.
When investigating a cold case, you have to start all over, look at the evidence again, sometimes you find errors in the investigation itself , that often lead to a suspect.
I was looking at a street view and believe the apartment is still there. I see what I believe to be a bathroom window and have to say, If that is the actual method of entry, the person is not terribly large. I am 6'1" and 224 lbs and I MIGHT be able to squeeze through that window. ( Although not with the nimbleness and finesse that one would expect. Meaning I would probably end up falling through the window, and waking up the occupants of all of the apartments in the building) It looks like the common 1st floor back door is center of the building and to the right would be ( given the location of the vent sack on the roof) the common bathroom. The kitchen windows are likely the smaller windows As they are likely at a counter height of 34" ( I think). Could the bathroom window be a red herring? Either way I would guess that someone on the smaller side climbed through the windows ( If that is indeed how the perpetrator got in).
Similar threads
Staff online
-
FraizeAdministrator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 62
- Guests online
- 3,438
- Total visitors
- 3,500