The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #4

[Trooogrit]

For the sake of argument let me stipulate that what she was to testify was in fact "so trivial." That being the case it is true, is it not, that she was going to testify within the week. Let me suggest the following. The grave robbers were being close mouthed about their offenses but if Susie got on the witness stand and alluded to other matters it might be to the defense's interest to cut a deal which included giving up bigger fish in order to reduce the sentences to come. Their lives were on the line and they were looking at doing hard time with hardened criminals and one can only imagine how those creeps were licking their chops waiting for these guys to enter the general prison population. I can imagine a scenario where they would have done virtually anything to avoid that fate. Being in the Greene County jail is a fer piece from being in the state prisons with all of the sexual predators who inhabit those facilities. I suggest if they knew anything they would have sung like canaries on or off the witness stand. With the girls gone, the grave robbing trial had the air let out of the balloon and receded to the back pages as all the attention was given over to locating the women. The grave robbers were off the hook in that investigation. They got a slap on the wrist and the missing women's case has gone dormant. Offhand, I would say that if there were any connection to the grave robbing and the women gone missing, the criminals whoever they are made off like "bandits."

Let me make myself perfectly clear on this. I am not interested in theory about higher ups, or bigger fish. When I say trivial, it is because this was trivial. This was sensationalized in the media. I say this with confidence and have no doubts, it is something that is beyond debate in my mind.

If the grave robbers had nothing to do with this crime we are left with three known criminals who may have been involved that have been publicly identified. They are Cox, Garrison and Carnahan. If the grave robbers and these three guys had nothing to do with this crime then we are looking at an unknown killer or killers and all kinds of rumors about other riff-raff in the area; none of which can be established as factual. But Cox, Garrison and Carnahan are all in prison for the rest of their natural lives and we are dealing with facts when we discuss them.

We are only really left with 2 criminals that have tied themselves to this case. Carnahan is just the boogeyman of Springfield, I am sure their are others if we look hard enough.

 

[Hurricane]

For the sake of argument let me stipulate that what she was to testify was in fact "so trivial."

That being the case it is true, is it not, that she was going to testify within the week.

Let me suggest the following. The grave robbers were being close mouthed about their offenses but if Susie got on the witness stand and alluded to other matters it might be to the defense's interest to cut a deal which included giving up bigger fish in order to reduce the sentences to come. Their lives were on the line and they were looking at doing hard time with hardened criminals and one can only imagine how those creeps were licking their chops waiting for these guys to enter the general prison population. I can imagine a scenario where they would have done virtually anything to avoid that fate. Being in the Greene County jail is a fer piece from being in the state prisons with all of the sexual predators who inhabit those facilities. I suggest if they knew anything they would have sung like canaries on or off the witness stand. With the girls gone, the grave robbing trial had the air let out of the balloon and receded to the back pages as all the attention was given over to locating the women. The grave robbers were off the hook in that investigation. They got a slap on the wrist and the missing women's case has gone dormant. Offhand, I would say that if there were any connection to the grave robbing and the women gone missing, the criminals whoever they are made off like "bandits."

If the grave robbers had nothing to do with this crime we are left with three known criminals who may have been involved that have been publicly identified. They are Cox, Garrison and Carnahan. If the grave robbers and these three guys had nothing to do with this crime then we are looking at an unknown killer or killers and all kinds of rumors about other riff-raff in the area; none of which can be established as factual. But Cox, Garrison and Carnahan are all in prison for the rest of their natural lives and we are dealing with facts when we discuss them.

Not true!

 

[Hurricane]

Let me say that I am, most likely, of the mind that this abduction is essentially asexual assault/murder case. That does not rule out perpetrators who were also involved in other criminal activities including the use of controlled or illegal drugs. All three of the women had some sort of activity that put them in front of the public and therefore any of them could have been noticed by a very bad person or persons and not been aware of that notice--and so could have been stalked for a time by a stranger or mere acquaintance. Or it might have been someone with whom one or more of them had a more substantive connection and who might have a more personal motive for murder. I tend to discount that, at this point, because to someone who knew the house or Suzie or Sherill, the third car would have indicated someone else was at the house and might have been discouraged the whole business.

The notion that Cox isn't involved because he always gets caught makes no sense. We only know of those crimes for which he was caught; he may have gotten away with rape, assault, and multiple murder.

It interests me that the FIRST THOUGHT of Sharon Zellers's family was that Cox abducted the women in Springfield. It's also interesting that a man who was (briefly) on death row because a body was found is suspected of this crime in which the bodies remain missing. What sort of stressers led Cox to getting caught again I can't say. But some of these guys get careless or we get lucky--and some kill on and
on.

For an example of what higher-ups will do if a teenage girl sees or hears too much, see the Kaitlyn Arquette case, which is too complex for me to summarize here. Kait was chased down in her car on an Albuquerque street and shot, execution style. Albuqueque police were almost certainly involved either in covering up this crime or in the murder itself. So it is possible that the grave robber thing might be linked to something else and we might not know it. But I am for the moment of the sexual assault persuasion, subject to further consideration.

Argument from Ignorance. You can't substantiate your argument that he has gotten away with anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

 

[Missouri Mule]

Not true!

She wasn't going to testify within a week or so? Can you expand on this so I understand it better? Were they merely going to read into the record her deposition already taken? I'm not clear on your meaning.

If that were the case and she wasn't actually going to be put on the witness stand it would tend to change my thinking. As I recall, the "48 Hours" piece indicated that her upcoming testimony was a motive which prompted the police to look at the grave robbers. If on the other hand, she had nothing of substance to offer the court, I can, of course, see the logic of declaring that her testimony/deposition would be "trivial." This is of potential importance in understanding the case better.

 

[Kathee]

She wasn't going to testify within a week or so? Can you expand on this so I understand it better? Were they merely going to read into the record her deposition already taken? I'm not clear on your meaning.

If that were the case and she wasn't actually going to be put on the witness stand it would tend to change my thinking. As I recall, the "48 Hours" piece indicated that her upcoming testimony was a motive which prompted the police to look at the grave robbers. If on the other hand, she had nothing of substance to offer the court, I can, of course, see the logic of declaring that her testimony/deposition would be "trivial." This is of potential importance in understanding the case better.

The case wasn't set for trial then. IMHO, the 48 Hours piece was done on the fly and isn't a very good resource.

 

[Missouri Mule]

The case wasn't set for trial then. IMHO, the 48 Hours piece was done on the fly and isn't a very good resource.

Kathee, thanks for the skinny on this matter. I'm beginning to wonder what the essential facts really are. Was she going to testify at some other point in time that you are aware of? I had thought, erroneously it appears, that the trial was just in the offing when the women went missing. This suggests, perhaps, that there is no obvious connection to be made to their abductions and the grave robbing matter. Offhand, do you know the original date of the trial prior to the typical continuances which string these things out "forever?"

 

[Hurricane]

Kathee, thanks for the skinny on this matter. I'm beginning to wonder what the essential facts really are. Was she going to testify at some other point in time that you are aware of? I had thought, erroneously it appears, that the trial was just in the offing when the women went missing. This suggests, perhaps, that there is no obvious connection to be made to their abductions and the grave robbing matter. Offhand, do you know the original date of the trial prior to the typical continuances which string these things out "forever?"

There had not even been a preliminary hearing; the boys had not even been bound over for trial; yet the rumor mill has Suzie about to give testimony.

 

[Kathee]

Kathee, thanks for the skinny on this matter. I'm beginning to wonder what the essential facts really are. Was she going to testify at some other point in time that you are aware of? I had thought, erroneously it appears, that the trial was just in the offing when the women went missing. This suggests, perhaps, that there is no obvious connection to be made to their abductions and the grave robbing matter. Offhand, do you know the original date of the trial prior to the typical continuances which string these things out "forever?"

What one needs to remember is just because someone gives police a statement it doesn't necessarily mean they will be called as a witness in a case. That being said, I do believe that Suzie would have been called to testify in this case.

If my memory is correct, charges of institutional vandalism weren't filed against the boys until AFTER our girls went missing. The matter was set for preliminary hearing in July. After at least four continuances, their preliminary hearings were held in September of '92. Recla pleaded guilty in September of '93...Clay a month later.

 

[Kathee]

After reading a ton into this thread and being drawn into it more and more, I have a few questions I was hoping someone might know the answer to.

Does anyone know what ever became of the vehicle stolen from the neighbor of Stacy McCall, a classmate of hers as well? I have seen various snips of it and the police mentioned it was stolen, I believe, the night of the disappearance. I wonder about the possibility that it WAS used or damaged/contaminated in some way and was tied to the case... Does anyone know anything about the classmate who owned this car?

Has everyone seen this story? I just found it for the first time myself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gHUqa7aZnE

The way Janelle Kirby speaks to the reporter and the camera, to me, is very troubling. Referring to Suzie as "the other girl" is way off target. I believe in my research, I had read Kirby quoted as saying they were all friends at some times and then at others, that Suzie wasn't much of a friend. She would certainly be a person who could gain access to the home at delmar, after the girls were ready for bed. In fact, she is possibly one of the least harmless to the Stacy and Suzie after the party. She could've easily gained entry by saying something was forgotten at her home, or by saying that she changed her mind and was going to spend the night at the Levitt Home. The turn of events that had the girls leave the Kirby home and go to Sherill's also is a bit odd. They didn't realize there wasn't enough space? There's ALWAYS enough space for friends. I wonder if they even arrived at the Kirby home. It's regrettable that LE didn't offer immunity for underage drinking to all the kids at the graduation party the girls can last, in my mind, be credibly seen at.
She, as we all know, married the b/f she was with, at the scene of the crime the morning after. I wonder what he was doing that night or what his alibi is. I know secondhand of a major crime that was commited by one spouse (never caught, fooled LE 100%), in front of another (who had no idea it was going to happen) the marriage remained in tact for years after it, but then crumbled. I know the innocent spouse will never speak of it, for fear of retaliation. If anyone wants the details, pm me.. just don't want to air it out publicly.
Perhaps a ruse was used, but not by cox.

In my younger years, when people in their teens experienced a major crisis or death of a peer, the person injured or deceased, was always spoken of as EVERYONE's friend, even in the case of suicides. I'm baffled as to her indifference. Even people that were not liked, were known as everyone's friend in death.

Sometimes, something hiding in plain sight is the toughest to find. I'm sure everyone remembers the Shawn Hornbeck case. He was hidden, in plain sight for 4+ years, just 30-50 miles away from where he was abducted. He was brainwashed, and obeyed Michael Devlin when he had many opportunities to escape while alone. What broke the case was when Devlin abducted another boy, and police got one phenomenal tip that ended up breaking the case open.
Some interesting things about the case is that no one had seen the abduction or had any idea who the perp was. With that being said, I heard so many stories about what allegedly happened to him. One involved a meth runner hitting him while he rode his bike.. and having to take him and the bike and make them disappear. He was missing for 4+ years.. and was in the same region the entire time. So many sensational theories swirled, as they do in this case.
Back onto my suspicions with Kirby:
1. The last KNOWN person to see Suzie and Stacy
2. Mother is her Alibi, to me her account is somewhat suspect
3. Odd statements (what little we have to go on)
4. First KNOWN person at the crime scene. Walked into a home she had never been in! Referred to Suziee as "the other girl" but was comfortable to let herself into the home?
5. Actions may have been suspicious on Sunday morning
6. Never contacted the police, despite serious signs of trouble. Janis was the first one to contact the police and, if I'm not mistaken, tracked Janelle down, as opposed to her contacting the McCall's, which would seem logical.

So many things in this case are based directly off of statements she has made to LE. Where they were going, what they were doing, everything about the Levitt house. She's highly inconsistent by my opinion.
I really think she knows a lot more than she has shared. Perhaps she's not guilty of anything and is a victim in some way too.

Sorry if I'm soaking up too much space in this thread... it really pulls me in... I'll back off for awhile... lastly, anyone know where tangledweb went? It seems he/she is inactive... too bad.

The whole timeline of events hinges on Janelle's statements!

 

[Missouri Mule]

What one needs to remember is just because someone gives police a statement it doesn't necessarily mean they will be called as a witness in a case. That being said, I do believe that Suzie would have been called to testify in this case.

If my memory is correct, charges of institutional vandalism weren't filed against the boys until AFTER our girls went missing. The matter was set for preliminary hearing in July. After at least four continuances, their preliminary hearings were held in September of '92. Recla pleaded guilty in September of '93...Clay a month later.

My memory is that the hearings were as you state.

Nevertheless it has to be obvious that they believed they were in a world of hurt so the exact date of the hearings is not particularly important because they had to know they would likely wind up in the slammer. I would imagine that was a fate that wore heavily on their minds and every day that went by they probably were more and more erratic in their behavior. If they were the agents of anyone pushing drugs this behavior had to be noticed. So the upshot of this is that the exact date of the hearings was not a deciding factor in what went down if this was in any way relevant. It was the observed behavior of the grave robbers who were looking at what happens to young boys introduced to hardened criminals in the general prison population. I would imagine that any experienced detective who interviewed these boys probably laid out what was to come and it was very graphic in order to get them to come completely clean. Would you agree?

I would also add this. I seriously doubt if any of these guys knew everything that Suzie may have told the police. I don't know how tight Suzie was with these guys or what information that was shared among themselves. And as we know the cops can lie their heads off to gather information from suspects. They might have told these guys things that curled their hair and they went bawling and squalling home to their parents, friends and everyone that their world was coming to an end. I can't imagine the pressure they found themselves. The thought they would be sent to the state pen to mingle among the perverts and sex monsters lurking there must have been terrifying.

While the depositions or information that Suzie provided the police may have been little to nothing, I really doubt that the grave robbers knew that or were told that by the police. It was the unknown that probably scared them half to death. I see tons of motive here. And so did some of the cops if the stories circulating are factual. While the public statements of the police are that Suzie's testimony did not result in their going missing, the grave robbers didn't know that; at least leading up to the time they actually did go missing. They could have and probably did think the very worst.

 

[Hurricane]

What one needs to remember is just because someone gives police a statement it doesn't necessarily mean they will be called as a witness in a case. That being said, I do believe that Suzie would have been called to testify in this case.

If my memory is correct, charges of institutional vandalism weren't filed against the boys until AFTER our girls went missing. The matter was set for preliminary hearing in July. After at least four continuances, their preliminary hearings were held in September of '92. Recla pleaded guilty in September of '93...Clay a month later.

My opinion is that whether Suzie was around or not this case would never have come to trial. It would have been pleaded out just like it was. No Prosecuting Attorney would prosecute this over $40 of gold dental fillings. Did you ever ask Moore or even Patterson about that? Only those who want to make a big deal of this to support their theory would believe that this case would have went all the way to a trial.That's why some even want to make it a hate crime.

 

[Kathee]

My opinion is that whether Suzie was around or not this case would never have come to trial. It would have been pleaded out just like it was. No Prosecuting Attorney would prosecute this over $40 of gold dental fillings. Did you ever ask Moore or even Patterson about that? Only those who want to make a big deal of this to support their theory would believe that this case would have went all the way to a trial.That's why some even want to make it a hate crime.

Neither Moore or Patterson were the prosecutor back then. However, I did ask the prosecutor who held the office at the time and both assistant prosecutors who handled the majority of the case.

They told me they were prepared proceed to trial, but they always believed they would plea bargain. It wasn't just about the gold, but the desecration of the man's final resting place.

 

[Hurricane]

Neither Moore or Patterson were the prosecutor back then. However, I did ask the prosecutor who held the office at the time and both assistant prosecutors who handled the majority of the case.

They told me they were prepared proceed to trial, but they always believed they would plea bargain. It wasn't just about the gold, but the desecration of the man's final resting place

.[/

quote]

I guess it would have been Mountjoy driving the prosecution. And I hear what you are saying about desecrating a grave; I intended no disrespect, but this is a cemetery that is 5-6 blocks from a college campus and receives some form of vandalism several times each year. And I don't doubt that the prosecutors office was prepared but I will never believe that this case would have ever went to trial.

 

[Trooogrit]

I would say that the original 3 to 5 people looked were the graverobbers, Bartt and Kovaks. These guys were on the radar in week number one. Here are the quotes I could find when the extradicted the last of them back from Illinois.

"Its just one of those people we just absolutely have to talk to , to clear up some of the questions we have," Brazael said.

" I don't believe he had anything to do with the disappearences. We think we will eliminate him as a suspect."

The man is the last of "three to five" people the police originally considered of interest in the case. The others have been ruled out. Brazael said.

NL JUNE 30, 1992

"The 21 year old man is jailed in Illinois awaiting extradition to Springfield on a fugitive warrant for vandalism. He and two others are charged with felony institutional vandalism. Apparently stole gold fillings from a corpse at Maple Park Cemetary.

Police doubt any of the three had a role in the the apparent abductions of Sherrill Levitt, 47, her daughter Suzie Streeter, 19 and Streeter's classmate Stacy McCall, 18."

NL JULY 1, 1992

Police sources said one of the suspected vandals is a former boyfriend of Streeter, who gave a statement regarding the vandalism.

A Crime Stoppers Tip led to the three arrests in early March.

Police sources say investigators extensively questioned the former boyfriend and conducted up to 48 hours surveillance on him following the abductions.

Police also checked into the possibility of cult activity involving the three men and found NO evidence.


NL JULY 1, 1992


"Caller: On Suzie Street, I have heard the rumors that she used to date a guy who would go up to the graves and take gold teeth out of people and pawn them.

N-L police have verified this before, but say they have substantially ruled out this former boyfriend as a suspect correct?

Glenn: That is correct. I think you've got the full story on that.

NL JULY 13, 1992


I think the 48 hours is very misleading considering it was filmed in June, but not aired until September. By rights the scenes with these guys as prime suspects should have been watered down. At the time of the airing it was one of the most powerful shows they had ever produced. Unfortunately the recent show kept much of that same information in it and we fall back to week one of the investigation. I had hoped something new would come out.


My name's Wyatt Earp... it all ends *now*!

 

[Kathee]

I don't think Clay and Recla were involved in our girls disappearance. They, too, were kids who were easily influenced.

We NEVER hear anything about JR.

 

[Missouri Mule]

I suggest we consider looking at this case logically. Please let me explain.

While most believe the actual act of vandalizing those graves was, while quite abhorrent, in the grand scheme of things was fairly insignificant. After all, no one lost their lives over this gross act of stupidity.

However, getting back to the matter of Suzie I would make this point. No one here, on the police department, the FBI, the CIA or the NSA would have a clue what conversations took place while Suzie was in the company of the grave robbers. We don't know what arguments might have taken place or what might have been said in the course of their relationship, such as it was, that might have caused concern. For example, over a minor argument she might have blurted out that "if you don't leave me alone I'm going to tell the cops about your association with Gerald Carnahan." Almost everyone in the Ozarks would have liked to hang him from the nearest lamp post if they had the chance. (a little hyperbole)

Now why do I say this? Well, for several months now, we have been treated to various and sundry tales of supposed illicit activities taking place at the company owned or operated by Carnahan in Nixa as described on Air Alex. No one here, I daresay, can give an up or down answer whether these activities actually took place. But it did involve drugs. Anytime that drugs are involved it is an invitation to have a bulls eye on one's back. For all we know any number of things might have been shared with Suzie who filed that away which came out whenever they had an argument. Does anyone know how long they had their relationship? I don't. But it must have been for some period of time for one of them was described as her "boyfriend." She had another previous boyfriend who evidently liked to beat up on her and she had a restraining order against him as noted in the Greene County Circuit Clerk records.

Having said this I don't believe any of these low level characters were directly involved with the women's disappearances. But it is entirely conceivable that any one of these guys went back to the bigger fish or his "buffer" (Carnahan?) and let him/they know that they couldn't keep their traps shut and the cat was let out of the bag. When the mob has a blabbermouth, they usually solve their problem by taking that person out in the backwoods and putting a few rounds in the back of his head. Problem solved.

If drugs were involved, there was a lot of money; hundreds of thousands of dollars; perhaps millions of dollars. Anyone involved in that kind of distribution network is going to want to protect their territory and livelihood. They will do desperate things and collateral damage does not concern them greatly. One of the things I had long heard was that Jackie Johns was going to spill the beans on Carnahan and he took care of the problem although he reportedly mutilated her body in the process. I believe that was also involved with the (or a) business in Nixa. Someone who attended the trial might be able to clarify what was the motivating factor for her murder.

So whether or not the grave robbing charges went to trial or not, the concern that there were "loose lips sinking ships" could have led to this crime. It is plausible and cannot be dismissed out of hand unless it could be proven what conversations took place between Suzie and these individuals and that will never be known. And that provides a motive. Remove the source of the information and remove the threat.

 

[Trooogrit]

I suggest we consider looking at this case logically. Please let me explain.

While most believe the actual act of vandalizing those graves was, while quite abhorrent, in the grand scheme of things was fairly insignificant. After all, no one lost their lives over this gross act of stupidity.

However, getting back to the matter of Suzie I would make this point. No one here, on the police department, the FBI, the CIA or the NSA would have a clue what conversations took place while Suzie was in the company of the grave robbers. We don't know what arguments might have taken place or what might have been said in the course of their relationship, such as it was, that might have caused concern. For example, over a minor argument she might have blurted out that "if you don't leave me alone I'm going to tell the cops about your association with Gerald Carnahan." Almost everyone in the Ozarks would have liked to hang him from the nearest lamp post if they had the chance. (a little hyperbole)

Now why do I say this? Well, for several months now, we have been treated to various and sundry tales of supposed illicit activities taking place at the company owned or operated by Carnahan in Nixa as described on Air Alex. No one here, I daresay, can give an up or down answer whether these activities actually took place. But it did involve drugs. Anytime that drugs are involved it is an invitation to have a bulls eye on one's back. For all we know any number of things might have been shared with Suzie who filed that away which came out whenever they had an argument. Does anyone know how long they had their relationship? I don't. But it must have been for some period of time for one of them was described as her "boyfriend." She had another previous boyfriend who evidently liked to beat up on her and she had a restraining order against him as noted in the Greene County Circuit Clerk records.

Having said this I don't believe any of these low level characters were directly involved with the women's disappearances. But it is entirely conceivable that any one of these guys went back to the bigger fish or his "buffer" (Carnahan?) and let him/they know that they couldn't keep their traps shut and the cat was let out of the bag. When the mob has a blabbermouth, they usually solve their problem by taking that person out in the backwoods and putting a few rounds in the back of his head. Problem solved.

If drugs were involved, there was a lot of money; hundreds of thousands of dollars; perhaps millions of dollars. Anyone involved in that kind of distribution network is going to want to protect their territory and livelihood. They will do desperate things and collateral damage does not concern them greatly. One of the things I had long heard was that Jackie Johns was going to spill the beans on Carnahan and he took care of the problem although he reportedly mutilated her body in the process. I believe that was also involved with the (or a) business in Nixa. Someone who attended the trial might be able to clarify what was the motivating factor for her murder.

So whether or not the grave robbing charges went to trial or not, the concern that there were "loose lips sinking ships" could have led to this crime. It is plausible and cannot be dismissed out of hand unless it could be proven what conversations took place between Suzie and these individuals and that will never be known. And that provides a motive. Remove the source of the information and remove the threat.

Everything I have seen on this graverobbing charge is for the media, it was dead in the water by the first of July of 1992. Her testimony had no substance because she was not in any kind of trouble. 48 hours used it for dramatic effect and frankly I think they did that wrecklessly since the show did not air until september. Other than the 48 hours it is not considered any kind of motive anywhere in all of the pages in print. Why are we still talking about it?

 

[Missouri Mule]

Everything I have seen on this graverobbing charge is for the media, it was dead in the water by the first of July of 1992. Her testimony had no substance because she was not in any kind of trouble. 48 hours used it for dramatic effect and frankly I think they did that wrecklessly since the show did not air until september. Other than the 48 hours it is not considered any kind of motive anywhere in all of the pages in print. Why are we still talking about it?

If I understand your position correctly you don't believe Cox had anything to do with this. You also dismissed Carnahan if I recall correctly. You apparently don't believe there is anything to the grave robbers. I believe this leaves us with Garrison does it not? Do you want to talk about him? I'm game.

If you want to put forth a new or alternate theory I'm sure many would be interested. I'm looking for the elusive motive.

 

[Trooogrit]

Having said this I don't believe any of these low level characters were directly involved with the women's disappearances. But it is entirely conceivable that any one of these guys went back to the bigger fish or his "buffer" (Carnahan?) and let him/they know that they couldn't keep their traps shut and the cat was let out of the bag. When the mob has a blabbermouth, they usually solve their problem by taking that person out in the backwoods and putting a few rounds in the back of his head. Problem solved.

If drugs were involved, there was a lot of money; hundreds of thousands of dollars; perhaps millions of dollars. Anyone involved in that kind of distribution network is going to want to protect their territory and livelihood. They will do desperate things and collateral damage does not concern them greatly. One of the things I had long heard was that Jackie Johns was going to spill the beans on Carnahan and he took care of the problem although he reportedly mutilated her body in the process. I believe that was also involved with the (or a) business in Nixa. Someone who attended the trial might be able to clarify what was the motivating factor for her murder.

So whether or not the grave robbing charges went to trial or not, the concern that there were "loose lips sinking ships" could have led to this crime. It is plausible and cannot be dismissed out of hand unless it could be proven what conversations took place between Suzie and these individuals and that will never be known. And that provides a motive. Remove the source of the information and remove the threat.

STEP BACK look at what you created as a motive, from this. 19 year old Suzie Streeter gave a statement to police about the vandalism.

Does that really make sense to you?

If you think about this. The night this occurred. We have 2 changes of plans. Seperate parties for these guys. One of the guys works with her on a daily basis? I do not think that anything like this would have happened on that night.

Now what this has made me think is we have a random act, or we have a stalker that was following either one of the girls at the parties that night.

 

[Trooogrit]

If I understand your position correctly you don't believe Cox had anything to do with this. You also dismissed Carnahan if I recall correctly. You apparently don't believe there is anything to the grave robbers. I believe this leaves us with Garrison does it not? Do you want to talk about him? I'm game.

If you want to put forth a new or alternate theory I'm sure many would be interested. I'm looking for the elusive motive.

The only reason Cox or Carnahan are suspects is because they are bad guys. Should we make a list of convicted felons in southwest missouri in 1992 and talk about them all?