The Springfield Three--missing since June 1992 - #6

[Jennibee]

What should also astound you is the "Actual Number" of random people who go missing every day, every week, and every year......never to be seen again. No answers, No closure,.....Nothing.

What's that number then?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[wfgodot]

What's that number then?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

http://facts.randomhistory.com/missing-persons-facts.html

 

[TexasT]

http://facts.randomhistory.com/missing-persons-facts.html

Protocol for missing persons has changed greatly .
Sadly , today is the 20th anniversary of Amber Hagerman being found .

TT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jennibee]

Bumping


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Missouri Mule]

Just a heads-up. On Tuesday morning on ID Discovery (channel 192 on Dish), "Disappeared" regarding the 3MW will be shown at 8 AM CST. Probably nothing new but perhaps something will be of value to those not intimately familiar with the case.

 

[CircuitGuy]

True, but it's still "living beyond your means." She also had creditors demanding payment for debts allegedly incurred by her ex.

Running up credit card debt is very common. I doubt this alone would be significant to investigators.

I've seen these claims about Sherrill Levitt in previous posts:

• She was "living beyond her means".
• She operated with money orders instead of checks.
• Someone claims to have talked to a high-ranking detective who says they know the motive but don't know who did it. According to this claim, the target was involved in criminal activity.
• She was a slient partner in a small business.

To me this points to her aggreeing to launder money from criminals. In this scenario the criminals were giving her cash they got illegally. She would take some of it as payment, show some it as business revenue, and pay it to the crooks as if they were suppliers to the business. I don't imagine this being huge amounts of money, maybe $20,000 a month being laundered. She took her cut in cash (cash-purchased money orders when necessary) and spent it on her middle class lifestyle. She showed very limit income on her taxes, not enough to support a middle-class lifestyle.

Maybe at some point she spent some of the money that was supposed to be paid to the crooks. Maybe they had some sort of dispute about how much they were owed, so they murdered her. The girls were in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's just luck that the criminals were able to subdue them, kill them, and dispose of the bodies without getting caught, despite the fact that there were three victims instead of the one. With bad luck of the criminals, they might not have been prepared to handle three victims, and it would have led to a struggle that would have caused them to get caught or flee.

This is all pure guessing.

 

[JnRyan]

Since the two girls did not make a decision to go to Sherrill's house till early in the morning, I also tend to believe Sherrill was the target. But then again, they couldn't have been too surprised by the 2 girls there as both girls' cars were parked out front. If this was due to Sherrill's involvement with criminal activity or her husband's debts the criminal must have been in situation where he (or they) had to get to her that night regardless of who was there. If it involved a criminal element and Sherrill was the target why not postpone it to another night? Why that night when it was obvious there were 2 others there?

OTH, since the decision by the 2 girls to go to Sherrill's house instead of sleep over at a friend's house was a last minute late change it still makes me believe the 2 girls were not as likely the targets as Sherrill was.

 

[U2forever]

Since the two girls did not make a decision to go to Sherrill's house till early in the morning, I also tend to believe Sherrill was the target. But then again, they couldn't have been too surprised by the 2 girls there as both girls' cars were parked out front. If this was due to Sherrill's involvement with criminal activity or her husband's debts the criminal must have been in situation where he (or they) had to get to her that night regardless of who was there. If it involved a criminal element and Sherrill was the target why not postpone it to another night? Why that night when it was obvious there were 2 others there?

OTH, since the decision by the 2 girls to go to Sherrill's house instead of sleep over at a friend's house was a last minute late change it still makes me believe the 2 girls were not as likely the targets as Sherrill was.

JnRyan, I agree. Leave no witnesses.

Praying Sherill, Suzy and Stacy are brought home where they belong and their families get the justice so deserved.

 

[colette]

OTH, since the decision by the 2 girls to go to Sherrill's house instead of sleep over at a friend's house was a last minute late change it still makes me believe the 2 girls were not as likely the targets as Sherrill was.

Unless someone saw the girls that night and followed them home to Sherrills.

 

[Jennibee]

Or unless someone was already in the house when the girls get home. I lean more towards this theory.

Moo

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[CircuitGuy]

the criminal must have been in situation where he (or they) had to get to her that night regardless of who was there. If it involved a criminal element and Sherrill was the target why not postpone it to another night?

I agree with this if the criminals were smart.

It's possible the criminals made a plan to murder Sherrill and didn't make the logical decision to abort once they saw more cars there. They may have been hyped up on adrenaline and given to poor decisions in general, as I imagine criminals are. They may not be long-range thinkers. The concept of putting some important off one week for a good reason may have been foreign to them.

This idea requires them to be stupid but lucky, lucky enough to succeed in the murder, not get caught in the act, and never get caught in the future.

I go back and forth thinking smart-but-lucky seems unlikely and then OTOH thinking if there are many murders committed each year, we would expect every so often for the criminals to get extremely lucky.

 

[TexasT]

Unless someone saw the girls that night and followed them home to Sherrills.

Certainly a possibility. Decent drive from last party to Delmar . What's the odds stopping at a convience store ? She was a chain smoker ? Thirsty after a night of partying or restroom break ? Buy gas ?

DL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[monkeymann]

Certainly a possibility. Decent drive from last party to Delmar . What's the odds stopping at a convience store ? She was a chain smoker ? Thirsty after a night of partying or restroom break ? Buy gas ?

DL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could play into the Georges story. Could be they came home, and then went back out to get something to eat....or they went to Georges before they went home, and the part of the Georges story about Sherrill being with them was just not accurate. Then they could have been followed home by someone they knew that they saw a Georges, or by one or more strangers.

Although......I have always felt....as the FBI did, that the 3MW crime was committed by at least one person that one or more of the women knew.....and that it wasn't a random crime.

 

[ekardh]

JnRyan, I agree. Leave no witnesses.

Then why not just kill them?

There are multiple cases of families or groups of women being attacked in their own homes that turn out to be robberies or sexual assaults, or both! In the vast majority of those cases, the crime is almost always limited to the household. There's no need to dump the bodies, only the need to dispose of any incriminating evidence. Apparently there were no signs of foul play or robbery, which indicates that the abduction was the only thing that took place at the house. This is interesting, because if it was sexually motivated it means we're dealing with someone who wanted the women for a prolonged period of time. Someone not dissimilar to Leonard Lake, who abducted women and used them as sex slaves until they were expendable. However, Lake's victims were lured to his cabin out in the country under false pretenses, not quite the same deal here. It's rare enough for one woman to be taken from her home, but kidnapping three adult women in the middle of a residential area is almost unheard of, hence the extraordinary nature of his case.

 

[gaia227]

This is what baffles most about this. Why were they abducted? Abducting 3 grown women is no easy feat and then once you have them you have to keep control of them, have a place to take them without being too obvious. It's possible a taser was used to subdue them. It seems almost impossible this was the work of a single perp. I think there had to have been at least two.
No signs of forced entry. How did they get into the house? They were taken in the wee hours, not a time when one could feign stopping by for a social call.
I go back and forth about who I think the targets were. If the girls were followed home it's hard to believe there were no signs of a struggle. The girls had been in the house long enough to start getting ready for bed so if they were followed the perp (s) waited awhile before going in. Had the girls been drinking and just forgot to lock the door?
Then I start to think it makes more sense the perp (s) were already there and Sherrill had already been subdued. Buuuut, if that were the case then why wouldn't they have been attacked right when they came in instead of being allowed time to get ready for bed?
There is the possibility they weren't abducted until early morning as in like 6-7am and were asleep thus more easily subdued. But the perp (s) run a bigger chance of being seen if it was light out.

It makes my head spin.

I was born and raised in Springfield (and just moved back last month). I was 12 the summer they vanished. We never thought that almost 30 years later we'd still have no idea what happened to them and have more questions than answers.

 

[Batman's Mommy]

This is JMO, I think there was one target. The perp had some knowledge of LE. With a gun, the women would have cooperated and done as told, exiting the home, allowing the perp to leave no DNA or trace of what transpired.

 

[TexasT]

Although......I have always felt....as the FBI did, that the 3MW crime was committed by at least one person that one or more of the women knew.....and that it wasn't a random crime.

Agreed , only troubling thing is you would think 24 years some ex gf ,friend ,family of the offenders ect would get disgruntled, decide to collect a reward get a concious or something .

Then you see something like this :

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/sneak-peek-the-pact/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[zencompass]

I have always felt that Suzie was aware of some threat that her mother told her about and perhaps they thought it would not happen (they miscalculated the brazenness/intent of the person making the threat).

I felt that Suzie was the one who decided that the girls should go to her house as the threat/fear was weighing on her mind and she thought "safety in numbers". She may not have told anyone about this threat - just wanted to go home as she felt her mother needed "protection". By the time they reached Sherrill's house - the person(s) who made this (possible) threat was/were already in the home.

This is just my opinion of course.

 

[U2forever]

Then why not just kill them?

There are multiple cases of families or groups of women being attacked in their own homes that turn out to be robberies or sexual assaults, or both! In the vast majority of those cases, the crime is almost always limited to the household. There's no need to dump the bodies, only the need to dispose of any incriminating evidence. Apparently there were no signs of foul play or robbery, which indicates that the abduction was the only thing that took place at the house. This is interesting, because if it was sexually motivated it means we're dealing with someone who wanted the women for a prolonged period of time. Someone not dissimilar to Leonard Lake, who abducted women and used them as sex slaves until they were expendable. However, Lake's victims were lured to his cabin out in the country under false pretenses, not quite the same deal here. It's rare enough for one woman to be taken from her home, but kidnapping three adult women in the middle of a residential area is almost unheard of, hence the extraordinary nature of his case.

Why not just kill them?
Ekardh, I cannot answer that, I'm not a criminal.
I will tell you this, your post is some scary sh!$.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kemo]

Why not just kill them?
Ekardh, I cannot answer that, I'm not a criminal.
I will tell you this, your post is some scary sh!$.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After following true crime for a while, I have noticed a obvious pattern: when the bodie(s) are effectively concealed, the perpetrator was unusually known to the victim, when the bodie(s) are not concealed, the perpetrator had no ties to the victim. This pattern doesn't always hold, but the correlation is pretty strong.