TX TX - Julie Moseley, 9, Mary Trlica, 17, Lisa Wilson, 14, Fort Worth, 23 Dec 1974 - #3

[Via Marple]

I was falling to sleep last night and considering the Houston connection between the letter and a comment left by Debra here on WS, saying she met a DJ in Houston and he drove early morning to visit her but returned home (23rd or 24th? Dec) because she was occupied (or words to that effect.)

It could be totally coincidental, or maybe the alleged failed visit by this Houston DJ inspired the author of the impersonated* message to TT.

clarification: I am currently of the opinion that letter was not authored by Rachel.

I have considered that scenario with the letter. But I can't make sense of why Debra wouldn't recognise her own words or note, if she wasn't part of the cover up. Sorry double, no triple negatives! Obviously I am not a writer

 

[raven9860]

Just so that I get you correctly - you mean the person who has a related website, and who has been bringing them up? I don't remember about the bag with human teeth (my bad memory) so just to be sure.


Are there other sources you've seen, other than Cat?

I can understand why PD wasn't considering a "Rachel kidnapping other girls" scenario. The families must have assured them that Rachel was a great friend of Renee, and Renee a great friend of Julie. It's the human viewpoint versus legal viewpoint.

Yes to both questions.

 

[raven9860]

I have considered that scenario with the letter. But I can't make sense of why Debra wouldn't recognise her own words or note, if she wasn't part of the cover up. Sorry double, no triple negatives! Obviously I am not a writer

I think a person would recognize their own words/note and just may have took the opportunity to use it for an explaination of why Rachel was gone.

 

[3llecia]

I have considered that scenario with the letter. But I can't make sense of why Debra wouldn't recognise her own words or note, if she wasn't part of the cover up. Sorry double, no triple negatives! Obviously I am not a writer

I've taken a relook at all her posts on WS and come away with another interpretation of intent behind those statements. I reread most of the contemporaneous newspapers during the first years of the missing/eventual homicide/then cold case investigation. I've considered the self-reported relationship breakdowns that happened after the disappearance, <modsnip - discussing fb comments>.

Weighing it all up, all that complex "what's legitimate information, is there any other reason they said that" thinking stuff over the last week, the aim was to get some fresh eyes on the "politics" that have obscured this case.

I currently think answers haven't been found because of lies, cover ups and not enough pressure was exerted by law enforcement during the critical first 48 hrs these girls seemingly vanished.

With anecdotal understanding of how trauma proliferates within family dysfunction, I think outsiders will be unable to wrap their head around this case without knowing the relationship dynamics at play. So consider:

Two sisters, both linked to and living with the same man, who worked at (and eventually bought and sold) a business owned by a dying father the sisters reportedly feared.

One's vanished, the other has been publicly called out since by her own sibling and members of the other two families in a bid for answers.

Their young brother, growing up in the aftershock of his sister's disappearance with painful reminders (police investigating if found skeletal remains are Rachel every now and then), no answers, a flamed suspicion against a sibling who was originally a pillar of support for the young boy, resulting in his lifelong quest to solve it all.

Houston. Father's treatment happening in Houston. A DJ apparently coming from Houston and returning to the city in the first 24 hrs of the case, according to the sister left behind. An inconclusively authored letter stating the girls will go to Houston and return. Rachel's mother's published story about a man who "walked into her house", then tells her he saw a "light blue van... two men...told not to interfere because 'it is between me and my wife'" and that alleged witness was also reported to be from Houston.

 

[Willow17]

This has confused me as well. Letting a stranger in the house, pointing to a picture of Rachel and saying that’s who I saw being shoved in a blue Van, while a younger girl ran off but was caught by 2 men and shoved into the van???

 

[3llecia]

This has confused me as well. Letting a stranger in the house, pointing to a picture of Rachel and saying that’s who I saw being shoved in a blue Van, while a younger girl ran off but was caught by 2 men and shoved into the van???

We don't know this Houston witness was a stranger, or the circumstances around what he told to Rachel's mother Frances Langston further than what she reported to a journalist.

The part of the article we're referencing makes it sound like a stranger just happens to waltz into her home, then points at the Rachel picture saying "that's the baby I saw" recounting the moment he just happens to be in FW on the very day the girls disappeared. I think context is missing to a large extent, and knowing more about this reported witness would be valuable to weigh up FL's claim about what he told her years after the fact.

A. Who is the Houston witness? Was that witness followed up by police?
B. Why are all links to Houston in this case only coming from the letter's unknown author, Debra, Frances Langston or the father (by proxy of his treatment location)

So many questions.

 

[Suglo]

This has confused me as well. Letting a stranger in the house, pointing to a picture of Rachel and saying that’s who I saw being shoved in a blue Van, while a younger girl ran off but was caught by 2 men and shoved into the van???

Does anyone have a link to the article where the mother stated this? I can’t seem to find it.

 

[raven9860]

We don't know this Houston witness was a stranger, or the circumstances around what he told to Rachel's mother Frances Langston further than what she reported to a journalist.

The part of the article we're referencing makes it sound like a stranger just happens to waltz into her home, then points at the Rachel picture saying "that's the baby I saw" recounting the moment he just happens to be in FW on the very day the girls disappeared. I think context is missing to a large extent, and knowing more about this reported witness would be valuable to weigh up FL's claim about what he told her years after the fact.

A. Who is the Houston witness? Was that witness followed up by police?
B. Why are all links to Houston in this case only coming from the letter's unknown author, Debra, Frances Langston or the father (by proxy of his treatment location)

So many questions.

So many questions and zero attempt to clarify.

After really looking at statements (old and new) from Rachel's family, I find my focus is going in a totally different direction.

 

[raven9860]

1999 Star Telegram

 

[3llecia]

Does anyone have a link to the article where the mother stated this? I can’t seem to find it.

 

[Suglo]

Thank you @3llecia !

 

[Parksestx]

Yet another tie to Houston.

 

[Via Marple]

Yet another tie to Houston.

 

[3llecia]

Very very interesting!!

 

[3llecia]

I have an idea. Radiator shop formerly owned by Cotton Arnold, then by TT. Car missing.

What were the other Fort Worth auto businesses and who owned them? Junk yard owners or scrappers?

 

[Mrs. Badcrumble]

I hate to be *that* jerk, but we've already got one admin/mod warning about dragging Facebook stuff in here, and I do not want to see this thread locked or pulled, as this is a good and informative thread filled with good, rational people -unlike that godawful fb group.

 

[raven9860]

I hate to be *that* jerk, but we've already got one admin/mod warning about dragging Facebook stuff in here, and I do not want to see this thread locked or pulled, as this is a good and informative thread filled with good, rational people -unlike that godawful fb group.

Can we not use the comments there of family members as source material here?

 

[Suglo]

Can we not use the comments there of family members as source material here?

We are only allowed to use posts made by admins of the official FB page not comments to said posts or posts by members.

 

[raven9860]

We are only allowed to use posts made by admins of the official FB page not comments to said posts or posts by members.

I see.

As the only family member of Rachel that is an Admin is her brother,

and very few comments, info, or updates are made by him,

(imo) there is nothing of any relevance to be used.

In the future, I will make no comments regarding that page.

 

[Suglo]

I see.

As the only family member of Rachel that is an Admin is her brother,

and very few comments, info, or updates are made by him,

(imo) there is nothing of any relevance to be used.

In the future, I will make no comments regarding that page.

It’s frustrating I know.