TX TX - Julie Moseley, 9, Mary Trlica, 17, Lisa Wilson, 14, Fort Worth, 23 Dec 1974 #8

[Brightchaser47]

DP

 

[Brightchaser47]

The A's were multi-taskers. Look at ALL the places DA was on the night of the 22nd and the day of the 23rd. Look at ALL the places RT(RA) was on the night of the 22nd and the day of the 23rd. Look at ALL the places CA was on the 23rd. Look at ALL the places FA was on the 23rd.

Ha-Ha...

 

[jetsfanjohn]

The A's were multi-taskers. Look at ALL the places DA was on the night of the 22nd and the day of the 23rd. Look at ALL the places RT(RA) was on the night of the 22nd and the day of the 23rd. Look at ALL the places CA was on the 23rd. Look at ALL the places FA was on the 23rd.

Agreed. It's farcical.

I'd love to know where some people.close to Rachel where around 1pm on the afternoon of 23rd December 1974.

 

[Brightchaser47]

I'd love to know where some people.close to Rachel where around 1pm on the afternoon of 23rd December 1974.

We all would. But it's painfully obvious after nearly five decades, we're not going to find out. It's pretty clear that whoever caused Rachel, Renee, and Julie to disappear was/is perfectly willing to take it to the grave, because they'd rather be dead than in prison.

 

[beubeubeu]

I'm thinking that story was an embellishment of what actually occurred. Perhaps it was that embellishment that got Rachel into trouble. It would be extremely heartbreaking to find out she was murdered for something she didn't actually do...

And if it would be something serious, like RW possibly saw Rachel and VB kissing passionately on his couch.
If that was really something big and completely unacceptable for a married woman - then what stopped RW from banning (or at least strongly discouraging) Renee from hanging out with Rachel as possible bad influence?
Why would he be okay with her dating TM if his best friend was involved in cheating with a married woman?
It wasn't ancient history for them, this alleged interaction just happened, few weeks earlier, not really much time to forget about it, to make up for such mistake...
None of the few clues that we have are suggesting that thing was very serious or even taken as very serious by the only person who claimed to whitness such event.
Allegedly it was enough to snitch on Rachel to CA, but what does that mean without the context? Some people would find kissing as innocent way of goofing around and never give it a second thought, others would find it highly inappropriate for a young woman to even be in the same room as a young guy who isn't her husband.
How it was for RW?
Is it even clear that it wasn't something oh, this girl should be more careful with what she's doing cause such careless meetings could ruin her reputation -> I better express my disapproval and speak to her father about it?

 

[Brightchaser47]

I'd love to know where some people.close to Rachel where around 1pm on the afternoon of 23rd December 1974.

Actually, I'd like to know where  Rachel was around 1 pm on that day. We don't really know  that, do we?

 

[beubeubeu]

The A's were multi-taskers. Look at ALL the places DA was on the night of the 22nd and the day of the 23rd. Look at ALL the places RT(RA) was on the night of the 22nd and the day of the 23rd. Look at ALL the places CA was on the 23rd. Look at ALL the places FA was on the 23rd.

Not only A's were multi-taskers. TT, ST, TM, VB's whereabouts are also like that. And Julie's dad's too.
Since in my last post I thought about RW I now also wonder about his whereabouts.
And to be more specific: how did he ended up with A's neighbour and the source of revelations about Rachel's engagement (?!) or relationship with Melvin.
Did he called him for help in the search? Did he picked him up on the way to the mall? And if the latter - did he visited A's home before to ask what they know? Did he saw FA and CA there?

And did anyone other than RW ever confirmed that TT and RW showed up at the Mall around 11 PM.
Cause that is hella weird. Especially considering their highly theorised involvement in the crime, possibly even having crime scene at Minot home.
Who with the even slightest bit of sanity would leave that house not leaving anyone to wait by the phone?
That's bad for the circumstances with Rachel going missing and even worse for Rachel just being murdered there.
The arrangements were made already. In case of some unfortunate events, T's house would be very likely to be called by Rachel. I can't imagine anyone accepting the idea of everyone leaving that house for at least an hour and leaving that phone "alone". And it wasn't just A's who could be theorised as also involved cause two more families. Wasn't the risk that someone in these families will try to call T's residence and not having anyone to pick up the call right away going straight there to check what's going on? Or asking a neighbour to show up for a check?
RW never (at least to my knowledge) expressed anger and frustration with the fact that DA and TT showed up at the mall. And he likely could be expected to do that if, as far as he knew that would mean that nobodys waiting by the phone at home. So... are we just unaware that there was someone else at that home, left to wait by the phone in case someone (Rachel or other family members) will call?

 

[Brightchaser47]

Not only A's were multi-taskers. TT, SA, TM, VB's whereabouts are also like that. And Julie's dad's too.
Since in my last post I thought about RW I now also wonder about his whereabouts.
And to be more specific: how did he ended up with A's neighbour and the source of revelations about Rachel's engagement (?!) or relationship with Melvin.
Did he called him for help in the search? Did he picked him up on the way to the mall? And if the latter - did he visited A's home before to ask what they know? Did he saw FA and CA there?

And did anyone other than RW ever confirmed that TT and RW showed up at the Mall around 11 PM.
Cause that is hella weird. Especially considering their highly theorised involvement in the crime, possibly even having crime scene at Minot home.
Who with the even slightest bit of sanity would leave that house not leaving anyone to wait by the phone?
That's bad for the circumstances with Rachel going missing and even worse for Rachel just being murdered there.
The arrangements were made already. In case of some unfortunate events, T's house would be very likely to be called by Rachel. I can't imagine anyone accepting the idea of everyone leaving that house for at least an hour and leaving that phone "alone". And it wasn't just A's who could be theorised as also involved cause two more families. Wasn't the risk that someone in these families will try to call T's residence and not having anyone to pick up the call right away going straight there to check what's going on? Or asking a neighbour to show up for a check?
RW never (at least to my knowledge) expressed anger and frustration with the fact that DA and TT showed up at the mall. And he likely could be expected to do that if, as far as he knew that would mean that nobodys waiting by the phone at home. So... are we just unaware that there was someone else at that home, left to wait by the phone in case someone (Rachel or other family members) will call?

SA?

 

[Brightchaser47]

Especially considering their highly theorised involvement in the crime, possibly even having crime scene at Minot home.
Who with the even slightest bit of sanity would leave that house not leaving anyone to wait by the phone?
That's bad for the circumstances with Rachel going missing and even worse for Rachel just being murdered there.
The arrangements were made already. In case of some unfortunate events, T's house would be very likely to be called by Rachel. I can't imagine anyone accepting the idea of everyone leaving that house for at least an hour and leaving that phone "alone". And it wasn't just A's who could be theorised as also involved cause two more families. Wasn't the risk that someone in these families will try to call T's residence and not having anyone to pick up the call right away going straight there to check what's going on? Or asking a neighbour to show up for a check?
RW never (at least to my knowledge) expressed anger and frustration with the fact that DA and TT showed up at the mall. And he likely could be expected to do that if, as far as he knew that would mean that nobodys waiting by the phone at home. So... are we just unaware that there was someone else at that home, left to wait by the phone in case someone (Rachel or other family members) will call?

Maybe ST was at Minot, minding the phone (possibly where ST Jr was, too, come to think of it...).

 

[beubeubeu]

SA?

ST, sorry, typo.

 

[beubeubeu]

Maybe ST was at Minot, minding the phone (possibly where ST Jr was, too, come to think of it...).

That would allow DA to "guard the phone whole day" if it was ST who picked up TT from bowling - but if she did then why would they leave kid there? Why would they think that's better to leave him and pick him up later?

Now as I'm thinking of it. Wouldn't it be like the first question that pops into anybodys mind? TT shows up at the mall: WAIT, IF YOU'RE HERE, DOES THAT MEAN NOBODYS BY THE PHONE AT YOUR HOUSE?
And that should cause them either to realize their mistake and go straight back.. or to say that for example ST is there. Anyone could ask that and cops definitely should ask that. Especially if considering them runaways.
Nobody did? Or the person who stayed by the phone at Minot preffered to stay unnamed?

Many many things could be watered down to oh, they just weren't thinking that way, couldn't predict - and that's completely fair. But to have so much of that yet have the audacity to call the Rachel the one who was making poor decisions is just ridiculous.

 

[beubeubeu]

Hmm. Human trafficking does not present in such a way.

But claims made by people theorising that human trafficking is the cause for somebody's disappearance does present in this way.

 

[FW_Froggy]

I've never heard anybody say where DA and TT were between around 8:30 and 11:00pm. We know TT brought the keys to the car to Seminary South around 11:00pm. Nobody knows where CA was that evening either.

 

[Brightchaser47]

That would allow DA to "guard the phone whole day" if it was ST who picked up TT from bowling - but if she did then why would they leave kid there? Why would they think that's better to leave him and pick him up later?

Now as I'm thinking of it. Wouldn't it be like the first question that pops into anybodys mind? TT shows up at the mall: WAIT, IF YOU'RE HERE, DOES THAT MEAN NOBODYS BY THE PHONE AT YOUR HOUSE?
And that should cause them either to realize their mistake and go straight back.. or to say that for example ST is there. Anyone could ask that and cops definitely should ask that. Especially if considering them runaways.
Nobody did? Or the person who stayed by the phone at Minot preffered to stay unnamed?

I was meaning maybe ST was minding the phone while TT and DA went to the mall that night.

Many many things could be watered down to oh, they just weren't thinking that way, couldn't predict - and that's completely fair. But to have so much of that yet have the audacity to call the Rachel the one who was making poor decisions is just ridiculous.

I think DJ was the only one claiming that, and he's a controversial character.

 

[beubeubeu]

I was meaning maybe ST was minding the phone while TT and DA went to the mall that night.

And I mean that whoever that was, it should be known to some people other than TT and DA, cause that sounds like kind of an obvious question to be asked there.

 

[Brightchaser47]

I've never heard anybody say where DA and TT were between around 8:30 and 11:00pm. We know TT brought the keys to the car to Seminary South around 11:00pm. Nobody knows where CA was that evening either.

I assume TT and DA never offered an explanation, but I've wondered if they could possibly have been looking elsewhere for the girls, prior to showing up at the mall lot. Maybe someplace they wouldn't want the other families to know about. Not sure if that would involve CA or not...

 

[Brightchaser47]

Nobody knows where CA was that evening either.

Never thought about it till now, but did CA have any hobbies or regular appointments he kept (like poker games, fights, etc)? Maybe he was sneaking out to make a buck. If he knew DA and TT were responding to the situation, maybe he thought, "Hey, they don't need me there, I'll just go (?), instead. The wife will never know." And she didn't.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

Actually, I'd like to know where  Rachel was around 1 pm on that day. We don't really know  that, do we?

My best guess is Minot Ave.

 

[Brightchaser47]

My best guess is Minot Ave.

But if she was at Minot Ave at 1 pm, and killed shortly thereafter, why wasn't her car found until almost 8 hours later? There were people actively searching for that car earlier that evening. That's a pretty big time gap, considering Minot Ave is only minutes from Seminary South. Where was that car all afternoon? Why is ST the only known "witness" who saw that car in that time period? It doesn't add up.
Rachel wasn't 'last seen at Seminary South'. She was 'last seen' in that car.

 

[Brightchaser47]

Yep. That's how I think it went down also. Girls killed early afternoon in a certain residence. Bodies moved that night in a van.

Actually a van wouldn't be necessary. Most cars of that time (including the Oldsmobile) had  huge trunks. If the girls were strangled, suffocated, or drugged for example, there would be little mess, and the Olds could indeed be used to dispose of bodies. Remember, that car was not processed one iota, as a potential crime scene. And if anything, it was too clean.

Not 100% sure if organised crime had to even be involved though.

No, there are several lakes, swamps, building construction sites, well foundations, etc that would hide a body nicely. You'd just have to weight it down, or be sure carnivorous animals would have access to it. Remember the "body dumps" (Brazoria, etc)? Those weren't all complete skeletons that were found...
BTW, how many of those were checked against the trio? And how many that  were checked, were  properly checked?