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

[Valiant]

I would suggest that the purpose of this misdirection, wherever it comes from, is to try to place the girls at the Mall that day, e.g 'witness' sightings etc.

I agree that would seem to be the purpose. But to keep the police away from TT’s house, the A family house, or the business location(s)?
My opinion is especially the last one.

 

[Brightchaser47]

I would suggest that the purpose of this misdirection, wherever it comes from, is to try to place the girls at the Mall that day, e.g 'witness' sightings etc.

I agree that would seem to be the purpose. But to keep the police away from TT’s house, the A family house, or the business location(s)?
My opinion is especially the last one.

I would absolutely agree that it's misdirection intended to steer folks away from something. But FWIW, the misdirect isn't coming from TT, so I seriously doubt things occured at his home as we've been led to believe. As for the A family house, that's a possibility, but we have to take into account Little Brother's whereabouts. If he was privy to events at 11 yrs old, could he keep quiet or even lie about it for the rest of his life? Good question.
I believe at this point whatever befell the girls actually started in the Gordon neighborhood. The last  confirmed, legitimate sighting of them places them at a store (A/N) just down the street from where they met up as a threesome. There are just too many questions (for me) regarding the MP reports and statements from folks who were there. jmo
ETA: For those who haven't seen them, Rachel's and Renee's reports can be found on an old post by  johnbelt (thread 5, page 18, #345). Not sure about Julie's.

 

[Tex Willer]

I spoke to JM's brother, who told me that he had spoken to VB several times. VB guaranteed him that he never saw the girls that day and that he was never with them at the SS. And TM absolutely believes him.

 

[T rex]

One might wonder if the information from the A family to the police might be part of the reason the police were not as active on the case as expected. There seems to be misdirection from the family now, and I wonder if it was around back then to keep police away from the family and the business.

Like when they all go down to the bus stop which only gave credence to the runaway theory and undermined what some of the family members had been saying. I'm not saying I blame them, I'm just saying I would have used a little discretion when doing it. I wonder how much the A family had to do with arranging the entire thing.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

I believe at this point whatever befell the girls actually started in the Gordon neighborhood. The last  confirmed, legitimate sighting of them places them at a store (A/N) just down the street from where they met up as a threesome. There are just too many questions (for me) regarding the MP reports and statements from folks who were there. jmo

RSBM.

FWIW, I read somewhere that the PI Dan James said the solution to the case lies at Gordon down the road from Julie's (or words to that effect). I think there may have been some sort of predator living in the neighbourhood ?

Do you think they were followed from Gordon Ave, or do you think something happened to them in the neighbourhood ?

FWIW, I think something happened elsewhere, but I like to keep an open mind.

 

[Valiant]

The thing I wonder about is if TT and the As were all 100% innocent in what happened to the girls, but had to deflect attention away from the business for whatever other reasons because something wasn’t above board there (hence the letter that seems to come from someone close to the girls). The thing that’s really odd is the denial of a second location for the transmission shop when the advertising back then clearly showed two locations.
The letter would buy time to clean up the activity at the shop.

 

[T rex]

RSBM.

FWIW, I read somewhere that the PI Dan James said the solution to the case lies at Gordon down the road from Julie's (or words to that effect). I think there may have been some sort of predator living in the neighbourhood ?

Do you think they were followed from Gordon Ave, or do you think something happened to them in the neighbourhood ?

FWIW, I think something happened elsewhere, but I like to keep an open mind.

Is it possible that after going to the A/N the girls determined it should have been enough time for the other girls to have finished their chores and they returned to Gordon before going to the mall?

 

[T rex]

The thing I wonder about is if TT and the As were all 100% innocent in what happened to the girls, but had to deflect attention away from the business for whatever other reasons because something wasn’t above board there (hence the letter that seems to come from done close to the girls). The thing that’s really odd is the denial of a second location for the transmission shop when the advertising back then clearly showed two locations.
The letter would buy time to clean up the activity at the shop.

Chop shop?

 

[DD Byrd]

Is it possible that after going to the A/N the girls determined it should have been enough time for the other girls to have finished their chores and they returned to Gordon before going to the mall?

Which are we talking about between "the girls" who determined and "the other girls" who finished chores?

 

[DD Byrd]

 johnbelt (thread 5, page 18, #345)

Thanks for this.
My question on Rachel's report is whether her sister was the last to see her or just who gave the report. Because Rachel was supposedly last seen at "home." But her clothing at the time was "unknown." That recollection might not be as thorough as Renee's mother had of her own daughter, but I'd think DA would remember something if she's the one who saw her.

 

[Brightchaser47]

Which are we talking about between "the girls" who determined and "the other girls" who finished chores?

Julie's sister and a neighbor girl from Gordon had chores to finish before they were to meet the Trio at SS.

 

[Brightchaser47]

FWIW, I read somewhere that the PI Dan James said the solution to the case lies at Gordon down the road from Julie's (or words to that effect). I think there may have been some sort of predator living in the neighbourhood ?.

RSBM
A known predator living in the neighborhood would be simple enough to investigate, by either Dan or LE, and I would hope that possibility had been looked at. If police could detain VB for 5 minutes for questioning, and Dan could interview him, they could surely do the same to a suspected pedophile!
I remember mention of a store down the street, but I'm not sure what businesses were in that neighborhood then. I think that comment of Dan's might have been a teaser though, tbh. jmo

Do you think they were followed from Gordon Ave, or do you think something happened to them in the neighbourhood ?

If I believed they made it to SS, I'd say they were followed from Gordon. But I really think they met up with someone we're not told about somewhere in the neighborhood. jmo

 

[Brightchaser47]

Thanks for this.
My question on Rachel's report is whether her sister was the last to see her or just who gave the report. Because Rachel was supposedly last seen at "home." But her clothing at the time was "unknown." That recollection might not be as thorough as Renee's mother had of her own daughter, but I'd think DA would remember something if she's the one who saw her.

I could actually give her a pass on the clothing bit, because she was allegedly still half asleep and had no way of knowing she'd be asked to recall that information later. Having said that, I have doubts that DA saw or spoke with Rachel at all that day. I don't feel she's directly involved in the girls going missing, but I do question the MP report (as well as her alibi). jmo

 

[Brightchaser47]

DA claims Rachel invited her along on the shopping trip prior to leaving for Gordon, but DA couldn't roll out of bed. Had she accepted, that would've been Rachel, DA, Renee, and Julie shopping together-- a 19 yr old, her 17 yr old married sister, married sister's 14 yr old bestie, and a 9 yr old. Somehow that doesn't seem likely. js

 

[Brightchaser47]

Is it possible that after going to the A/N the girls determined it should have been enough time for the other girls to have finished their chores and they returned to Gordon before going to the mall?

I would say so, except they should've run into them on Gordon and apparently didn't. Unless, they just missed each other, and the Trio met with trouble about the time the others were en route to SS.

 

[Brightchaser47]

The thing I wonder about is if TT and the As were all 100% innocent in what happened to the girls, but had to deflect attention away from the business for whatever other reasons because something wasn’t above board there (hence the letter that seems to come from someone close to the girls). The thing that’s really odd is the denial of a second location for the transmission shop when the advertising back then clearly showed two locations.
The letter would buy time to clean up the activity at the shop.

I agree there was definitely something going on with the shops, and that would make a lot of sense, if it weren't for all the inconsistencies from Rachel's mother and (still) pushing the mall narrative so hard. jmo

 

[DD Byrd]

DA claims Rachel invited her along on the shopping trip prior to leaving for Gordon, but DA couldn't roll out of bed. Had she accepted, that would've been Rachel, DA, Renee, and Julie shopping together-- a 19 yr old, her 17 yr old married sister, married sister's 14 yr old bestie, and a 9 yr old. Somehow that doesn't seem likely. js

I think it's plausible that widespread age group could shop together, esp since they were somewhat intertwined family/friend-wise, and all female. What I'm landing on is whether Rachel did indeed ever ask DA to go. Not being able to get out of bed makes sense for a lot people on a day off/hungover/not morning people, etc....but it also allows for lying by omission. She'd be putting herself as a potential witness to the beginning of whatever happened, but also not wedded to any facts. You can't prove you don't know particulars via questioning.

 

[DD Byrd]

solution to the case lies at Gordon down the road from Julie's

To me that screams, "I know something but not enough to act on it without getting sued to Kingdom come for defamation" on the part of PI James. Depending on when he said that, he could either mean he believed "it" (an object, another letter, less likely remains) was a tangible piece of evidence still there, OR intentionally used the word "solution" to be taken more broadly - i.e. the address itself, the people there, business dealings, etc.

Does anyone have actual interviews/reports from Julie's sister or her friend? I'm wondering how/why it was confirmed the trio were meeting anyone at all.

 

[Brightchaser47]

I think it's plausible that widespread age group could shop together, esp since they were somewhat intertwined family/friend-wise, and all female. What I'm landing on is whether Rachel did indeed ever ask DA to go. Not being able to get out of bed makes sense for a lot people on a day off/hungover/not morning people, etc....but it also allows for lying by omission. She'd be putting herself as a potential witness to the beginning of whatever happened, but also not wedded to any facts. You can't prove you don't know particulars via questioning.

All good points. I don't think Rachel invited her, and I agree DA was likely trying to cover her own tail with that story. jmo

 

[Brightchaser47]

DP-Deleted by me