|
Post by poweranni on Jun 22, 2018 23:16:23 GMT -6
... Another thing I have been pondering (so please don’t take my head off) is that a sexual assault on Sue really can’t be ruled out just because LE didn’t find semen. The attack may have been interrupted by the boys’ entry into the house before any kind penetration or ejaculation happened. Sue was killed wearing a Muu Muu (not the most flattering or sexy garment but comfy) and a bra. Sue was petite and it doesn’t appear that she was physically endowed enough in the chest area to require wearing a bra at night. It’s just a guess, but I think that she was wearing the panties (that was later used as a gag) and bra for modesties sake because the neighbor boys Dana and Justin were staying in the house that night. Also, the underwear had to be removed before the tape was placed around her ankles or you wouldn’t be able to get them off. If someone was trying to stage the underwear they would have had to go into the girls bedroom and riffle through multiple drawers trying to find Sue’s underwear verses Sheila’s or Tina’s. That would have been one really calm killer(s) if he/she took the time not to make a mess out of searching those drawers. It is remarkable to me that LE didn't search every nook and corner. I really is odd. Curious what you think, Just Curious Is there a reason for why she wouldn't be wearing underwear, for comfort? Why would she be wearing underwear to bed, for modesty? Were the young men wearing underwear? And if so, was it because there was a woman in the house? Am I missing something here?
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Jun 23, 2018 8:24:07 GMT -6
True, but I think the timing of the wounds, etc is the main way we can rule out "sexual assault" or any other time-consuming business.
|
|
|
Post by poweranni on Jun 23, 2018 14:10:24 GMT -6
Well to play the devil's advocate here, you could explore the posibility that they may have attempted sexual assault but couldn't, due to a mechanical dysfunction on the perp's part. She also could have put up one hell of a fight and got killed in the process.
I am no expert ... but maybe not all perps are interested in that final act of sexual dominance, or carrying it out even if they wanted to, thus none of the obvious post-mortem residue.
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Jun 24, 2018 20:54:50 GMT -6
I'm not an expert either but John Douglas was. His report said:
Excerpt from an FBI Profile:
This profile was done by a man who (around the same time as the Keddie murders) profiled Karla Browns killer, by analyzing crime scene photos, right down to the type and color of car he drove. One of the investigators who sat in on the profile said he wondered how in the world this man could do this from looking at a picture. Karla Brown's killer ended up being everything John Douglas said he would be. Amazing.
|
|
|
Post by raemen2 on Jun 25, 2018 15:47:53 GMT -6
This has always disturbed me: The way Sue was found. The underwear as a gag, being hog tied. Even though evidence does not confirm a sexual assault, to me, it coveys certain aggressive sexual overtones that may indicat an adult (s) was present. Now whether the assault on Sue was for its own sake or some kind of twisted retribution for precieved wrong doings towards the perpetrator or another person....??
|
|
|
Post by karis on Jun 25, 2018 20:02:23 GMT -6
This has always disturbed me: The way Sue was found. The underwear as a gag, being hog tied. Even though evidence does not confirm a sexual assault, to me, it coveys certain aggressive sexual overtones that may indicat an adult (s) was present. Yes I agree. Being hog tied is something I would think an adult would do. But who knows. To be honest kmik and I are from the south and I had to ask my husband about it. So I would assume they had to be around cattle or know how to rope. Now whether the assault on Sue was for its own sake or some kind of twisted retribution for precieved wrong doings towards the perpetrator or another person....?? Well the only problems that we can say for sure Sue had was with her own children. Frank Davis said she had a fight with a man in the weeks before the murders. Daniel French could not have been a fan of Sue or Tina after the "molestation" was reported to the police but no one says much about that.
|
|
|
Post by raemen2 on Jun 26, 2018 7:03:27 GMT -6
I think if domestic issues are a possibility for motive we also must consider that Sue might not have been the initial target of the rage. I think there is a reasonable possibility that John might have been the intended victim and things quickly escalated from that point. If Sue was the target ....why not cover Johnny with the blanket, if it was indeed, John who was in the wrong place at the wrong time?
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Jun 26, 2018 15:02:01 GMT -6
True, but Johnny and Dana had no defensive wounds which to me says nobody fought with them/they fought with nobody. Sue had defensive wounds so she fought with somebody. It's possible that the killer subdued Johnny and Dana with a knock in the head and Sue came in, saw what was going on, and fought with the killer(s). So maybe the killer(s) intended to take Tina but Johnny and Dana were in the living room floor asleep so they had to get past them first.
Even if Tina was involved (willingly or unwillingly) it's obvious she was a child and didn't consider (as has been stated before) any consequences. I'm not sure when John Douglas created the profile but it was obviously before she was found. I don't see that her being found dead would have caused him to change his profile since he wrote in his report: "However, her age will also work against her if her abductor feels he no longer has control over her and feels that she may go on the run and go to authorities." My take from that is he was saying if she was not soon found she might become a liability for the killer who might end up killing her.
I think Meanie once said she thought the report was done around May or June of 1981 (that would be around the time Marilyn was pointing the finger at Marty). Keddie28 always said John Douglas was fed lies by the corrupt LE but if so why even request John Douglas to create a profile of the killer in the first place? I think John Douglas created a profile of the real killer.
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Jun 26, 2018 22:01:45 GMT -6
Whether or not any sexual intentions were aimed at Sue, I think she was originally left in such a way to "show the world what a w*@$e she was". Even if Tina was the target, someone was very pissed at Sue And someone wanted to protect her modesty after the fact. Could be one and the same, but I kinda doubt that.
|
|
|
Post by karis on Jun 27, 2018 6:16:00 GMT -6
Whether or not any sexual intentions were aimed at Sue, I think she was originally left in such a way to "show the world what a w*@$e she was". Even if Tina was the target, someone was very pissed at Sue And someone wanted to protect her modesty after the fact. Could be one and the same, but I kinda doubt that. I totally agree with you snoho. Regardless of the target of this crime, extreme hate was involved in the killing of Sue followed by remorse. Sue fought for her life. Even though I believe this crime involved Tina and someone she knew or was going to meet later that night, I can't understand the killing of Johnny and Dana or explain the involvement of Justin (if his DNA is really on something). And there is no explaining Ricky and Greg sleeping through all this.
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Jun 27, 2018 17:05:11 GMT -6
I may be the only one but, I can believe it totally possible that the boys (at least the sharps) could have not been woken up. I have been shocked at what tuckered out boys can sleep through. Its possible Dana and Johnny were knocked senseless and never let out anything over a moan. And just a thought, but I think there's a diffrence between defending ones self and fighting back, I think Sue defended herself
|
|
|
Post by karis on Jun 27, 2018 21:42:27 GMT -6
It is very possible the boys slept through it. I just don't see how. Some kind of noise got Justin out of bed that night. He says he witnessed a "fight between Johnny and Dana and 2 men, he then see's Tina get "abducted, but he doesn't wake up Ricky or run for help? Instead he leaves the security of the bedroom to try to stop the bleeding on Sue (who must have been bound and gagged). At some point he must have walked around and looked at the bodies of the boys, (because only 2 people stated Dana had waffle sole shoes, Justin and the medical examiner) and yet he did not wake Ricky Sharp up? He must have nerves of steel. But according to Nina Meeks, he "wet his pants" when talking to cops at her house. It just doesn't make sense for him not to wake up the person he spent the night with, the person who lives in the house, and ask him "what's going on"?
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Aug 2, 2018 22:35:52 GMT -6
I'm not an expert either but John Douglas was. His report said:
Excerpt from an FBI Profile:
This profile was done by a man who (around the same time as the Keddie murders) profiled Karla Browns killer, by analyzing crime scene photos, right down to the type and color of car he drove. One of the investigators who sat in on the profile said he wondered how in the world this man could do this from looking at a picture. Karla Brown's killer ended up being everything John Douglas said he would be. Amazing. I had an instructor give me John Douglas' book when I was researching for a project, "deviant behavior in antisocial personality types". I thought it would be my bible, but even through showcasing his accomplishments, I disagreed with him on a lot of things. Things that are being shown to be true all these many years later. I don't discount Douglas at all, but he's kind of a stubborn, pompous, blowhard also. Like everything else in this case, I try try to take him with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Aug 3, 2018 5:15:19 GMT -6
I don't think I've ever even written a post on the profile by John Douglas until the thread on Tina. I was always familiar with it but too busy researching all the people on the PON list. What he said really fits what many of us have said on this forum. I just think of how many people hang on every word said by 28 (who to my knowledge is not a professional in the field) but choose to over look things like the profile because 28 said John Douglas was fed lies by the "corrupt" LE. I'll give 28 credit on the way he went about discounting the profile. He put the blame on corrupt LE, not on John Douglas being an idiot, or being corrupt. Smart.
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Aug 3, 2018 20:48:07 GMT -6
I don't think I've ever even written a post on the profile by John Douglas until the thread on Tina. I was always familiar with it but too busy researching all the people on the PON list. What he said really fits what many of us have said on this forum. I just think of how many people hang on every word said by 28 (who to my knowledge is not a professional in the field) but choose to over look things like the profile because 28 said John Douglas was fed lies by the "corrupt" LE. I'll give 28 credit on the way he went about discounting the profile. He put the blame on corrupt LE, not on John Douglas being an idiot, or being corrupt. Smart.
Yeah I wouldn't call douglas an Idiot, but his field has evolved since 1981 when his bsu was first gaining traction. He didn't have good info and really wasn't invested. I get where he's coming from, "one of these is different from the rest,why?"
|
|