|
Post by kmik on Dec 25, 2019 21:27:08 GMT -6
Where does Tina fit into all of this? Could it just be a coincidence that she didn't spend the night in 27 and went home where she ended up missing from a murder scene? Yes, I think it could be. BUT could it be a coincidence that: 1. she didn't spend the night in 27 the very night that murder was committed in 28 2. was the only one not found in 28 the next morning 3. taken far enough away so she wouldn't be found immediately. I can hardly believe the killer thought to take her to throw off an investigation when whoever came to 28 wasn't even prepared to murder. Hammer (28) knives (28) air rifle (who knows or will tell) electrical cords (girls bedroom in 28) medical tape (who in the world would bring that of all things??)
I think of Sue being gagged (unlike the others) and all I can think is that she was gagged - not because she was the target - but because she was fighting back and trying to scream for help. It doesn't appear that Johnny or Dana were in a position to scream or surely they too would have been gagged.
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 27, 2019 7:36:59 GMT -6
jmo likes this
Post by Admin Horan on Dec 27, 2019 7:36:59 GMT -6
I think tying up and gagging Sue suggests they did not want to kill her--and maybe didn't. I think the evidence all shows she was killed later, by someone else, after the others left. I think they took Tina more or less as a hostage to keep Sue (and the boys) quiet. And the bloody shoeprints that look like Tina's don't go near Sue's body, only Johnny's. I think SHEILA is the one who covered Sue. Does that mean she also killed her/finished her off? The only person we KNOW benefitted from Sue's death was Sheila. And she knew she would before the murders happened. And she and her uncle Don lied about it to police. And in about 85 percent of cases where a victim is covered like that, the killer (or accomplice) is a woman.
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 29, 2019 23:20:47 GMT -6
Post by jmo on Dec 29, 2019 23:20:47 GMT -6
Well if Sheila's baby was born in early February she would have gotten pregnant around the beginning of May when she was living with her uncle Don. It's a little odd that Sheila and Don would both be lying about things (if they were/are). And, nobody ever talked about the murders to Sheila and Sheila never talked to the boys about it? I can't even imagine not talking about something as tragic as that.
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 30, 2019 9:07:01 GMT -6
Post by Admin Horan on Dec 30, 2019 9:07:01 GMT -6
Why would it be odd for Sheila and and her uncle to both lie to protect her? They both told police that Sue was "running" from her husband Jim. Sue's own sister gave a more detailed statement that Jim had KICKED Sue and the kids out--for the last time. How do we know which one is lying? Simple. Jim REFUSED to take the surviving kids back after Sue's death. And "somebody" called Jim from Cabin 28 a couple of weeks before the murders. When police asked Sheila who called Jim, she claimed, "I don't know." Really? REALLY??? Every one of the Sharp kids moped and moped and moped for their dad, but a call to his house was totally unknown to them?? Really. And how many COLLECT calls were made from Cabin 28 to Jim Sharp? One thing for Sue and Sheila to fight over would be the phone bill.
This lie about Sue "hiding from Jim" is extremely important because, not only did Sheila get to go back to Oregon to live near her baby after Sue died, but she KNEW that would happen BEFORE Sue was murdered. And sending cops on a wild goose chase to see if Jim had Tina could be called complicity in her kidnapping. Aaaalllll by itself, that's not enough to put Sheila in the gas chamber. But it's not the only fishy thing:
1. Don Davis arrived at Cabin 28 before 8:45 am Sunday morning. That means he left home before 8:30. Zonita Seabolt didn't even call police from the Albins cabin until 8:10ish. No one called Don from the Albins cabin. When police asked him what he was doing there, he told them he'd received a phone call from "a member of the family." He never said who. Why not? For one thing, it could only have been Sheila. If it had been one of the boys, then that means Don told him, "Go back to bed and pretend to be asleep." If it was from Tina, and he lied to police about it, then Don obstructed justice right there. And what other "member" of the family COULD have called him, out of sight of witnesses, at about, oh, say, 8:00 am? If not Sheila? Ooooooorrrr, maybe he lied about why he was there. "A member of the family" is the kind of Clintonesque answer a lawyer would script. Which raises the question--what was Don doing between 8:00 and 8:30, if not talking to a lawyer?
2. Don Davis told police that he and his wife drove out to Keddie for dinner Saturday night. But, the funny thing is, he claimed he didn't see or speak to Sue. What??? He didn't call and ask if she wanted to go with them? She lived less than 200 yards from the restaurant. He didn't drop by to say "Hi?" on the way home? He parked less than 100 yards from her house. He didn't call and ask "Can we bring you something from town?" His WIFE didn't make do any of these things? Really? Really.
3. Uncle Don immediately took the "hysterical" Sheila BACK TO HIS HOUSE. That was a serious mistake by police. They should NEVER have allowed her to leave Keddie until they had questioned her thoroughly. Feeling "sorry" for victims and their families is one of the biggest mistakes any investigator can make.
4. By the time she started answering questions, Sheila had been sedated and coached by her uncle--and possibly his lawyer. Her answers--the ones we know of--don't always align with the facts. And they very often differ from the statements of others. Our problem is, 95 percent of what she told police is still un-"leaked." But even those snippets often contradict information from the "Timelines" that she supposedly supplied. There is no doubt that those "timelines" are seriously compromised by whoever typed them up. We don't even know who that was.
5. One very serious discrepancy is over whose idea it was for Tina to break normal routing and spend Saturday night at home, instead of with the Seabolts. Any time any victim or suspect breaks their normal routine just before a felony is always a clue. Always. It's never ever note a clue. It seems Tina was the one who told the Seabolts that Sue said she couldn't sleep over that night. But that doesn't prove that Sue said that. It could have been TINA. It's weird, to say the least, that Sue would demand that Tina stay home in a house full of boys that night, when she usually spent Saturday nights with the Seabolts. If she was in a spat with Zonita, then why let the other daughter--who didn't seem to know how to keep her legs together--spend the night there, but not Tina? On the other hand, if TINA made that up, and made up an excuse to give Sue, then THAT means TINA was planning something. Sue usually slept on the couch, or at least fell asleep there for a good part of the night. That would have made it super easy for Justin to sneak down the hallway to the girls' bedroom. In his "hypnotized" statements, he clearly had detailed knowledge of that bedroom, including who slept in what bed. He wasn't psychic.
6. But, over the years, BOTH Sheila and Zonita change their stories. Now they say it was Zonita and Sheila and Alyssa who decided to have an "older girls" only sleepover. The problem with that--and again, any time ANYBODY changes their story, it's a 99 percent chance it's a lie--is that the Seabolt girls Tina's age stayed in the Seabolt house that night. Why not Tina? And why lie about it years later? It's obvious--if either Sue or Tina decided to break Tina's routine, then that's a clue to Tina's disappearance.
7. SHEILA is the ONLY source for the stories that: A. Justin went to town with them that morning to sign up for baseball. Justin said nothing about being with the Sharps that morning--only late that afternoon and then into the evening. That's important, because, Zonita once claimed she heard the "sounds of lovemaking" coming from Cabin 28 that morning, when Tina was left home--alone by Sue. If anyone was having sex in that house that morning, it was Tina and Justin. Who apparently conspired to spend the night together in the same house that night. And that might explain was Sue was in the girls bedroom, instead of on the couch, where Sheila herself said Sue usually slept. B. That Dana came home with them at noon Saturday, helped with the yardwork, and hitched back to town with Johnny after. That story is pretty hard to believe. For one thing, their friends told a different story. Why would SHEILA lie about it? To cover for where Dana (and maybe Johnny) really were that afternoon--getting things ready for a party that led to their deaths. One of Sheila's friends tried to make her own memory line up with Sheila's story, but it's clear she's correcting herself to fit Sheila's story, and not remembering any actual "yardwork" that day on her own. Zonita Seabolt was at least as nosy as Glenna Meeks, but she never said anything about the Sharps doing any "yardwork" that day. Neither did any of the Smartt's, including Justin. C. The claim that Sue "never hurt anybody." Sue had deeply hurt Sheila, Richard Meeks, and Mama Meeks over giving up Sheila's baby for adoption. Not to mention the baby.
8. Sheila's answer to every single question that might have been the slightest help to investigators in catching the murderers of her mother, brother, and sister was "I don't know. I don't know. I don't know." And once she got out of California and back to Oregon with her baby (more or less next door,) she was even less help. The funny thing is, in the video where she and her little brother tour Cabin 28 twenty some odd years later with a "psychic," her memory is razor-sharp. That's amazing, because she herself spent less than eight weeks of her life in that house. And you can hear her repeatedly giggling.
In summary--there is a pile of evidence that Sheila lied, lied, lied. And zero evidence she ever told the truth. Until somebody show us some evidence to the contrary. Oh, I know, there is a laundry list of EXCUSES for why Sheila and her Uncle Don lied, prevaricated, stalled, stonewalled, and misled. But no evidence they told the truth. The net result--a pile of corpses, and no justice.
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 30, 2019 17:07:51 GMT -6
via mobile
kmik likes this
Post by raemen2 on Dec 30, 2019 17:07:51 GMT -6
Personally, I don’t find it that unusual that Don and his wife might not stop by while they were in Keddie. I lived about 10 miles from my father’s house, when I found myself in his neighborhood sometimes I would drop in, sometimes I would not, just depended.
I do, given the devastating circumstances, find Don’s statement that a “family” member called downright creepy and unnecessarily evasive, if, indeed it was Sheila that called. For cripesakes why wouldn’t Shiela call her uncle!! So why so cryptic?! Maybe Tina called, not good. Maybe Jim Sharp called Uncle Don after receiving a phone call... still not looking good. That bit of information could screw up the timeline given to police?
Tina not spending the night: gut feeling that Tina wanted to be back at 28 for her own reasons, gut feeling that at least 2 kids at 28 wanted to be settled in at 10pm so the adult in the house had NO reason to be up too late that night.
I think both Tina and Justin left 28 at some point that evening. Justin is at least in part being truthful in what he witnessed. However, I think Tina left on her own accord. I mean why not take Justin too, he clearly witnessed at least some of what was going on. If you’re grabbing Tina as collateral why not grab Justin too.... unless they are both guilty and Tina was the one who decided to run. As for Greg, he probably was asleep. Maybe Ricky too or he did a really good job at pretending to be asleep.
Agree, a lot of lies and omissions with a smattering of truth here and there.
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 30, 2019 17:31:58 GMT -6
Post by kmik on Dec 30, 2019 17:31:58 GMT -6
The Shaver Report said that Mrs. Seabolts phone was disconnected so she had the owner of the Keddie resort call the police and someone called the brother, Davis. Don said a family member called him so maybe one of the owners called the police and Don Davis for Sheila - since I'm assuming while someone was making the calls Sheila and Jaime were getting the boys out?? I know Pat Dorris said Donna called her because Sheila had called Donna - but who knows?
I don't find it odd either that Don went out to Keddie and didn't stop to see Sue - and why stop after leaving- it was around 11:00?
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 30, 2019 19:43:42 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by raemen2 on Dec 30, 2019 19:43:42 GMT -6
Sheila states in the initial report that she went WITH the Seabolts AFTER the phone call (s) to look in 28’s window. So did she go with Zonita to the Albins? Did all the Zeabolt children run up to the Albins with Zonita? Sheila comes back to the house hysterically claiming there is blood and bodies in 28 and the rest of the family just continues to get ready for church, probably not. Zonita sends Sheila and Jamie over to 28 to look for survivors, while she runs to call police, probably not. Do the Albins sit there and have coffee after Zonita calls police about bloody murder at 28, probably not. Does Zonita send/allow her 16 year old son into a crime scene, probably not. Was Uncle Don called at 8:10/8:15, probably not.
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 30, 2019 21:32:37 GMT -6
Post by kmik on Dec 30, 2019 21:32:37 GMT -6
Shaver report:
From Sheila's statement
.
From Zonita's statement
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 30, 2019 22:10:27 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by raemen2 on Dec 30, 2019 22:10:27 GMT -6
So it seems that Sheila didn’t make a direct request for her Uncle to be called. Surely, Zonita would remember that. Sounds like Zonita assumed since Don was there, some one had to have called him or how else would he be there. Would the Albins have had the sense to call Don, maybe. But the timeline of those calls just don’t jive with his arrival at 28
|
|
|
Tina
Dec 30, 2019 23:31:59 GMT -6
Post by kmik on Dec 30, 2019 23:31:59 GMT -6
How would we know unless we had their actual interviews? I'm not sure I'd be able to think clearly in a situation like this and I'm 49 years old so I can't imagine if I was only 14. My questions, as far as Sheila or Don, would be what they didn't tell police for fear of making their family look bad.
|
|
camfaults
New Member
Researching cold cases of California.
Posts: 46
|
Post by camfaults on Dec 31, 2019 0:59:33 GMT -6
Shaver report:
From Sheila's statement
.
From Zonita's statement
Sheila's story of finding the bodies and the removal of the boys from the cabin also varied in her book, How to Survive Your Visit to Earth (2012).
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Dec 31, 2019 6:47:11 GMT -6
Exactly. According to Zonita, Zonita asked Mrs Albin to call police. But, according to Don, it was NOT Mrs Albin who called him. According to him, it was a member of the family. Not Mrs Albin.
So, who was it? Which member of the family? Sheila? Tina? Ricky? Greg? There's no one else. And no LEGITIMATE reason to give police a lawyerly answer. Only fishy ones.
Neither Sheila, nor Don, nor Ricky, nor Greg have ever been the slightest help to police. I know, I know, they have a bottomless peanut bag of excuses for not being helpful. They don't need us to make up more excuses for them. What they need is for someone to beat them with rubber hoses until they start helping.
That's my expert opinion and advice. Do NOT let that stop you guys from continuing to discuss. I could be wrong. But until someone shows me EVIDENCE I'm wrong, I'm going to keep saying it--Sheila, Chuck, Henry, and Justin are THE prime suspects. ALL of the evidence points to them. NONE of the evidence points in ANY other direction.
Now, it is of course highly possible that at one time, a fistful of files from PCSO and CA DOJ would have proven me wrong. But based on conversations with Gamberg, I'd say those files are loooooooooong gone from PCSO. And you know who is 1000 percent to blame for that? "Sheriff" Greg Hagwood. HE'S the one, ON CAMERA, letting the PRIME SUSPECT rummage around the Keddie Room unsupervised. At best. I'd bet credits to navy beans he HELPED carry that box of files out to Josh's car.
I mean, what a lucky break for Sheila! Her cousin (whose statement to police is one of the ones I'd love to see) "just happens" to be taking a class from a "documentary" film teacher who gets her access to the evidence that proves his student's cousin guilty?
Hang in there, Sheriff! McNarie can't get you on TV any more. But I'll see what I can do...
|
|
|
Post by tinkryz5 on Jan 4, 2020 10:36:34 GMT -6
I believe in you Admin Horan. I really think they're involved.
|
|
kay
Junior Member
Posts: 94
|
Post by kay on Jan 4, 2020 13:01:53 GMT -6
I don’t mean to be the devils advocate here but this is just speculation, could her changing some of her stories be something psychological, like she truly doesn’t remember or her memory is distorted about taking her brothers out and etc? I mean don’t get me wrong, her story has clearly changed quite a few times. But some of the stuff she’s changed her story about isn’t exactly something that would be a big deal for her to change, like if she ran back to the Seabolts or if she was taken by the younger Seabolt boy? I just don’t understand why some of these stories were changed when there was really no need to change them.
Another thing I noticed in sheilas book is she specifically says Jamie walked OVER the bodies in search of survivors. How do we know his boot print isn’t somewhere at the scene, or he didn’t unintentionally tamper the evidence?
I truly just feel like maybe 50% or so of the lies people are telling, don’t change the case what so ever and there’s no reason to lie about it. So the question is: WHY
|
|
|
Tina
Jan 4, 2020 20:45:09 GMT -6
kay likes this
Post by kmik on Jan 4, 2020 20:45:09 GMT -6
I believe (just my opinion) that she told the truth of how she discovered them in 1981. Most definitely the trauma of what she saw combined with what she found out later were what she told in later years. As for what she told in the book I think she and her husband threw the book together very quickly on the heels of the last documentary. I don't believe that Sheila told the police anything that might make her family look bad (in her defense she probably felt that she was protecting their memory but that doesn't help to solve murders). I've said this for years and may be oh so wrong but she is the only one who has ever seemed to want to see this solved.
The story she told in her book of Jaime going inside stepping over bodies - who knows- maybe her husband convinced her to embellish that part? Jamie first said he went in the back door only to change his story to say he never went inside. There was no need to step over the bodies since there was plenty of walking room between the bodies and the wall/furniture.
It's been years since Karis and I got hooked on this case. Since then and a whole lot of going over the info we have just confirms to me that a lot of people in the documentaries were weaving a whole lot of speculation together with very old memories. Regardless of what the documentaries got wrong I still love to watch them!
|
|