r/springfieldthree

Thank you all for the interesting discussions the past few days. I think the anniversary of this terrible crime has many of us thinking, and several people brought up points I had never considered before. It's a testament to how confusing this case remains.

I've said it several times, and I'll repeat it. Anything is possible with regard to this case. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the perpetrator was someone completely off the radar; that is, if we ever get any resolution at all.

With all that said, here is my ranking of current theories of who was responsible from most likely to least.

1. One or more of the grave robbers, plus an additional, unknown perpetrator (s).
2. Associate of grave robbers, with no direct involvement of the three grave robbers.
3. Relative/Friend/lover/associate of Sherrill's, who had a beef with her for some reason.
4. Relative/Friend/boyfriend/associate of Susie
5. Stalker of Susie and/or Sherrill
6. Relative/Stalker/boyfriend/former boyfriend of Stacy
7. Someone, or someones, from the graduation parties, arising from a recent altercation
8. Contractor/worker related to the recent move into the Delmar residence
9. Neighborhood peeping Tom
10. Someone unknown living in the neighborhood
11. Random perpetrator, possible serial killer, perhaps spotted them on the way home
12. High school friend group

I think of Bartt Streeter and the McCall family, who have lived so long without answers. I would like to know where the remains are for the sake of those families.

However, I suspect the remains are on private property, and finding them would lead directly to the perpetrator. That is why they have never been revealed.

This isn’t a finger pointing post, it’s simply trying to clarify some things here and ask a “why” or two.

We know that Janis calls the Kirby house, speaks to another Kirby daughter, and is told that Stacy ended up at Suzie’s.

We know that Janis eventually caught up with Janelle at the “water slide” and asked Janelle why she didn’t call her (Janis) and Janelle replied that she didn’t want to worry her. This can be heard right from Janis in a modern interview on YouTube.

Before that confrontation Janelle and Mike had already been to 1717 E. Delmar and Janelle had called another friend and her mother and checked out places such as a sub shop. Why was the McCall residence completely discounted as to a possible location as to where the girls could be?

There’s the longstanding thought that Stacy may have had a plan or two that she didn’t want Janis knowing about, but if Janelle is getting worried and starting to actively search (by phone and in person) places where the women could be why is the McCall home not considered?

I could be missing a detail here that would do away with this, but still.

As I post this, it’s been thirty-four years to the moment when the girls were likely spending their last hours with their respective families. I used to think, if I had the chance to be an observer to simply know a truth, I’d pick the grassy knoll in Dallas or the L.A. Ambassador Hotel pantry. I think now I’d pick across the street from 1717 E. Delmar. Truly the most baffling case in our times.

I dont belive they were directly involved with the abduction. But they may have unknowingly helped a telephone worker with a crime. A dentist office employee noticed 3 men leave a van in close proximity of the delmar residences.

I read where Sherill and Susie had only just recently moved into the house they lived at like 6 weeks or so before they went missing. I’m just wondering if maybe this was a case of mistaken identity where the perpetrator(s) thought the previous owner still lived there or didn’t know that they had sold the house to someone else?

I have made this point in various threads but I'll make it here as a distinct post and I will add one extra consideration.

I do not know where the 3MW's bodes are and this is just a speculative exercise. But frankly, so are most of the viewpoints expressed on this specific aspect, in my view. I am aware of course of the two police digs and and various other locations that have been mentioned. I don't dismiss any of them. Except that I consider Cox Hospital to be very unlikely.

I do think it reasonable to say that the killer wanted very much to not be caught and acted accordingly. For that reason I think he may well have sought out a location which provided:

• Very short journey- a matter of minutes
• Long term security of the bodies never being discovered
• Site that has easy access
• Minimum work required
• No likelihood of being interrupted or observed at the critical time
• Minimum surviving signs to attract subsequent attention

He has two such places each about on average 4 mins drive away from 1717. These are:

1. Hazelwood cemetery
2. Maple Park Cemetery.

Who looks for dead bodies in a cemetery?

Both cemeteries appear to have offered access.

He doesn't need to dig graves. He just needs to access a mausoleum -the older kind, the ones with shelves for simply laying caskets on rather than the more recent ones with effectively a drawer to house the casket. He needs to access a walk-in mausoleum that has a lockable door -either mortice lock or padlock - not the cement sealed slab at the front type - too much time and clearly noticeable once disturbed. Guess where you find the right kind? The older approximately central areas of both cemeteries- the areas that are most private and least overlooked. Both have drivable wide roads/pathways right in deep. A van on low beams isn't going to be noticed by residents 200 meters away at 4am especially with mature trees in those areas further reducing visibility. More especially if driving a green or other natural-toned vehicle.

The victims were petite. Their bodies could well be added into a casket that is still structurally intact but the original bodies have decomposed or effectively mummified and require much less space. If he had to he could remove the skeletal remains and relocate them elsewhere in the cemetery (like go to a recent grave, pull back the fresh turf, dig down a couple of feet in the still fresh earth, deposit the skull and bones and fill in, and replace the turf. Nothing noticeable remains. Or he could just leave those bones inside the mausoleum). The 3MW's remains are then inside caskets that may last several more decades before collapsing and when they do, they reveal mortal remains- there is nothing there to reveal that they belong to the wrong person. Jewelry etc having been removed. The door is locked again and the killer leaves.

How does he gain access to the crypt? Well he could break a padlock and take a chance and replace it with another old looking padlock and hope no one notices. That requires pre-planning. He would 'ideally' have done research or reconnaissance in advance and selected a crypt that hasn't been used for years or there is no continuing family line or they have moved away. Again that requires pre-planning but the only constant feeling I've had about this case across the decades is that it was probably never going to be random.

Back to the lock. Suppose it's a mortice lock or he doesn't want to break the padlock. Where were keys for those mausoleums usually kept back in 1992? I would say most likely at the funeral directors an/or on site. There only seems to have been one small building at Maple Park back then. A small stone building serving as a maintenance shed and an office. If I wanted to break in there and get a key I'd want to make it look like a garden variety burglary. Take the key. Do the horrible deed, then return the key and take something obvious. Kind of like the reported event in the SNL of Wednesday 10th June: 'Maple Park Cemetery, 300 W Grand, between 5pm Friday and 9a.m. Monday. Taken 22-inch blade chainsaw.' I wonder if that was ever solved and had a 'more innocent' explanation?

If I had been with SPD one of the tracks I would have wanted to explore would be to go to both cemeteries, get a list of walk in mausoleums meeting the criteria outlined above and check them out. Unfortunately now, all these years later, every skeleton in the right size ranges would have to be dental or DNA tested to establish identity.

 

I feel like we could solve this case if we went through the publicly available evidence, piece by piece and don’t exclude people until they are excludable. Chances are something like 92% that they were abducted and/or murdered by someone close, most likely an intimate partner of one of the 3. Start with intimate partners and family and work out from there. There are plenty of people who probably have motive, out of those folks, so did they have opportunity? Most of the serial killer types that people try to link to this case probably would have taken the money from the purses. Not taking the money feels really personal to me. The women would not have left the house voluntarily without their purses unless they were forced to.

My hunch is still that it was a cop or someone pretending to be a cop, because of the purses and the porch light. It reminds me of the Golden State Killer, especially with multiple victims, except that I don’t think he ever removed people from their house. Having driven past the house, it’s in a place that gets a decent amount of traffic, day and night. That was something that I was not expecting. So, removing them from the house seems like a huge risk of witnesses or possibly even interference and arrest. To me, this seems like something planned, thought out, and the person or persons had high confidence of success.

What could have caused this? It wasn't damaged in previous photos with Suzie and Sherrill. Do you think a tall van could have squashed it? It also wasn't far from the globe.

https://www.google.com/search?vsrid=CI2Y0Yenhpi9IRACGAEiJDdiN2RjZDY2LTA3YWMtNDA4OS1hMjlkLTBhNWMwOWYxMmEwNTJ7IgJkeigQQnMKLmxmZS1kdW1teTo3N2FkNTE2MC1hNzFkLTRiM2MtOGY4Zi1lNGRmM2UzM2ZmZjkSQQo_L2Jucy9kei9ib3JnL2R6L2Jucy9sZW5zLWZyb250ZW5kLWFwaS9wcm9kLmxlbnMtZnJvbnRlbmQtYXBpLzI5OO3diseY8ZQD&vsint=CAIqDAoCCAcSAggKGAEgATojChYNAAAAPxUAAAA_HQAAgD8lAACAPzABEOUDGJwDJQAAgD8&udm=26&lns_mode=un&source=lns.web.gisivli&vsdim=485,412&gsessionid=4G2saRks_zyJM5DRUzNARyiKZeTsQKTrWtT7mAviywjE79fV0u-l4w&lsessionid=TUtBJD6K4UZug5pqQDJLoutrrzLVHKgx1O7CZSur-r_r6TklmApY3w&lns_surface=19&authuser=0&qsubts=1780700031510&biw=384&bih=689&ved=0CBYQh6cGahgKEwiY5JXwl_GUAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQpwE&tbnid=VzJ2-ZIQ5jtU4M&ictx=2

https://www.reddit.com/r/springfieldthree/comments/1dx5r1s/ive_seen_some_say_that_they_cant_see_the_globe_in/

This case desperately needs new people to look at it. I can only imagine the records and all tips piled up over the years that exist. I wonder if something important was missed early on that made this case go cold. But yes, that’s all I’ve got.

One of my theories about the Springfield Three has less to do with some giant organized conspiracy and more to do with the psychology of criminal circles, especially gang associated people and the way they justify violence.

From what I understand about gangs, prison culture, and criminal organizations, they almost always wrap their actions in some kind of “righteous” excuse. They’ll say it’s about loyalty, respect, punishment, or protecting the group. But a lot of the time, that’s just the narrative they use to justify darker motives underneath.

That’s why I’ve wondered whether something similar could have happened in the Springfield Three case.

My theory is that word spread around local criminal associates that Suzie was supposedly “snitching” regarding the grave robber situation and people connected to the Galloping Goose circle. Maybe it wasn’t even the main grave robbers themselves. Maybe it was just somebody on the outside, an associate, a hanger-on, somebody who overheard things through the grapevine.

In criminal circles, rumors alone can become dangerous.

I could imagine somebody hearing: “Yeah, this girl’s talking. She’s a snitch!!!” “She could cause problems.”

And in that environment, the person convinces himself he’s carrying out some kind of “street justice.” That’s the lie gangs and criminal cultures often tell themselves. They turn revenge into “honor.” They turn intimidation into “respect.” They turn cruelty into “business.”

But underneath that justification, the real motive may have been far uglier and more personal.

I’ve wondered if one of these men may have already noticed Suzie before, maybe met her once somewhere around town, maybe developed an unhealthy sexual fixation on her. In a place like that social scene, people knew of each other. Suzie and her mother weren’t invisible people.

So in this theory, the “snitch” narrative becomes more of an excuse than the true motive.

The mentality becomes: “We’re going over there because she’s a snitch.”

But underneath it, maybe somebody really wanted power, control, sexual domination, or violence. Maybe the original intent was intimidation. Maybe things escalated once they realized Stacy was there too. Maybe panic and loss of control turned it into something even worse.

That’s what I mean when I talk about gang hypocrisy and criminal rationalization. The public reason inside the group is always framed as loyalty, justice, or respect. But underneath, the actual motivations can be ego, sadism, sexual obsession, rage, or the thrill of power.

To me, that possibility feels more believable than some elaborate mafia-style conspiracy. Sometimes terrible crimes happen because dangerous people convince themselves they’re acting for a “cause,” when really they’re just acting on their darkest impulses

Also, I think they were recieving phone threats before hand. I have wondered if sherrill picks up the phone one day out of frustration, and said "look, yall best leave Suzie alone or we will call the cops and tell them about (insert highly incriminating GG gang secrets that suzie heard from Dusty.)

I think that one nailed the coffin shut.

Let's not forget, The APCO sighting introduces the possibility that the danger started earlier that night . With a phone call, a threat, or an attempt at intimidation that spiraled completely out of control.