Post by Helen Dagner on Mar 29, 2011 0:07:27 GMT -5
What would be the harm in taking one last definitive, objective look at John’s alibi(s)? He apparently had a passport showing he was out of the country during the time of one of the murders. Could he have killed three of the four kids and one of the cases not be related? Surely it was possible in the late 70’s to get a fake passport. How was the passport information checked out? Was the passport taken at face value? Did anyone check to see if the father (who may have had the same name) had been traveling during that time? Is it POSSIBLE that this John had a fake passport and could be the killer? I know LE must hate these types of websites, but really, wouldn’t it be possible for you to tell Helen how/why John was eliminated as a suspect in the past? The cases are 35 years old, will probably never be solved with 100% certainty, and there can’t be a lot of hot tips coming in. If John is not still a viable suspect, why not reveal how he was eliminated (at least to Helen)?
I know there are a million arm-chair detectives out there and LE has had to deal with almost all of them in the OCCK case. However, while the child porn angle initially makes sense, it would mean more than one or two people were probably involved, making it that much more likely that someone would talk or slip up over the years. Of course if these cases were related to that industry, photographic evidence may exist, which is probably the only way to prove who killed these kids. But what if that’s not what happened?
It may seem crazy to LE that a website like Helen’s exists, but these crimes affected many, many people—in hugely life-altering ways. Not only were the crimes unimaginable, but there were no answers. That’s why some of us ask if it is possible that the focus on the child porn industry, like the focus on the blue gremlin in 1977, is off-base?
Again, no offense is intended to you or any LE. The OCCK case is unlike any other. But this is a decades-old case and surely no harm could come of either putting to rest once and for all the John theory, or admitting that it is possible it could have been someone like John or John himself, but it can’t be proven and that’s why you still have to look at other possible suspects.
Xxxxxxx
I know there are a million arm-chair detectives out there and LE has had to deal with almost all of them in the OCCK case. However, while the child porn angle initially makes sense, it would mean more than one or two people were probably involved, making it that much more likely that someone would talk or slip up over the years. Of course if these cases were related to that industry, photographic evidence may exist, which is probably the only way to prove who killed these kids. But what if that’s not what happened?
It may seem crazy to LE that a website like Helen’s exists, but these crimes affected many, many people—in hugely life-altering ways. Not only were the crimes unimaginable, but there were no answers. That’s why some of us ask if it is possible that the focus on the child porn industry, like the focus on the blue gremlin in 1977, is off-base?
Again, no offense is intended to you or any LE. The OCCK case is unlike any other. But this is a decades-old case and surely no harm could come of either putting to rest once and for all the John theory, or admitting that it is possible it could have been someone like John or John himself, but it can’t be proven and that’s why you still have to look at other possible suspects.
Xxxxxxx