Tina as the first victim

theories and spec; back up posts w/ reasoning and evidence/examples

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby dmac » Wed May 21, 2014 12:22 am

The only time limit they had was between when they walked in and when they believed it was time to go. In this case, they seem not only familiar with the inside and outside layout of Cabin 28 (and the surrounding environs), but the habits of neighbors and train workers. The most trustworthy accounts have the call going into PCSO dispatch at shortly before 8am, so that would mean Sheila went home around 745 am, well after dawn.

Some Keddieites were routinely up before dawn (note Mr Seabolt was already off getting firewood, and that Marty himself missed his appointment with Mr Meeks for an early-Sunday firewood hunt), so I would guess the initial criminals were out of 28 between 4-5 am.


I have a new and trustworthy source tonight who gave me insights on PCSO's perspective on the victims and the case. This info dates back before Hagwood, to his predecessor, Bergstrand.

At the time of the murders, according to Sheila, Tina would often crawl behind the couch just to be close to Sue. She would lie in the space behind the couch, with Sue sitting or laying on the couch, and poke her head out the side by 'Sue's Corner' to watch TV from under the table. That is totally believable.

PCSO believed Sue was on the couch and Tina behind it, watching Love Boat, when the killers came in. They believed Tina covered Sue, and the killers came back and found Tina and took her. This, of course, doesn't jibe with the boys' memories that Tina came home and went to bed during Love Boat, then the boys stayed up watching Fantasy Island with Sue (which came on after LB), then went to bed and talked for a while before falling asleep. The boys also said Sue was wearing her robe, which was found hanging from her bedroom closet door. Plus her glasses were on her nightstand, and she needed them to watch TV. Plus blood was on her bed, on Tina's bed, on clothes, on the floor, on the wall, and on the door. So, if this was 25 years on when these opinions were in play, PCSO still thought 1+1=11

I'm hoping this source builds into a torrent of new insights, and I wish I could discuss some of the other things I've already learned.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby Cheshire » Wed May 21, 2014 3:33 am

EDITED because I had to go back and re-read that twice. So this is something Sheila told police at the time, that she never mentioned on any of the boards? I don't recall seeing that info on any of the old boards either. Could account for the couch being pulled away from the wall, if it was done by the cops looking to see if she was still hiding there.
Cheshire
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:34 pm
Has thanked: 155 times
Been thanked: 112 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby dmac » Wed May 21, 2014 12:59 pm

The couch is seen in the earliest CS photos with the left side (as you sit on it) shoved completely up against the wall. There's only a few inches of clean carpet exposed, which gives an idea of the small distance the couch was originally away from the wall- like any normal house, just a few inches. Tina may well have been small enough to crawl into that tiny space behind the couch, particularly if the couch was closer to the wall at the top of the back cushions than at the base.

The police had to pull the couch and end table away from the wall to remove the wall panel from "Sue's Corner", which had blood on it. That also appears to be when they found Johnny's wallet on the floor behind the couch, directly behind where Sue normally sat. They then put everything back in place and took more photos.

EDIT: In looking at the photos, this image best shows how far the couch was away from the wall when the crimes happened. It's taken after the wall chunk has been removed and the couch replaced, and the couch is again shoved directly against the wall, leaving no gap. You can see the back of the couch was straight, touching the wall at the base as well as the top. You can also see how the bloodstains on the floor stop where the couch was prior to it being shoved against the wall during the crimes, with Sue later placed on top of that newly-exposed carpet.

Is that space big enough for Tina? I'm not saying the couch was always that close to the wall, but it certainly was when most of the blood was shed that night.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby Indigo » Fri May 23, 2014 10:08 am

This just breaks my heart if it's true that Tina would sneak back there just to be close to her mom. It wouldn't surprise me in the least. And we'd never hear it from Sheila because it puts such an unflattering light on what a wonderful mother and close family they had. But..... looking at the photo of the couch placement before it was shoved against the wall, that's an awfully narrow area for even someone as small as Tina. I think she could have done it - but if anyone was on the couch at the time, they would have to be aware of it. Which then brings into question the possibility that Sue was very well aware that Tina would 'sneak' back there (and watch tv) and let her do it instead of having Tina join her on the sofa or send her elsewhere.
O, what a tangled web we weave; When first we practice to deceive! ~
Sir Walter Scott
User avatar
Indigo
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: Standin' on a corner in Winslow, AZ (it's such a fine sight to see)
Has thanked: 278 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby Chichibcc » Fri May 23, 2014 7:02 pm

I'm guessing this was a habit that Tina engaged in so often, that Sue probably didn't give it a second thought, unfortunately-although she certainly should have.

That was undoubtedly an uncomfortable position to be lying in, wedged between the couch and wall like that, especially if she laid that way for hours on end while watching TV. I can't imagine being that affection/attention starved :(
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby sparkplug » Sat Jun 07, 2014 1:38 pm

From day one, I've always thought that drugs were involved. One scenario that plays over and over in my head was that Tina was taken to "lead" the killers where drugs were stashed that the boys found out about. Only speculation, of course.
sparkplug
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:06 am
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby Chichibcc » Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:10 pm

But they could've forced Johnny and/or Dana to do that for them, by confronting them elsewhere--why ambush the cabin and get other people involved unnecessarily, therefore complicating things even more?
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby Cheshire » Mon Jun 09, 2014 9:10 am

I believe that Bo and company were involved with drug trafficking, either in partnership with law enforcement officials high on the food chain, or maybe just with those officials looking the other way because Bo had a protected status of some sort. While it's possible the boys and/or Sue stumbled into learning something about that, and that became a motive, I'm starting to think that the murders started as Marty getting out of control with Sue, and then Bo (and POI #3, #4?) stepped in and staged the scene to make it look more like the work of a random mass murderer. And I've always thought Tina was taken as leverage somehow, possibly to keep people quiet, under threat they would kill her if they weren't obeyed. Justin believed she was "down by the river" and wouldn't have been so frantic about getting them to look for her if he thought she was already dead.
Cheshire
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:34 pm
Has thanked: 155 times
Been thanked: 112 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby dmac » Sun Jun 15, 2014 3:17 pm

Whatever the reason for the coverup, whether it be the local aspect (one theory being LE were protecting themselves and a local kingpin, protecting Gary Mollath's bad name, etc) or a much larger enterprise (the Iran-Contra Bush/Reagan cocaine trade), it's abundantly clear that elements of PCSO and CA-DOJ conspired to illegally quash any proper investigation into the murders of four innocents.

Namecallers galore can stupidly mock those of us who know there was and is a criminal conspiracy in covering up the Keddie Murders, but no matter why there was a coverup, no matter the angle, it was big enough that California DOJ were involved at the onset of the case with the sole duty of derailing any proper look at the killers.

    con·spir·a·cy
    [kuhn-spir-uh-see]
    noun, plural con·spir·a·cies.

    1.the act of conspiring.
    2.an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
    3.a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
    4.Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
    5.any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

After spelling it out for the learning impaired, the Keddie Murders is two crimes: the actual murders, and then the criminal conspiracy perpetrated by Law Enforcement to NOT solve the case and go after Marty, Bo, Loon, Dee, Tony, et al...
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby sparkplug » Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:44 pm

Chichibcc wrote:But they could've forced Johnny and/or Dana to do that for them, by confronting them elsewhere--why ambush the cabin and get other people involved unnecessarily, therefore complicating things even more?



Good point, but these fools were nuts and not very smart (from what I've read about their past history).

Thinking the boys had stolen drugs, and that the drugs were in the house, they could have waited for them to return to the cabin. By doing that, they though they could recover the drugs rather quickly. They followed them inside (mom asleep) and Dana started to resist. Shit hit the fan and hammers, unknown objects and knives started to fly. Tina knew something about where the drugs were (or so they though) and they took her in the attemp to recover their stash. They either recovered the drugs and killed Tina or killed her either way to keep things hush hush.
sparkplug
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:06 am
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby Chichibcc » Sat Aug 02, 2014 12:30 pm

Why would Tina have been suspected of knowing where any drugs were? If Johnny had hidden some, I wouldn't necessarily see him confiding in her.

Plus, having his own room in the basement downstairs would have limited the chances of anyone in the family discovering them (depending on how well they were hidden, and how much time, if any, the other Sharp children spent down there).
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Tina and the couch

Postby dmac » Sat Aug 23, 2014 2:37 pm

Back to the prospect of Tina getting behind the couch. As we know, it was shoved up against the wall when found by LE, so was there sufficient space for Tina prior to it being moved?

Last night I let Photoshop determine an answer:


B-9_54_Sues_Cornerb.jpg


B-9_54_Sues_Cornerd.jpg

That appears to be a shift of around 12 inches, which is sufficient a space for little Tina to crawl into.

As an aside, I know I've said that the gold ball appears to be a ball foot for the couch, but it's apparently not the case. It's not under the arm of the couch, and it's too far forward, so count that gold ball as yet another unknown object. The yellow and white cardboard packet appears to be a used Kodak 110 film carton. The front of the packaging was Kodak yellow, and the back was white, with instructions.

310xZLvDZyL.jpg
You must be a member of the Keddie Forum with 15 approved posts to view the files attached to this post.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Tina as the first victim

Postby wonderer » Sat Jan 17, 2015 5:13 pm

As part of my working theory.... I think Tina was thought to be at the seabolts as that is where she is most Fridays. Her presence could of been a surprise to the killers. Her removal was possibly due to evidence of assult or the screams heard were Tina escaping and they decided to remove her at that point in case someone showed up.
wonderer
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:53 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Previous

Return to just speculatin'

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest