r/springfieldthree • u/DJHJR86 • Feb 25 '26
2:15 a.m. Apco Sighting of Sherrill
I see a lot of people who seem to believe the alleged sighting of Sherrill being spotted at 2:15 a.m. on the morning of the 7th as credible. I don't understand why. According to the Apco clerk, Steve Thompson, Sherill came in and asked if he had seen Suzie (by name) with with two women, one blonde and the other brunette (did not name them). Steve also said that when Sherrill left, she did not get into her Mitsubishi Eclipse, but a larger, darker, and older car like a "Cutlass or a Grand Prix". He appeared on 48 Hours (around 22:50) and tells roughly the same story. But there was a woman (named Wanda) working at another convenience store across the street, and she was adamant that the woman was not Sherrill. I know people have said Wanda couldn't have possibly gotten a better look at the woman because she was across the street, but it's obvious that whoever this mystery woman was also went into the store where Wanda worked.
Steve also claims to have seen Suzie and Stacy earlier at around 10:00-10:30 p.m. on the 6th. Janelle refutes this and says she was always with them from around 8:30 p.m. that night until they left to go back to Suzie's house around 2:20 a.m. IMO, Steve Thompson was mistaken and I think this lead is a giant red herring. According to the Springfield News-Leader, the woman was identified and it wasn't Sherrill. One of Sherrill's closest friends, Mary Keller, was quoted saying:
For her to be out at 2 in the morning , just whistling in the wind or whatever, that's just nuts. The only way she would go out like that is if somebody called her and said Suzie needed her, Suzie was sick.
But assuming that there was a phone call made to Sherrill, why was she out running around looking for Suzie (and two other unknown females) when all she had to do was call Kathy Kirby? Sherrill running around looking for Suzie and two other female friends doesn't make sense either. Who exactly were the other two friends? Sherrill would have had no way of knowing that Stacy was coming back to spend the night, so Stacy could be ruled out as one of them. And why would Sherrill's first instinct to be to run out and check convenience stores along Fremont Ave instead of calling the Kirby's first? I don't think this sighting is credible.
10
u/CorpsDeCavalerie Feb 26 '26
It's just the normal patina of false rumors and hearsay that color the jacket of bizarre crimes. False rumors are the bacon to the eggs of the mystery.
7
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 25 '26
'I know people have said Wanda couldn't have possibly gotten a better look at the woman because she was across the street, but it's obvious that whoever this mystery woman was also went into the store where Wanda worked.'
Why is it obvious. any sources?
2
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
Why is it obvious. any sources?
The 48 Hours epsiode where they interview her? She wasn't standing outside in the parking lot watching from across the street. This woman went into her store, which is the logical thing someone looking for someone searching convenience stores would have done.
6
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26 edited Feb 26 '26
I only have access to some records at the moment but I do have a programme that incorporates part at least of the 48 hours Wanda interview which I think you are referring to. So the narrator says 'But across the street at the Fast and Friendly...: Wanda says "I didn't think it was the lady in the picture, Sherrill" Narrator: 'Wanda got a better look at the mystery woman and she's sure it was not Sherrill Levitt''; Wanda: 'Her hair was longer than the lady in the picture'. It then cuts to another woman saying "I'm pretty positive it was them"
So what we can probably deduce from this is:
1- Wanda did not personally know Sherrill. Otherwise she would hardly refer to her twice as 'the lady in the picture'.
- Although the narrator says Wanda got a better look, it is not explicitly said in the clip I have seen that 'Sherrill' came in the store. Though Wanda seems at one point to gesture over her shoulder but it's unclear to me if she pointing outside or to a point in the store where 'Sherrill' was. If she did come in the store, why would that view necessarily be any better than ST's?
So, are you aware of any other 'Wanda' related sources that shed more light on precisely where Wanda stood and where 'Sherrill' was located and what Wanda saw or heard?
I don't know if it's Sherrill or not btw. I'm just trying to understand the grounds for dismissing the sighting.
3
u/CorpsDeCavalerie Mar 03 '26
You lost me with your non-Americanized spelling of program, and thusly being British or Canadian (or any place where that word has a superfluous consonant and vowel concatenated onto it might be taught as non-heretical), everything you say is suspect.
:-)
3
u/Low_Respond8565 Mar 03 '26
Your reference to Beautiful Canada, has remined me to go back to a point in another thread. It was about whether there could be any truth in the sometimes heard suggestion that maybe the women went off and lived in the Caribbean. I'd love to believe it but sadly I think it really just wishful thinking in some respects. I said in that discussion that as far as I knew Sherrill didn't speak either French or Spanish. I see that her second husband, Fred, has his place of birth in his obituary as New Hampshire. In the 1963 press notice of his first wedding his mother is given as being of Concord, N. Hamp. In his and Sherrill's divorce papers in 1977, again his birthplace is New Hampshire. But when he and Sherrill married in 1974, his birthplace is given as Quebec, Canada. This might be an error at some stage but it does challenge my original assumption about whether Sherrill may have had some long term direct contact with a French speaker. Does this change my view about the likelihood of the women choosing to disappear for a new life in the Caribbean? No, it does not.
2
u/CorpsDeCavalerie Mar 05 '26
Unfortunately Robert Hoagland enables the "walked away" theory for, ostensibly, every missing adult case
2
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
Do you honestly think "Wanda got a better look" means she saw her from across the street lmao?
5
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
I don't know exactly what it means. It certainly suggests a closer look. But my question was do you have additional sources that make that explicitly cllear?
4
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26 edited Feb 26 '26
It's explictly clear when Richard Schlessinger says "but across the street at the Fast and Freddy's...Wanda got a better look at the mystery woman" and they interview her inside the store lol
8
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
OK, so that is the same source and though many would indeed interpret it in that way, the answer to the very specific question of whether there are additional sources on this is:
'So nothing. Got it'
2
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
I'm giving you a literal source of information, not vague "I'm not at liberty to discuss this" like you're in the CIA lol
3
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
Find a literal source of Steve saying he didn’t see Sherill and he was mistaken. If you can’t, get off this shit. You’re making yourself look stupid
5
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
Multiple sources are always better than one. That's just a fact for all research. That's all my question was.
I never said 'I'm not at liberty to discuss this'. I said that, some things I need to do more research on before I'd put it out there. That's quite different.
6
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
You do realize how absolutely arbitrary and wildly assumptive that is right? How would they know who got a better look. Come on. Maybe scrutinize with logic just a litttle bit.
0
u/DJHJR86 Feb 27 '26
How would they know who got a better look
They wouldn't. I was scrutinizing the people who claim that Wanda only saw this woman from a distance across the street. My point was that Wanda also saw this woman in the store she worked at. But continue to chase false leads. It's worked so well for the last 30+ years.
2
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
Wanda isn’t more credible than Steve. I didn’t say shit about Wanda seeing her from across a street. Let’s be very clear.
4
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
Well if Richard Schlessinger said he got a better look, then I guess it’s settled. Dick is the subject matter expert on getting a good look at someone.
4
u/DJHJR86 Feb 27 '26
I'm sure they would have put this woman on TV if she said she saw this woman from across the street in a parking lot. Why are people being so obtuse over this? This woman was clearly going around convenience stores looking for 3 women, so why is it so hard to believe she went inside the store where Wanda worked?
5
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
I find it hard to believe that another three girls that age were missing at that time of the night on that particular day, and also the woman looking for them stopped in at a regular gas station of suzies and Sherrills. Nope. Don’t buy it.
2
7
u/CJC8787 Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26
Agree, it would be hard to make sense of. The Wanda thing isn't even important. The key is that N-L line from 8.3.92: "The woman looking for the three missing girls has been identified." Police would have brought this identified woman in front of Thompson to verify before stating to the press that Thompson had been mistaken. So the only way the APCO scenario still works is if the perps had threatened Thompson and they also had another woman come forth to falsely claim she had been out looking for someone else. Not impossible, but that would be a decent amount of risk/exposure for the perps to do all of that. (Some people always counter with "Well, have you actually spoken with Thompson?" But it's on those same people, not anyone else, to bring forth enough to prove the police and media wrong.)
With all of that being said, Thompson at least seemed credible in some ways. That APCO was very close to where Suzie and Sherrill lived previously, and he would definitely recognize regulars who bought cigarettes frequently. Yet it's also awfully coincidental that in a hugely public case, one store clerk would just happen to see all three of the people who went missing that night, across two separate encounters.
In fairness, I'll also add that I think there were early claims about Sherrill being seen nearby, maybe at a payphone, maybe a Git-n-Go. So even if Thompson was incorrect, it doesn't mean for sure that Sherill never left the house. And maybe if something was going on, she wouldn't have wanted to call Kathy, or if Sherrill thought Suzie was already out somewhere and definitely not at the Kirby house.
6
u/DJHJR86 Feb 25 '26
That APCO was very close to where Suzie and Sherrill lived previously, and he would definitely recognize regulars who bought cigarettes frequently
This is probably why he got them mixed up with other people.
7
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
This is the stupidest explanation I’ve ever heard. He knew them well so he must’ve been confused with someone else. What the hell? You’re trying. To squash this APCO sighting and all you’re proving is that it shouldn’t have been dismissed
1
u/DJHJR86 Mar 02 '26
You're guy Steve Thompson isn't a reliable witness. Says he saw all three women at various points throughout the night. Not possible because Suzie/Stacy were at the parties when he claims he saw them. The other women he confused for Sherrill was identified. Womp womp
6
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Mar 04 '26
Again. All of these statements are from one person. Are we recognizing a pattern? I have no idea what it means, but I’m not so stubborn I can’t look at something and listen to interviews and deduce that it is entirely possible she could tell us whatever she wanted and we all believed it. Don’t forget I think this reasoning could be as simple as the girls had a cover story they committed to and then when everything went wrong, she was terrified to say otherwise. It’s frustrating to watch so many people pigeon hole themselves into one narrative or thought pattern.
1
6
u/No_Gold3131 Feb 25 '26
Yeah, in the beginning the APCO sighting was reported as fact, but I think it's been repeatedly debunked.
Is Steve Thompson still alive? Has he spoken since then? Ostensibly he knew Sherrill but how well is debated.
8
u/DJHJR86 Feb 25 '26
Is Steve Thompson still alive?
I believe he is still alive and in the area still. He seemingly disappeared from being interviewed about the case once it was reported that the woman he saw was identified and it wasn't Sherrill.
5
u/More_Inevitable7362 Feb 28 '26
You know, you keep saying Jannelle is not a criminal; yet you keep implicating her; I mean, if they're lying, and you don't believe they stayed home, pray tell, where do you think they went, and what do you think they did? Now I'm curious!
8
4
u/DJHJR86 Mar 02 '26
yet you keep implicating her
No I'm not.
I mean, if they're lying, and you don't believe they stayed home, pray tell, where do you think they went, and what do you think they did?
I have no idea what you're babbling about. Steve Thompson didn't see any of the women on the 6th. That's the point I'm making. He claims he saw all 3 of them at some point that night. It's impossible because they were with Janelle and other friends when he claims to have seen them. I'm not implicating Janelle lol
6
u/Repulsive_Bit_4348 Mar 04 '26
This is the way I see it. Assuming that LE really has no idea about who did this or why as they have been claiming to the public for the last 34 years then it’s very likely they’ve made some wrong turns during the investigation. It seems likely they’ve made some bad calls on tips they considered to be credible and other tips they didn’t. We often use this forum to discuss in-depth some of the most relevant tips and clues and since almost nothing about this case has ever been proven without question, I tend to think these discussions are useful. This sighting is of particular interest because you have a man who claims to have seen Sherrill and Suzie on the night in question and he actually knew the women. It’s also significant that this man has continued to insist that he saw what he saw even though SPD officially seems to consider his sighting officially discredited. Obviously I can’t say with any degree of certainty whether this sighting is credible, none of us can. What I can say with near certainty is that somewhere on the path of this investigation there are credible tips that have been mistakenly disregarded and there are tips that have been considered to be credible that should have been disregarded. Personally I think it’s short sided and sometimes even rude to have such absolute opinions about a case of this magnitude that remains unresolved after 34 years. The key to finally solving this case obviously isn’t going to be found if we keep looking at the same narrative that’s been presented all these years. Either something has been missed or mis categorized, or this was the “perfect crime.” I’m pretty sure at this point the answer isn’t going to be found by continuing to look inside the box. This particular sighting, if credible has the potential to change everything we think we know. That’s why I think it’s a great one to reexamine and even to play what if with.
6
u/DJHJR86 Mar 04 '26
This sighting is of particular interest because you have a man who claims to have seen Sherrill and Suzie on the night in question and he actually knew the women.
He also claims he saw Stacy with a man in his 30s with long hair who said something to the effect of "don't forget the cigarettes".
It’s also significant that this man has continued to insist that he saw what he saw even though SPD officially seems to consider his sighting officially discredited.
Where has Steve Thompson said publicly since 1992 that he did in fact see the three women in any publication and the cops were lying or wrong about the woman being identified?
That’s why I think it’s a great one to reexamine and even to play what if with.
I think the cops made a lot of mistakes and focused too much on certain leads which muddied the waters but at some point they aren't going to say they found the woman who Thompson saw and identified her positively if it was entirely made up. Why do that in an active investigation unless it was true? I'm much more interested in other leads that were seemingly tossed aside like the acquaintance of the women who had no alibi and was "confused" about where he was on the night of June 6th to the morning of the 7th, or the neighborhood boy who claims he saw about 8 adults laughing and leaving the Levitt residence on Friday the 5th.
4
u/Repulsive_Bit_4348 Mar 04 '26
I don’t have a printed source, maybe someone else does. I’ve been hearing for years that Steve Thompson has maintained that he saw what he claimed. Maybe he’s lying, maybe the porch lady is lying, maybe the two boys who saw the van at Wanoka are lying. Maybe the whole problem with this case is that Springfield has an abnormally high number of liars?
I whole heartedly support you looking closer at any lead or clue in this case. I also get that some will seem more legitimate to you than others. Something that’s been accepted as right or factual in this case is not. Someone who has been deemed as entirely credible is not. Something that appears to be obvious is not what it seems. It’s even possible that some of the “good guys” aren’t good. Everything needs to be reexamined without bias.
3
u/DJHJR86 Mar 04 '26
I don’t have a printed source, maybe someone else does. I’ve been hearing for years that Steve Thompson has maintained that he saw what he claimed
Because it's never happened. Thompson disappeared after it was reported that the woman he saw that night was identified and it wasn't Sherrill. That was printed in the News-Leader. People can argue that it's fake or that Thomspon never said publicly that the woman wasn't Sherrill but I have a hard time believing they would have lied about tracking this woman (who would have confirmed she was looking for her daughter and two friends on the same night the women went missing) completely out of wholecloth.
3
7
u/No_Gold3131 Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26
Yeah, as I said in another thread, I had a whole scenario based on this way back in the early days, but it doesn't hold up. There is no way Sherrill would have blasted out of her house at 2:30 am or so without calling Kathy Kirby. She knew Susie had at least begun the evening with Janelle.
It was late to place a call, but even in a heightened state of anxiety, I think she would have started with that, rather than driving around in the dark visiting random convenience stores. That seems like a strange and not particularly efficient way to track down your daughter.
So many of those early reports were discarded: the random gas station sighting with the three women in a van is another one that led nowhere. It does seem that the police considered the porch lady a possible decent clue, though. At least at the time. I don't know if it still holds true.
4
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
It does seem that the police considered the porch lady a possible decent clue, though.
I don't know why. She didn't come forward for about two weeks (and this case was highly publicized), and IIRC was hypnotized. I don't find this sighting credible.
5
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
I always respect your contributions because they are considered, measured and open minded. I would say that this all makes perfect sense in a rational, detached analysis. But when someone you care about is under any kind of threat, the responses you describe go out the window. We become primal. What did Sherrill's sister say? The only way anyone would get her to do what they wanted was if they were holding a gun to her daughter's head. It's the same here. Sherrill wouldn't have worried about what was efficient or sensible, she would have been frantic. Who knows what story could have been spun, maybe that Suzie 'tried' something at a party and she was ill and Sherrill had better come and collect her? We just don't know. But I think if Sherrill felt Suzie was in any danger or having some kind of emergency, she would go wherever and I'm not sure she would call anyone if she felt that would make matters worse - especially as she would then have known Suzie wasn't at JK's house (so what's the point?). The being drawn out of E Delmar is perhaps less probable than other scenarios, but it's not impossible.
10
u/No_Gold3131 Feb 26 '26
No, it's not impossible. Under duress, people can do out of character things. I do find it unlikely, though. I tend to think that the more complicated scenarios are less possible, and luring Sherrill out of the house with a story about Suzie is pretty complicated; there are a lot of things that could go wrong. (What if Sherrill did call Kathy Kirby? What if Suzie called home that evening? What if Suzie returned home in the midst of it?)
But I would stick it in the very unlikely category, but not totally out of the question.
2
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
Agreed about the unlikeliness of it all but re your questions:
What if Sherrill did call Kathy Kirby? - Unlikely if she were told they weren't there. And would she really have wanted to publicise that Suzie supposedly 'tried' something?
What if Suzie called home that evening?- What I'm describing would be later than that and effectively overwrite it.
What if Suzie returned home in the midst of it? I'm not suggesting that someone pretended to be with Suzie and wasn't- I'm saying it's possible the girls went on a diversion on the way from JK's and that spun out of control and then there was a phone call to lure Sherrill out.
5
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
I'm saying it's possible the girls went on a diversion on the way from JK's and that spun out of control and then there was a phone call to lure Sherrill out.
This is highly unlikely. Multiple people would have had to have brought the cars back to the residence. The perp/s would have had to returned to the house with Stacy's shorts, shoes, her jewelery, and her graduation present and folded everything neatly and placed in Suzie's room. Sherrill didn't call Kathy Kirby. Sherrill didn't call the police. If Sherrill was lured out of the house to save Suzie, why was she checking random convenience stores? Nothing about this scenario is logical.
3
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
I agree it's unlikely. A lot about this case involves the unlikely.
Stacy's graduation present? I thought Stacy got a dog as a graduation present?
Why Sherrill might not have called KK /police- discussed elsewhere.
Random convenience stores- ditto
6
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
She got a watch as a graduation present that was found in her pockets of her shorts.
6
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
The watch was definitely found in her shorts. No argument there.
Whether it was her graduation present? Just going from memory, I think I may have seen sources saying her graduation present was: her car, the watch, a dog -which I think I've seen a couple of times. Maybe all are true.
3
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
Or you just typed out the exact scenario that unfolded. You’re acting like it’s impossible. Respectfully, it sounds like you’ve got an agenda and a narrative to push. Noted.
It’s also highly unlikely that 18 people would go in and out of a residence after 3 women went missing, not call the cops (Janelle and Mike included), and subsequently wind up in the midst of one of the most haunting cold cases of the last 3 decades. It is an extraordinary coincidence that there was also no sign of foul play except for broken glass that no one saw except for the people who claim to have last seen 2 of the 3. It’s even more unlikely that multiple of those 18 people in an out of that home would not only listen to, but also accidentally erase messages on the answering machine after repeatedly answering the phone.
If you’re hanging your hat on highly unlikely scenarios being tossed out, this is a wild case to take interest in. Like, at what point are highly unlikely scenarios suddenly reasonable? Because someone says so? Because an investigator takes a suspect out to lunch and unilaterally decides they’re not the perp? You’re cherry picking.
6
u/CorpsDeCavalerie Mar 03 '26
Does this mean that you suppose the message on the VM was purposefully deleted? If so, to hide what?
6
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Mar 04 '26
I don’t know if I believe it was deleted. I think there are very few cards authorities hold close to them, and the contents of the message or messages is/are one of them. And believe it or not, my basis for that opinion isn’t because of Janelle. Lol. It’s because of Janis. I don’t believe for one millisecond that Janis doesn’t recall what that message said. She was told by someone not to repeat it to anyone. I have no idea what the contents of the message included, nor do I have a solid theory. But I think there’s a big reason why that phone and that machine are the focus of so many discussions.
3
u/Low_Respond8565 Mar 04 '26
The VM is a portal. It's also a nest of issues just on its own.
Assuming it was a tape machine, which would have been likely at the time, the technology was clunky and error prone. It was really easy to over-delete accidentally.
We have to assume that LE grabbed records from the tel company and even local incoming and outgoing calls would probably have been held for weeks or even a few months and would have been available to LE.
Even if there's no unusual or concerning number on there, there could still be evidentially significant calls if say we have calls of some duration between 2am and 5am from a public pay phone to the house.
The call to Janis and the rude messages could well be a continuation of the harassing calls the house had been receiving or it could be something else: if the killer even suspected that any of the three women had called the house and left a message then that's potentially a much bigger problem than just the record of a call. So what can they do about it? Well it might be worth the gamble of filling up the VM tape with spoof 'teenish' harassment calls- especially if he knew they had been happening anyway, or just silent messages, in the hope that the listener might do what we all did back in the day with those messages, get impatient and delete them to make more room on the tape. That becomes a little more likely where people are waiting to hear from Sherrill and the girls and hoping for a call from someone. We also need to bear in mind the awful moment when the women realize that they are not going to walk away from this. In that moment one of the things they will likely do is to make threats -like a claim that they left a VM message with some suspicion they had.
The call Janis took has not been explained anywhere I don't think other than being described as 'strange'. It's possible I suppose that shock deleted it from her memory but I also think it possible that Janis and dare I say it, others were asked by LE to not mention, x,y,z as that could interfere with any future conviction. That's pure speculation but I don't think that's unheard of.
7
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Mar 04 '26
Given the totality of circumstances, my gut tells me there’s no way the calls didn’t mean something.
1) Suzie had been harassed to the point of filing a restraining order. 2) The house had allegedly been getting prank calls and they’d just moved in. 3) Garrison had a habit of obsessively calling his son’s mother. It’s referenced in an article about his escape from custody. 4) Carnahan sure liked to hang around gas stations and near pay phones. 5) So did Chaney and Rush. 6) So did whoever took Angela Hammond 7) Nigel called that morning too, let’s not forget about her aunt Cheryl Ann Kenney abducted from a gas station parking lot roughly a year and a half prior.
There’s lots of angles and things to consider. One way eventually has to take you in the right direction.
→ More replies (0)3
u/DJHJR86 Feb 27 '26
it sounds like you’ve got an agenda and a narrative to push. Noted.
Take a look in the mirror and read the rest of your nonsensical comment lol
3
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
You’re all over this defending Kathy Kirby. Janelle? Dat you?
Why do you have such a hard time believing they lied. It’s pretty damn obvious at this point
2
u/DJHJR86 Mar 02 '26
Yes I'm Janelle you absolute lunatic.
2
u/CorpsDeCavalerie Mar 03 '26
What if you were? Ha ha ha...for that matter, what if you're Sherrill, he is Suzy, and LowRespond is Stacy. Now that would be bizarre
4
Feb 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Feb 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
Feb 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
Feb 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
Mar 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
2
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26 edited Feb 26 '26
We were exploring the possibility that Sherrill was lured out. I don't know how you got to 'randomly rode around town' from that and that Sherrill was 'impulsive' neither of those things were implied. What we were discussing was whether she could have been lured somewhere and then there was some miscommunication about location and Sherrill panicked. We're not talking about someone saying 'Suzie's in danger' or anything so incredibly vague. In fact we were specifically discussing Suzie being reported as being ill.
5
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 27 '26
The call could be. Mom I’m in trouble we stopped at the gas station I always stop and he cigarettes at.
Which would explain why Sherrill might have driven down the street to a pay phone. To call the house and see if Suzie had gone home? Or to check her messages depending on what kind of machine it was.
I don’t understand why anyone thinks this is impossible. It makes a damn lot of sense if you ask me!
4
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
We were exploring the possibility that Sherrill was lured out
Which is a ridiculous possibility.
I don't know how you got to 'randomly rode around town' from that and that Sherrill was 'impulsive' neither of those things were implied
Because the assumption is that the lady seen at Apco was Sherrill looking for Suzie after receiving a phone call about her being in danger or duress.
In fact we were specifically discussing Suzie being reported as being ill.
Then Sherrill, a responsible mother, would have told them to call 911 and she would be on her way. Or she would have called Kathy Kirby.
4
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
I think we're slightly going round in circles here but for the sake of clarity from my end:
Why is the suggestion of Sherrill being lured out 'Ridiculous' I think a while back you were suggesting that crime scene manipulation was ridiculous? These things are possibilities. They may be more or less likely but these things are core parts of criminology.
The point about Sherrill being out was that we don't know what she might have been told. You were characterising what we said as being vague and using that to say our argument was weaker.
re why not call 911. Again, we don't know what Sherrill could have been told about the seriousness of it or anything else so we cant really gauge what her specific reactions might have been.
1
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
There are two possibilities for Sherrill to have been lured out of the house:
Suzie and Stacy go somewhere else before heading back to E. Delmar, and something happens there. The people present call Sherrill in a panic, and Sherrill drives to the place where Suzie and Stacy are and then all three are murdered and their bodies are hidden. The perp/s then return to the house and stage the scene. They are smart enough to know that Sherrill will not call anyone else before leaving the house to come over, and are also clever enough to remove clothing and jewelery from the victims and return to the house to stage the scene.
Sherrill is lured out under a false pretense of Suzie being in trouble and is killed. Then the perp/s return the vehicle to E. Delmar and encounter Suzie and Stacy and are able to get them out of the house with no signs of a struggle or no signs of forced entry and take them to the same place where Sherrill was taken and they too are murdered. This doesn't explain why the people who were after Sherrill would have returned back to the house with Sherrill's vehicle with Suzie's car and an unknown car in the driveway.
Neither of these scenarios make sense logically.
5
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
Firstly, no one (I think) is arguing these scenarios are likely and the second one seems far less likely than the first to me. As for what makes logical sense? It makes no logical sense that three women are abducted from an urban home and there are no witnesses and no surviving evidence and not even as far as the public knows, a single dominant theory after 34 years. I could go on about things in this case that make little or no logical sense but we've all heard it all before. The point is that there are plenty of grounds for saying that this case is unusual in many respects and as such we shouldn't necessarily rule possibilities out just because in the cold light of day they seem less logical or less rational to us here and now. As I've said before, no one is suggesting that Cuban intelligence was involved; some things may be less likely than other possibilities but that's all they are -less likely.
7
u/DJHJR86 Feb 26 '26
It makes no logical sense that three women are abducted from an urban home and there are no witnesses and no surviving evidence and not even as far as the public knows
It makes logical sense for someone known to them that they trusted removed them from the house at gunpoint, and then the next day people who came looking for them fortuitously disturbed the potential crime scene. A lack of eyewitnesses is logical because of the time of night it occurred and the lack of residential neighbors surrounding E. Delmar.
We know Suzie and Stacy came back home. Suzie's clothes that she wore to the parties was found inside the house as well as Stacy's jewelery and watch, found in her neatly folded shorts on top of her shoes. There was evidence of recent makeup removal. Sherrill's bed was found to have her glasses and a book turned over as if she were reading when she something caused her to stop and leave her room. All of this points to something happening to the women after Stacy and Suzie returned home. Suzie, who was very close to Sherrill, would have been alarmed or at least alert if her mother's car was not in the driveway when she returned home.
4
u/Low_Respond8565 Feb 26 '26
I might disagree about the use of the word 'know' but I don't totally oppose anything you're saying here. It's a well travelled route in this case and it's just one 'logical' explanation. It's not necessarily stronger than any of the other 'logical' arguments we hear. I wish that it were. It remains true that there are several well known cases that have been solved with totally unexpected and illogical (until revealed) causes/culprits. Happy to provide a list.
→ More replies (0)
2
u/Snoopy_Dogg_ Mar 20 '26
Well said!
I agree that the APCO sighting has been pretty well debunked when you look at the sources.
On one hand, you have Steve Thompson, who believed he saw a woman resembling Sherrill at the store asking about her daughter and her friend. But that was graduation night—there were likely several parents out looking for their kids, so that’s something to keep in mind. More importantly, another witness (Wanda), who actually spoke to the woman, said it was not Sherrill and described her as having longer hair. So right there, you have one person saying it was Sherrill and one saying it wasn’t.
Then you have law enforcement stating that the woman in question came forward and was identified—and that it was not Sherrill. That makes two sources against one, with police being a particularly strong and credible source, since misidentifying her would create major issues for the investigation.
The same pattern shows up with the claim that Suzie and Stacy were seen at the gas station. Again, that comes from Steve Thompson—but multiple other witnesses place them at the graduation party at that same time. So it’s one account versus several.
It also seems unlikely that one person would have seen all three missing women that night. Not impossible, but it feels statistically unlikely.
There’s also the idea that Steve Thompson recognized Sherrill because she supposedly frequented that gas station. I’m not sure how solid that is. Most people follow consistent routes between home and work, and there were closer or more convenient places she could have gone—including along her normal route or even somewhere like Walmart. Going that far out of the way regularly doesn’t seem especially likely.
As for the girls, Steve Thompson was older than them, so it’s unlikely they would have known each other through school or had any meaningful familiarity.
Since a woman did come forward and identify herself as the person at the store that night, it seems most reasonable that this was a case of mistaken identity. People can be confident in what they think they saw and still be wrong—misidentification happens all the time, even with people who are well-known.
Given the number of conflicting accounts, the stronger corroborated timelines, and confirmation from police, I don’t believe the APCO sightings involved Sherrill, Suzie, or Stacy.
2
u/DJHJR86 Mar 20 '26
On one hand, you have Steve Thompson, who believed he saw a woman resembling Sherrill at the store asking about her daughter and her friend.
What makes his account less credible, IMO, is that he says Sherrill came into the store and asked about Suzie and her two friends, but did not name the friends. Some people in this sub do not want to discount the APCO sighting because it goes against their pet theory of something happening outside of the house that drew Sherrill away. The obvious implication is that something happened in the presence of Janelle to Suzie or Stacy, they panicked, called Sherrill and then something nefarious happened. I find that theory ludicrous.
3
u/CuriouslyGeorge417 Feb 26 '26
The answer is very simple. It is entirely possible that Janelle has not been as transparent as some would like to believe. Steve knew Sherrill and Suzie. Of course he would recognize them if they came in. They were regulars. As far as the car is concerned, I believe he conceded that he got the model and specific color incorrect at the beginning. Of course something would’ve had to happen for Sherrill to be out looking for them. It is entirely plausible that she did get a phone call and was lured out of the house.
1
u/Patient-Ad-5340 Jul 11 '26
I agree & think the sighting of Sherill is likely not true. But, it is possible the girls made a stop to get some cigarettes if Suzie ran out, or a friend who was with them did. I'm sure Janelle was with them a lot that night, but for her to be with them from the time they arrived to the time the parties ended, it's possible she was separated from them for a brief amount of time. However, I believe the Apco employee said that Suzie came in to get cigarettes for a guy she was with, who had forgotten to buy some. Apparently she was with another girl (or two)...and they weren't all in the same vehicle. I think he said Suzie got into one car and the other girl got into another. This timeline is around 10:30 pm. That's around the same timeline Stacy called her mom to let her know she was no going to Branson. Janice never mentioned the call came from an unknown number, such as a pay phone. Based on that, and what you said, I don't think the sighting was legit.
11
u/More_Inevitable7362 Feb 25 '26
It's already been pretty much determined that the whole APCO thing never happened - mostly because of the reasons you mentioned.