Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 5 votes

The Girl Scout Camp Murders

girl scout murder oklahoma

  • Please log in to reply
740 replies to this topic

#61    regi

regi

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,464 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 27 September 2012 - 08:17 PM

I'm not a city slicker (I'm not a cowgirl either), but I admit I'm afraid of the dark. :passifier:
And, yeah, under those canopies of trees, that camp would have been pitch dark at night... which causes me wonder if there was some sort of an outdoor light on permanent buildings such as the staff house.
But you know, even if the staff house did have a light, it would still be very dark within the units.

Authorities said the blood evidence indicated that two victims were killed in the tent, and I see no reason to question that, but I'm not sure that the third victim was assaulted and/or murdered at the discovery site.
For the reason you pointed out, it makes no sense.

What you've suggested....that the perp intended to watch as events unfolded, has crossed my mind. That's actually a very interesting theory to contemplate.

You know, I've experienced info overload, and I'm still trying to process what I've learned so far.

I don't know how a person could comply, or find themselves as an accessory in any horrific crime, but I know they have, and because I know so little of the evidence, I can't discount that it was a possibility in this case. At the same time, I do think one person could have done it.

Edited by regi, 27 September 2012 - 08:59 PM.


#62    regi

regi

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,464 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 29 September 2012 - 02:26 PM

I've gone over my notes from newspaper articles, the pretrial testimony, and the doc.
At least one newspaper report was that among the items reported stolen from the farmhouse were "a sash cord, duct tape, 3 bottles of beer, and 3 identical crowbars."
I don't know when the break-in occurred, but apparently, the scent dogs led to that property.
The doc info (part 2 @ 11:40) was that the "nylon rope and duct tape used to tie up the children were stolen from a farmhouse...".
My first thought is that those are a very strange assortment of items that anyone would break-in to steal. I don't know if anything else was reported stolen, or what was available to steal. (One article described a deserted house on a 110 acre ranch that adjoins Camp Scott.")
If the newspaper reports were accurate about all that was reported stolen, I can see one person taking three bottles of beer, maybe more-so if there was only 3 to begin with, but 3 crow bars? Why the heck would any one person take 3 crowbars?
So, 3 bottles of beer...3 crow bars.
I don't think those items were mentioned in the doc., but an article reported that the empty bottles were found on camp grounds.

I don't know if a reporter was present in court to follow the day-to-day trial proceedings.
If there was, I don't know which paper the reporter was from; it doesn't appear that was Tulsa World, or Tulsa Tribune
Pryor is the county seat, so I would think that if any reporter was present daily, they would have likely been out of Pryor.

Edited by regi, 29 September 2012 - 02:30 PM.


#63    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,758 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 30 September 2012 - 01:49 AM

I'm still (slowly) making my way through Tent #8...  He mentions that during the trial (which is what the book seems to mainly be focusing on - not the actual murders - darn it) the hotel/motels in the Pryor area had a huge influx of business - largely from the media... The New York Times even had a reporter there...

The pre-trial hearing was televised (I don't know if it was recorded as well) because they had so many 'spectators they had to use an auditorium as well as the courtroom (the courtroom could only seat ~96 people)... They opted to not televise the actual trial for various reasons...

The book is frustrating because so far (I'm on page 150 out of 226) it focuses mainly on the prosecutors, defense teams and the judge...  It's almost like the crime was second to the trail...  I'm not fond of this author....


edit to add: Yes the 'threeness' of those items would indicate that there may well have been more than 1 sick twisted evil @%$^&*@+!!!! involved...

Edited by Taun, 30 September 2012 - 01:52 AM.


#64    susieice

susieice

    December's Child

  • Member
  • 11,093 posts
  • Joined:10 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pennsylvania

  • "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice."
    .....Robert Frost

Posted 30 September 2012 - 06:15 AM

I know what you mean Taun. It's a lot easier to find references to the trial than it is to the actual case.
I do think that there's at least one other person that's getting away with this. I don't doubt that Hart was there. From what I read 3 of the 5 DNA samples that did turn up results tested positive for him.

"The universe is full of magical things, patiently waiting for our wits to sharpen."  Eden Phillpotts

Opponere draconem est prehendere vitam

"I'm sure the universe is full of intelligent life. It's just been too intelligent to come here." Arthur C. Clarke

#65    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,758 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 30 September 2012 - 02:34 PM

I found an interesting thing last night...

Dr (?) Janice Davis testified about the forensic evidence of this case which she was in charge of.... She later became infamous here in Oklahoma for the poor handling of evidence under her watch...  She later committed suicide - not sure if it was related to her 'fall from grace or not' but it ruined her professional live and had to have influenced her private life...

The poor quality of forensic evidence doomed this case from the start... I do wonder if the case would have ended differently had the evidence been better handled...


#66    regi

regi

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,464 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 30 September 2012 - 03:25 PM

What the heck?! :cry:
I recall a lot of controversy re: the Oklahoma State Crime Lab, specifically, she was the supervisior and/or a lab tech who were not only inept and improperly handled evidence (including mixing up samples), but most appalling, repeatedly provided trial testimony of phoney results favoring the prosecution's case which led to wrongful convictions.

Even if I had confidence in the DNA evidence in this case, in my mind those results are inconclusive because they said two probes didn't match. (Actually, I don't know why it's not considered a exclusion for that reason.)
Regardless, inconclusive results must be supported by other evidence because it's certainly not enough on it's own to determine guilt.

Taun, a review on the book you're reading stated that the book includes "a full account of the prosecutor's and defense's closing arguments", and that they're "both quite revealing". (The author wasn't in the courtroom during the trial, was he?)
I'm also interested in the testimony of the state pathologist.

Edited by regi, 30 September 2012 - 03:26 PM.


#67    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,758 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:55 PM

View Postregi, on 30 September 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

What the heck?! :cry:
I recall a lot of controversy re: the Oklahoma State Crime Lab, specifically, she was the supervisior and/or a lab tech who were not only inept and improperly handled evidence (including mixing up samples), but most appalling, repeatedly provided trial testimony of phoney results favoring the prosecution's case which led to wrongful convictions.

Even if I had confidence in the DNA evidence in this case, in my mind those results are inconclusive because they said two probes didn't match. (Actually, I don't know why it's not considered a exclusion for that reason.)
Regardless, inconclusive results must be supported by other evidence because it's certainly not enough on it's own to determine guilt.

Taun, a review on the book you're reading stated that the book includes "a full account of the prosecutor's and defense's closing arguments", and that they're "both quite revealing". (The author wasn't in the courtroom during the trial, was he?)
I'm also interested in the testimony of the state pathologist.
There was also a woman named Joyce Gilchrist - who got the most 'ink' and actually was involved in more 'controversy'...  She was dismissed for falsifying evidence to match the suspect and 1700 of her 3000 cases had to be reviewed. 23 people were sent to death row on her evidence.. 11 of which were executed...  I don't think she was part of this case, but she and Davis are often 'lumped together' in peoples memories of those times...  Davis worked with the state while Gilchrist worked with the city...

Haven't got to the closing arguments yet... I'll let you know when I do...


#68    susieice

susieice

    December's Child

  • Member
  • 11,093 posts
  • Joined:10 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pennsylvania

  • "Some say the world will end in fire, some say in ice."
    .....Robert Frost

Posted 01 October 2012 - 12:56 AM

This isn't sounding good for those DNA results I mentioned before. Wow. What I don't get is why didn't they try to convict Hart using phoney proof? I forget what year those tests were done, but I think I recall it as 2007 when the results were announced. It's up there in one of the links. If two didn't match, then they must have come from someone else.

"The universe is full of magical things, patiently waiting for our wits to sharpen."  Eden Phillpotts

Opponere draconem est prehendere vitam

"I'm sure the universe is full of intelligent life. It's just been too intelligent to come here." Arthur C. Clarke

#69    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,758 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 01 October 2012 - 11:40 AM

View Postsusieice, on 01 October 2012 - 12:56 AM, said:

This isn't sounding good for those DNA results I mentioned before. Wow. What I don't get is why didn't they try to convict Hart using phoney proof? I forget what year those tests were done, but I think I recall it as 2007 when the results were announced. It's up there in one of the links. If two didn't match, then they must have come from someone else.

I think it was partially a case of the Defense being more aggressive and up on current technology than the Prosecution... Quite a lot of evidence and testimony was successfully blocked by the defense - according to the book...  The author paints glowing word pictures of the defense team and their strategy.. but to me they just come off as smug, annoying, whiners....  I'm all for giving the accused the best defense possible... but I have always despised certain tactics by defense lawyers (as well as prosecutors i must say)...


#70    regi

regi

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,464 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 01 October 2012 - 12:18 PM

View PostTaun, on 30 September 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

There was also a woman named Joyce Gilchrist - who got the most 'ink' and actually was involved in more 'controversy'...  She was dismissed for falsifying evidence to match the suspect and 1700 of her 3000 cases had to be reviewed. 23 people were sent to death row on her evidence.. 11 of which were executed...  I don't think she was part of this case, but she and Davis are often 'lumped together' in peoples memories of those times...  Davis worked with the state while Gilchrist worked with the city...

Yeah, that's the one I was remembered. I came across an article yesterday which reported that Gilchrist started work in the crime lab in 1980 under Janice Davis! (I can't link the article :td: ), but there's lots of articles online about that whole deplorable disgrace.
Gilchrist knowingly misrepresented the strength, probability, and reliability of analysis results, and surely, in at least one case, had to have knowingly presented completely false results. Her analysis excluded the guilty perp, while her testimony of the same analysis helped convict an innocent man!

11 men already executed...I wonder how many were innocent. Lord have mercy.


#71    regi

regi

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,464 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 01 October 2012 - 12:31 PM

View PostTaun, on 01 October 2012 - 11:40 AM, said:

I think it was partially a case of the Defense being more aggressive and up on current technology than the Prosecution... Quite a lot of evidence and testimony was successfully blocked by the defense - according to the book...  The author paints glowing word pictures of the defense team and their strategy.. but to me they just come off as smug, annoying, whiners....  I'm all for giving the accused the best defense possible... but I have always despised certain tactics by defense lawyers (as well as prosecutors i must say)...

I seen both sides use what I consider unethical tactics.
In this case, the jury didn't believe the states evidence. It sounds like they made the right decision.
Example, Sheriff Weaver testified that Hart DID NOT have those photos in his possession when he was booked into the jail which he'd later escaped from.
There was other testimony that the photos were seen in Weaver's possession.
Weaver's testimony served WEAVER, but at the same time, discredited a physical link to Hart.


#72    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,758 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 01 October 2012 - 01:06 PM

View Postregi, on 01 October 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

I seen both sides use what I consider unethical tactics.
In this case, the jury didn't believe the states evidence. It sounds like they made the right decision.
Example, Sheriff Weaver testified that Hart DID NOT have those photos in his possession when he was booked into the jail which he'd later escaped from.
There was other testimony that the photos were seen in Weaver's possession.
Weaver's testimony served WEAVER, but at the same time, discredited a physical link to Hart.

True... While I still believe that Hart was involved, I do feel the jury made the only decision they could with the evidence that they were presented...


#73    regi

regi

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,464 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 01 October 2012 - 04:11 PM

View PostTaun, on 01 October 2012 - 01:06 PM, said:

True... While I still believe that Hart was involved, I do feel the jury made the only decision they could with the evidence that they were presented...

Do you believe that primarily because of the testimony of the previous victim...what she said about Hart's behavior with her glasses?


#74    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,758 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 01 October 2012 - 04:46 PM

View Postregi, on 01 October 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

Do you believe that primarily because of the testimony of the previous victim...what she said about Hart's behavior with her glasses?

That's part of it... It's also the fact that his mother lived just 'outside the wire' of the camp and he had been hiding in that area for a couple years (going from house to house) - she had to know he was there and he had to of stayed there for a while... That puts him in the immediate area...  That is a lightly populated area. What are the odds that two (or three or four) homicidal, sexual perverts would not only live in that small a population, but get together and plan/execute something like this? Leave no usable evidence, get away with it and then never do it again?  Also the trial Judge's (who everyone involved in the case - Prosecution, Defense, law enforcement and spectators all agree was above any form of reproach in this trial) remarks to the parents of the children after the trial "Sometimes for our system of law to work, the guilty must be set free", says something...

I just get a very bad vibe about Gene Leroy Hart in this case...  maybe it's just my feelings, maybe deep down I just want to think that the evil so-and-so who did this was caught and died in prison... I don't know...


The whole thing about the two wedding pictures is still odd to me... It's odd that he would have carried around two meaningless photos (unless he had a 'thing' for one of the women in them ?) for all that time, and it's just as odd that the Sherriff might have hung onto them in the hopes of framing him.... neither one adds up...

Edited by Taun, 01 October 2012 - 04:46 PM.


#75    regi

regi

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,464 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 01 October 2012 - 07:03 PM

Re: Hart having lived in the area his entire life, or that he might have been in the area, it's not evidence that he did it or had anything to do with it.
One of the things that bothers me the most is that it doesn't appear that anyone else was seriously investigated.
Hart was the sole focus early on, and from there on out, they looked no further.

I think you've set your scope a little too narrow re: who could have been capable of these murders.
Of course, I don't know. Hart could have done it, whether or not there was any credible evidence of it.

Re: the photos, they were said to be from a prison worker's daughters' wedding; it seems to me that Weaver could have had an interest, or connection to them that's unknown to us.
I doubt the sheriff would have had them for the purpose of framing Hart, but I think he could have had the knowledge that Hart had developed them.
One thing (among others) that I can't figure out is how Hart could have had possession of the photos after his escape. Where were the photos when he left the prison and then booked into the jail where Weaver said the photos NEVER were?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users