Update from Georgetown Sheriff concerning Rachel Cooke.

Discussion in 'The Search for Rachel Cooke' started by Tricia, May 21, 2003.

  1. Tricia

    Tricia Administrator Staff Member

    I would like to tell everyone what a wonderful experience the Run/Walk for Rachel was.

    RC, JR and all of those involved should be commended for putting together this event. It’s hard work and they worked tirelessly almost around the clock to make sure everyone had a good time and money was raised for the charities involved.

    Last year when Forums for Justice flew into Austin to help RC search and present the Cooke family with a check, it was announced at the press conference that the Sheriff’s office was forming the Rachel Cooke Task Force.

    It went down like this.

    FFJ had just presented RC with the check at a news conference. Then a reporter fromK-EYE announced the following during his “stand up†report.

    “The Sheriff’s office is stepping up to the plate with more manpower. The Sheriff will announce on Monday the forming of the Rachel Cooke Task Force. A group of investigators devoted solely to finding out what happened to Rachel Cookeâ€.

    Needless to say we were all thrilled. Then the reporter interviewed me and I opened my yap and said: “Forums for Justice will gladly work closely with the new task force to get the word out about Rachel. We will make sure everyone in the world is aware of Rachel Cooke Task Force progressâ€.

    So for almost a year I called the Sheriff’s office for updates on the task force. I called and called and called and called and called.

    I spoke with a wonderful man by the name of Sgt. Lumas. Sgt Lumas was always polite but he would always try and explain that certain things needed to happen first before the task force could be formed. He was kind, patient and never condescending. Yet I felt like I was getting the total run-around.

    Now almost a year later the task force has yet to be formed. Well by God I was going to set this Sheriff’s department straight. I requested a meeting. I was going to confront them about the “lie†of the task force. I was angry for RC and the Cookes and to a lesser extent I was angry that we told our members we would work closely with the now non-existent task force.

    Friday I am taken to a back room. I demand answers. I get the same run around from Sgt Lumas and Lt. Cutler. “We need a crime scene, we need leads, this isn’t a cold case, it’s still active but we don’t have enough to form a task force,â€and on and on.

    “WELL THEN WHY DID YOU ANNOUCNE THE FORMATION OF A TASK FORCE LAST YEAR???†I said in my most, “Don’t **** with me fella’s†ala Faye Dunaway ala Joan Crawford voice.

    I was met with a perplexed silence.

    â€Uh, Tricia we never announced the formation of a task force. Why would you think that?â€

    To make this long story short the Sheriff department denied ever stating such a thing. Sgt Lumas finally admitted to me that he could never figure out why I kept calling and asking about a task force. I asked Lumas why didn’t he ever tell me there was no task force to begin with. Sgt. Lumas told me he didn’t want to be rude and thought I was pushing for a task force…OMG. He didn’t know what I was talking about for a year. I wish he had said something so I could have gotten to the bottom of this soonerJ

    Come to find out, after checking with the station that ran the story and made the announcement of the task force, we found out the reporter lied. He lied. By cross checking the producer notes we were able to determine the reporter took one little statement by Sgt. Lumas (the Sheriff is certainly open to the idea of a task force sometime in the future) and pumped it up to the “official announcementâ€. Needless to say the reporter was fired long ago for doing crap like this.

    So we are back at square one. No task force yet. No task force was ever promised by the Sheriff.

    I give Sgt. Lumas credit for not having a restraining order filed against me. He must have thought I was nuts.

    Remember even though there is no task force that doesn’t mean we should sit back and do nothing.

    This forum has some incredible thinkers on it. Think about this and try and come up with a scenario as to what happened to Rachel:

    *Rachel was taken in broad daylight within yards of her home
    *Rachel was cooling down from a run so she may have been a bit tired.
    *Rachel was sweating and her hair was messed up from the run. According to the Sheriff Rachel would absolutely insist she run in her house and take a shower if a friend had pulled up along side her and asked her to get in his car and go somewhere. No question. The investigators are positive Rachel would not have gone anywhere with anyone after a long run like she just completed without getting fixed up first.
    · She was close to her home so she wouldn’t get in a car and accept a ride to her house. She was just too close for that scenario to be logical.
    · No screams were heard
    · No evidence was found anywhere in the area. Not so much as a piece of the foam from her headset.
    · The detectives feel certain that Rachel would have put up a fight and screamed if someone grabbed her even though she would have been tired. Besides in broad daylight it would be too risky for the person to attempt to take Rachel. Not impossible but not very likely either from what I understand.

    So what happened? What scenario can you come up with that makes sense. Let’s brainstorm. We might think of something that the investigators have not.

    The one thing I thought of is if someone Rachel knew pulled up, convinced Rachel there was an emergency and Rachel had to get in the car right now. Perhaps this person said a family member was injured. The investigators had already thought of that and it didn’t pan out. Everyone they know she knows checks out with an alibi.

    Remember the alibis apply only to the people the Sheriff’s office is aware of that knew Rachel. Could the person involved in the abduction be someone that Rachel knew but no one else knew ? A mere acquaintance ? A brand new friend met days before? If so what would compel Rachel to get in this persons car.

    Could someone that barely knew Rachel pulled up along side her and started talking to her, then pretended to pass out compelling Rachel to open the door to help?

    I don’t know. Neither does law enforcement.

    Like I said we have some really good brain power here. Think about it.

    You never know what someone else might come up with that no one else has thought of.

    Last edited by a moderator: May 21, 2003
  2. Voyager

    Voyager Active Member

    OK, here is another senario....

    Suppose that Rachel finished her run and entered her own home, to cool off and take a shower....

    The doorbell rings, and a man in a uniform says....I am here to repair the air-conditioner, fix the sprinkler system, look into giving an estimate on painting the house....

    The man is polite, he has on a work uniform with his name on the pocket and an emblem from some company embroidered on the front....It is a simple matter to find such a uniform and to pose as a bonified repair person....

    Her parents have not told her that any repairs are to be done, but surely this nice man can just go ahead with his work while Rachel prepares to shower....

    The man goes out to his truck/van, opens the back or side door.....he returns to the house, bringing with him something to subdue Rachel....a drug to inject or chloroform...could be anything of the sort.....

    After rendering Rachel unconcious, he ties her up, wraps her in a quilted work blanket or tarp and carries her out to the truck/van and quickly vacates the area.....

    The abductor could very well have driven through six states with Rachel in tow before the police put out an alert bulletin over 24 hrs. later....Truly Rachel could be alive and being held captive any place in the U.S., Mexcio, or Canada.....Of course the abductor may have murdered Rachel during that same period of time, but I prefer to think that she is a valuable asset to this abductor and that he is keeping her alive.....

    I am sure that RC, Janet, JoAnne, and the police have all wracked their memories for any sort of person who may have done real work in their home or in their neighborhood, or someone who may have delivered at their home or had a mail route, paper route, or some sort of regular work reason to be in their particular neighborhood during that holiday season and known Rachel's running schedule and the family's habits and work schedules.....

    Of course, I would urge Rachel's family, friends, and neighbors to rethink and reevaluate anyone they know or saw during that period who might have acted even remotely suspicious, out of place, or present doing work in the vicinity during that time....

    Someone saw something....they just haven't put it all together as something that applies to Rachel's disappearance....

    Perhaps RC and JR could put together a reminder mailer to send out to all of the neigbors, family, friends, and supporters in the Georgetown area, asking them to try and recall anything suspicious or indeed just anything they think might possibly be checked out....someone acting out of place or a bit strange at that time.....

    Before this becomes a "cold case" and too much more time goes by, people need to think back and recall everything that was going on during that time period and how it might relate to Rachel's abduction......any new acquaintances, purchases, work, deliveries, people passing through, undue interest in the family.....all sorts of venues that might lead police to a person or location....

    Thanks for listening....I do think it is quite possible that the abduction happened from within the Cooke home where rendering Rachel unconcious would have been easier and unobserved....I do not think that Rachel would have gone with anyone without a fight, if she had been concious, given her family's description of her as a strong independant young woman...

  3. "J_R"

    "J_R" Shutter Bug Bee

    We really do not know that Rachel was taken while she was still outside and I like the fact that Tricia and Voyager are bringing the scene inside the house because that is just as likely a scenario. Rachel could have made it inside. Perhaps someone was inside the home waiting for her. The house was not locked. People here did not lock there homes, gates and so on until after Rachel was abducted.

    Here is the real problem. No crime scene was found. That does not mean there isn't one - it means just what was said - no crime scene was found. They (the Sheriff's Office didn't find it.) Why?

    1) How do you find a crime scene when you don't know where to look?

    2) The SO didn't treat this seriously as an abduction. They felt Rachel had left on her own. Had the SO responded to this immediately as an abduction they may have had better success at finding the crime scene. The SO treats every missing person over a specific age as a runaway. IMHO that is so wrong. I think they need to weigh each case individually on it's own merits.

    3) If the crime scene was in the house, by the time the SO was in the home multiple friends and family members had been in the home to aid the Cookes in a preliminary search around the neighborhood. It could have been obliterated. Certainly, it would have been trampled over.

    4) The SO never finger printed the Cooke home but they did use Luminol on the home over a year later. I don't believe the Cookes know the results of those tests at this point.

    5) Suspicious activity: We do know that multiple people stated that the trash pickup on that day was late though the local trash collection company seems to be denying that.

    6) Suspicious activity: There were a couple of new homes being built on the same street the Cookes live on, which means there were "unknown" construction workers in the area during the time Rachel was home for the holidays.

    7) IMHO, we need to know if service trucks (cable T.V., telephone etc.) were in the neighborhood either authorized or unauthorized.

    8) We need the neighbors to remember any and all "friends" who may have been in the neighborhood. By friends I mean the kids who hung around Rachel and JoAnn or the other neighborhood kids. While you hate to think that one of them may have been involved, we find it difficult to believe that this was a total stranger abduction based on the layout of the Cooke neighborhood. The person who took Rachel had some familiarity of that neighborhood, the layout, the routines of the people who lived there, the Cooke family and Rachel while she was home IMHO.

    Tricia's right - 284 heads are certainly better than a 1-2 when trying to think about what hasn't been done to bring Rachel home.

    As a suggestion, for those that have questions about what has or hasn't been done in this investigation, please be sure you have read at least the first few weeks of RC's journal before asking them because many questions will be answered by the journal. Once you have read the journal it may also help you come up with ideas that we simply haven't thought about.

    RC's journal can be found at the link below. It is broken down by month. You will learn a lot about the initial investigation by reading January 2002. Click on the tab that says, "Journal."

    Last edited by a moderator: May 21, 2003
  4. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    This is hard to do

    because I didn't know Rachel, so I can't look at it from her viewpoint. Only people who knew her or are close to the Cookes could even come close to looking at it from her viewpoint.

    I can look at it from my viewpoint, as in, what would I or one of my daughters do under certain circumstances. Could someone have stopped her as she was nearing her home, looking for directions? There was a time I would have gone right up to the side of the car to give them directions. I don't do that anymore, haven't for years. I stand way back away from the car, ready to take off if they look like they are getting out of the car.

    If someone stopped, under the guise of looking for directions, and she approached the car close enough for someone to grab her, it could have been overwith quickly. It's possible someone even got out of the car asking for directions, grabbed her, threw her in the car and from there it was a matter of subduing her in the car. Men are stronger than women most of the time, much stronger. It wouldn't be that difficult for a strong man to overcome a girl Rachel's size, no matter how physically strong she was.

    There really can only be two scenarios here - either someone took Rachel by force, or she went with someone she knew. Unless someone had a gun or a knife on her, I can't believe anything happened inside the house, because I think she would have fought like hell in her house, and there would have been signs of a struggle. It seems strange she would agree to go somewhere with someone outside, though. I know I woudn't do that after I had been walking outside for miles, sweaty and all. The more likely scenario, for me, is that someone drove up beside her, grabbed her, and took off. That is what I think.
  5. Ayeka

    Ayeka Member

    Read the Journal!

    If you have never read RC's Journal, I strongly suggest you do so! He is right though. It is not an easy read...

    I read through January and February 2002. The one thing that seemed odd to me was the open garage door when RC got home from work that day. I'm sure that must have been nothing or RC would have referred to it again.

    There are some very intelligent minds here and I hope that one of our ideas helps the investigation along. I also hope RC is not troubled by any speculation that might pop up here.

  6. Tricia

    Tricia Administrator Staff Member

    Thank you all. Some incredible thoughts here.

    I did email RC and asked him to be sure and tell me if this thread was troubling to him at all. I haven't heard from him yet.

    I truly do not believe Sgt. Lumas with the sheriff's department is blowing smoke when he says he would welcome ideas.

    Keep them coming. Remember the Westerfield case. It was an off handed comment on a forum about Daniel's last hair cut that really helped nail Westerfield. Granted there was a lot more to work with in that case.

    Keep on thinking.

  7. LurkerXIV

    LurkerXIV Moderator

    Good luck on today's search.

    RC, JR, and crew: wishing you some success on the search today. 104* down there? Please drink lots of water while you're out there.
  8. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    I never know

    whether to pray they find Rachel or to pray that they don't. It would be devastating to find her in their searches, but I know how disheartening it must be to come home empty-handed again. I also understand that there has to be resolution in this case for the Cookes to ever be able to live again without wondering where their daughter is. I wish I could be there to help in the search.

    Scorching heat in Texas - wow. It's 54 degrees here. Lousy May.
  9. "J_R"

    "J_R" Shutter Bug Bee

    Maybe it would help to start with the actual facts so I will lay them out here:

    RC left the house approximately 5:15 a.m. Janet and JoAnn left the house approximately 8:00 a.m. Rachel was still asleep on the couch when her family left home that morning.

    Rachel's boyfriend Greg called around 9:15 and woke Rachel up. They got disconnected a couple of times but finished their conversation. I believe RC told me that call ended shortly after 9:20 a.m.

    RC returned home first at 4:45 p.m.
    Janet got home after 5:00 p.m.

    The garage doors were open when RC returned home.

    Rachel was wearing a green sports top, grey shorts, Asics shoes and carrying a yellow Walkman.

    Remember that while there are neighbors who stated they saw Rachel jogging that is subjective information.

    The cell phone record is factual as are the times RC and Janet returned home.

    Below is a map of the Cookes neighborhood. The map is going to be somewhat confusing because it is one dimensional. The blue lines are not roads - they are simply grid lines. The black lines are city streets. The red line is a major road. The yellow X marks where the Cooke home is. The street names have been removed for privacy but look at the map carefully and you may understand why many of us do not believe this was a total stranger abduction.

    The last siting of Rachel was approximately where the blue grid line crosses the street that comes from the main road to the street the Cookes live on - looking at the left side of the map.

    Rachel's jogging route typically took her from the Cooke home towards the street that leads out to the major road on the right side of the map and she returned home on the street where I indicated the last sighting was. All of those streets simply dead-end as shown.

    I hope this helps give those interested in trying to come up with new strategies some idea of what RC and even the SO has been up against.
  10. Tricia

    Tricia Administrator Staff Member

    I keep coming back to several things.

    According to the Sheriff, and RC correct me if I am wrong, but Rachel would never had gotten in a car with a friend until she showered and fixed herself up. Correct? Just would not have happened.

    She was so close to her home that she wouldn't have accepted a quick ride to her door step.

    Also she NEVER wore her running shoes in the house. She took them off at the door. Yet no shoes were found.

    If my information is correct then I have to go on the assumption that she was taken or got into a car for some reason.

    Yet all of Rachel's friends and so on have alibis. The ones the Sheriff knows about anyway.

    First thing I would do (if I could) is triple check those alibis. Over and over and over. I wish we could see the alibis without the names of the suspects. Maybe we could pick something up that no one has thought of.

    Also think about everyone you know. Does your family know everyone you know? Do your friends know everyone you know. Of course not.

    Rachel is a kind woman. No doubt. What if someone she knew pulled up along side her and convinced her their was an emergency. A family member was hurt. Maybe said he saw a car wreck and it looked like her family's car. Convinced her to "jump in and I'll take you there". Who wouldn't? What if it was someone Rachel knew slightly but yet know one really knew she knew. Does that make sense?

    I think she got into a car willingly. Unless....someone pulled up and said they had a family member and she better get in the car or else.

    I don't think Rachel was psychically forced into a car.

    I hope the SO checks those alibis out again. I hope Rachel's friends will keep thinking. Think about who Rachel knew. Even slightly.
  11. "J_R"

    "J_R" Shutter Bug Bee

    Things that really disturb me

    The last house Rachel had to pass as she rounded the corner to head home belongs to a Travis County Sheriff Deputy and his wife. I believe he was home since he worked nights and if so his TCSO car was parked in the driveway. His home has visibility to the street Rachel was last sited on as well as to the street the Cookes live on. Rachel's last sighting was within yards of his home. This is another reason I am not so sure Rachel was taken from the street but if she was what does that say about how comfortable the abductor/s was in pulling this crime off?

    Even if Rachel made it home the Cooke home is still within yards of this house and the abductor was taking a major risk that he would be seen or heard by LE. To me that should be a major factor in profiling this abductor!

    Again, there are several accounts that the trash pick-up was late that day but the local garbage company denies it - why? Has the SO investigated this discrepancy thoroughly?

    There was a peeping incident prior to Rachel leaving for college. Has the SO tried to match that to any other incidents in the county and come up with a perp?

    Has the SO questioned the one property owner that refused to allow his property to be searched. While there may not be probable cause to get a warrant to search the property such questioning may at least gain some insight into why this owner is refusing access to the property. While the property owner may well be within their rights, it raises my hinkey meter that anyone would absolutely refuse permission to have their property searched when there is a person missing in their neighborhood.
  12. LurkerXIV

    LurkerXIV Moderator


    RC said before that the SO was in touch with the Baton Rouge serial killer task force, and had reported Rachel's case to them.

    Georgetown, TX. does seem a long way from BR, and most of the sk's victims were local to that area. However, other cities and states are now being looked at, since Derrick Todd Lee worked as a pipefitter in other cities, and also as gravel-truck driver.

    I am sure the TASK force knows by now if Lee was in the Austin area at all that week.

    What gives me a big knot in my stomach is that Derrick Lee was arrested numerous times as a peeping tom. This was how he ascertained whether his victims were home alone or not.

    Someone was peeping in the Cookes windows. Is there any description of this person?
  13. "J_R"

    "J_R" Shutter Bug Bee

    Lurker, I can tell you with 100% certainty that the the peeper was definitely not Derrick Lee based on the description Janet gave me.
  14. Scarpetta

    Scarpetta Member

    The peeper thing has always bothered me. I'm assuming he's never been located....right?

    After thinking about the someone telling her there's been an accident and to get in the car...if it was a stranger telling her that...how would they have known where to find her? I mean wouldn't she question that? Makes you wonder if this person was dressed as someone of authority. In a small town, if someone pulled up and said...your mom's sick or there's been an accident...wouldn't Rachel have said...who are you? I'm not sure she would fall for that.

    I haven't completely understood if the last place Rachel was seen was in front of that house(the one we saw when we there). Has that been written in stone?

    I guess we don't know if Rachel opened the garage door when she left. Anyone fingerprint any doors leading into the house from the garage?

    Did Rachel always go into the house through the front door? Without fail? Did she always take her shoes off? Most people who know me know that I almost always take my shoes off outside...but...there are times when I'll keep them on if I'm running in for something. My point being...just because her shoes weren't found doesn't mean she didn't make it home. Maybe the phone was ringing and she ran in and someone was in there waiting for her.

    As I recall there was a lot of wooded area behind her house. I don't see why Mr. Peeper man couldn't get her out into those woods. Do they lead to any roads anywhere?

    These are just random thoughts. Things that bother me.

  15. "J_R"

    "J_R" Shutter Bug Bee


    To my knowledge the peeper has never been located.

    Both RC and Janet have told me Rachel would not have gotten into the car with someone even if they told her a family member was ill or injured unless that person was LE or known to her.

    Nothing is written in stone and IMHO we would be foolish to believe that it is (i.e. that Rachel did or did not make it home.) No one knows except Rachel and her abductor/s.

    RC will have to respond to the question about the garage door being opened by Rachel. I am not sure that question has ever been asked or answered. The Cooke house has never been finger printed. The SO did come out and check it with Luminol fairly recently and as mentioned I don't believe the Cookes have those results.

    My understanding is Rachel always removed her shoes and headed right for the shower when she returned from her run but your idea about the phone is a valid one and should be considered. Since no crime scene has been found all fresh ideas need to be considered IMHO.

    The area behind the Cooke home backs up to a much larger property. That property has been searched and we had K9's on the search as well. In order to get to a road from the property you either have to pass the home on the property and come down the driveway or go through a gate on the opposite side of the property but I believe we were told that the gate is always kept locked.
  16. Scarpetta

    Scarpetta Member

    I'm assuming that there is a door inside the garage that leads into the house...right? I definitly think that should be fingerprinted. I can't believe it wasn't. Did Rachel ever leave out the garage door to go running? Robert made the comment that the door was open when he got home but I never knew if that was out of the ordinary.

    Here's my problem. I just can't see a stranger pulling up beside Rachel in a car and pointing a gun at her and telling her to get in. Especially in daylight. They must have had something since no one seems to think that we should get in a car otherwise.

    What if someone stopped ahead of her on the road and somebody got out and asked for directions. Would she get close enough to the car to be grabbed and thrown in? If they pulled a gun on her would she get in or take her chances and run?

    I'm asking b/c if Rachel wouldn't do this and that or put herself in danger....then it keeps going back to being someone she knew.

    Of course, then people will tell you that she didn't want to be around anyone after running until she showered. So even if she did know this person, why would she get in the car so close to home? That's why I asked how sure people were about her being that close to home. Maybe she said, I'll meet you at the house and they grabbed her in the driveway out of sight since the Cooke's house is somewhat shaded from view.

    Was it the night before that her and Greg got into the "little" confrontation with what's his name?

    I could go on and on. For some reason I'm getting pulled back to Georgetown. I just feel that there's something we're missing and if we look the answer is there.

    I dreampt the other night that I found a purse with 15 bucks in it. The very next morning I found a wallet in the parking lot with 14 bucks in it....creepy. I've had that happen before. I just can't shake this feeling.

  17. Voyager

    Voyager Active Member

    JR, A Question....

    You told us in the past, that there is one neighbor who refuses to let the police or volunteers search his property...do you know him, know anything about him....do you know why he will not let his property be searched?

    Also, is there any legal means that can be used to gain access to this person's property?

    Did Rachel know this person or any of his family? Is there a chance that Rachel saw something she shouldn't have concerning this neighbor or his activities and that she might have been kidnapped to keep her quiet about it? Just taking some stabs in the dark here.....just seems that wherever there is reluctance and secrecy where such an important matter of a child's life is concerned, there might be some sort of connection to that event or something that person is trying to hide....

    What is your take on this RC?

  18. Ayeka

    Ayeka Member

    Scar, Voyager

    Excellent posts. Thank you for sharing them!

    The neighbour who refuses access may be involved in something else illegal (growing pot or whatever) and doesn't want the property searched for that reason, but you're right, it looks awfully strange (to me) that they'd refuse a search.

    I wish I had something further to add.

  19. "J_R"

    "J_R" Shutter Bug Bee

    Scar, I am not sure fingerprinting anything at the Cooke house at this late date would provide any information and that is probably why it wasn't done at the same time the SO came out for the Luminol testing.

    RC will have to answer your questions about the incident with the prior boyfriend and what Rachel's reaction to being approached with a gun would be but IMHO, I truly believe this does go back to one of about three scenarios:

    1) Someone Rachel knew and trusted
    2) Someone representing themselves as LE
    3) Someone who knew enough about the neighborhood and Rachel's daily activities that they were able to grab Rachel and incapacitate her so quickly that she was unable to scream or put up enough of a struggle to leave an obvious crime scene. This could have been inside or outside the home IMHO.

    IMHO, the answer does lie in Georgetown though there is a possibility that this could have been a construction worker from another area and we do get a lot of them from the Houston area - an area where we know there is a major problem with abductions. One hopes that the SO did a thorough background check on all the construction workers in the immediate area.

    Voyager, Ayeka gave you the same answer I would have on the person who refuses to allow his property to be searched. The SO stated there is no "probable cause" for a warrant to search this property. IMHO, this person should be questioned to get some answers and it really bothers me that anyone would refuse a search knowing that there is a missing person but evidently he is within his legal rights to make that refusal.

    Another thing that truly disturbs me is the refusal to drag Lake Georgetown due to budget constraints. I say - find the budget or raise the funds some way. This is a town that has a lot of money and I know that had this been done in the early months that the SO probably could have had a successful benefit of some kind to raise funds to drag the lake. They probably still can though it might not be as easy as it would have been in the initial months. There are probably other funds at the state level the SO could tap into if they want to accomplish this and I for one do not understand why they haven't exhausted all resources to get this done.

    Sheriff Maspero's term is coming to an end. IMHO, if Sheriff Maspero is looking for re-election he will need to resolve Rachel's case. He may not be aware that those running against him will use this as leverage against him. The voters will also look at what has and hasn't been done in Rachel's case (among other issues) when casting their vote so it's time for the SO to really take a long look at what has and hasn't been done to solve this case and move on it.
  20. RC

    RC FFJ Senior Member

    The garage door

    Let me explain about the garage door. Janet's truck was in the shop and she left the garage door opener in it. When Janet and JoAnn left for school around 8:00 a.m. they did not bother to get out and close the door. Yes, it was stupid but it happened.

    Timeline, JR made some minor mistakes.

    I left for work around 6:00 a.m.
    Janet and JoAnn left for work around 8:00 a.m.
    Rachel's boyfriend Greg called on her cell phone and the call ended at 9:15 a.m. (I have a written record of that)
    I got home around 4:45-5:00 p.m.
    Janet and JoAnn took the rental car back and picked up her truck and arrived home about 30 minutes after I did.

    I consider all of the above as facts. As Mark Young pointed out to me, everything else is not necessarly a fact. We know she disappeared between 9:15 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. oin 01/01/2002.

    Here are some neighbor observations. These are pretty certain but remember Rachel ran everyday and the neighbors might have had the day wrong.
    1. One couple was walking and Rachel pasted them twice. The last time see was about 1/4 mile from our house heading towards it.
    2. A second couple was pulling into their driveway and Rachel was walking (cooling down). They had to stop while she walked across their driveway. This was less than 2 blocks from our house and Rachel was heading towrds the house.
    3. Both of these sitings support each other and they were around 10:30-11:00 a.m.

    Here are a couple of more things.
    1. Both Janet and I don't feel Rachel would have gotten into a car with anyone without taking a shower.
    2. She usually kicked her shoes off on our front porch or just inside the frotn door. (her jogging shoes were not found)
    3. When Rachel stopped to walk she was done. She would not run anymore.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice