Thu Jul 23 22:25:40 PDT 1998

PBAS!
By the way has anyone tried to ascertain the whereabouts of
the Izard boy ..That's if he's still live and what does Doris have to say
about him .Has she made any atempts to find him? .I honestly hope
this case is solved,e specially for poor Doris's sake .Shes been through alot..She deserves some closure and peace,Oh.What happens if this
case is solved,but the murderer is deceased?

Response: If the case is solved and the murderder is deceased, there's no real justice, only truth and a cleared name for those suspects still living in the area.

[from Elbertha]

To Rayson-Sonya: People *do* seem to be getting their facts mixed up here.
Beatrice Carmichael and Howard Hadley both said in their interviews that Beatrice picked up Doris at the Otts home before returning to Howard's hous e at 7 p.m. to cook supper.
In one of the hypnosis sessions, Doris Hammack said that Bitty/Biddy had come to get her *early*.
Also, the Otts have not been interviewed, as far as I know, but they should have been.
The only statements made in regard to Doris being at the Otts home were made by Beatrice and Howard in 1958, and by Doris Hammack (while under hypnosis).
It's occurred to me that Thomas Hinkley may have already known about the layoffs when he got to the Izard house. Remem ber that he had talked to Lydia Catlett, who had overheard Tina (Yvonne) Hawkins talking about the layoffs on the phone. He may not have actually seen anything, but may have been scared to death that his brother was involved.
I think that Elliott P erch was trying to stir the men into violence against Izard and Bowlan while he was at Sid's. I noticed that Ed Rebstock only drank one beer and left just before Jimmy Warren swung at Perch. I'm still suspicious of Rebstock. He had also been overheard t hreatening Richard Izard and Bowlan--and he wasn't drunk, having had only one beer. There are a few men whose whereabouts at the time of the murders aren't verified, but I can't really pin the murders down to being any one of them.
Beatrice Carmich ael went to Sid's around 1:30 (I think), looking for Howard. It's possible that she heard that Howard was drunk and making threats against Richard Izard, so it would make sense that she might go roaring into the Izard driveway in an attempt to stop him f rom doing something foolish. She may have just missed the murderers, but found LeAnne in the kitchen, got her, and then came upon Ricky in the driveway and picked him up and took them to Howard's.
Oh, well, I now seem to always be speculating on th is case. It's taking over my life!
Elbertha

Response: Good point about the Otts. There doesn't seem to be any information on this family. Still, it's questionable that Doris was old enough yet to realize that Carmichael had arrived to pick her up early. Perhaps her sensation of not wanting to leave translated in her mind that Biddy had come too early. As for Rebstock, he seems like a long-shot. He was identified at Pappy's at 1430-1445 hours with Joe Mitchell. It would take nearly half an hour to get to Pappy's from the murder scene.

from Pbas!..
Even though it would make for a beautiful ending and be
wishful thinking on my part if Doris Hammock was the missing Izard
child, I doubt that she is. Beatrice was less than warm toward Doris
and obviously bi tter, but even still I believe her..Reviewing the text from the forensic hypnioses(sp), it would would seem likely that Doris
is really Hadley's girl and the reason Beatrice was angry was because
the Izard children were disposed of..One question? Where is the Izard boy .If he is still alive why hasn't he surfaced?

Response: The Izard children may have been found. Read news article here.

Snerc Theory - Part II - 'HADLEY TO THE RESCUE' ------Part I of the Snerc theory 'DANAHY'S REVENGE' was posted earlier tonight and focuses on the identities of the killers. Part II traces events following the discovery of the bodies and examines the Detro it events and the identity of Doris Hammack. -------- DAY OF THE MURDERS ------- Mid-afternoon - Elbert Warren takes the children to Richard's parents in Tocopola. They will shelter Ricky but they reject LeAnne because they know Danahy is the father. ---- ---- Late-afternoon - Warren takes LeAnne to Hadley because he knows Hadley can arrange for Beatrice and/or the Otts to look after her. Hadley and Warrwn bury the payoff money in Hadley's garden. --------Saturday night - After the police interviews are co mpleted, Danahy and his thugs come to Hadley's house to try to recover thr payoff money. Beatrice shields LeAnne so Danahy never recognizes her but LeAnne does get blood on her leg from the fight that rages around her. Hadley abd Warren chase off the thug s. Hadley does receive serious enough injuries to force him to get hospital treatment. Beatrice, whoose twin sister died at birth insists that they continue to protect both little girls. -------- Fall 1958 - Hadley goes to Detroit to find a job and leaves both Doris and LeAnne with Beatrice and the Otts. He gets a job reference from Perch on the strengthg of his reputation as a roughneck. He leaves the payoff money buried in the garden of the house now used by the Warrens. Hadley changes his name to Hamma ck to make it hard for Danahy to find him. -------- Late 1959 - Beatrice brings LeAnne to Hadley in Detroit, probably because she has learned that Danahy will be returning and is afraid he will recognize his daughter. -------- November 1959 - Hadley is a sked to kill a mobster but despite his big talk he doesn't have the stomach for it and he winds up helping set up an FBI sting. -------- August 20 1960 - A telegram is sent to Beatrice which purports that Hadley has died. However, Beatrice's handwritten n ote indicates some sort of Western Union mistake. It appears that words are out of sequence and the telegram should have contained the directive "Have Doris come Sunday train." It appears that Hadley is faking his own death with the help of the FBI to hid e from the mob. -------- August 21 Someone, probably Jeannie Warren, brings Doris Hadley to Detroit. -------- August 23 - An unknown woman brings LeAnne to Immaculata. This would almost have to be Jeannie Warren since LeAnne would know Beatrice or Mrs Ott . LeAnne probably had to be sent to Immaculata since Hadley"s new identity would only involve one child. -------- End of August - Beatrice makes a final "Howard" deposit for an amount related to the pawn value of the loose stones from the ring. On August 26, six days after Howard"s supposed death, Beatrice filed the deed on the house. The Warrens were suddenly able to pay for a house probably with some of the payoff money. -------- December 1960 - Beatrice sends $500 to Immaculata because of guilt over L eAnne's fate. THE IDENTITY OF DORIS HAMMACK ------In several other recent cmments I have listed many reasons to believe Doris Hammack is really LeAnne Izard. THe strongest is that Beatrice showed no affection or interest toward Doris Hammack even though s he apparentky loved Doris Hadley very much. Bardwell said Doris Hammack had piercing eyes while Beatrice said Doris Hadley had sad eyes. Doris Hammack made LeAnne Izard-type references to murdered parents, a big brother, her mother's ring, playpen, chocol ate cake, and water-dunking punishment (possibly from flooding the bathroom). Finally, she doubted that Hadley was her father and she did not like Beatrice. There is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that the woman known as Doris Hammack is actually LeAnne Izard.

Response: Good theory, well thought out. But I think there are many doubts that Hammack is actually LeAnne Izard.

Ciaral - extended theory.....
Howard Hadley killed the Izard parents.
The fast moving car was driven by Ms Carmichael.
Ms Carmichael may have taken the children to Hadleys house after seeing what he'd done to the Izard parents.
Ms Hadley went to pick up Doris and came back to find the Izard children gone. She beat on him asking him "where are they?"
Hadley killed and disposed of the children while she was gone.
LeAnne - Garden, Ricky - Well... The blood Doris sat in was from the murder of one of the children.
I am 99.9% sure Doris is Doris Hadley, I am just as sure that the Izard children are dead and that Howard Hadley killed them.
I believe ( but am by no means certain) that he acted alone.
Ms Carmichael p robably didn't want Doris remembering her past for obvious reasons, Doris' memories will point to "Biddy" as being involved at very least in the cover up.

Response: Good point about Carmichael. Her strange behavior during the interview with Doris Hammack has had us pondering her part in this case.

Rayson-Sonya
I don't know where you guys got the info that Biddy picked up Doris at 4:00pm on friday. It says in week#5 responses to our posts that The Otis' said that she picked up Doris between 6:30-7:00pm. Go to answer's for previous posts, click o n week#5 I know it says answers will be soon but the answer's are there for that week(just do it). Now what is puzzleing to me is why would the Otis' say that. Doris clearly remember's having pancakes and playing with the kittens that day. She doesn't men tion lunch, just that Biddy came and got her early that day which 6:30-7:00 is not early. Why did the Otis' lie? What did they gain from Lying?

Response: As we've said, there's reason to believe that Doris' perception of time was off. Trusting the childhood memories of a witness during hypnosis forty years later is one of the downfalls of forensic hypnosis.

This is Ciaral... I still think Hadley did the murders, I believe the children are either in the garden or the well. Ms, Carmichael is dead... search the place!!!!

Response: The kids may have been found. Read the Eagle article here.

[from Elbertha]

To Dixon Hill: That Howard Hadley *attempted* to change for the sake of his daughter shows that he loved her, even though he may have been sometimes abusive toward her. Love for one's child just doesn't go away. Anyway, have a good weekend.

I was just thinking some more on the timetable of the murder:

Around 2:30: Mrs. Hawkins hears a car go roaring up the driveway, saying that she only saw the cloud of dust. Some have suggested that the car may have been ro aring *out* of the driveway. I tend to believe that she meant exactly what she said. I live on a gravel road, and you can tell in which direction a car was going by the way the dust flies.

Around 2:35: Murphy drops Ricky off at the foot of the Izard driveway. Says that he met Thomas Hinckley by the Blakeney place (don't see it on the map) on his way out.

2:41: Thomas Hinckley knocked on Lydia Catlett's door. Time set by radio program per Mrs. Catlett.

Around 2:45: Thomas Hinckley discovers bodies.

2:52: Sheriff/Police received call from Hinckley to report murders.

3:05: First officers arrive at scene.

This timetable gives Thomas Hinckley about 20 minutes to do something about the kids if they w ere still there when he arrived. I don't think he would kill them, as they were his friend's children. He may have thought he was sending them to safety. He could have taken them down to the pasture to meet someone who came to where the school bus turn ed around. That would explain his location when the officers arrived. The person(s) who picked up the children would have then gone in the opposite direction from where the officers would have come.

Between the time the car roared up the drivew ay and the time Hinckley arrived was about 15 minutes. Could this murder plus the kids snatched and gotten out by the murderers in 15 minutes? If Hinckley and Mrs. Catlett were talking on her front porch, it's likely that one of them would have noticed a car coming out of the Izard driveway, so if the murderer probably left either before 2:41 (which creates an even tighter time crunch for committing the murders and snatching the kids) or after Hinckley arrived at the Izard's house.

Note: Thomas Hinckley said in his interview that he saw a couple of cars in addition to the school bus, but nothing noticeable. Maybe he saw them after he saw the school bus, since Elroy Murphy didn't mention them?

If the murderer were still at the house wh en Thomas Hinckley got there, it's likely that the murderer *was* his brother, Walter, because I don't think Thomas Hinckley would be protecting anyone else. I also don't think Thomas Hinckley would still be alive if it was anyone else.

Could Wa lter and Howard Hadley have been together at the Izard house? Could they have possibly arrived *before* 2:30, which would have given them plenty of time to commit the murders? Could the car roaring up the driveway have been Beatrice, who then took the c hildren over to Howard's for safety?

Later, at Howard's house, he could have gotten even drunker and, irritated at the crying children (I imagine *all* the children would have been crying and upset.), hit Ricky and one of the girls hard enough to have killed them. If Doris Hammack is really Doris Hadley, she would probably have been with Beatrice and could have seen the dead bodies, which would account for her dreams, etc. I don't think that Doris Hammack saw the other kids drowned, since she s aid under hypnosis, "He said..", but perhaps heard discussion about drowning or throwing the dead children into water. They may have actually gone to the Sardis reservoir, since she said that the blood was washed off her leg with pond water. A small chi ld would probably call a lake a "pond."
At any rate, I still think that Doris Hammack is probably LeAnne Izard, simply because of her conversation with Beatrice Carmichael and the "thing" she had as a child about having a brother who would come save her.
Elbertha

Snerc Theory Part I - "DANAHY'S REVENGE' -------- The final Snerc Theory will be presented in two parts in view of length and subject matter. Part I will cover events through the discovery of the bodies and will emphasize identification of the killers. Pa rt II - 'HADLEY TO THE RESCUE' will discuss later events and emphasize identification of Doris Hammack. Part I - 'DANAHY'S REVENGE" is changed very little from the original version posted July 5. -------- 1952-1955 Danahy and Lisa resumed their affair and Danahy was LeAnne's father. -------- March - April 1958 Richard did agree to help the union and began accepting payoff money. -------- March - April 1958 Perch made a deal with Bowlan to undermine the union effort. The two apparently met at tha resevoir. Perch identified union leaders, disclosed Richard's sell=out and possibly stole a package which he incorrectly thought might be a shipment of payoff money. -------- THE DAY OF THE MURDERS -------- 0900-1000 Bowlan met with Richard to force him to announc e the lay-offs and to let him know he knew about Richard's betrayal. Bowlan was setting Richard up for worker retaliation but not ncessarily murder. -------- 1100 Richard makes the announcement. -------- 1230 Richard arrives home and interrupts Lisa hangi ng her wash. He leaves his keys in his truck possibly so he can make a quick escape if they were threatened. -------- 1300 Elbert Warren, Danahy, Corey and Booker leave the bar. -------- 1300-1400 Corey and Booker attack Warren who puts up a good fight. D uring this brawl something is said which lets Warren know that Danahy is on his way to the Izards. -------- 1345-1400 Richard and Lisa argue while Richard is digging up payoff money from garden. The argument may be over the end of the payoff payments or o ver Danahy or both. Richard was wearing work gloves which left no fingerprints and was holding the shovel in a digging position with his hands two feet apart as was shown in the blood stains on the handle. He swung around without changing his grip and hit and killed Lisa with the shovel. -------- 1345-1400 In either panic or grief, Richard ran to get two wet towels from the wash to clean Lisa's wounds and dropped two other items that he also accidently scooped from the wet laundry. --------1345-1400 Danah y arrived before Richard got back to Lisa's body. Richard may have tried to grab a tool to defend himself but Danahy attacked him with some other weapon, knocked Richard down and then kicked him to death with steel-toed work boots. -------- 1400-1430 Elbe rt Warren arrived on the scene probably before Danahy could get the payoff money and Danahy fled. Warren probably got the payoff money, Richard's wallet and Lisa's ring from the kitchen. He carried LeAnne to the creek with him when he planted the blanket and cap to make the killer think the children had drowned. -------- 1435 Ricky arrives on the school bus. -------- 1436-1438 Murphy sees Ricky at the first turn in the driveway where he is talking to Warren who is hidden from Murphy's view by the tree lin e. -------- 1441 Warren drives away with both children while Hinkley is visiting Catlett.-------- !445-1450 Hinkley discovers the bodies. END OF PART I

Response: Interesting theories, though you seem to have little faith in the decency of any of these people.

[From: Dixon Hill]


One more item... The Izard's house is on County Road 106, locally known as Sadler's Hill Road. In the hypnosis transcripts, Doris says (of her bloody "get it off me" experiences) that she was "in the old house" on Hope Road. Hadley's employment record from the Bowlan factory states his address as "Box 24, Hopewell Road, Oxford."

The Otts also lived on Hopewell Rd.

I think this further wraps up the fact that Doris was Hadley's daughter.

T here doesn't seem to be any evidence of Carmichael's home address before she moved into the Hadley house. Her witness interviews were conducted at her business. Where'd she live?

Also, has anyone found any information about how far apart Hadley 's home, the Izard home, the Ott's home, and Carmichael's home were from each other?


--- Dixon Hill, P.I.

Response: Recent developments have answered some questions about Hope Road. This is now a county road, perpindicular to Old Taylor Road, near where we drained the pond on the old Hadley property.

[From: Dixon Hill]

Elbertha: Okay, so it's a given that Bowlan for all practical purposes could not go 70 MPH for any appreciable length of time from Oxford to Memphis. Seems you've pinned that down solidly.

I didn't express mys elf clearly about Hadley. I agree the violent, abusive, bingeful personality was there from early on. I'm saying it got worse -- he lost what little conscience he had.

Unless I'm forgetting an earlier post, I'm the one who proposed that Bea wan ted to misdirect Doris into thinking she's Hadley's daughter, by phoning in her own "tip." I've retracted that view. Too convoluted plus it doesn't really agree with the facts. Given any two equally plausible explanations, the simpler one is usually co rrect.

I think you're right to chase down some of the other accomplices. I believe there might have been a "comedy of errors." Except that in the particularly dark comedy, the errors all combined to obfuscate the facts rather than to reveal the m. That doesn't usually happen; usually something comes unhinged and gives away the case. But you never know... I've seen some crazy mis-coincidences in my time (the universe sometimes does tend towards maximum perversity!)

I probably wo n't be able to post anything more until Monday.

Until then,
    --- Dixon Hill, P.I.

[from Elbertha]

I just noticed something. In the notes about the murder scene, this sentence jumped out at me:
"T. Hinkley located in area south of scene, near fence line at Hawkins Creek to southwest of garden."

As I said bef ore, there was an awful tight time element between the time Ricky got off the school bus and the discovery of the murders. Suppose Thomas Hinkley was the one who threw the baby blanket and Ricky's cap into the creek? Maybe he *had* already heard about t he lay-offs and thought his brother had something to do with the murders. Maybe he found the kids there at the house and called someone before calling the police and arranged for them to pick the kids up, and then threw the blanket and cap into the creek to make it look as though they had drowned. I'm not sure how he would think this would clear his brother, but it would account for his excessive hand-wringing and nervousness when being interviewed.
Hmmm! Gotta think about this some more!
Elb ertha

Response: Good point. We haven't shut out this path yet.

[from: Elbertha]

To Dixon Hill: I get to be a P.I.? Kewl! O.K. Bowlan driving 70MPH between Oxford and Memphis. He'd be lucky to get to Holly Springs, let alone Memphis, alive, considering the state of Hwy. 7 and Hwy. 78. Hwy. 7 was a ver y narrow and very crooked road before they straightened it out about 10 years ago. Plus, if the cops were as vigilant on that road then as they are now, he would have been stopped before he got to Abbeville. Also, Hwy. 78 (used to be called Death High way) was a crooked and dangerous road before they put the expressway in. I really don't think Bowlan would have driven that fast on either road. I think he valued his hide too much.
Hadley and his daughter: It's possible that his wife died in childbirth as a result of the beatings he gave her, and he may have regretted that. I think that he did love his daughter, but was at least verbally abusive to her during his drunken binges. Beatrice Carmichael practically said so. Many people who abus e their children do love them, but the abuse comes from their own demons. Howard was abusive toward his wife before his daughter's birth, so it's likely he was abusive toward his daughter, even though he probably loved her. I don't think Howard really h ad a personality change; the abusive and violent personality was always there. Doris Hammack made remarks that indicated that she wasn't sure if Howard was her father; it seems to me that she should have *known* that he was her father.
I agree with whoever first said that Beatrice Carmichael probably made the phone call to the 'Oxford Eagle', saying that Doris Hammack resembled the Hadley family. Beatrice couldn't afford to have it come out that Doris Hammack was really LeAnne Izard, because it wo uld implicate her in the murders.
BTW, are Lisa Izard's parents still living? Would it be possible to get a known photo of Lisa Izard and compare it with the Doris Hadley photo that Beatrice Carmichael had?
Given the tight time schedule betwe en Ricky's being dropped off by the school bus and the time the bodies were discovered, it *does* seem as though someone in the immediate neighborhood may have been involved in concealing the children. I still think that Ricky, at least, was probably kil led at Howard's house because of the things Doris said in the hypnosis session.
Elbertha

Response: Lisa Izard's parents are no longer living, and we don't have any old pictures of her to compare with Carmichael's Hadley photo.

[From: Dixon Hill]


Whoever said this case is maddening is right! Way too many suspects. I must have a masochistic streak in thinking this is fun!

Murphy: You're right about the kids; that occurred to me later that evening while driving in the car. The blood either came from a bloody garment of Howard's, which may have been shoved under the bed and which Doris might have sat upon, or else one or both of the kid's bodies were on top of the bed and dripped blood down. [Sorr y for being so graphic. This is an ugly case.]

I too am confused about the problems with disposing of the corpses. It's only a hunch, but I don't believe the "well" (whatever that refers to) was used as punishment for the kids. I think Doris witnessed the body disposal and Howard used that to terrify his daughter into submission.

Even though Hurricane Creek was usually shallow, it was reported at the time to be deep and fast-moving. But that's where the search was concentrated on. Either the creek is a red herring, or else it was faster moving than anybody calculated, and the bodies ended up wayyyy downstream. Either way, we wouldn't be able to find any bodies now....

Elbertha: If you're investigating the Izard murders, and aren't being paid by the government to do it, then it doesn't matter if you're being paid or not --- you're now a P.I. Congrats! And thanks a bunch for the distance/time info; we needed that. Actually what we needed was a P.I. lo cated near Oxford and that's you.

"Biddy" was clearly Beatrice's nickname. See her bio. "Bit" was either a nickname Howard used, or was easy for little Doris to say.

I think Bowlan already had cash problems. I don't think he went in f or the mob thing... not sure whether he was approached or not, but if he was he probably tried to distance himself without saying "no". Either that or he said "yes" and then changed his mind. I think the "Bowlan collection" was his attempt at putting to gether a paper trail to keep him safe from an FBI investigation if ever there was one.

The total mob presence in Oxford consisted of... Perch. I don't believe there was any mob presence before him. So there weren't an abundance of henchm en; he had to work with the "materials" (read: drunks and rowdies) at hand.

Anyone have any thoughts about the Rebstock/Mitchell theory? I think this is worth investigating. (I would but I'm losing steam so I will stick to my current theory unl ess it just falls apart.)

Elbertha's theory of adult Doris not being Howard's daughter seems to be based on a discarded theory of mine as to who the tipster was. I'd still like to know who called the Oxford Eagle (newspaper). But the evidence f or Doris Hammack/Hadley is so strong I just can't see there being any indirection there.

Rayson-Sonya: No one sensible would have laughed you out of here. It's a far less outlandish and contrived theory than some of the suggestions I've s een around here. [I've ROTFL'ed on some of them in private that I certainly haven't flamed in public... and you know I'm not one to wear kid gloves. Pun intended.]

Elbertha again: Maybe they would drive 70. My mom used to do 70 (albeit on a highway) in 1966 in our '62 Mercury Comet. Bowlan would certainly have had a car with the muscle to sustain 70 MPH for 2 hours.

Also, you said you had a problem with the Howard-attitude-change towards his daughter. Normally I'd agree but I think if you read his bio you see a distinct and deep-seated personality change... for the worse. He was overcome with grief when his wife died. He tried to become a better person for his baby daughter but failed. Finally, he committed a gris ly set of murders. Past this point he seems to be just a violent, drunken, selfish sociopath. He brags to the union steward in Detroit that he's had experience in dealing with people violently. When they say "something more permanent" he says "I'm your man." Sounds like a man who's either on the verge of self-destructing, or has backed away from that brink by becoming more comfortable with the role of murderer.... and seems certainly willing to do it again. Only he was thwarted by the FBI taking the target into custody.

Later!
    --- Dixon Hill, P.I.

Response: The phone tap transcripts is certainly a major aid in determining just what Hadley would and wouldn't do. You're right -- he says he's "Busted a skull or two in the past." Read more here.

Snerc's theory about the "unknown woman"-------- A final undecided issue is the identity of the woman who took LeAnne Izard to Immaculata and who probably brought Doris Hadley from Oxford to her father in Detroit on Sunday August 21. It seems to be a pro cess of elimination. It could not have been Beatrice because LeAnne would have known her and Beatrice would have known LeAnne had the ring. It could not have been Mrs. Ott because LeAnne would have known her. The only likely remaining candidate would seem to bee Jeannie Warren.

Snerc's theory about the "unknown woman"-------- A final undecided issue is the identity of the woman who took LeAnne Izard to Immaculata and who probably brought Doris Hadley from Oxford to her father in Detroit on Sunday August 21. It seems to be a pro cess of elimination. It could not have been Beatrice because LeAnne would have known her and Beatrice would have known LeAnne had the ring. It could not have been Mrs. Ott because LeAnne would have known her. The only likely remaining candidate would seem to bee Jeannie Warren.

[from: Elbertha]

Just a comment on what I've seen written here and on the web pages:

People are wondering about why Lisa was doing so much laundry. Remember that this was 1958, and a lot of people here in the South still used wringer washing machines (my own mother used one until 1962). Most people did their laundry only once a week, so Lisa would likely have been doing quite a lot of laundry that day. As for the white shirt being washed with LeAnne's pink dress, it could be that L isa waited until she had washed two loads before going to hang the clothes out.
Also, women wearing slacks was not all that common in the 50s. They normally wore housedresses, and the white shoes could have been an old pair that she wore around the house.
Gotta go. More later.
Elbertha

Response: Thanks, Elbertha, for being the cultural interpreter.

[from: Elbertha]

To Khruhschev: I figure that it would take at LEAST 2 hours to get to Memphis from Oxford in 1958. Bowlan would have been pushing it, though, to have made it back to Oxford in time to kill the Izards by 2:30-2:45.
If he left at 10 a.m., he would have had to drive to Memphis (not sure what the speed limits were in those days, but I'm sure nobody drove at 70MPH as they do now), go downtown to the Peabody Hotel, check in by noon, go to lunch, get into his car and get bac k to Oxford by around 2:30 p.m. That allows only 30 minutes for checking into the hotel and going to lunch, and would still be pushing it to get back to Oxford.
If Bowlan had anything to do with the murders, I'm sure that he wouldn't have soiled hi s hands to do it.

I still think that Doris Hammack may be LeAnne Izard--mainly because of Beatrice Carmichael's attitude. Beatrice *wanted* Doris Hammack to be Doris Hadley because people knew that she had cared for a child she said was Doris Hadley, and if it turns out that Doris Hammack is actually LeAnne, then that implicates Beatrice.

I keep seeing people wondering about the "old biddy," but it's perfectly natural for a small child to mispronounce a name. Bitty/Biddy = Beatrice

Also, in the hypnosis session, Doris Hammack says that Bit came to pick her up *early*. Beatrice was supposed to have picked her up after about 4 p.m., which is *not* what I would call early. And, people are saying that a small child would n ot switch to accepting a first name change. I think it's entirely possible, given enough time and the right circumstances.
I do have a problem with the section of the hypnosis transcript where Doris Hammack said that she was at the Otts' that day, but also wonder if it wasn't possible that this wasn't fed to her as a small child, as well. Maybe the woman who fixed her some pancakes for breakfast was actually her mother, Lisa. Did the Izards have any kittens or cats around their house?

Earlier, I posted a note where I said that I believe all three children were at the Hadley house. It's possible, of course, that there were only two children there, but the reason I think that at least one of the Izard children was there is because in th e hypnosis transcript, Doris Hammack said, "Don't pick me!"

I also have a problem with Howard's attitude toward his child after the murders. True, he was probably abusive during times when he was drunk, but it seems that he cared about his chi ld. A parent's attitude and love for his child doesn't change like it seems Howard's did--unless, of course, the child wasn't really his.
Anybody else think the way I do?
Elbertha

Response: I agree with your assesment of Bowlan in Memphis -- no way he could get back to commit the murders.

[from Spiderhead]

Hello again!

What happens to children who cry? In this case, obviously, they die. There is no way that Doris Hammack can be LeAnne Izard. It seems fairly apparent to me that she saw the murders of the two Izard chil dren. Perhaps Howard took the children all the way to Michigan before disposing of them, most likely in the pond that Doris refers to (when she talks of washing the blood off). If there weren't so darn many suspects, this case might be a little easier t o figure out! Good one, guys!!

-Spidey

P.S. - Does anyone know of OJ Simpson's whereabouts at the time? One can never be too sure. :)

Response: As you'll see with the latest update, the pond question might have been solved. Read Eagle article here.

[from:Khruhschev]

to Elbeartha: THANK YOU!!! thank you for telling us how long it takes to get to Memphis! I wasn't sure (I'm from the North) and I was just going on what the other poster said. You have just proved my point. If It takes 2 ho urs to get to Memphis, Bowlan is definitely NOT in the clear. He left at 10 am. He had plenty of time to drive to Memphis, check in, go to lunch, make sure he was seen by the concierge and the maitre d'. He probably put up a big fuss about the service, to make sure he was remembered. If he were to drive back to Oxford, "take care" of his last remaining union problem, he could have enough time to drive back to Memphis and be seen for dinner. He tells then to ask the conciierge and the maitre d' for his alibi, and all they can say is, he checked in, he was seen at lunch, he was seen at dinner. It would just be assumed that he was there between lunch and dinner.
Khruhschev

Response: Not so sure that Bowlan could have driven back. He's got a tight alibi.

Perch's car wasn't white. It was dark with white fins. To view the car, you can go to the search engine and type "Perch car" choose "all terms" and "sensitive." On the second page of matches, you will find an match that says "Evidence Photo 1958 BelAir " and there you'll find a picture of Perch's car, although, it wasn't the original photo. This one is in black and white, while I remember the other photo being in color. But the old photo was Blue with a white stripe down the center. Does this helop y ou any?
Khruhschev

Response: You can view Perch's car here.

A few more loose ends from Snerc ---------- Little Doris' statement that she had chocolate cake for her birthday AGAIN probably relates to the chocolate cake that LeAnne hugged on her two year birthday.----- Beatrice's shouting about little children, as reported in the hypnosis session probably means that Beatrice who lost a twin sister at birth was insisting that Hadley help protect both of the two little girls of virtually identical ages

Response: You got into the spirit of psychological evaluation, it seems.

Rayson-Sonya
It's funny since I more or less started believing that Doris could not be LeAnne anymore, more people are now coming up with reasons why she maybe LeAnne..this case is driving me nuts...Next case mystery writers found dead in office. A sh ovel and a pair of gloves were found between the victims...wet laundry was dropped by one of the victim's as she rushed to try to save her boss...LOL..
Seriously, I also wondered if it was possible that Mrs. Otis watched LeAnne while she did the Lord' s Work for the church, wonder's what church the Otis's attended? Was gonna post it but thought I would be laughed out of crimescene as too far fetched. Still wonder's why the Otis's said that Bea picked Doris up between 6:30 and 7:00pm. But if that is cor rect then why would Bea pick up LeAnne? Also wonders if the answers are going to be posted about our comments for the past 4 weeks or maybe they can't because the case would be solved earlier then they anticipated.

Rayson-Sonya
I like the theory that Howard was put in the witness protection program that would help resolve this if he were really alive somewhere. ...Wonder's was going over Catlett's interview again when she was talking about the car that was at Ri chard's house and Hannah's. It was described as a dark car with a white arrow onthe back . I looked for the photo of Perch's car, cause for some reason I remember Perch's car was white and I can't find the photo anywhere even used search engine can't find it. So if Perch's car was white, whose car was at Hannah's once by itself,present when the guys were doing union strategy meetings at ther house and going to Richard's house late at night. Can anybody help me?

Response: You can view Perch's car here.

Snerc's thoughts on the Hammack-Carmichael interview--------I believe that this interview provides the strongest evidence that LeAnne Izard is Doris Hammack. As others have noted Beatrice appeared to love Doris Hadley a great deal. She had lived with her and cared for her for over a year and probably over two. She had kept a framed photo in her bedroom for 40 years.--------- Despite this, she showed no joy at a possible reunion with Doris Hadley. She expressed little interest and asked virtually no questi ons about Doris' life. She showed no affection.------- As Elbertha has noted, Beatrice knew that Doris Hammack was not Doris Hadley. It was Beatrice who called the newspaper tp initiate the meeting and her objective was to convince Doris Hammack that she was Doris Hadley.-------I believe that Beatrice was afraid that if it was known that Doris Hadley was someone other than Hammack, attempts would be made to find her and to disrupt the lives that she and her father had established.

Response: Interesting point, though Carmichael probably didn't count on the hypnosis session with Doris Hammack coming out as it did. If she had lived to read about it, this development would have shocked her, to be confronted with the fact that this may be Hadley's daughter after all.

Snerc's theories about the movements of the children ------ Elbert Warren brought both LeAnne and Ricky from the murder scene. ------ He took the children out of town to Richard's parents who wouold protect Ricky but who rejected LeAnne because they knew she was Danahy's child. ------ Elbert took LeAnne to Hadley so the little girl could stay with the Otts or Beatrice. ------ LeAnne and Doris were left with Beatrice and the Otts when Hadley went to Detroit. ------- Beatrice brought LeAnne to Detroit in e arky 1960 (not September 1959 as she claimed) when Danahy returhed to Oxford and became a threat to LeAnne if he should recognize her. ------ Howard sends for Doris when he fakes his own death to start a new identity. ------- LeAnne is taken to Immaculata because Hadley's new identity only provides for one child.

Response: How do you account for Warren's injuries that day, if he was busy transporting kids?

Additional Snerc thoughts about the hypnosis transcripts --------I called attention to a number of elements of the hypnosis session which support my view that Doris Hammack is really LeAnne and that Hadley protected her from her murderous real father, Jes sie Danahy in comments I posted July 21 17:51:02. This comment is to call attention to additional points. -------- As others have noted the yellow and white cage appears to refer to LeAnne's playpen. The reference to another man laughing with Hadley is p robably to Elbert Warren who brought the children from the murder scene and probably helped chase off Danahy and his thugs. The many references to hitting, throwing beer bottles and yelling is clearly a reference to the fight on Saturday when Danahy trie d to reclaim his daughter LeAnne. The dog lying on the ground is probably one of Danahy's thugs who was decked with a beer bottle and who Hadley had called a dog (among other things). --------- Yhe reference to leaving the Otts early is misleading. The hy pnotist thought the blood got on LeAnne the day of the murder when it actually got on her during the fight on the Saturday after the murder. She probably was left at the Otts the night of the murder after Elbert Warren brought LeAnne to Hadley and Beatric e.

one more thing....if hadley was dead and bea got the telegram telling her so, who else knew to contact bea when hadley died, and why contact her about the kid...if hadley was dead...and i say if...why would someone go to so much trouble to telegram bea wh en they could have put the kid in the home themself...that makes no sense..i think tha mob connections that hadley had were because of bea, not perch or anyone at the glove factory...now all i need is a motive for hadley...perhaps it was the layoffs...but that seems too weak...AG!
jIV

Response: Bob Duffy sent the telegram, and he may have met Carmichael at some point. Or maybe he just knew her from talking with Hadley. There is a connection that should be followed up on. Read the telegram here.

wasn't there something about a bloody footprint next to a playpen? maybe doris is leann and hadley killed ricky because he was so old he would be recognized...that would explain the blood talked about in the hypnosis...i don't know if i buy the whole had ley killed the izards thing...i think if that was the case, then why do we need to know so much about the mob....i think bea had something to do with their deaths, maybe she had them killed by the mob for howard and then hadley had to get rid of the child ren himself...their murder sounds like a mob hit...probably a favor for hadley from bea becasue she loved him, and in a fit of rage after he died she put the kid in an orphanage because she realized that he was no good...maybe?
jIV

Response: Traces of blood were found on the top railing of the playpen and one drop of blood found on floor of playpen. Hadley had more mob connections than Carmichael, and if you really want to get down to the mob angle, try Elliot Perch, who was the biggest rabble rouser following the lay-offs.

(From Cheeky1}

While a Leanne is really Doris theory is tempting there is really no way Doris Hammack can't be Doris Hadley if her revelations in the hypnosis sessions are correct.
In the session relating to the day of the murder she is at th e Otts. In her mind at that stage Bea is Howard's friend. LeAnne would not have had that knowledge....unless we construct some babysitting theory involving LeAnne at the Otts.
Cheeky1

Response: You're right. And what reason do we have to construct a babysitting theory?

Snerc's thoughts about HADLEY'S BOGUS DEATH------ As noted in my comment posted July 20 18:54:11, the garbled telegram, when corrected, appears to be a directive from Howaed himself to send the real Doris from Oxford to Detroit, "Have Doris come Sunday tr ain." ------- This means Howard's death was faked. Has anyone noticed that strange things happened to Howard's records in Detroit. Most of his personnel records were destroyed. It took ten months to locate a death certificate. He was supposed to be buried in an unmarked paupers grave, Did the FBI have a witness protection program in 1960? ------ We know Hadley was a drunk, a brawler, a wife beater and a union goon, but there is zero evidence that he ever killed anyone (including the Izards). The most like ly scenario is that he did not have the stomach for the Bello hit, so he helped the FBI set up their sting. If the mob was getting suspicious, the FBI could have helped him fake his own death and begin a new identity with his real daughter.----- He probab ly had to send LeAnne to Immaculata because his new identity would only involve one child.

[Elbertha]

I've managed to thoroughly confuse myself. I had thought that Hadley maybe killed his child by accident and snatched LeAnne to cover his act, but I have more questions.

RE: The Union/Mob motive

Mrs. Euple Stur gis said that Lisa Izard was "terrified of those communists and their union preaching" and that she had overheard Lisa talking to her mother about this at church on Sunday, April 6.

Thought: Suppose Richard WAS taking kickbacks from the union and Lisa was getting scared about the possible ramifications.

Thought: It is strange that Mr. Bowlan and Elliott Perch BOTH went to Memphis that day. (Note: To those who estimate traveling time of 60 minutes from Oxford to Memphis, remember that this is 1958 when people likely didn't drive as fast, and Hwy. 7 at that time was a narrow, twisting road, plus Hwy. 78 from Holly Springs to Memphis wasn't really a good road, either. I would say that it probably took a good 2 hours, at least, to g et to Memphis (about 75-85 miles one way due to the crooked roads. I live near Oxford, and I know.)

Thought: Mr. Bowlan is supposed to have gotten deeply into debt with the factory. In debt to whom? The "Mob?" All the cutbacks and cutting o f corners he was doing suggests to me that he may have been trying to realize as much cash as possible in anticipation of closing down the plant. His interview indicates that he may have suspected Richard Izard of working with the union activists. He co uld have been angry because if the workers had unionized, his costs would have increased considerably--thus cutting down on the amount of cash he would have been able to sock away. However, this theory doesn't jive with the other theory of collusion betw een Mr. Bowlan and Elliott Perch. I'll have to think about this some more.

Thought: In regard to Hadley being hired by the union mobsters to kill Richard Izard, I'm sure that Hadley is connected in some way, but I have to wonder about why the y would trust this job to a known drunk.
I'm leaning toward the theory that Hadly was there, whether by design or whether he accidentally stumbled onto the murder scene, but that the murder, if done for hire, was committed by someone other than Hadley . Who? Well, in reviewing the suspects' interviews, I notice the inconsistency between the interviews of Ed Rebstock and Joe Mitchell.
Each claims to not have more than one beer at Sid's, and left early to avoid the fighting.
Ed Rebstock cla ims that he went to Pappy's on Hwy. 6, arriving around 2:40 p.m., with Joe Mitchell arriving around 3 p.m., and they stayed there until about 5:30 p.m. Pappy Harris confirmed this.
Joe Mitchell said that he went to Sardis to see about some field wor k but couldn't find anyone to speak to. (The farm stated that they were looking for field hands, but said that no one was around the house at that time). Returning directly home, he stopped at Red Spot for gas at about 2:30 p.m. and arrived home at 3:10 p.m. (verified by wife and daughter). (Attendant at Red Spot said Joe had stopped there for gas but could recall time more specifically than between 2:30 and 3:30.) Joe Mitchell also said that he talked to his mother on the phone at about 3:30 p.m., and learned of the murders at approximately 4:30 on the radio.
Who is lying? Joe Mitchell or Ed Rebstock? I tend to lean toward Ed Rebstock. Perhaps Ed Rebstock was the "hired goon" who killed the Izards, with Hadley happening upon the scene either d uring or immediately afterwards and taking LeAnne Izard. Perhaps the murderer came upon Ricky while leaving the scene, and snatched him (and later killing him) to avoid leaving a witness. I don't think a "hired goon" would have gone into the house to ge t the baby out of her playpen. I think that Howard or Beatrice probably got her. Note: Biddy or Bitty could be a young child's attempt to say "Beatrice."

Thought: Doris Hammack/LeAnne Izard.

Beatrice could indeed, as one other pe rson suggested, been the one who called Doris Hammack and suggested that she resembled the Hadley family. Why? Maybe because she knows that Doris is really LeAnne and wanted to reinforce the idea that Doris Hammack is Doris Hadley. As for the childhood photo of "Doris Hadley": If the child Beatrice was caring for was indeed LeAnne Izard, and assuming that Beatrice had the child's photo made, the photo would have to be one of LeAnne Izard, which means that the use of the photo as a means of confirming that Doris Hammack is Doris Hadley is useless. Beatrice Carmichael was too upset, IMO, for someone who was really taking care of Doris Hadley instead of LeAnne Izard.

Well, as I said, I've managed to confuse myself--big time!

Elber tha (P.I. Wannabe)

Response: You're right on questioning who would turn over a mob hit to a drunkard like Hadley. This question arises again when he is contacted about a possible hit in Detroit. (Read the transcript here.) Perhaps by giving the job to someone of Hadley's reputation, the contractor could distance himself from the mess by publicly dismissing him as a drunk. Suspicion of Rebstock arises every now and then, but he's still not a strong suspect in this investigation because he didn't stand out as a troublemaker. Still, he would be the perfect, unassuming sort who could be hired. Little is known about him.

[From: Murphy]

Dix: I think you've summed things up pretty well. The only thing I question is the remains of the Izard children being found in the well. They could very well be (no pun intended). But we don't have any indication of whet her the well was still in use at the time of the murders. It easily could have been, either as a primary or secondary water source. If it was, it's unlikely Hadley would have left the bodies in the well since it would contaminate the water. Also, over time, wouldn't a distinctive odor have emanated from the well if decaying bodies were in it?

The well probably was used as a "punishment," certainly for Doris and maybe even for Ricky and LeAnne. Hence, Doris's statement during the first hypno sis session "Do you know what happens to kids who cry?...The water, they go in, he puts them in."

I wonder about the Izard children being drowned. If they were, what was the source of the blood Doris sat in? The descriptions of Hadley's injurie s don't seem to indicate a wound that would have bled that much or that long (from the time he was at the Izards') to leave enough blood on the floor for Doris to get it on her leg when she sat on it. So where did that blood come from? My guess is that it must have come from one or both of the Izard children.

The Vicar may be right about looking for the remains in the reservoir based on the references to floating in the second hypnosis session, though I don't believe McPhail was involved in the murders. I don't think Hadley would have disposed of the bodies in Hurricane Creek even though it runs behind the Izard home because (a) the Eagle described it as "usually shallow" and (b) the police and volunteers searched the creek area pretty thoroug hly in the days following the murders I don't think he would have left the bodies in the well because of reasons already stated above. That leaves the reservoir as the only other place nearby to "float 'em" doesn't it?

I don't have a good feel for the distances between (a) Izard home and Hadley home, (b) Hadley home and reservoir, (c) Hadley home and Carmichael home or (d) Hadley home and surrounding neighbors. It would be easier to gauge the feasibility of all these events (murder of the chil dren, disposal of the bodies, etc.) if we knew how much time it took to get from place to place and how easily the neighbors could have seen or heard what was happening. Can anyone help?

--Murphy

Response: If you haven't checked it yet, see the Eagle article about the Old Taylor pond here.

I still think not only Hadley committed the murders, I don't think he acted alone, I think the friend of his with the fast cars, I can not remember his name, and Tommy Joe's brother, and Danahy, all had a hand in it. Either way Doris is not one of the Iz zard children, and I still believe the children are dead, I believe that is why Doris keeps remembering Hadley's words about what happens to children, who cry.

Response: The hot-rodder you speak of is Harvey Booker. If all of these guys were involved, that's a lot of mouths to keep shut.

I want to add to my previous comment and those of others. I think Det. McPhail may have co-conspired with
Hadley and may have dumped the Izard children in the resevoir. He was then spotted by Elbert Warren. Warren and the detective
fought and W arren was knocked unconscious. Warren felt he would not be believed, because people would be apt to believe the det.
over Warren given his history with the detective's woman and his own reputation.
At the resevoir the detective may have gotten mud and blood on himself--therefore the need for the coat. One might even believe that
McPhail made a "freudian slip" when he was interviewed by the current detective and made refererence to Warren's story about being
in a fight at the resevoir. McPhail made a comment then about sticking like mud.
Therefore if possible check the resevoir and the well for the children or other clues.
[From:the vicar]

Response: What do you think would be McPhail's motive in killing Izard?

[From: Dixon Hill]


Snerc: Where on Earth did you come up with the idea that Hadley did not die in Detroit?

Khruhschev: You wanted feedback. I agree with Suzd that your latest posting in particular was quite pe rceptive. I didn't dissect Bea's interview like you did, but everything you bring up jibes with the impressions I had while reading the transcript. I didn't completely pick up on "...I never wanted to be a part of it." Yep -- she revealed she wa s an accessory right there.

I believe her phrase "not to speak of" meant she kept receiving money (erratically --- which perfectly agrees with our picture of Hadley), but she didn't really have any kind of real communication with him.

Th e idea about Izard as idealist vs. Perch as mob-connected schemer fits perfectly. I believe your idea completes my theory of Perch planning the murder because it fully fleshes out the motive.

Rayson-Sonya's analysis of the hypnosis session also dovetail very nicely into Khruhschev's thoughts and my own. I believe little Doris called him "Howard" because he distanced himself from his own daughter. I can just hear him yelling, "DON'T call me 'Daddy!' I'm Howard. Get that straight , kid. Howard." Also, don't forget, Doris was apart from her father for nearly a year, at the age when most children develop their basic intellectual/emotional relationship with their parents.

So, to recap. Perch hired Howard to kill or seriou sly rough up Richard Izard; motives as described by Khruhschev. He killed Lisa because she got in the way. Perch did all the planning, Hadley carried out the plan by just "jumping right into it." After Richard and Lisa were dead, Howard realized he was about to be seen by witnesses and grabbed little Ricky and LeAnne "just in time" (unfortunately). He got back over to his own house and realized the kids were a liability, not an asset. So he killed them either by drowning or by beating. Bea and Doris were involved pretty much in accordance with the recent theories below. [If it was death by beating, Hadley got rid of the bodies by putting them down a well. If it was by drowning, then he drowned them in the well and left them there.]

Elber t Warren stumbled upon a clandestine meeting at the reservoir, and was assaulted pretty much as he claimed except that he saw and heard more than he admitted. His assailants threatened him with a swift and gory death if he blabbed.

Afterwards, Hadley held the temporary job at the farm supply for a while, then got a job in Detroit & used Perch as his reference. He used an alias for his last name, got involved with the mob there, his first action with them was a failed hit. Either his lifestyl e caught up with his health (heart attack, as stated on the death certificate), or he was bumped off by the mob. His own side might have done it (figuring he spilled the beans and let the target get away), or the opposing family might have done it in ret aliation. Little Doris was witness to a lot of violence and carousing during her short stay with Howard in Detroit. She may indeed have also witnessed a murder (Howard's?) which would reinforce her trauma and the resultant nightmares.

Rest assu red I didn't come up with all this myself! I'm sure to mess up the attributions, so here's my list of "primary contributors" in no particular order: Suzd, Rayson-Sonya, Murphy, "Khruhschev," Laries, Cheeky1, Wix, Niki. Plus a host of others. Sorry if I forgot somebody! :-) ]


--- Dixon Hill, P.I.

I believe that she's describing Howard Hadley a.k.a Howard Hammock as
the man. The blood is her parents' it got on her when he took her out
of the crib. After he had drowned Ricky. Probably Ricky saw his parents and started to cry and then run he was caught then drowned.
The murders happened because Mr.Izard knew Perch was trying to bring the mob in at Bowlan Gloves and was therefore killed. That still left
Howard Hadley out of a job so he reminded some people in Chicago of his excellent work with the Izard's. He was awarded with a job and because of his work another hit.Mrs.Carmichael may or may not have witnessed the killings but I think she knew.[oxford]

elbert Warren had three kids, a wife, and no job, what do you think he did with $2600.... fed his loved ones

Response: Good point. But it was $2,650.

Isn't it suspicious that Beatrice Carmichael opened a bank account on 4/17/58 and deposited $150 at that time (6 days after the murders)? Where did this money come from? Supposedly, this account was for money Hadley gave to Beatrice to take care of his daughter while he was in Detroit. But Hadley didn't move to Detroit until much later that year. Also, supposedly, Hadley paid for this child care bill with the proceeds of renting out his home to Elbert. But Elbert didn't start renting it until that wi nter.

Also suspicious is that although Elbert Warren cashed his life insurance (from Glove Factory) for $2600 on 4/25/58 he didn't have enough to pay off his home and had to rent from Hadley? Property in 1958 couldn't have cost much more than a couple of thousand. What did he do with the $2600?

- Drainer

Response: That money wouldn't have gone far with Elbert out of work and harboring a serious drinking habit. On top of that his wife Jean was laid off the following year.

has anybody done a d.n.a. test on this lady and the izard family?

Response: No DNA testing has been done because this test is extremely expensive. Only a current case of the utmost importance could be considered for such funding.

I suspect that Mr Perch Had Something to do with this the reason being is one of the interviews said in it that mr perch has a belair i did some resarch on this car.The Tire Marks were from a car or truck with 14in tires the belair back then had 14 in tir es.What kinda car did the izards have? Did any one have a Belair other then Mr. Perch?
[from:Det.Iverson]

Response: The Izards had a Rambler and a Ford pick-up. By all records, no one else invovled in the case owned a Belair.

{from T. C.}

Hey Dixon. good thoughts, but if Hannah Waither's got the kids out of there, how do you explain the blood and dirt on the playpen and floor?

{from T.C.}

I have only recently started reading this case, so I have to catch up. I have a question for those of you who think Doris Hammack is really LeAnne Izard. If she is, what happened to Doris Hadley? And, Has it ever occured to anybody that the killer may not even have been anybody from around the area? And also, if Elbert Warren had taken one the children to Richard's parents, Don't you think they would have let the police know about it? I'm sure, that they would have wanted to know who their son. One other thing, one of you said that the children may have had different fathers, I just wondered what would cause you to thunk this.

By the way, don't any of you have spell check?

Response: Surely the Izards murders were not coincidence following the plant lay-offs, though it hasn't been discounted that a hired killer was brought in from out of town, then quickly sent on his way. In regards to your question about the identity of the children's father, Lisa Izard dated Jessie Danahy throughout high school. The jealous lover later became an employee with Bowlan Glove, under the orders of Lisa's then husband, Richard. Read more about Lisa Izard and Jessie Danahy here.

Snerc looks ahead----------How should the police proceed to wrap up this case? Is there any way to find out with assurance what really happened? Are any perpretators left to punish? -----------Several key witnesses remain alive and can be questioned. Elb ert Warren is still available for questioning. Howard Hadley apparently did not die in Detroit and can provide important testimony if he can be located. Harvey Booker is still alive but since he was one of the perpetrators he is not likely to be a useful witness. Doris Hadley and Ricky Izard can corroborate some events if they will come forward.

Response: All evidence in possession suggests Hadley is dead.

(From: BeeJay)
It seems that Howard Hammak was indeed Howard Hadley and Doris is Doris Hadley. The Izard children must be dead and in the well on the property, now long covered over. By going home early that day Biddy saw either the actual killing or the disposal of the bodies, either way she knew what happened and became an accomplice. Doris got into the blood on the floor and was traumatized further (besides the fear she already had of her abusive drunken violent father). The killings were unpremedi tated and due to his temper and drunken state, he took the kids when he realized the mailman was coming and fled over the creek with them as he didn't have time to finish the job and remain undetected (he killed them when he got home). Perch got him his j ob with the mob/union connections and Howard eventually sent for Doris, who was dropped off at the shelter when she wasn't picked up fast enough. There is no-one left alive to prosecute, and Doris is not the Izard baby.

[suzd]

Just want to commend khruhschev for an excellent posting today. Very thorough, insightful and plausible!

[from: Emerald]
Well, I think this new info points the finger at Howard as the one who disposed of the children. Bea had the misfortune of knowing this info, and living with it. The sad thing is that Doris is Hadley's daughter and has been torm ented with these memories all her life. Hopefully these sessions will reveal then whole story for her so she can get past it and go on. I think Perch was behind the murders. I believe Hadley & his bunch carried it out.
I am ready for the conclus ion, when will this be wrapped up?

Response: The end is near. New developments have turned up two children's bodies. Read about it here.

Rayson-Sonya
Still going over the hypnosis again. Several things really bug me.
Session 1 she refers to Howard as Howard not Dad even though he says he's her dad she doesn't believe him a five year old would know her father by then. Yellow and w hite refers to the Fire escape in Michigan. She describes him as killing a dog down below then he seems to be describing either a fight he was in or a killing then he sees Doris and she becomes frightened.
Session 2 she describes having the dream for the first time at Immaculata. She remembers the blood on her leg, she is in the Howard's house on Hope Road. *Note she still calls him Howard. She tells bit to get the blood off. Who is Bit? Howard's friend...seems since Howard and Beatrice were so close Doris should think of Beatrice as a mother figure, not Howard's friend. Beatrice stops Hadley from hurting her he says he's gonna get her Beatrice hits him while she is holding and protecting Doris. She says blood was washed off by a pond. Then her memor ies go back to Michigan,(yellow and white)it is hot she can't breath, where him go.. where him go..After prompting by the work Floating her memories go back to Miss. she descibes him going to the water when they leave, then going to sleep under the bed. < BR>Session 3 Doris clearly remember's Mrs. Otis making pancakes. Beatrice comes to get her early.They go to Howard's house he is there, they began fighting Doris hides under the bed hearing bits and pieces of the fight.He has to get rid of something Beatr ice yells at him she hits him..little children Doris goes to sleep Beatrice wakes her up by pulling her arm upon waking up she remember's the blood she sat in. Beatrice takes her home...Her next memory is her being on the fire escape again in Michigan.. < BR>I think she saw a murder in Michigan, which triggered her early memories in Mississippi. I know this is really long but trying to get this together is tough.

Response: Bit seems to be Biddy Carmichael. There was an interesting comment posted that suggests Hadley demanded that Doris call him "Howard" as opposed to "Daddy" to keep their kinship vague.

I don't think the hypnosis session was conclusive at all. Seems like she fought the hypnosis, or it wasn't administered correctly. Don't see that any conclusions can safely be drawn from this. I'd do it again.

Hasn't any physical evidence from the original case ever been examined with today's modern approach, testing methods, etc?

Response: The hypnosis session was conducted by Dr. Gregory J. Sykas, a reputable forensic hypnosis who administered the session correctly. Still, in this procedure it's hard to determine what Doris Hammack recalled or what was imagined from years of pondering these dreams and episodes. As for testing the physical evidence, it is a costly procedure that is usually reserved for active cases. Though this case has been reopened, the funds aren't available for testing at this point.

[CHarrisonB} I feel sure from the lastest information that Doris is in fact Doris Hadley. Howard killed the Izards and when the kids cried, he took them with him to his house. He killed them there and dumped the bodies in water ( probably the resovoir or the new dam site) I still don't know why he Killed Richard.

Snerc's reasons to believe Doris Hammack is LeAnne Izard and not Doris Hadley-------- Bardwell said Hammack "didn't want old biddy taking care of her," and Hammack reported similar memories while Carmichael and Hadley appeared to be very close.--------Ba rdwell and James both said Hammack claimed her parents were murdered. -------- Bardwell, James and Hammack all reported a memory of a big brother while Hadley was an only child.-------- Hammack thought of the ring as belonging to her mother.-------- Bardw ell described Hammack as having "piercing eyes" while Carmichael said Hadley had sad eyes.-------- It is hard to believe Beatrice would have permitted her beloved Doris Hadley being placed at Immaculata and the foster system.-------- One possibility for t he mix-up about the telegram may have been a mix-up in the sequence of words. The telegram may have been intended to say "Howard dead of heart attack today. Can't keep her past Monday. Have Doris come Sunday train." If Duffy was really the person who died and Hadley was switching identities, this directive to Beatrice would mean Doris Hadley stayed with Beatrce while eAnne was with Howard.

Response: Interesting switcheroo tactics. Duffy's whereabouts are being considered.

Rayson-Sonya
still thinking about the hynosis sessions. still trying figure it out since everything is pretty much garbled which would make since, from a child's point of view. On the 3rd session she starts off good but once it gets to the murder's ev erything goes out of whack and she just sees mixed up images(I believe not in sequence)which throws us off again. Such as the seeping blood, could have been at the murder scene or the bloody kids were in the bedroom where she went to hide. The Hadley hou se and grounds definetly need to be searched. Luminol would pick up traces of blood in the floor even if it was old blood. We also need a diagram of the Hadley house and grounds, is it near a pond? Or is Doris refering to the creek by the Izard's house wh ere Beatrice got the blood off? Also since Howard is dead and Carmicheal is dead how can we really know the ending who is going to confess? Unless the lawyer is going to find a letter in Beatrice's effects or in a safety deposit box, how can this case be solved?
Just thinking out loud...I figured this close to the end we should be closer not haveing so many questions still.

Response: The old Hadley place is being investigated following the discovery of two children's bodies in the pond. Read about it here.

Snerc's theory of why the Izard children were kept apart.-------- It appears that both children were taken away from the muurder scene by Elbert Warren. It also appears that both children survived after this but were kept in separate protective locations. One possible explanation for this is that the keepers of one refused to keep the other. This may point to a key difference between the two children - they may have had different fathers. It appears that Ricky was born just a little less than one year aft er Richard and Lisa married and he is almost certainly Richard's child. However, it is possible Lisa and Danahy resumed their affair after this, as hinted by Catlett. If Warren took the children to Richard's parents, who did not live in Oxford, and if the y Knewor were informed of LeAnne's parentage, it is possible they rejected the child. Warren could have then turned to Hadley who had child care support with Beatrice and the Otts. Hadley may have then been stuck with the responsibility of keeping the chi ld safe from her murderous real father. --------snerc

I believe Hadley did the deed. Further, I suspect that Doris is Hadley's daughter
Doris. As I have stated before, I believe that Beatrice Carmichael was
actually killed (it didn't take much). Others may have had knowledge who the
murderer w as, but for their own various reasons (fear;appathy;etc.) did not come forward.
This was a very tightly knit community and the rule of thumb generally was (and is), "keep your
trap shut"! I think it is conceivable that the detective investigating the case was paid off.
He also may have played a more active role in the murders----because I still can't figure out why he
was wearing a coat at that time of the year in the south. I believe he was covering up blood stains
and/or had his co at lined with $$$$. I know money was discovered, but that could have been just for
show to throw off suspicion re:motives.
[From:the vicar]

Response: If Carmichael was murdered, then there is definitely someone alive who will be brought to justice. As for McPhail, he has always been quite a character. His coat is a staple to his personality. It completes the picture of the Chandler detective he always wanted to be.

Snerc's initial interpretation of the hypnosis transcript.-------- Key elements of these notes support the theories that Doris Hammack is LeAnne Izard and that Hadley had protected her from the real killer, Jessie Danahy, and his cronies.-------- Doris/Le Anne's repeated statements that kids who cry are put in water may relate to her childhood episode of flooding the bathroom and flushing family toothbrushes down the toilet. An angry father, Richard, could have dunked the child as punishment.-------- Doris /LeAnne is doubtful that Howard is her father.-------- The "dog" references may simply reflect Hadley's shouts during the fight and it is very possible he would have used beer bottles as weapons to defend himself.His bad smell may have been from spilled b eer.-------- The floating references and the statement "He went down to the water when we leave," may refer to Elbert Warren carrying LeAnne with him when he went to plant the blanket and cap in the creek.-------- The blood on her leg was probably real an d came from the fight between Hadley and the real killers. --------snerc

Well it sounds like I was right on the mark except I didn't figure out what happen to the childern. But it figures right if he killed the parents that he would kill the kids. But why would he take the kids and drowned them instead of killing them at the crimescene. Maybe he didn't want to but they started crying and got on his nerves so he drowned them and that is what Doris probably saw.

LOL Laries

Well it sounds like I was right on the mark except I didn't figure out what happen to the childern. But it figures right if he killed the parents that he would kill the kids. But why would he take the kids and drowned them instead of killing them at the crimescene. Maybe he didn't want to but they started crying and got on his nerves so he drowned them and that is what Doris probably saw.

LOL Laries

Well, this case coulda been wraped up a few weeks back... It seems that Doris is indeed Doris Hadley, Howard was involved in the Izard murders & drowned the Izard children. Miss Carmichael knew all along and died with the secret.
I look forward to a nother case of the caliber of the Purity Knight case.

Response: How can you wish a murder of that caliber on anybody?

[From: Elbertha]

I keep reading comments about the well at Howard Hadley's house. I did a search on "well," and didn't come up with a water well. WHAT well?

Response: The "well" is speculative. The water source that Doris Hammack mentioned in the hypnosis session is likely the Old Taylor pond, which was recently drained. Two bodies were found. Read the newspaper article here.

Rayson-Sonya
Well,actually I have more questions. Doris said in her hypnosis that Biddy came and got her early...if so why did the Otis's say that she got her at 6:30-7:00pm it is in response to comments week#5.Although it says response soon it does l ist the responses for that week.I wonder why the Otis's would lie? If Doris know's that the Otis's are the Otis's and Beatrice is Biddy, then why can't she remember that Howard is her Daddy? She just remarks he says he is but I don't know.That really soun ds fishy to me. Beatrice was one sick puppy to cover for Howard all those years.
From Doris's hypnosis I'm trying to figure some timeline. After leaving Sid's Bar she may have gone to the Otis's gotten Doris she went to Howard's house. She saw he wasn 't there so she went to the Izard's. Both left the car ran around back saw the bodies, Doris sat down next to Lisa, she got blood on her (Doris remark about she takes care of me..makes me think that since Howard did play cards with Richard that perhaps Li sa would watch Doris sometimes and recognized her) Beatrice took her by the creek and washed her off. She then went back to Howard's house where she confronted Howard asking where were the kids..Doris ran into the bed room hid under the bed while Bea and Howard argued about everything she feel asleep. Bea woke her up by jerking on her arm and she took her to her house for the weekend.
That's what I get from the hypnosis session anyways..

Det. Nelson if the Otis's are still alive they need to be asked again what time Beatrice came to get Doris and if they lied why?

Response: We're looking into the Otts. Thanks.

[khruhschev]

niki is right. I reread beatrice's little talk with doris. beatrice is a self-revealing person. I'm going to list the things I think that beatrice revealed in her talk with doris, I want to know what others think of my ideas:
*beatrice was planning to mislead doris. she clearly did not want the conversation taped. she fears that what she says, if closely examined or if recorded will incriminate her.
*she immediately reveals that she knows that doris may find out somethin g bad. she says "I think it's a waste of your time to be digging around in your past. Never know what you might find. Best to let the past lie." older people are usually ecstatic when the young want to know more about their past and their family membe rs.
*beatrice reveals that she knows about the ring, and probably knew where it was at one time. she also reveals that she didn't know doris had it. I'll talk more about this later. "That couldn't possibly be true. I know that ring you're talking ab out. You couldn't possibly have the same one...You couldn't have ENDED UP with it."
*bea reveals that she KNOWS that the Izard children are dead. she says "those Izard kids are dead" and then tries to cover it up by saying "must be after all these y ears." That sounds natural enough, but she also adds "that's all past and can't be changed. No trace of them ever found. None ever will be I'm sure. Nothing you or I do is going to change that."
*beatrice says "lot of nerve dragging me into this. I never wanted to be part of it." is she really talking about the town gossips? I don't think so. She doesn't say "I don't want to be part of this." But "I NEVER wanted to be a part of it." That's past tense.
*she had some contact with doris after she sent her to detroit. she says "I don't care what anyone else tells you. She went back to him and that was that." That is the statement of a woman who is SURE that someone else is going to tell doris something different.
*she kept in contact with howard. when asked if she stayed in contact with howard, her answer was "Not to speak of.." Not a plain and simple NO but "not to speak of..."
*when bea is informed about the hypnosis, she says: "No! You shouldn't do that!" then adds "I mean.. . isn't that dangerous?" she knows that doris witnessed something. I'll get into what she witnessed later.
*the timing of bea's "spells" during the conversation is very telling. She takes ill after these three announcements, questions, or suggestio ns.... the fact that doris told the police that she had the Izard ring, when doris wants to know if bea took her to immaculata, and when doris tells her she is going to be hypnotized.

Here is my tentative theory....
I think that perhaps the t heory that Hadley was hired by Perch is the most plausible, for the simple fact that Perch got Hadley another job, and probably helped him out with the new name. Perch obviously didn't think that Izard was on the side of the unions. I'm not sure if any of the stuff about the payoff money is true. I think that Perch felt that Izard was the roadblock that was keeping the union out. Or maybe (this is a long shot) Izard did want unions (just like Elbert Warren) but not the type of union that Perch was adv ocating. Izard is an idealist. He believes that alcoholice drink because they are misunderstood and because they never had the opportunities that others might have. he feels that employees need days off, not just to attend funerals, but also to grieve after the funeral. Izard is an idealist. He would be attracted to the idea of a union, and everyone knew that he would be. So why didn't Perch think so? the only answer is that Izard's idealistic union, is not what Perch was a part of. Perch's union i s mob-connected. It's not about helping the worker, just replacing one elitist system with another. Izard, as a foreman, was getting in the way of what Perch wanted to do. Some union sympathizers like Elbert Warren, didn't want Danahy and other hothead s, but Perch encouraged them to join. I think that Izard was of the same mindset of Elbert Warren. I don't know exactly what happened at the Izard's house. I think that Hadley killed the Izards. And I'm honestly not sure why Lisa was killed. Probably because she was a witness. The children were taken, to Hadley's house. We've all been assuming that LeAnn would have survived because she couldn't tell what happened while Ricky could. A three year old can recognize a face express fear, do lots of thi ngs that could put Hadley in jeopardy. Hadley knew the capabilities of a three year old. He had one. I think that Hadley killed the izard children and put the bodies in the well. He threatened Doris by saying if she cries or if she says anything, she will go in the water with the other bad children. That is why Bea is so sure that doris is not LeAnn, and that the Izard children are not alive, and why she doesn't want doris to "dig up all that old dirt." I think that Bea thought that the whole ring wa s pawned, not just the stones, and had no idea that Howard didn't pawn the setting. That's why she is so shocked when doris says she has the ring, and that the police know she had the ring. This is the first piece of PHYSICAL evidence that links her and Hadley to the Izard murders. Remember Bea's exact words "You couldn't have ENDED UP with it."

khruhschev

Response: Great deconstruction of interview. These are points we've combed over during the case. Excellent summary.

[From: Chaz -- [email protected]]

Doris is truly Howard Hadley's biological daughter, and both Izard children are dead; Howard drowned both of them in the creek near the house after he killed their parents.

Bea Carmichael -- a complicat ed woman if ever there was one -- became aware of Howard's involvement in the murders, and confronted him about it on the day of the slayings. In fact, Howard was still a mess -- still had blood on him -- during the argument, and some of the blood got on his little girl Doris, who was there and witnessed their argument.

The fact that Howard owed Bea a great deal of money does not entirely account for the fact that he agreed to sign his Oxford home over to her. Another reason he did it was to enco urage her to keep her mouth shut about the killings.

None of this really addresses the issue of Howard's motive. The union wiretaps show that he's capable of murder, but they also show that he lacked the initiative to come up with the idea on his own. He was the kind of guy who could kill, but only because somebody of greater influence than he told him to do it.

Howard Hadley/Hammack was only the swift, sure right hand of the actual murderer -- the person who arranged for him to do it.< BR>
And that, IMHO, is the last great unresolved issue of this case: who or what prompted ol' Howard to kill the Izards and their children? Who put him up to it?

Response: That seems to be the question on everyone's mind. Out of everyone who had it out for Izard, why would Hadley react? His violent tendencies may have been more irrational than we realize. Read more about Hadley here.

[From: Dixon Hill]


Well, whaddya know! Turns out I wasn't too far off base, except for my hopeful guessing about the Izard kids. It looks pretty bad for them... as Cheeky1 was the first to recommend, time to check the well. Boy hav e we been missing the obvious on this case! Repeatedly.

Snerc: Hadley wasn't smart enough to fool the mob. He is "all violent impulse and no thoughtful reason." Remember, in Detroit he was ready to just zoom over and "stick a fork in" J eans Bello. Hadley didn't plan any of this, Perch did, which is the only reason the case was able to go unsolved. (That and the paid or threatened silence of at least two others, Bea "Biddy" Carmichael and Elbert Warren.)

Cheeky1: I thin k we'll find the "cage" is nothing more than a child's playpen. Or it's the fire escape itself (rungs look like a cage to a young child?). Unless Howard was cruel enough to keep his daughter in a large dog cage (he actually might have been).

Th e blood on the leg is due to the fact that she was at the crime scene probably shortly after the murders. I'm guessing she didn't see the murders themselves. Also, it's pretty clear Bea saw everything (or at least a lot --- enough to fully and de eply implicate her as accomplice-after-the-fact).

I won't be surprised if it turns out that Howard was himself murdered in Detroit (see my comments below) and that Doris also witnessed that as well.


    --- Di xon Hill, P.I.

Response: Interesting point about Hadley being knocked off. Although would the mob try and cover up his death to make it look like a heart attack?

Doris talks about children who are put in the water for crying. Perhaps she is refering to the Izard kids?
[Dean]

Response: It seems most likely.

[From: Thumbsy]

Seems pretty clear that poor Doris is the unfortunate child of Howard. Bitty is Beatrice Carmichael, who witnessed Howard's murder of the Izard family and he paid her off for years. Check the well for the bodies of the children.< BR>

Response: Or the Old Taylor pond. See the Eagle article just released.

[Kay]

I believe that Howard Hadley is the one that killed the Izards either by himself or he had someone else with him. I also believe that Doris is not Leanne but Hadley's daughter. She has details about the murder or the hiding of the Izard c hildren but not about Richard and Liza. The incident she is remembering about blood and murders are a totally different incident. She is in possesion of the ring because Howard gave it to her after selling the stones for much needed money.

(From Cheeky1)
At last...the hypnosis sessions!
My first reaction is, after just reading it, DRAIN THE WELL (at the back of Howard Hadley/Bea Carmichael's place.
I am confused about the cage on the fire escape though. And the blood on the leg.
For other Crimesceners who are thinking...where is it? I found the hypnosis session by doing a search for it ("Doris Hammack hypnosis" using the site search engine) after getting an advisory Crimescene email and not finding the link in "news" (as usu al....but I love this site and its creators anyway)
Cheeky1

Response: The fire escape seems to be in Detroit, as there aren't any high rises in Oxford.

[from:[email protected]]
I think victim 2 was killed first, Her blood was drying first, before her Husbands[victim 1]I think maybe the children did it,If there was abuse..the Children may have killed them then got scared and took off..Either that or the mailman,he had touched them and had moved them, and said some stuff that I would think only the killer would know...

Final snerc theory (unless we get a chance to use any of the hypnosis to refine theories).----- Corey and Booker attacked Elbert Warren and said something to let Warren know that Danahy was going to the Izards.----- During an argument, while Richard was d igging up payoff money from garden, he hit Lisa with the shovel and killed her. Since Richard wore work gloves there were no fingerprints on the shovel.----- In grief or panic, Richard ran to get wet towels from the wash to clean Lisa's wounds but he was intercepted by Danahy. Danahy attacked Richard with some other tool or weapon and when Richard fell Danahy literally kicked him to death with steel-toed work boots. Richard's blood got on the shovel from the blood spatter. Danahy probably took the payoff money.----- Warren arrived a little after 1400 after Danahy left the scene. He planted the cap and blanket to make it appear the children drowned. He waited for Ricky in the driveway and then took both children to safety.----- On Saturday, some sort of co nfrontation took place between Danahy, Corey and Booker with Hadley and probably Warren. Ricky may have been killed but Isuspect he survived. The payoff money may have been taken over by Hadley and Warren.----- The children were sent to some safe location - possibly with Beatrice's ex-husband in Baltimore. When Hadley went to Detroit, LeAnne who was hard to handle because of her nightmares went with him. Ricky may have stayed in Baltimore and Doris stayed with Beatrice.----- Hadley changed his name so Dan ahy could not find him.----- Hadley may have gotten in trouble with the mob if they suspected he set up an FBI sting to avoid a hit.-----When his friend Duffy died, Hadley switched identities, sent for his real daughter and had LeAnne taken to Immaculata.

I keep reading about the motive being the union activities, mob
involvement, and Danahy's jealousy for killing the Izards, but has
anyone considered that the motive for killing the Izards may have
actually been to snatch LeAnne Izard?
I just started reading this site this weekend, and haven't really
sifted through all the evidence yet, but this is the one thought that
keeps coming to me.
I just went back and read the interview where Howard Hadley had started drinking becaus e of the layoffs, yet went home and worked in his garden. Beatrice Carmichael said she picked up Doris at the Otts home, yet I haven't seen any verification from the Otts that Doris was there that day. Beatrice also made mention of the fact that Howard was a mean drunk and that she took Doris home with her because Howard was drinking so heavily.
Did anyone think to dig up Howard's garden? It is possible that in his state of mind and intoxication, he could have perhaps killed Doris. Perhaps, he d ecided to replace her with LeAnne, but had to kill her parents to do so, reasoning that the union activity and layoffs would be considered a good motive for the death of Richard Izard. Then, there's Ricky; at age six, he was old enough to know who he was and would have been difficult to hide. Perhaps he is buried in Howard's garden, along with Doris.
Beatrice Carmichael probably became an accessory after the fact because she still hoped that Howard would marry her. When it turned out that he woul dn't, she settled for payoffs.
The only thing I'm not clear on is that it seems that someone in the area should have recognized that the child she was keeping was not Doris, but then, Lisa may not have taken the child out much, and Beatrice probabl y would have avoided the people that Lisa and Richard knew.
I don't believe Howard "fell in love" with LeAnne, as someone has suggested. It seems to me that he was rather abusive toward her, if she was the child he was shouting at in the recording of the telephone tap. Since it was reported that he had apparently loved his daughter and since he probably didn't mean to kill her (if he did), it seems to me that every time he looked at LeAnne, he was reminded that he had killed his only child.
El bertha

Response: The old Hadley place is currently being examined.

This is a real off-the-wall snerc thought. I keep wondering what was wrong with the telegram. One possibility might be the sequence of words. What if it should have said "Howard dead of heart attack today. Have Doris come Sunday train. Can't keep past Mon day." Is it possible Hadley had LeAnne Izard with him and Beatrice still had Doris. Remember the child with Hadley did not like "biddy" which doesn't sound like Doris. Perhaps it was really Duffy who died and Howard was using an identity switch to hide fr om the mob. He could have had LeAnne taken to Immaculata and skipped out with his real daughter. I'm not really happy with this theory but it does explain aspects of Doris' behavior which seem to fit LeAnne. In any event, I'm sure the telegram mix-up will have to be explained to get a full solution to this case.-----snerc

( From Special Agent G )
Wasn't there a recent DNA case involving the Sam Shephard murder? That case is as old as this one. In roughly the same time period. I believe the doctor was cleared in that one by DNA evidence. Is the evidence in this case still available? Or has it been destroyed? Or lost? Perhaps the blood of the Izzard's (off the murder weapon or their clothes) can be tested against Doris and thus prove or disprove one of the theories. I also hear talk in the news about peo ple getting exhumed and DNA tested all the time. Even people from the 1800's. So it is possible for DNA testing to be done on an exhumed body from any period in time. Perhaps in the future they will test the DNA of all corpses before they are interred and keep the results on file. I wouldn't be surprised if the government isn't doing that to newborns and to us without our knowledge. While we're alive. Special Agent G

Response: The DNA testing is too expensive, and it isn't apparent yet if it will come to that.

[From: Dixon Hill]

Well, just in case they wrap up the case today, here's my half-baked theory. (No time to really present this properly since I have a paying case with a hard deadline. :-) BTW, I'm purely guessing on how the Izard kids ended up because I still don't think we've seen enough clues to piece it together... :-(

Elliott Perch hired Howard Hadley (at least, maybe also Jimmy Warren or others) to either "rough up" or else murder Richard Izard. If it was a "rough up" then they carried it a bit too far. Elbert Warren was in fact ambushed and probably did see something of his attackers but they ganged up on him and told him he was a dead man if he leaked anything. He was not one of the perpetrators.
< BR>So Hadley (who moved to Detroit, used the alias Hammack, and got a job via a recommendation by Perch) was directly responsible for the murder act, but it's Perch who was guilty of premeditated murder by planning the act and hiring those who carried it out.

Hannah Waithers and Frank Abbott got the two kids out of there, [maybe] quite separately from the murders. (That's a Pure Guess.) They kept quiet to keep the kids safe since they witnessed the murders. I've got no idea who got them out of Oxford, though.

Doris Hammack is Howard Hadley's daughter, and I'm back to my original conclusion that she witnessed the murders. Beatrice was in fact being payed off whether she herself viewed it that way or not. Howard pawned t he stones and pearls from the ring. He either gave the ring setting to Doris or else Duffy gave it to her following Howard's death (not knowing the importance of that ring)! Doesn't much matter if Bea made it to Detroit and personally delivered D oris to the girls home or not --- though I'm inclined to believe she did, because of the way the "drop off" letter is phrased: "She is a good child and will surely give you no trouble." Compare from the Doris/Beatrice interview: "Yes, I surely do ." Bea was not aware of Howard's name change. Part of the reason Howard owed her money is that she paid for him to get out of town. She knew or suspected that Hadley committed the murder but did not know what happened to the Izard kids.

[Sudden insight: perhaps Doris also saw what happened to the Izard kids?]

Bea sent the $500 to the home due to pangs of conscience. She was a liar but it's obvious she cared about the little girl.

That just about wraps it up. Hopefull y there will be a bit more evidence before they close the case, so that I can refine this and make it better than just a guess.


Regards,
    --- Dixon Hill, P.I.

I still think: After the Layoffs at the plant, Elbert & Jimmy Warrens, Frank Abbott, Howard Hadley and Elliott Perch went to SIDS got tanked. Decided to go to Richard Izard and find out why he didn't warn them of the layoffs after they paid him for the pr otection. I think the murders are Elbert and Howard both seem to have some sort of injuries when questioned. They ran into Lisa Izard First hit her to hard and realized what they did, at that time Richard Izard probably saw or heard the noise and went to help his wife, he put up a struggle that is why he was beat so bad before he died. I thank they realized what they have done and didn't plan on killing them and they grabbed Leann Izard and Fled the scene. I thank Frank Abbott left Leann at Hannah Wather s' s house with one of the guys probably Elliott because he has no alibi at that time. Then Frank went to tracked down Hannah and told her to grab Richie Izard when he got home from school and that she need to hurry home because he had the little girl the re with one of the guys. * Hannah Waithers has no alibi. She says she was out shopping for a dress to wear to dinner with Frank Abbott the night of the murders. She says she was in and out of shops all afternoon, but it would be very difficult to determin e where she was every minute of the day if she was going in and out of shops and trying on dresses. I think she is more involved than she lets on. The union met at her house. She claims to know little of the Izard children, yet she knows where Ricky's pla yhouse in the woods is and that he is a Cub Scout. And she immediately defends Frank without prompting. Since her house is close to the Izard's it could have been used as a hiding place.

Howard Hadley and Howard Hammack are the same person. So th at would mean that Doris Hadley and Doris Hammack are the same person too. While she was staying with Miss Carmichael, she must have heard stories of Leanne Izard. She knew her parent were gone, and maybe she somehow linked this with the murdered Izards. The only way Doris could be Leann is if Howard accidentally killed his own daughter in a drunken rage and buried her on his property. Then by luck, because of the Izard killings he went in the house saw Leann, took her and raised heras his daughter.

And the last evidence only proves that Howard was involved because he has sold the diamonds that came out of the ring that Doris still has, which belonged to Lisa Izard. I think Miss Carmichael didn't make it to Detroit on time and Robert Duffy's w ife or girlfriend dropped the kid off at the orphanage. (That is why she wouldn't know the child's birthday or any other information. Because Beatrice would have at least gave them the birthdate.) Robert Duffey probably call Beatrice and told her he had her put in the orphanage and Beatrice probably figure that was a good idea for right now and paid a tuition of $500.00 for her to keep her there.

Eventually Beatrice figure she had no time and she wasn't receiving anymore cash because Howard is d ead, so she left the kid in the ophanage.

Well thats my thoughts and Im sticking to them.

LOL Laries

Response: Thanks for the input.

[From: Niki]

True, Beatrice Carmicheal has shown that she is not a credible witness. However, human being have a natural urge to reveal themselves. In trying to hide something that we know, our subconcious works against us, and we unconsciously reveal the very thing we were attempting to conceal. It can be done through a word, and action, unconciuos association, etc. I think that in trying to conceal her knowledge about the case, Beatrice Carmicheal actually revealed that she knew more than w hat she was saying. Do not discount her conversation with Doris because you feel that she lied. It is even more VALUABLE because she lied.

Niki

Response: Good point, and this is some of the reasoning behind the hypnosis session with Doris Hammack. View it here.

Has anyone checked to see if there was an actual birth certificate for Doris Hadley to see if she ever actually existed? T.C.

Response: Doris Hadley's birth certificate states that she was born on July 18, 1955.

(From Cheeky1)

Thanks Dixon for that link to the poll.
It raises the question...is there only one murderer given that we can only post one vote for one person? Well, when it comes down to it, I voted for Mr Corneal Abrasions. Though I do thin k others were involved.
The Ibello/Bello thing was just an observation really but he could have changed his ID if his second initial was I.
Cheeky1

[From: Dixon Hill]


Wow. How did we totally miss the possible connection between the Ibello family and the Bello family? My name is mud twice in as many weeks. Good eyesight and good thinking, Cheeky1!

Has anyone seen the new "vot ing booth" where you get to cast your "vote" for the perpetrator of the crime? It's at http://www.crimescene .com/cgi-bin/noir/poll_it.cgi
Be sure to vote for your primary suspect! Cool addition, Detectives Nelson & Armstrong!

--- Dixon Hill, P.I.

Response: Thanks. It's a project taken on by psychology students from Ole Miss to gather data on the nature of suspicion by the general population in murder cases.

(From Cheeky1)

Just a few random thoughts...
I still believe Howard Hadley was involved in the Isard (adult) murders and that Walter Hinkley was somehow involved too - interesting that Hadley, as Hammack, was being considered as a hit man in Detroit (in the phonetap transcripts).
But I still wonder about a couple of others.
Frank Abbott was cleared as a suspect but he had no alibi from 1405, when Hannah phoned him at home, to 1530, when Steve Ibello arrived to tell him about the murde rs.
Frank Abbott was a union organiser and involved in the secret meetings and presumably knew about payoffs etc.
Also, Steve Ibello. The Detroit evidence mentions the Bello family..is Steve really one of them (though he was drinking in Sid's at t he itme of the murders). Maybe a mob link?

Possibly Doris witnessed the murders of the two children by another man at her dad's place? That might be the mean man.
I don't think you can believe what Miss Carmichael has to say about much of the evidence because she proved to be an unreliable witness with her lies over the Detroit/Hadley/hammack/Immaculata connection.

With the payments to Miss Carmichael, she did not actually start looking after Doris fulltime, from what I can work out, until later that year when Howard went to Detroit for work. The Otts cared for her until then. So why pay her money beforehand?

Residents south of the creek were out at the time of the murders.
Probably soneone parked that side, crossed the creek and did the deed..maybe with someone arriving by car as well at 2pm (unless it was the other Izard car, driven by another, tearing up the driveway).
Perhaps the escape of the kiler(s) was made from a car parked south of the creek.
Cheeky1 < BR>

Response: Interesting connection to Ibello and Bello. We'll keep that one on the low burner.

[from:Emerald]
I have read every piece of evidence on this case I could find. I have gone back over the info several times. Why are things I have seen missing? When is Doris' Hypnosis Session going to be posted? I am very interested in the finding s. I have come to the conclusion she is a Hadley. But, I feel she does have some missing info, possibly, she witnessed something. I feel Howard murdered the Izards. That Bea is an acomplice to the missing children. But, something is missing that ties a ll of this together. Why were the children abducted? They had living relatives at the time. It has to be something more than just for their protection. I am courious as to when all of these peices will be put together & how they will fit. I have read alot of great assumptions. Someone has to be correct,or, at least, darn' close.
This has been very interesting. Thank you.
---Emerald

Response: The Izard children could have been witnesses, hence their abduction. View the transcripts from Doris Hammack's hypnosis session here.

[From: Dixon Hill]


There will likely be no DNA testing. It has been suggested repeatedly in previous comments. The police & sherriff's department don't have sufficient cause to be able to get an exhumation order from the courts. Even if t hey did, there's a good chance that a DNA test won't be effective, due to the age of this case and the means they used for preserving bodies in 1958. (Experts please correct me if I'm wrong here.)

So we will have to solve this using conventional investigative measures which means (mostly) using our heads. Forensic science isn't going to pop up and save the day this time.

* * *

Hammack was buried in a pauper's grave, which means we may never find his remains. Very convenient (for the perps) since there is somewhat of a possibility that he was done away with by the mob following the Bello affair in Detroit.

* * *

I have no reason to believe that anyone other than Beatrice Carmichael received the telegram. I t was in her effects; Murphy's explanations are correct as far as I can see; and finally, it doesn't bring any theories closer to a solution to assume otherwise.

I do, however, keep flip-flopping back and forth regarding whether Bea droppe d off Doris at Immaculata. True she wasn't Catholic. She could have looked up the girls' home in any number of references. Once again, does finding the answer to this question get us any closer to solving the crime?

Now, figuring out what happ ened to the Izard kids does help us get closer to the solution. Why kill the parents but not the kids? Or... why leave the adult bodies there but hide the kid's bodies? Finding the explanation to those questions helps us solve the crime. (For e xample, a previous participant suggested that a woman was pretty directly involved in the murder, and would be less likely to condone the murder of the children than, say, a union organizer with a violent past. In seeking to explain what we know about th e kids, we can come up with some interesting scenarios to explore.)

* * *

Once again, I'll (mis)quote Sherlock Holmes: "Once every impossibility has been eliminated, whatever remains, regardless of it's implausibility, must be correc t." We haven't been working at eliminating possibilities --- we've just taken McPhail's old list at face value without trying to eliminate anything else.


Regards to all,
    --- Dixon Hill, P.I.

PS: To our newcomers-- we've developed a voluntary convention of signing our messages at the bottom, and (for messages of more than about 5 lines) putting our names at the top, preferably in brackets. If you don't want to give out your real name, u se a pseudonym. AND PLEASE DON'T SHOUT BY USING ALL "CAPS." It hurts our ears! :-)

As I posted the comments about the DNA testing, another thought occurred to me...why has there been no move to try to locate Howard Hadley, or Doris's father, Howard Hammack? There is reason to believe that Hammack is dead, considering the telegram found by Beatrice's lawyer...some attempt should be made to locate his resting place...also, some attempt should be made to find Howard Hadley, as there is also reason to believe that Hammack and Hadley could be the same person...If either Hammack, Hadley, or b oth, could be located, DNA testing could also be done to see if Doris is the daughter of either Hammack or Hadley, also. Just a thought

Response: There is ample evidence to suggest Howard Hadley and Hammack are one in the same. Remember that Hammack put down Elliot Perch as a reference when applying for work at Phillips Aviation in Detroit.

There is good reason to believe that Doris could be the missing Izard girl...why hasn't any move been made to try to have the bodies of the Izards exhumed so that DNA testing can be done to determine if Doris is, indeed, the missing Izard daughter? I wou ld think that if permission has been granted to exhume the bodies of presidents and unknown soldiers, it shouldn't be too hard to secure permission to exhume the bodies of two murder victims when new evidence in their case has come to light.

In case you're all wondering...yes, I know this is a work of fiction....

Hey, something does not make sense, I was reading through McPhail's notes. According to them from the time Ricky was last seen to the time Tommy Joe arrived at the crime scene only 10 minutes had elapsed. If Ricky had not gotten up the driveway yet, and the long driveway was really that long, and he only had 10 minutes to get up the driveway, see the bodies and get over the initial shock, and then disappear without being seen by kTommy Joe, I seriously doubt he could of done all of that in those 10 minu tes, let alone grab his little sister too.
I still believe he was grabbed where he was last seen by whoever committed the murders, and was probably killed there too. I still believe Tommy Joe passed his brother, and some others on the road, leaving r apidly, and that is the true reason he went up the driveway, not the package, and I still think he confronted the killer, and was threatened to keep his mouth shut, and that is the reason he was nervous, when interviewed, I still think he does know what h appened to the Izzard children, and if he is alive, ought to be requestioned along with his brother and Danahy.

Wouldn't it be possible to do dna testing on Doris and the Izard remains and thus eliinate one of the theories?

Response: It's a costly test just to determine if Doris Hammack is related to the deceased.

Rayson-Sonya
Wonder's if comment posted 2 down is really a clue... it is really weird...LV experienced sitting by their dead mother and birthday is 2 days after LeAnne's...this is more than coincidence..Well if she is really LeAnne then the story woul d be Jessie Danahy hired Hadley to murder the Izard's..
Danahy was docked 2 days pay about 3 weeks before the murder's for fighting on the job...maybe being fired was last straw.. Hadley killed the Izard's..Carmichail took children to Denahy who has n o real alibi after he left Sid's. Denahy claims Corey and Booker came to his house at 10:30,Corey said around 10:00 and Booker said 11:00, but when the police came looking for Denahy at 11:40 there was nobody there period.
Carmicheal was originally fr om New Orleans, and that is where the bunch went after the murder's. Maybe Carmichael had the kids until she could call someone then Denahy took the kids to New Orleans to someone there. I maybe reading more into the posting below but the personal details are just too much for me..so I came up with a senario just incase it is something....

Response: It seems unlikely that Danahy could have afforded to have two people killed. He probably had what it took to do it himself before hiring the job out to a drunkard like Hadley.

Rayson-Sonya
*notes Beatrice's movements on Murder Day
1:30-goes to Sid's looking for Hadley
2:00-around 4:00-is at Hadley's house while he's(gardening)
4:30-arrives home to grab some stuff for dinner
7:00-arrives back at Hadley's hou se with Doris, fixes supper.
leaves later with Doris, she keeps her until Sunday evening
Questioned on Tuesday by McPhail
since Hadley is her only alibi from 2:00 until 7:00, she could have taken the kids and used her mob friends to get them o ut of town more than plenty enough time to call someone and get them out of "Dodge"

THIS IS A LONG SHOT,BUT HERE GOES. THIS WAS A SET UP OF SOME SORT, FROM THE MOB, OR SOMEONE WAS HIRED,FOR MONIES DUE FROM SOME SORT MAYBE. PERSONAL VIEW, EXPERIENCED SAME EXPERIENCE AT A YOUNG AGE, SITTING BY A DEAD MOTHER AT A YOUNG AGE, THERE IS A MOTI VE HERE,CHILDREN TAKEN TO A DIFFRENT STATE AND ADOPTED OUT, BY DIFFRENT FALSE NAME. TAKEN CARE OF BY AN ELDER COUPLE. FICTION OR NON FICTION, I WAS BORN SAME YEAR AND SAME MONTH WITH 2 DAYS DIFFRENT.(6/23/55) THERE IS MORE TO THIS, A LOVER OF SOME SORT GE TTING EVEN, HIRES A HIT MAN OUT OF ANGER,KILLS THE PARENTS AND STEELS THE CHILDREN,AND THEN DUMPS THEM FOR FEAR OF BEING FOUND OUT, TAKES ON A DIFFENT NAME AND DISAPEARS. HAD TO BE A CLOSE FRIEND THAT THEY HAD TRUSTED,SOMEONE THAT THEY HAD KNOWNED. AS I S AID-- A LONG SHOT --(LV)

Response: Jessie Danahy certainly fits the bill of a spurned lover, though he did return to Oxford in 1960. Interesting theory about the kids, though.

Rayson-Sonya
Wonders why the responses to comments for week#5 were pulled. Was going over old responses and noticed info that I know I saw before was no longer listed, checked and realized that thoses responses for that week were pulled, namely when C armichael got Doris from the Otis's and other info such as Hadley's injuries are now missing. Very curious indeed.

Response: See week 5's responses here.

We are waiting for the detectives to answer over a month worth of comments. The last comments answered were posted on June 11! Are we going to get answers before you guys solve the case yourself? I'm looking at something that says Investigator replies will be posted weekly.

Response: Sorry, it's been a hectic summer.