Known Victims: Keith Call and Sandra Hailey

[cleopatra]

Oct 8, 2018 2:43:17 GMT MJP said:

Oct 3, 2018 0:51:52 GMT MJP said:

I wanted to start a thread to collect and consider relevant issues appearing in other threads; for starters:

...

Tracking Keith and Sandra's movements in the CP

Based on various news reports, the bloodhounds tracked the following movements from Keith's car:

SANDRA moved nearly a mile west along the parkway to the bridge over Indian Field Creek. Her track had crossed the parkway to the landward side of the bridge, where the dogs then wanted to enter the water to continue their work.

Note: due to the reference to the landward side, I'm assuming the dogs wanted to enter the creek rather than the river. Does that sound right to you?

KEITH's track initially followed the same direction as Sandra's but then circled back along the shore to the bottom of a cliff below (one report says to the east of..) the overlook where his car was parked.

Note: one report also mentions the dogs traced a scent from the car down a steep, 25-foot vine-covered slope to the beach. I'm assuming this relates to Keith's track circling back to the shore, but I don't know that for certain.

The high tide that morning was at 0415 hrs and the beach was covered with water between 0200-0730 hrs. I don't know how high the water would've been for anyone reaching the beach.

Later on Sunday during the first search, the dogs waded through shallow water along the shoreline to pick up the scent and then were driven about in boats to continue tracking the scent in the York River. The dogs indicated they found scents as far out as 70 yards into the river but divers could find nothing.

….

The above suggests to me that Keith and Sandra were still alive when they were driven to CP. (I do not believe they went there of their own accord but will save that for another post.) It seems too difficult, too dangerous for the killer/s to attempt to move bodies that distance at night along a road / down a steep path to the shore.

Does separating Keith and Sandra suggest one or more killers to you?

If this case is linked to Cathy and Becky's and also David and Robin's, what does the evolution in the killer/s handling and control of the victims suggest to you?

I posted the following in the 'Route 17' thread but it makes sense also to post it here.

...




Pin: University.

Black dash line: J Clyde Morris Blvd (one option for travelling from the party to get to Route 17).

Red dash line: Route 17 (one option for Keith to drive Sandra back to her home in Grafton, to meet the 0200 hrs curfew deadline). Obviously we know they never made it back to the Hailey home. If you continue driving along Route 17 it intersects with the Colonial Parkway at Yorktown.

Yellow highlight: Colonial Parkway.

1 = Yorktown pub.

2 = Location where Cathy's car was found.

A = Location where Keith's car was found (and underneath that overlook is the beach where the bloodhounds tracked Keith's movements).

B = Indian Field Creek shoreline, where the bloodhound's tracked Sandra's movements).

The dogs were made to smell the clothes.  The dogs  then tracked the SCENTS.

The trails the dogs traced are of where the scents had been, which could have been from:

- the victims themselves

- their clothing being carried by the CPK

- the CPK if he handled the bodies

- the car 

There is no way to know the order in which the trails took place. 

The trail going across the CP overpass may have been of the car being driven by the CPK, returning from that side, and not of Sandra heading in that direction.  The CPK could have buried the bodies on that side of the overpass and then drove back in the Jamestown direction to the Overlook to park the car.

"Call's scent was followed to the river side of the bridge, then along the shoreline downriver toward Yorktown to a location east of the overlook where the car had been located.

At that point the dogs  wanted to follow the scent.

Later, dogs in boats indicated they had found scents as far as 70 yards out into the York River..."

That  trail could have been of the CPK going to the shore where may have left a boat earlier. The trail going 70 yards out into the river may have been the CPK sailing off on his boat. he would have had the victim's scents all over him from handling their bodies, holding their clothes, driving Keith's car. Since the dogs indicated the latter trail was of Keith's scent, it may have been Keith's car they smelled. 

The killer could have towed a small motorboat or jet ski there earlier, then driven to the Christopher Newport University, parked near the shore, then walked to where he abducted the couple at their car.

When (IF) he sailed off onto the James River, it would have been to where he parked his truck/car, so that he could hitch the boat to it and head for home.

[MJP]

Jan 1, 2019 7:21:29 GMT cleopatra said:

Oct 8, 2018 2:43:17 GMT MJP said:

I posted the following in the 'Route 17' thread but it makes sense also to post it here.

...




Pin: University.

Black dash line: J Clyde Morris Blvd (one option for travelling from the party to get to Route 17).

Red dash line: Route 17 (one option for Keith to drive Sandra back to her home in Grafton, to meet the 0200 hrs curfew deadline). Obviously we know they never made it back to the Hailey home. If you continue driving along Route 17 it intersects with the Colonial Parkway at Yorktown.

Yellow highlight: Colonial Parkway.

1 = Yorktown pub.

2 = Location where Cathy's car was found.

A = Location where Keith's car was found (and underneath that overlook is the beach where the bloodhounds tracked Keith's movements).

B = Indian Field Creek shoreline, where the bloodhound's tracked Sandra's movements).

The dogs were made to smell the clothes.  The dogs  then tracked the SCENTS.

The trails the dogs traced are of where the scents had been, which could have been from:

- the victims themselves

- their clothing being carried by the CPK

- the CPK if he handled the bodies

- the car 

There is no way to know the order in which the trails took place. 

The trail going across the CP overpass may have been of the car being driven by the CPK, returning from that side, and not of Sandra heading in that direction.  The CPK could have buried the bodies on that side of the overpass and then drove back in the Jamestown direction to the Overlook to park the car.

"Call's scent was followed to the river side of the bridge, then along the shoreline downriver toward Yorktown to a location east of the overlook where the car had been located.

At that point the dogs  wanted to follow the scent.

Later, dogs in boats indicated they had found scents as far as 70 yards out into the York River..."

That  trail could have been of the CPK going to the shore where may have left a boat earlier. The trail going 70 yards out into the river may have been the CPK sailing off on his boat. he would have had the victim's scents all over him from handling their bodies, holding their clothes, driving Keith's car. Since the dogs indicated the latter trail was of Keith's scent, it may have been Keith's car they smelled. 

The killer could have towed a small motorboat or jet ski there earlier, then driven to the Christopher Newport University, parked near the shore, then walked to where he abducted the couple at their car.

When (IF) he sailed off onto the James River, it would have been to where he parked his truck/car, so that he could hitch the boat to it and head for home.

Hey Cleo, happy New Year.

Based on the limited information available: I believe the bloodhounds used were trained tracking dogs, not air scent dogs.  My understanding of a tracking dog is that the "scent" it follows is a trail of skin particles that a person naturally sheds as they move.  The dogs' ability to track skin particles is why they can also be trained to search for bodies in water (a body's skin particles will continue to float to the water's surface even when the body is immersed at depth).

John Branyons (Tidewater Search & Rescue) was fairly confident that each of the three dogs had followed a solid / strong trail, which made it likely each dog followed a trail walked by Keith or Sandra. 

IMO it is extremely unlikely that a trained tracking dog would confuse the skin particles of Keith or Sandra with those of the unknown killer(s).  

Regards, MJP

[cleopatra]

Jan 1, 2019 10:17:01 GMT MJP said:

Jan 1, 2019 7:21:29 GMT cleopatra said:

The dogs were made to smell the clothes.  The dogs  then tracked the SCENTS.

The trails the dogs traced are of where the scents had been, which could have been from:

- the victims themselves

- their clothing being carried by the CPK

- the CPK if he handled the bodies

- the car 

There is no way to know the order in which the trails took place. 

The trail going across the CP overpass may have been of the car being driven by the CPK, returning from that side, and not of Sandra heading in that direction.  The CPK could have buried the bodies on that side of the overpass and then drove back in the Jamestown direction to the Overlook to park the car.

"Call's scent was followed to the river side of the bridge, then along the shoreline downriver toward Yorktown to a location east of the overlook where the car had been located.

At that point the dogs  wanted to follow the scent.

Later, dogs in boats indicated they had found scents as far as 70 yards out into the York River..."

That  trail could have been of the CPK going to the shore where may have left a boat earlier. The trail going 70 yards out into the river may have been the CPK sailing off on his boat. he would have had the victim's scents all over him from handling their bodies, holding their clothes, driving Keith's car. Since the dogs indicated the latter trail was of Keith's scent, it may have been Keith's car they smelled. 

The killer could have towed a small motorboat or jet ski there earlier, then driven to the Christopher Newport University, parked near the shore, then walked to where he abducted the couple at their car.

When (IF) he sailed off onto the James River, it would have been to where he parked his truck/car, so that he could hitch the boat to it and head for home.

Hey Cleo, happy New Year.

Based on the limited information available: I believe the bloodhounds used were trained tracking dogs, not air scent dogs.  My understanding of a tracking dog is that the "scent" it follows is a trail of skin particles that a person naturally sheds as they move.  The dogs' ability to track skin particles is why they can also be trained to search for bodies in water (a body's skin particles will continue to float to the water's surface even when the body is immersed at depth).

John Branyons (Tidewater Search & Rescue) was fairly confident that each of the three dogs had followed a solid / strong trail, which made it likely each dog followed a trail walked by Keith or Sandra. 

IMO it is extremely unlikely that a trained tracking dog would confuse the skin particles of Keith or Sandra with those of the unknown killer(s).  

Regards, MJP

Happy New Year to you too MJP!  

The dogs could have been using both to track their targets - skin particles & scents.

And there is still no way of knowing from which end the trail began - bridge to car or car to bridge, water to car or car to water, water to bridge or bridge to water.

I see a trail, regardless of where it began and ended, between the car and the bridge, to the left (Sandra's trail) and to the right (Keith's), then 70 yards into the water of the James River. 

The CPK could have had a motorboat or jet ski waiting for him under the bridge. It would have been well concealed. 

He may have buried the bodies somewhere before getting to the turn about and bridge area.  I do not believe he or any of his victims walked a mile from the turnabout to the bridge.  As careful as he seemed in order to avoid detection, I doubt he would have risked being seen by anyone, regardless of the time.  The path leading from the turn about to the bridge is completely exposed.  No trees or bushes. And a mile is a long walk to be out in the open.

I am guessing the bodies are somewhere within a mile away from that area.  Daniel and Annamaria were found about a mile away from their car.  David and Robin were also about a mile away from their truck. The Bluefield couple were killed about a mile away from where their truck and bodies were found.  I don't believe the CPK is measuring his movements. It may be some spatial thing going on in his mind, that he isn't even aware of.

Maybe he used the underneath of the bridges to hide his boat.

Cleo


 

[cleopatra]

There must have been ONE INDIVIDUAL who first voiced that Sandra and Keith went skinny dipping.  It would have been someone others believed was smart or who may have been in a supervisory role who other troopers would not question.

Maybe the clothes and other personal items (gold watch, wallet, keys, etc.) were left as part of a staged scene in order to make people/LE believe the couple went skinny dipping...…… along with later on a, theory/suggestion....

If not for the FBI showing up at the scene, local LE would have left it at that - the couple went skinny dipping.  Local LE dismissed the families input when they said Sandra and Keith never would have gone to the Parkway to make-out nor to go skinny dipping at that time in the freezing cold nor left the car with keys in the ignition.

And, why didn't the local LE call search and rescue? Why did they take away their clothes? What did they expect the kids to wear when they were done skinny dipping?  Why did they remove 3 beer cans and only return 1?  When they did remove the clothes and stuff, why' did they leave the door open?

[cleopatra]

[cleopatra]

[MJP]

Jan 2, 2019 20:38:20 GMT cleopatra said:

Jan 1, 2019 10:17:01 GMT MJP said:

Hey Cleo, happy New Year.

Based on the limited information available: I believe the bloodhounds used were trained tracking dogs, not air scent dogs.  My understanding of a tracking dog is that the "scent" it follows is a trail of skin particles that a person naturally sheds as they move.  The dogs' ability to track skin particles is why they can also be trained to search for bodies in water (a body's skin particles will continue to float to the water's surface even when the body is immersed at depth).

John Branyons (Tidewater Search & Rescue) was fairly confident that each of the three dogs had followed a solid / strong trail, which made it likely each dog followed a trail walked by Keith or Sandra. 

IMO it is extremely unlikely that a trained tracking dog would confuse the skin particles of Keith or Sandra with those of the unknown killer(s).  

Regards, MJP

Happy New Year to you too MJP!  

The dogs could have been using both to track their targets - skin particles & scents.

And there is still no way of knowing from which end the trail began - bridge to car or car to bridge, water to car or car to water, water to bridge or bridge to water.

I see a trail, regardless of where it began and ended, between the car and the bridge, to the left (Sandra's trail) and to the right (Keith's), then 70 yards into the water of the James River. 

The CPK could have had a motorboat or jet ski waiting for him under the bridge. It would have been well concealed. 

He may have buried the bodies somewhere before getting to the turn about and bridge area.  I do not believe he or any of his victims walked a mile from the turnabout to the bridge.  As careful as he seemed in order to avoid detection, I doubt he would have risked being seen by anyone, regardless of the time.  The path leading from the turn about to the bridge is completely exposed.  No trees or bushes. And a mile is a long walk to be out in the open.

I am guessing the bodies are somewhere within a mile away from that area.  Daniel and Annamaria were found about a mile away from their car.  David and Robin were also about a mile away from their truck. The Bluefield couple were killed about a mile away from where their truck and bodies were found.  I don't believe the CPK is measuring his movements. It may be some spatial thing going on in his mind, that he isn't even aware of.

Maybe he used the underneath of the bridges to hide his boat.

Cleo


 

The one part that I can't agree with is any trail being from X to the car.  In that scenario the dogs would've had to find other trails leading away from the car in order to explain the absence of the bodies in / alongside the vehicle.  

I do agree that any notion of the offender(s) walking on the CP with Sandra and Keith is such risky behaviour that is seems unlikely to be correct.  However, until an official source can provide information / evidence that trumps Branyon's opinion re his dogs tracked trails walked by Keith and Sandra, I am reluctant to dismiss it as a possibility.

[cleopatra]

Oct 3, 2018 0:51:52 GMT MJP said:

I wanted to start a thread to collect and consider relevant issues appearing in other threads; for starters:

...

Tracking Keith and Sandra's movements in the CP

Based on various news reports, the bloodhounds tracked the following movements from Keith's car:

SANDRA moved nearly a mile west along the parkway to the bridge over Indian Field Creek. Her track had crossed the parkway to the landward side of the bridge, where the dogs then wanted to enter the water to continue their work.

Note: due to the reference to the landward side, I'm assuming the dogs wanted to enter the creek rather than the river. Does that sound right to you?

KEITH's track initially followed the same direction as Sandra's but then circled back along the shore to the bottom of a cliff below (one report says to the east of..) the overlook where his car was parked.

Note: one report also mentions the dogs traced a scent from the car down a steep, 25-foot vine-covered slope to the beach. I'm assuming this relates to Keith's track circling back to the shore, but I don't know that for certain.

The high tide that morning was at 0415 hrs and the beach was covered with water between 0200-0730 hrs. I don't know how high the water would've been for anyone reaching the beach.

Later on Sunday during the first search, the dogs waded through shallow water along the shoreline to pick up the scent and then were driven about in boats to continue tracking the scent in the York River. The dogs indicated they found scents as far out as 70 yards into the river but divers could find nothing.

….

The above suggests to me that Keith and Sandra were still alive when they were driven to CP. (I do not believe they went there of their own accord but will save that for another post.) It seems too difficult, too dangerous for the killer/s to attempt to move bodies that distance at night along a road / down a steep path to the shore.

Does separating Keith and Sandra suggest one or more killers to you?

If this case is linked to Cathy and Becky's and also David and Robin's, what does the evolution in the killer/s handling and control of the victims suggest to you?

mjp,

It seems correct that the dogs wanted to enter the creek.

They crossed the Parkway bridge. The landward side is  on the opposite side of the river. If the dogs went to that side, they would have had to then make an immediate  left turn leading down to the water. It  looks as though the water on that side meets the water from the oposite side underneath the Parkway/bridge. 

That's what it looks like to me, but I dont know if I'm correct. 

Cleo

[cleopatra]

Jan 6, 2019 1:52:42 GMT cleopatra said:

Oct 3, 2018 0:51:52 GMT MJP said:

I wanted to start a thread to collect and consider relevant issues appearing in other threads; for starters:

...

Tracking Keith and Sandra's movements in the CP

Based on various news reports, the bloodhounds tracked the following movements from Keith's car:

SANDRA moved nearly a mile west along the parkway to the bridge over Indian Field Creek. Her track had crossed the parkway to the landward side of the bridge, where the dogs then wanted to enter the water to continue their work.

Note: due to the reference to the landward side, I'm assuming the dogs wanted to enter the creek rather than the river. Does that sound right to you?

KEITH's track initially followed the same direction as Sandra's but then circled back along the shore to the bottom of a cliff below (one report says to the east of..) the overlook where his car was parked.

Note: one report also mentions the dogs traced a scent from the car down a steep, 25-foot vine-covered slope to the beach. I'm assuming this relates to Keith's track circling back to the shore, but I don't know that for certain.

The high tide that morning was at 0415 hrs and the beach was covered with water between 0200-0730 hrs. I don't know how high the water would've been for anyone reaching the beach.

Later on Sunday during the first search, the dogs waded through shallow water along the shoreline to pick up the scent and then were driven about in boats to continue tracking the scent in the York River. The dogs indicated they found scents as far out as 70 yards into the river but divers could find nothing.

….

The above suggests to me that Keith and Sandra were still alive when they were driven to CP. (I do not believe they went there of their own accord but will save that for another post.) It seems too difficult, too dangerous for the killer/s to attempt to move bodies that distance at night along a road / down a steep path to the shore.

Does separating Keith and Sandra suggest one or more killers to you?

If this case is linked to Cathy and Becky's and also David and Robin's, what does the evolution in the killer/s handling and control of the victims suggest to you?

mjp,

It seems correct that the dogs wanted to enter the creek.

They crossed the Parkway bridge. The landward side is  on the opposite side of the river. If the dogs went to that side, they would have had to then make an immediate  left turn leading down to the water. It  looks as though the water on that side meets the water from the oposite side underneath the Parkway/bridge. 

That's what it looks like to me, but I dont know if I'm correct. 

Cleo

[cleopatra]

[cleopatra]

[MJP]

Jan 6, 2019 6:56:08 GMT cleopatra said:

Thanks for posting all of the images; very helpful.

Based on all of the newspaper articles I've read there's a couple of things that don't match with the trails marked in your photos.  Looking at the top left image you have Sandra's trail going over the bridge and also Keith's trail reaching the Indian Field bridge but, based on all of the reported information regarding the trails tracked by the dogs, my understanding is that:

• Sandra's trail went from the car to Indian Field Creek - tracked along the seaward side of the CP i.e. if walking from the car towards the creek, the track was on the right-hand side.  Sandra's trail wasn't on the roadway itself but on the grassy area alongside the roadway.  When Sandra's trail reached the bridge, it cut across the roadway (not the bridge) i.e. went from the seaward to landward side of the roadway, and then to the creek shoreline.  The dogs indicated the trail continued into the water at Indian Field Creek.
• Keith's trail went from the car, moving in the direction of Indian Field Creek but traveled "a much shorter distance" before turning right towards the York River, down onto the shoreline and doubling back until it was on the stretch of beach below where the car was found at the turnabout.  Keith's trail to turn right and go down to the river was via a steep, 25-foot, vine-covered slope. 

I'm wondering whether both Sandra and Keith were together for the first part of the tracked trails and whether the point at which the tracks diverge i.e. Sandra continuing towards the Creek and Keith down the slope towards to the River indicates that one or both of them tried to escape and run to safety.  If so, and they were both caught and murdered, does this suggest two offenders?  If it was only one offender, he had the Devil's own luck that night.  

[cleopatra]

Jan 6, 2019 13:13:12 GMT MJP said:

Jan 6, 2019 6:56:08 GMT cleopatra said:

Thanks for posting all of the images; very helpful.

Based on all of the newspaper articles I've read there's a couple of things that don't match with the trails marked in your photos.  Looking at the top left image you have Sandra's trail going over the bridge and also Keith's trail reaching the Indian Field bridge but, based on all of the reported information regarding the trails tracked by the dogs, my understanding is that:

• Sandra's trail went from the car to Indian Field Creek - tracked along the seaward side of the CP i.e. if walking from the car towards the creek, the track was on the right-hand side.  Sandra's trail wasn't on the roadway itself but on the grassy area alongside the roadway.  When Sandra's trail reached the bridge, it cut across the roadway (not the bridge) i.e. went from the seaward to landward side of the roadway, and then to the creek shoreline.  The dogs indicated the trail continued into the water at Indian Field Creek.
• Keith's trail went from the car, moving in the direction of Indian Field Creek but traveled "a much shorter distance" before turning right towards the York River, down onto the shoreline and doubling back until it was on the stretch of beach below where the car was found at the turnabout.  Keith's trail to turn right and go down to the river was via a steep, 25-foot, vine-covered slope. 

I'm wondering whether both Sandra and Keith were together for the first part of the tracked trails and whether the point at which the tracks diverge i.e. Sandra continuing towards the Creek and Keith down the slope towards to the River indicates that one or both of them tried to escape and run to safety.  If so, and they were both caught and murdered, does this suggest two offenders?  If it was only one offender, they had the Devil's own luck that night.  

mjp,

I'll re-do that one. Thanks for pointing it out. I only have 1 article detailing the dog tracks. I haven't read about Sandra walking alongside the road on the grassy area.

When I read what you wrote about one or both of them attempting to escape I got a lump in my throat just thinking of what it must have been like for Keith and Sandra that night. The terror they felt. How horrible it must have been.

I, too, can't stop wondering if the CPK had an accomplice.  Handling two people at the same time is difficult, even with a gun. Outside, with a vehicle, then relocating them, tying their wrists, moving their bodies....   and I keep wondering why the CPK didn't just kill them. Why relocate them? What was he up to? 

Cleo

[MJP]

Jan 6, 2019 14:08:42 GMT cleopatra said:

Jan 6, 2019 13:13:12 GMT MJP said:

Thanks for posting all of the images; very helpful.

Based on all of the newspaper articles I've read there's a couple of things that don't match with the trails marked in your photos.  Looking at the top left image you have Sandra's trail going over the bridge and also Keith's trail reaching the Indian Field bridge but, based on all of the reported information regarding the trails tracked by the dogs, my understanding is that:

• Sandra's trail went from the car to Indian Field Creek - tracked along the seaward side of the CP i.e. if walking from the car towards the creek, the track was on the right-hand side.  Sandra's trail wasn't on the roadway itself but on the grassy area alongside the roadway.  When Sandra's trail reached the bridge, it cut across the roadway (not the bridge) i.e. went from the seaward to landward side of the roadway, and then to the creek shoreline.  The dogs indicated the trail continued into the water at Indian Field Creek.
• Keith's trail went from the car, moving in the direction of Indian Field Creek but traveled "a much shorter distance" before turning right towards the York River, down onto the shoreline and doubling back until it was on the stretch of beach below where the car was found at the turnabout.  Keith's trail to turn right and go down to the river was via a steep, 25-foot, vine-covered slope. 

I'm wondering whether both Sandra and Keith were together for the first part of the tracked trails and whether the point at which the tracks diverge i.e. Sandra continuing towards the Creek and Keith down the slope towards to the River indicates that one or both of them tried to escape and run to safety.  If so, and they were both caught and murdered, does this suggest two offenders?  If it was only one offender, they had the Devil's own luck that night.  

mjp,

I'll re-do that one. Thanks for pointing it out. I only have 1 article detailing the dog tracks. I haven't read about Sandra walking alongside the road on the grassy area.

When I read what you wrote about one or both of them attempting to escape I got a lump in my throat just thinking of what it must have been like for Keith and Sandra that night. The terror they felt. How horrible it must have been.

I, too, can't stop wondering if the CPK had an accomplice.  Handling two people at the same time is difficult, even with a gun. Outside, with a vehicle, then relocating them, tying their wrists, moving their bodies....   and I keep wondering why the CPK didn't just kill them. Why relocate them? What was he up to? 

Cleo

Thanks Cleo.  I'd be very interested to see the amended image.  Your diagrams are helpful to me in understanding all of the various pieces of information available and in trying to work out a sequence of events that matches that information.

I could be completely wrong about Keith and/or Sandra trying to escape but it is one possible explanation for the two trails diverging.  The other three cases suggest that there's always a point where the killer(s) temporarily lose complete control (Cathy and Annamaria's defensive wounds; David possibly starting to climb up before being shot) so perhaps the same happened with Sandra and Keith but, yes, a horrible thought nonetheless to consider one/both of them temporarily escaped only to be chased and caught again.

[cleopatra]

Jan 6, 2019 14:08:42 GMT cleopatra said: