My Blog

I theorize in my blog mainly about two cases, that of Tammy Zywicki and Amanda Tusing. Both cases are unique in that I chose them for a reason. Tammy Zywicki's case I remembered and the geographic aspect of it I still believe to be interesting even if at the end of the day the best conclusion is that the dead suspect from Peru, IL. is probably her killer. Amanda Tusing's case I found unique because I had trouble believing the Haunting Evidence tv show theory of what happened to her. You could say I "see" the case differently from the psychics. I doubt anyone picked up on it because like most of what I write, it is an assumption.

When I chose each of these cases, it was for the reason that they are both "cold" cases to the point where I would find it hard to believe that investigators are even working on any more. Moreover, I thought each case had sufficient online evidence with which to investigate and get information. A case with pictures, like Amanda Tusing's, is great because you can actually make some solid conclusions. It is still guesswork, but the conclusions seem that much more solid.

I wanted my blog to be different from other blogs about different murder cases. First, I thought it was best to focus on a few cases instead of many different ones. You could write post after post about missing persons although in investigating Tammy Zywicki's case I came across one missing person, Veronica Blumhorst. For me, she represents all missing persons. Lindsay(or Leslay) Harris I came across when I saw a tv news spot about the FBI's new program linking truck driving murders. I also thought it unique that she was also missing a prized watch like Tammy Zywicki. No case is less than 6 years old and one is over 20 years old.

Second, I wanted my blog to actually focus on ideas that might help "solve" these cases. This is a long-shot I know, but I thought the blog would be more interesting if it came up with new ideas instead of rehashing the same old story about a particular murder case. For example, there are other news articles, blogs, websleuth posts, about Amanda Tusing's case. But there are very few, if any that I can find, blogs that talk about the actual online evidence associated with the case and what they(the author) think about it. I am anonymous but not to the FBI or police. I have submitted ideas through letters etc until I came up with the idea for the blog, a way to reach people without bothering them.

Amanda Tusing case: And then it started to rain

On June 14th, 2000, Amanda Tusing left her boyfriend's house in Jonesboro, Arkansas at 11:30 pm to travel home to Dell, Arkansas along Rt. 18. It was about an hour's drive. Sometime along the way it started to rain and she pulled her 1992 Pontiac Grand Am to the side of the road underneath a streetlight in front of a home. What happened next is a complete mystery. At about 1:30am, when she had not phoned her boyfriend to let him know she arrived home safe, he called her parents and her father and boyfriend both went searching for her car. The boyfriend found the car first near Monette, Arkansas with the doors locked and the keys still in the ignition. Amanda Tusing was not with the car. Her body was found a few days later. The prevailing theory has always been that the rain or an officer of the law or someone posing as one caused Amanda Tusing to pull her car to the side of the road. When the car was found, the windshield wipers were in mid-swipe. This aspect of the case for me has always led to an interesting question: When the car was found, was the windshield wiper knob still turned on? According to specs for a 1992 Pontiac Grand Am, the car has power windows. If it was pouring down rain, I think it is safe to suggest she had her windows up when she pulled to the side of the road. I tried this little experiment. If you turn the windshield wiper knob on and off the wiper will always complete its swipe. If the windshield wiper knob had been found in the off position when the car was discovered, there is no way she could have talked to anyone on the side of the road by powering down her window. The reason is that after you turn the windshield knob off, once you turn power back on to power down the windows for example, the wiper will always complete its swipe. And if you turn the knob off while power is on, the wiper will always complete its swipe. The part that I always found odd was that the power to the vehicle has to be on the entire time during which she would have talked to the mystery person on the side of the road. If the car was running I thought a police officer would ask her to turn it off. If she had the windows rolled down in the rain I thought she would have turned off the wipers so they did not push rain water into her car. Even if she turns the windshield wiper knob off while talking to the mystery person on the side of the road, she still has to roll back up the window. I read that Amanda Tusing drove a 1992 Grand Am and I was curious to read about the car online. I found an auto review in the Chicago Tribune that pointed out that the one feature that is annoying on these cars are the power door locks. They will engage when you put the car in a forward gear, but will not disengage when you stop the car. Maybe Amanda Tusing drove a different type of car or her Grand Am was different, but I know this from experience: If you have to constantly push a button to get out of a vehicle, you will be afraid of locking your keys in the car.

Tammy Zywicki: The Starved Rock Theory

I have alot of theories about Tammy Zywicki's case. Here are a few of them: The trucker theory, the tow truck theory, the Rt. 66 killer theory, the guy that found body theory, the farmhouse next to MM 83 theory, the hotel theory, and finally the Starved Rock theory. I actually came up with this theory a while back after reading a book about state parks at the bookstore. This is the most totally outlandish theory I have but there is nothing else to write. At least the story behind it is interesting.

It has to do with the story of three women who were murdered at St. Louis Canyon in Starved Rock State Park in March 1960. An article titled, "Murder, They Wrought" in the Chicago Tribune(August 25, 1991) gives a good overview of the case. I found the article online recently and it gives a little more information about what actually happened. St. Louis Canyon is located a few miles off Exit 81 on I-80.

A question I wonder about Tammy Zywicki's case is why she pulled out her cameras? One of the things I did notice when looking at a book on photography is that everything seems to have to do with light. So I started thinking that maybe Tammy Zywicki chose the camera she did because it takes good photographs in areas where there might not be alot of light. When I learned that St. Louis canyon is only a few miles off Exit 81 on I-80 I became even more interested. A good question to propose would be "When she takes pictures of the football team, etc., what camera does she usually use?" She was scheduled to take pictures as the sun set around 7 pm so it is probably the same one. If it is the same one as is missing, that is not much. If it is different, that could be a clue. If someone put a bunch of different cameras in front of me and asked me to choose the most valuable or best one for difficult shots, I would not know which one to choose because I am not a photographer.

This is the Starved Rock theory. Suppose she makes it to St. Louis Canyon. She takes the cameras out because she needs to find her best one because it takes the best shots where there is less light. The killer, obviously someone familiar with Starved Rock State Park, is either already there or drove there. The killer realizes she has New Jersey plates and since tourists frequent the area knows her car sitting there is not going to raise eyebrows amongst other people at the canyon. He also realizes that even if he leaves his car there it should not raise too much suspicion until he can retrieve it. He then kills her as she tries to fight back. She hits him with her camera. That is where I got my idea for why I wondered why Tammy Zywicki never hit her assailant with her camera when she was kidnapped from the side of I-80(if she was wearing a camera). In the story of the women from 1960, one of the women hit the guy with her camera.

At this point the theory falls apart. Why would anyone then move her car to the side of I-80? How would they get home after moving her car? What would they do about their vehicle left at St. Louis Canyon? Why would they move the body since it is already a relatively remote place anyhow? Since it is the weekend wouldn't someone at the canyon, whether a tourist or local, remember seeing Tammy Zywicki's car or Tammy Zywicki taking pictures? She has an appointment at 7pm so why would she stop to do tourist stuff? It is too bad she never stopped at any tourist type place and signed a guestbook. Then it could at least be investigated as to whether she was interested in that area.

It was not a bad theory though, until you get to the part about the car.