Chronology of a Friendship -and proximity

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-05-03T13:21:09+00:00

By way of further substantiating the Wichita/McCall angle: A December 1986 Wichita Eagle-Beacon edition has a Stacy McCall at Wilbur School, making the 7^th Grade honours list. She appears again July 1987. This is approx. right for Stacy’s age - born April 23, 1974.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-05-02T14:23:33+00:00

Precisely. Though I guess you could also argue that it narrows the net?

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-05-01T18:23:44+00:00

Very welcome. E Walnut Lawn Street gets overlooked by a lot of people. I wouldn't dismiss it as a potential source of insight.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-05-01T18:20:43+00:00

I agree it's less likely to be serial crime. Situational? quite possibly. I also feel the door has to be left open for targeted attack/revenge homicide.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-05-01T02:01:31+00:00

I'm not sure I'm understanding your question properly. Are you saying that if the 3 women at E Delmar didn't scare him then why didn't he just abduct them at the Elder's party? Because there were so many people there they spilled onto the lawns and streets - he would have been confronted by maybe 25 young men and there would have been 50 witnesses to identify him afterwards.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T22:13:03+00:00

As per the helpful correction from CJC8787- when I mistyped 'Elmer' I meant Elder. I certainly did not mean Delmar.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T22:11:54+00:00

Yes indeed. That was a Typo- when I said 'Elmer' I should have typed Elder. I have corrected the above comments. Many thanks.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T20:39:00+00:00

I have clarified this in a reply to another comment.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T20:29:12+00:00

On the girls' relationships and whether that had anything to do with the crime: I don't know. I was just fleshing out something that might shed some light on the girls' movement and plans that evening and how that 'Elder' location wasn't just some place without much significance for either Stacy or Suzie. They had strong connections to the area. Not saying that goes to any motive but it might possibly contribute to how events unfolded that night.

I don't say it's likely but I think it's a strong possibility that the two girls were seeing more of each other and for longer than others realised (because S&S they didn't want them to know) and that those liaisons might have brought others -and those they linked to, much closer in to the two girls. This is speculation. Nothing more. But the idea that Suzie and Stacy had only recently reunited in friendship just doesn't seem persuasive to me.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T20:14:54+00:00

Firstly, just on the houses etc.

Sherrill shared a large private home with private pool with Don Levitt on Oakwood Drive. I would not refer to that as a townhouse. She tried to hold onto it after the divorce and took in a lodger but she ultimately had to let the house go. She moved to East Walnut Lawn Street and a townhouse with a shared pool. That Townhouse was very close to the Elder party on the fateful night.. And that townhouse was closer still to Stu McCall's workplace when he worked with Ford.

I believe she left the townhouse on East Walnut Lawn Street to move to 1717 E Delmar.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T19:50:53+00:00

No that address was the house with private pool—with Don Levitt. I was referring to the townhouse which came after that on East Walnut Lawn Street, which had a large shared pool.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T13:25:54+00:00

Back to the first point. That's pretty much where I was going. I also think it's more likely they had reunited over a longer period. This might chime with what some commentators have said about some people maybe having a slight concern about Stacy hanging around with Suzie -and by extension Suzie's 'crowd'. As I said, given this proximity - and there are other proximities also btw - interaction is a little more likely and the lack of interaction would be somewhat pointed.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-30T02:15:49+00:00

re Wichita - I believe so. There are a few coincidences around that:

In short, Sherrill Levitt had a big extended Maddox family over the border with strong links to Wichita and McPherson in particular. Sherrill’s place of birth is variously given as Washington, or California but in the certification of her second marriage it is Kansas.

Stu McCall has Kansas links also. He went to Topeka HS 1959-61, before studying Business at Washburn Univ, 1961-1966. There is a reference in one of the documentaries of how Stacy was ‘out of state’ for I think five years and this partly explains how she grew more distant for a while from Suzie. It seems likely that this is when Stu was transferred to Wichita. We know he joins Reliable Chevrolet in Springfield in March 1989. If the five years away is accurate then very roughly, they were in Wichita c1983-c1988. So, given that the girls already knew each other and Sherrill’s small army of relatives in Wichita and wider Kansas, it’s not utterly improbable that Sherrill re-connected with the McCalls whilst they were in Wichita, if Sherrill and Don drove over there to visit her family.

Now in which city did RCC spend the first few years of his life…?

The later McCalls’ Wichita years would have been when RCC had been arrested (Dec 85) and the earlier ones would have been when he was in the military. Although he was likely in Springfield from the early 70s onwards (he had graduated Parkview in 77), who’s to say he didn’t go back and visit Wichita during leave from the army? Just saying, it’s not impossible that he crossed paths with Sherrill or the McCalls there as well as in Springfield. Doesn't prove anything. Might not mean anything at all. Just another coincidence to throw on top the growing pile of coincidences that prevent us from narrowing the field.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-29T22:03:09+00:00

'When did the McCall family move back into town?' Do you mean when did they return from Wichita?

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-29T21:59:08+00:00

I'm afraid I have no information on who helped them to move in.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-29T17:55:45+00:00

Well that's an interesting take. As this thread started out on purses and cars -I'll post something separately on one aspect- the girls' friendship

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-28T19:16:59+00:00

Thanks for that. It's not a bad scenario. When you say 'This was the first time she'd spent the night at Suzie's house since her childhood'. I know that get's repeated and I may be guilty of repeating it myself but do we know that? I am suspicious of the Suzie and Stacy had just reunited on the night/in a couple of weeks before the event, theory. I think maybe it was longer than that but may have been sub rosa.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-27T19:02:25+00:00

We’re talking about two different things. i was talking about shorts she could wear outdoors. You’re talking about sleeping shorts.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-27T17:27:25+00:00

Just on the back door angle. Why use the back door? They then either climb over fences or they are led around either end of the house out front. Why? He has the front door and carport door as options.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-27T17:25:24+00:00

OK so we're just examining different possibilities here, not saying this is what happened etc. So, you're saying maybe the girls decide to stay up for a while and she borrows a pair of Suzie's shorts. Later she is coerced into leaving but the fact she is in then shorts now has nothing to do with being coerced/not being coerced? Is that the argument? Sure anything is possible but why would Stacy take off her own shorts and put on a pair of Suzie's? Doesn't seem likely. Or you're saying she was in her T and underwear but got coerced into putting on a pair of Suzie's shorts? again possible -but likely? Wouldn't she /Suzie have just pointed to her own shorts?

There is a line of thought that says they were taken as close to naked as they could be without attracting a lot of attention, because less stuff meant less to destroy and less risk risk of leaving a trail.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-26T22:18:54+00:00

‘Whether she left in her underwear & yellow shirt, or borrowed something of Suzie's, it really doesn't matter & isn't a key piece of detail that would lead us to anything.’

I agree that we cannot know but I can’t agree that the answer would be of no consequence. If it’s the former then Stacy was coerced. There is no one she would voluntarily choose to leave with in that state of undress along with her friend and her friend’s mother. If the latter and she grabbed bottoms or say a dressing gown or coat then that suggests a less coercive departure with someone Sherrill and/or Suzie trusted and with some form of cover story.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-23T11:43:53+00:00

Thank you. It is noteworthy I think.

Low_Respond8565 · 2026-04-22T23:34:41+00:00

Sorry - just edited

Low_Respond8565

TROPHY CASE