Does anyone remember this old case?

Two kids playing in a "powder magazine" (an old shack from the mining days, IIRC) are locked in there and the shack is set on fire.

The Fire Dept. shows up, puts out the fire and discovers the bodies, along with a piece of wood that was used to hold the door shut.

A man and woman come forward and claim they saw two big guys lighting it on fire, but they are discredited by the police because of their own run-ins with the law.

The kids had also earlier found a hundred dollar bill near the shack, leading police to believe maybe they had witnessed a drug deal and that's why they were killed.

Later, a guy in prison came forward and said he knew who did it, but I think he later retracted his story...

Does anyone know if there have been any updates to this one?

I have not seen this and if it is from the earlier episodes and Lifetime airs it that is a rarity for me? - Is this another one deemed too hot for Lifetime?

Later.

Yes, I remember that one. I have seen it on Lifetime, but its been a while. The boys name was Scott Johnson. What I found strange, is that while Scott's mom was interviewed for UM, they never even said the name of Scott's friend who was also killed in the shack, nor did any of his family participate in the show. I can understand the family not wanting to participate in the re-enactment if it was too painful, but to not even mention their son's name?

I know of no updates. When I did a search it came up a phone number of Scott and Andrea Johnson, Bullhead City. Could they be Scott's parents? I don't remember what they said his mom's name was.

I've seen just about every single segment, but I've never seen this particular one and it would be very interesting to see. How long ago did this happen? I also wish that Lifetime would show some of the older, less seen segments. I get sick of watching the same ones over and over.

It happened in the mid-70's I believe.

I have seen this case a bunch of times....I figured it was one of the more well-known cases.

I remember this case. It happened in 1974. I also thought it strange that they never mentioned the other boys name or showed any pictures of him, especially with the case being unsolved, you would think that the other boys family would have wanted to participate in hopes of finding the killers.

Originally posted by Mijada
I remember this case. It happened in 1974. I also thought it strange that they never mentioned the other boys name or showed any pictures of him, especially with the case being unsolved, you would think that the other boys family would have wanted to participate in hopes of finding the killers.

Maybe the other family didn't believe the murder theory. Just a guess. This story has been on Lifetime, and isn't all that rare. I'm pretty sure I have it on tape.

Justin

Yes, I remember that one. I have seen it on Lifetime, but its been a while. The boys name was Scott Johnson. What I found strange, is that while Scott's mom was interviewed for UM, they never even said the name of Scott's friend who was also killed in the shack, nor did any of his family participate in the show. I can understand the family not wanting to participate in the re-enactment if it was too painful, but to not even mention their son's name?

I know of no updates. When I did a search it came up a phone number of Scott and Andrea Johnson, Bullhead City. Could they be Scott's parents? I don't remember what they said his mom's name was.

Scott's mother's name was Sue Johnson. They never mentioned the father's name or interviewed him. What stood out for me was that they never mentioned the other victim's name or interviewed his family. I too thought that that was very, very strange.

Maybe the other family had relocated after the tragedy and they were unable to get the necessary permissions for the broadcast.

By the way, the fire was April 3rd 1974, according to the guy doing the interrogating during the segment.
-Necco

Maybe the other family had relocated after the tragedy and they were unable to get the necessary permissions for the broadcast.

By the way, the fire was April 3rd 1974, according to the guy doing the interrogating during the segment.
-Necco

This is yet anther one of those strange segments that is made even more bizarre because there is a very obvious and huge omission that the segment itself doesn't even address, Kinda like the proverbial pink elephant in the corner that no one mentions or however that saying goes.

Reminds me of the Clifford Sherwood story. The other boy's disappearance is only mentioned in passing by the mother and on a newspaper clipping that is onscreen for all of 5 seconds.

Makes one wonder what the producers were thinking/not thinking or perhaps purposefully trying to omit in these stories.

I would venture to guess this case is still unsolved. I think it is/was solved officially as the deaths were ruled accidental at the time. I can't recall if UM mentioned the case being reopened.

One of the saddest cases for me... I skip over that one on the DVDs.

According to news articles from Tuscon and Yuma (etc) at the time of the incident, the other boy was named Peter Hill, age 6.
Watching the vid.= three eyewitness whose account of two adult men setting or near the blaze match. Fire chief states that evidence leads to conclusion at least two people held door shut with a board.

The sheriff, at the time, Spears had twenty officers canvas the scene of the fire and also stated that 15 years previously the shack had been used for storage by skeet shooters.

The only plausable explanation that UM would not include the name of Peter Hill was due to his family being less than friendly (IMO), why ?

Also, why not give the name of the person who was accused at the time while he was in prison in NV ?

The only plausable explanation that UM would not include the name of Peter Hill was due to his family being less than friendly (IMO), why ?

Maybe they were involved or suspected who was and didn't want to be dragged into anything that would prove dangerous for them.

Too bad the episode was so shallow.

Missing information:

1) Was a gas can or any other vessel found with the boys to back the police claim the kids had been playing with matches and gasoline ?

2) No mention of Scott's father or Peter's family .

3) No background on the person who was named as one of the killers by a witness.

One of the things that bothered me about this segment was Scott Johnson's mother insistence that Scott was smart enough to escape a burning room. I actually don't doubt her point at all, and I find the murder scenario much much more likely, but there are plenty of victims of accidental deaths (fire or otherwise) who are also intelligent enough to avoid it, if they can. In fact, I'm willing to grant that almost, if not all, of those victims portrayed on UM meet this standard. Her knee-jerk comments about it simply reduce her credibility as an objective person, in my opinion. I don't know.

One of the things that bothered me about this segment was Scott Johnson's mother insistence that Scott was smart enough to escape a burning room. I actually don't doubt her point at all, and I find the murder scenario much much more likely, but there are plenty of victims of accidental deaths (fire or otherwise) who are also intelligent enough to avoid it, if they can. In fact, I'm willing to grant that almost, if not all, of those victims portrayed on UM meet this standard. Her knee-jerk comments about it simply reduce her credibility as an objective person, in my opinion. I don't know.

I think the reason she was "knee-jerk" was because this was obviously a murder IMO, and the deaths were ruled accidental. The boys aren't going to stand around in that small shack that's on fire and wait around to see what happens, if they can avoid it. I don't think it reduced her credibility. On some cases, I'm uncertain as to whether accidental, murder or suicide, but not this one. this was murder. between 3 witnesses and the board with the burn hole, there is no doubt in my mind.

Absolutely murder and she made a good point. If the fire was accidental, no way would the boys be lying at the far end of the shack with no signs of even attempting to escape.

yeah. plus there were 2 boys in there, so if for some reason one wouldn't know what to do, the other would.

Yeah, they were, most defintely murdered.

But, I don't buy into that drug theory. So many unsolved kid cases are always called "drug busts" meaning the kids came on to a drug dealer/s.

If a 9 and 6 year old, walk upon 2 drug dealers, are they seriously going to kill them because they saw them? They probably wouldn't even know what drugs are. The money thing makes sense, but it was just one bill. Coincidence?

Yeah, they were, most defintely murdered.

But, I don't buy into that drug theory. So many unsolved kid cases are always called "drug busts" meaning the kids came on to a drug dealer/s.

If a 9 and 6 year old, walk upon 2 drug dealers, are they seriously going to kill them because they saw them? They probably wouldn't even know what drugs are. The money thing makes sense, but it was just one bill. Coincidence?

Bump.

I don't buy the drug angle either. I think it's possible that they were molested and that is why they were murdered. A fire would also destroy the evidence.

Bump.

I don't buy the drug angle either. I think it's possible that they were molested and that is why they were murdered. A fire would also destroy the evidence.

I remember us talking about that on another thread once. It makes sense. There are few other reasons I can think of for drugging, then murdering a child (as if those are entirely logical to begin with).

I am new here and I registered simply because of this thread. Unsolved Mysteries is my favorite show ever. I have always loved it. I saw the show on Scott Johnson about eight years ago. I could never find information online, because I forgot his name. I was very haunted by this case. Today I was messing around on the net and came across his story on the unsolved mysteries web site. I was so excited to be able to read it, because I have never forgot the shock I felt about this case.
I know that these kids were murdered and I can not understand why they never really tried to find the guys.

I remember this case! I have not seen anything about it in years. I remember being scared by this when I was a kid, probably because the victims were my age.

Glad they kept this case in the Amazon version. I wonder if the shack is still there? I probably doubt it.

Glad they kept this case in the Amazon version. I wonder if the shack is still there? I probably doubt it.

Nope, long gone... torn down shortly after the deaths.

I’ve been pretty interested in this case since I first saw the segment when it originally aired and wrote about some stuff I found out here, in case you are interested:

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=183945&page=5&highlight=Bullhead

Nope, long gone... torn down shortly after the deaths.

I’ve been pretty interested in this case since I first saw the segment when it originally aired and wrote about some stuff I found out here, in case you are interested:

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=183945&page=5&highlight=Bullhead

Cool thanks!

This story was extremely sad to me.

The fireman featured in this case was still alive when I looked him up last - maybe around 2016.

Yep, Larry Adams is alive and well. He still lives in Bullhead City and owns a construction company.

Very sad case. I just feel like there are a lot of missing puzzle pieces in this one. I don't think that the eye witness accounts are very accurate