Katherine was the daughter of Bon Jovi's manager, Paul Korzilius. Anyone know of any update on this strange case?

I tried to find new info on this case a few months ago and didn't really come up with anything. It's a very disturbing case. My guess is that someone in the neighborhood knows what happened...perhaps it was a young person who committed the crime. Hopefully, rumors will start to fly or someone will want to unload and new information will come to the surface.

From what i know about the Austin area, her neighborhood is relatively secluded...in the hills on the west side of town. I can't imagine a predator coming from outside the area looking for kids. Evidently, Katherine's walk home from the mailbox was a regular routine...someone could have been stalking her.

I wonder if the police ever looked into finding out if anyone had moved out of the neighborhood soon after Katherine's murder. If so, someone is trying to get away. I think a lot of murderers get caught by needing to unload, how can anyone in their right mind live with themselves after doing something like that.

I'm unfamiliar with this case. Can anyone explain the details of it?

Katherine was about 9 or so years old. She lived on a circular street in a nice neighborhood in Austin, Texas. She and her brother had been running errands with their mom when they stopped the car to get their mail at the community mailbox. Katherine got the mail and then decided she wanted to walk home from there (about a 1/4 mile). Mom and brother went in the opposite direction in the car (b/c that's the direction the car was facing).

Katherine didn't come home, and none of the neighbors had seen her. Her mother and brother went in the car to look for her. They found her lying face down in the street on the other side of the circle from their house (in other words, Katherine would have had to walk far past her own house to get there). She had a fractured skull and other injuries (the coroner says it's consistent with falling from a vehicle). She was basically brain dead when found...about 15 minute after they picked up the mail.

Her mother said that Katherine's body looked like it had been displayed for her to find in the street. Her hair and clothing were smooth and in place. Police theorized that she may have jumped onto the back of her mom's car and accidentally fallen off. A P.I. ruled out that scenario b/c it was an extremely hot day (the car would have been too hot to touch), there was basically no where for Katherine to grab on, and Katherine had a broken thumb in a splint at the time.

Dogs had tracked Katherine's scent to a vacant lot in the neighborhood where the scent was lost. Perhaps she was abducted near the lot and left for dead at the other end of the neighborhood. The show didn't mention any suspects or whether Katherine had been sexually assaulted (she was wearing all of her clothes when found).

A footnote: Katherine's dad worked for Bon Jovi and they wrote a song about her death.

I have always believed that someone in the neighborhood accidentally hit her with their car which is why she was found still in the neighborhood and hair all smoothed aout (the person was probably a parent themselves) and felt terrible buut is scared to come forward. Now that the case has been on UM and so well covered, I doubt that person will ever come forward. If she had been abducted she would most likely have been found in the woods and from what I understand, no evidence of sexual abuse, etc. was found. I agree about the moving list. If they ran a check on everyone who moved out soon afterwards they might find a link.

This is probably one of the most disturbing episodes for me. That image of the little girl laid out in the street never really left me. I wish they'd solve it!

I get the feelling that maybe the girl was picked up by somebody, realized she was in danger, and jumped from the car to save herself. One fact that confused me though: didn't bloodhounds track the girl's scent into a nearby vacant lot?

I live in a neighborhood kind of like that -- very enclosed and secure. There are, however, always "strangers" in the neighborhood, like people who tend to lawns and perform other services. Sometimes you don't even notice these people, even though they are right there in your yard. I'm sure the police have exhausted all leads, but that seems like an obvious answer to me.

That was one of the most sickening things I ever saw on Unsolved. My bet is that someone struck at Jon Bon Jovi through his publicist.

Blue Jay, that is an interesting theory I hadnt ever thought of. Stranger things have happened. Thats how bizarre murders, etc. get solved, by throwing out ideas and random theories. So mysteroius.

After watching this episode the other day i think i have changed my opinion on this. I would like to point out some parts in this story that just did not make sense to me.

1. I don't really buy the hot day and the car was too hot to touch. i have touched my car on steaming hot days and you can touch it. I mean the sun would of had to be beating down on that car door and remember it was being driven so it was not in one place. Also the woman in the segment they hired to disprove this theory pointed out that if Katherine had held on to the door opener on the back of the car the door would of openend. Now i am no car specialist but i would figure that the trunk could of been locked and that would not of happened.

2. The fact that Katherine was laid out in the street to be found. It was 4:15 in the daytime so anyone who drove past her would of seen her. This would lead you to think the person who did this was someone who either grabbed her or hit her with their car and then panicked. The way the body was laying was perfectly place. But we must remember we are basing this on the moms eyewitness account who picked her up in a panic. So there is no real way to sustantiate this except a mother who was probably panicking. One can recall things later that might not be true and might not realize it. I mean they showed the mother running to her daughter and picking her up right away. I could not see myself in a panic catching the details of how she was laying and that her hair was combed out.

3. The bloodhounds tracked Katherine's sent to a vacant lot in the direction she was walking (that her mom saw her) and then it stopped. However Katherines body was found past her mom's house on the other side of the circle. This to me suggest someone picked her up (a neighbor perhaps) and told her he would drive her home, and then started to try and either molest her or something to that effect and she jumped from the car. However this explanation then does not really explain why she was laying the way she was in the street. That person is not going to get out in broad daylight and fix her up.

Anyway, what i am trying to point out here is that clue 2 and 3 contradict both theories. I personally do not think she was perfectly laid out as she was as her mom says. She was not molested either.

My feelings are one of two things happend.

1. She did jump on her mothers car and fell off. (Contradicts the Bloodhounds)
2. She was hit and run by a driver who panicked and drove off (contradicts her mother statement on how she was found)

I do not believe this was someone trying to kidnap her or do something to her because she was not sexually assualted, she lived in a very secure community, and she was laid out in the street.

ANyway, its a tragedy for sure, but i think it was an accident.

I'd go with the grabbing the car theory. She may have played in the field earlier which would not contradict the bloodhounds. I think this is tragic but I am not sure that there was anything that could have been done to prevent it. I still do not agree with the story about the hot car because I feel she could have jumped on the bumper and grabbed it and then fell off, coming to rest in a certain position laid out on the road.

I also prefer the car grabbing theory. Very basic reason -- it requires no other variables, completely unlike all the accident or conspiracy theories. Within a 15 minute window, I love my chances of being correct. As opposed to someone(s) else appearing, causing the death and vanishing without being detected.

The body's position is a non-issue. There are only so many ways a human can land, compliments of gravity. It's not like a dead little girl could have been balancing on one elbow.

I always embrace the simple explanation, whenever it's viable or there's no proof of stranger involvement. For instance, I'm amazed it took a year for someone to propose the missing scriptwriter -- Devore -- had plunged into a watery California grave, as opposed to all the abduction and conspiracy stuff.

Especially since I remember a somewhat similar incident in the Miami/Ft. Lauderdale area. Five or six teenagers attended a concert in the '70s and then disappeared along with their van. There were all kinds of rumors of kidnapping or intentional departure, including reported sightings in the New York area. Then maybe 15 years later a canal alongside the road near the concert arena was being cleared. A van turned up, completely unexpected. When it was being pulled out of the canal, human bones fell out of the mud in the back of the van. Only then was the van connected to the missing teenagers, more than a decade earlier. They had obviously driven off the road and drowned on the night of the concert.

I like your observations Aswi. I look at things the way you do.

Just think about Bill Rundle and Tracy Kirkpatick case. I never thought they drove off or were kidnapped. Even when the hat showed up in a spot the cops supposedly checked. Two people don't disappear with a car and are never found again. They had all these sorted stories and then the car is found in a feed lot with both of them in it. I don't think the hat was even Bill's.

Thats why in this case i don't put too much credit in the mothers eyewitness account. THe fact she was found along the same path her mom drove leads me to think she held on to the car too. THe fact the bloodhounds captured her scent can be also because of the fact that she walked that way numerous times.

Honestly if someone was trying to kidnap her or molest her they would of taken her somewhere and hid her. THe fact she was not attacked sexually and out in plain site just does no jive with the kidnapper story

Bump - someone brought this case up the other day and might want to read these theories.

Ignore the fact that she was not sexually assaulted. Not all kidnapped children are sexually assaulted; that's a stereotype. Sexual molestation wouldn't have been the purpose here. If Katherine was kidnapped and murdered, the purpose would have been to send a message. Remember, all this took place within a very brief time period. The message would have been "see how easily we can get to the people around you, the people you care about"?

One wonders what Jon himself thinks about this. Aside from the song, has he made any statements or is he under a police gag order until they can determine what really happened?

Sexual molestation wouldn't have been the purpose here.

You can't know the motivation of the killer unless you talk to the killer. BTK technically didn't sexually assault his victims. He masturbated at the crime scenes and that's how they knew the crimes were sexual. How do you know that Katherine's death wasn't playing out a sexual fantasy for the killer (if there was one, of course)? How do you know what the killer did before or after the crime?

You can know the motivation of a killer by the way the victims died. For example, take the ONS case, the killer bludgeoned the victims using far to much excessive force than was necessary, particularly with the females.
The criminal profilers deducted that the perpertrator had an extreme hatred towards women by the way the crime scenes were. Keep in mind there was no connection that law enforcement could find with the victims and the offender. Also where, when the victims were killed and how they were killed gives seasoned law enforcement officers clues behind the motivation.

As for Katherine's killer, IMO I don't think it was an experienced killer.
1. I think it was someone who knew enough of their routine to commit it, possibly a neighbor, deliveryman, someone who wouldn't raise suspicion. An opportunistic killer. The way the body was left doesn't fit the pattern of a sexual predator, who prefer to hide the bodies, or have a prearranged spot for the victim. The purpose being so they can go back to that area and relive the crime. A wide open street hardly being a conducive spot. This was more of a taunt for law enforcement and the parents.

BTW..BTK's motivation was control of the victim, not so much of a sexual motivation. Read about the woman he had selected for one of his victims, she was living with her boyfriend and BTK started harassing her and told her directly that to make things easier for her would be to move out from the boyfriend. Therefore making it easier for him to possibly gain control over her. Only when she didn't did he escalate his harassment, because he couldn't control what she was doing.

I know it's not ultimately about sex, but these killers, including BTK, derived sexual pleasure from their power over their victims. I watch enough shows about murderers and criminal profiling to know that you can derive ideas about what type of subject you're looking for from the way the person was killed and evidence at the crime scene. And the way that criminal profilers know this stuff is by interviewing criminals and applying statistical probabilities derived from this data to elements of a crime. I should have made my point more clear....you can't simply rule out a sexual predator because of lack of evidence in this case. I totally agree that this was a very inexperienced killer (again, if it was in fact a murder). What if the scene of the crime was right outside the murderer's front window, or on a street he drove down every day? Then you couldn't say that the murderer wouldn't be able to relive his crime just because Katherine was left out in the open. I think that is a much more likely scenario than BlueJay's theory that it was somebody trying to get at Jon Bon Jovi through killing Katherine.

Okay, let's go with your theory that the crime scene is right outside the UNSUB's window. It would be extremely rare for the killer to put the body there to relive his crime for the following reason. When a killer puts the body in a specific place to relive their crime, it is always in a place that will be hard to find because they do not want that area disturbed. We are assuming he didn't keep any trophies, which then would be an entirely different scenario. In this case the girl being put in a street where cars go by, people on bicycles go by, people walking by, if not on the original crime scene is hardly a place to relive their crime because of all the disturbance going on around/near it. Remember these type of offenders like to personalize the crime scene. They don't choose public roads because of that fact, it's a public road, everyone would be disturbing "his area".

BTW..sadistic killers/rapists do not derive their pleasure from the power over the victim(s). It is from the fear and pain that the subject emits, NOT the offender afflicting, that gives them their high or sense of well being. Because this type of killer has a very low perception of how certain women are. The sexual assault act is just to reinforce that mindset in his head that these women are getting what they deserve. BTK would not be classified as such.

Maybe the killer was moving the body into the woods, but a car was coming so he/ she laid it out and ran into the woods?

Possibility, I'd like to think law enforcement checked the area for footprints, disturbance among the brush, etc. It didn't mention anything about the woods.

Possibility, I'd like to think law enforcement checked the area for footprints, disturbance among the brush, etc. It didn't mention anything about the woods.

Funny, I like to think OJ did it.

HA HA sounds good to me.

If I'm remembering right, Mrs. Korzilius said the brother was crying when he FIRST reported that Katherine hadn't gotten home yet. Not sure what significance if any that would have but it always struck me as unusual. Maybe he was just a more sensitive child than my boys but I guarantee you my kids would not have been crying at that point. It would have been "hey! wasn't he/she supposed to come straight home? What are you going to do to them for disobeying?"
I've always sort of wondered if perhaps Katherine had told him that next time they stopped for the mail she was going to catch a ride on the back of the car and surprise her mother. Farfetched I know because he would probably have told his mother that after Katherine was found, but I can't come up with any other reason for him to cry before he knew what had happened to his sister. Just rambling I guess. Probably means nothing at all. :confused:

It's probably a good hunch. It's 95 degrees today here in Chi-town. So at lunch I thought I'd touch the hood of my car to see how long I could "hold on." Surprisingly, it's not that hot. She could have held on to the suburban and fell off.

BTW..sadistic killers/rapists do not derive their pleasure from the power over the victim(s). It is from the fear and pain that the subject emits, NOT the offender afflicting, that gives them their high or sense of well being. Because this type of killer has a very low perception of how certain women are. The sexual assault act is just to reinforce that mindset in his head that these women are getting what they deserve. BTK would not be classified as such.

Yeah, that's what the Original Night Stalker would qualify as. I see you've been doing your homework. But seriously, you're getting into technicalities that I really don't care about. Sorry to get off topic.

I think she got into a car somehow and for some reason jumped out. Possibly the driver felt bad and tried to fix up the way she looked. Then simly drove away. Who knows. I think if she had been hit by a car from behind, wouldn't she have had more bruising on her body from the bumper or fender?

I wonder if they ever dusted the hood and back of the car for Katherine's fingerprints. That would solve whether she was on the back of that car - unless she routinely opened the back herself.

Also, was the mail found next to her body?

I think the only suspect that is possible in this case is a hit and run driver. More than likely she held onto the back of the van. My vehicle is not that hot to the touch on a warm day either. I'm not buying the abduction.

Also, was the mail found next to her body?

As I recall, they never found the mail.

As I recall, they never found the mail.

I recall that she handed the mail to her mom and then asked if she could walk back to the house.

I found an old blog entry someone posted (it was a google cache so I can't link to it, sorry!!)

And it stated that her mom left her at the mailboxes with the key.

They apparently wrote the entry soon after viewing the episode, so I'm inclined to trust this account.

((It was under the title "This is really touching..." at elyouth.com. I don't know if you'll be able to find it if you sign up and whatnot, as I didn't feel like going through the trouble.))

its kinda creepy I live in Austin

I watch this show quite often but haven't seen the case and didn't know about the song til I imdb'd john bon jovi. I didn't read all the link so this question might already be answered. Does anyone know if they checked to see if this was maybe a kidnapping gone wrong? Someone thinking they could maybe cash in on bon jovi's money thru his manager's girl? The "someone took her in the car theory and she got away and got hurt" DOES have merit. (I'm a criminolist in boston btw) so am interested in old "cold" cases.

I agree with everyone. That story absolutely haunts me. Does the Unsolved Mystery's website ever update? I keep going to it to try and find updates on episodes I've seen and there's never anything new. I love the show but find myself searching the internet to see if I can find out anything most everyday. Today I discovered this site and I'm really excited. I have enjoyed reading the different thoughts and ideas from everyone. :wave:

I always thought that it could have been a youthfull offender. There was a case profiled on another show about a girl whose mom was at work so the moms boyfriend made sure she was wearing her personal alarm when she left to walk to a friends house. She was grabbed from in front of the house she was killed in and I beleive part of the alarm was even found on the sidewalk in front of that house. Sorry I don't remember which one or more details than I do. My point is that if it wasn't well planned or was spur of the moment on the killers part she could very well have been left in front of or very near the guilty persons house. Maybe they were afraid of a house to house search and didn't have time to do anything else with the body. I also wonder why the brother was crying already. It is possible that he is just very sensitive. Does anyone remember how old he was? I find myself hopeing that it was just a horrible accident because that would mean there wasn't another child predator out there.

I really doubt that the brother had anything to do with his sister's death. I don't remember how old he was but I think he was slightly older than his sister.

Personally I think the theory of Katherine grabbing onto the Suburban deserved further investigation. I think her mother may have let her out of the car and then Katherine decided on the spur of the moment to jump onto the bumper of the Suburban and ride along while her mother drove the short distance home. It would be useful to know if the mother had locked the doors after she let out Katherine. Also, some GM vehicles have a device where as soon as the car shifts into Drive, the doors automatically lock. If the rear door was locked, I think Katherine could have tried to stand on the bumper while holding the rear door handle or the protruding hinges that Suburbans have on the rear. She then could have fallen and her mother would not have noticed (not her fault though) due to the fact that a Suburban is a very large vehicle and the fact that her rear windows were darkly tinted. This would make sense especially considering that Katherine's injuries were consistent with falling out of a moving vehicle.

The reason I am bringing this up is because as a child I remember doing things like this.

Also, does anyone remember if the subdivision was a gated community?

I didn't mean to imply that I thought her brother had anything to do with it, because I never did think that. I just thought that maybe he had a reason to be afraid, like maybe he knew of someone who had been bothering her. Maybe she did hold onto the back of the car and had learned it from him. I wondered if he thought he would get into trouble for not finding her or if he really was just that sensitive. Maybe he found her like that and didn't know what to do and was afraid that he would get in trouble for not knowing what to do. I only thought that last one because of the girl that saw her sister get taken after answering the front door and didn't say anything about it for a long time because she thought she would get into trouble. I never thought the brother had anything to do with what happened to his sister.

If the door automatically locked wouldn't they have mentioned it? I don't remember if there were gates or not but I don't think it looked like there were in the re-enactment.

I don't think the doors had automatic locks on them. When the Korzilius family hired a private investigator to look into Katherine's death, the investigtor made a point of saying that if Katherine had grabbed onto the handle of the back door, the door would have opened. If the car had automatic locks, this wouldn't be plausible.

I don't think that the Korzilius family lived in a gated community, either. But I do agree with everyone on the thread... this is SUCH a sad case. I hope we'll get answers eventually. :(

When these older threads are bumped, sometimes I read my old posts and disagree with myself.:lol:

I think it may be possible that Katherine could have held onto the area above the rear door that the investigator showed us. The black paint there is dull and I think it would have been cool enough to touch, but for Katherine it would have been a stretch. Since the car had been used for errands, it wouldn't have been as hot as if it had sat out all day unmoved.

I agree with Toadley, I didn't think you were implying that, but I think that maybe he was overly sensitive. It would be good to know if he was overly sensitive.

This was just on last week.

I really have to question the parents here. I know they live in an upscale neighborhood where bad things never happen, but the fact of the matter is that these type of things can happen anywhere.

And I see about letting your 6 year old become independent, but there's many safer ways of doing that then letting her off at a mailbox and letting her walk home by herself. I don't care if it's "only" one eigth of a mile from the mailbox to her house. It's still dangerous - absent-minded even - to let a six year old girl walk around the neighborhood unattended to in this generation. Doing things like that, you probably should expect something bad to happen.

These people thought they were safer than they were, and it cost them. Nobody is ever really safe in this sad world we live in these days. And the most dangerous thing is thinking you are.

the parents are probably hiding something. maybe the mother rode the car with catherine on it, just playing abound and went too fast, maybe she accidently hit catherine. that would make more sense then letting a 2 yrold walk home alone and then not being concerned when she doesnt return immediately.

This was just on last week.

I really have to question the parents here. I know they live in an upscale neighborhood where bad things never happen, but the fact of the matter is that these type of things can happen anywhere.

And I see about letting your 6 year old become independent, but there's many safer ways of doing that then letting her off at a mailbox and letting her walk home by herself. I don't care if it's "only" one eigth of a mile from the mailbox to her house. It's still dangerous - absent-minded even - to let a six year old girl walk around the neighborhood unattended to in this generation. Doing things like that, you probably should expect something bad to happen.

These people thought they were safer than they were, and it cost them. Nobody is ever really safe in this sad world we live in these days. And the most dangerous thing is thinking you are.

Agree with ya. You cannot let children do things like this anymore. It is way to risky & it has gotten even worse since this incident occured.

I dont believe this was a accident & the girl was hanging on the back of the vehicle. The way she was described when found was it looked like someone had placed her there. If that's the case, I dont see how she could have been hanging on the back, fallen & ended up like she did.

I have always believed that someone in the neighborhood accidentally hit her with their car which is why she was found still in the neighborhood and hair all smoothed aout (the person was probably a parent themselves) and felt terrible buut is scared to come forward. Now that the case has been on UM and so well covered, I doubt that person will ever come forward. If she had been abducted she would most likely have been found in the woods and from what I understand, no evidence of sexual abuse, etc. was found. I agree about the moving list. If they ran a check on everyone who moved out soon afterwards they might find a link.
I am so confused by this case.. I am not sure what happened to this poor child.. I think that it may have been an accident.. and the person is too scared to come forward and say so as they feel like they may be charged with murder

When the mom and son arrived at the house, they said he went back outside to look for his sister. I remember his mom saying he was only gone a short time (maybe 5 min), but I wonder how far he walked down the street to look for Katherine. From the time he arrived back at the house to tell his mom he didn't see anything to Katherine's mom going back out to look herself, seems like it would only be a few minuets. It's seems like in that little amount of time, someone would have seen a car or person walking down the street.

But the way her mom described Katherine when she found her was strange. Her arms at her sides, seems to discount her jumping from the car, to me anyways. I hope one day the family will find the answer to this case...

The whole theory of Katherine falling off of her mother's vehicle cannot be true, because her body was found on a stretch of road that her mother didn't drive on to get home. A map of the neighborhood was shown on the segment and it clearly shows which route the mother took and where Katherine's body was found, two different areas!

The whole theory of Katherine falling off of her mother's vehicle cannot be true, because her body was found on a stretch of road that her mother didn't drive on to get home. A map of the neighborhood was shown on the segment and it clearly shows which route the mother took and where Katherine's body was found, two different areas!
Actually, you got this totally wrong. Katherine's body was found on a place where her mother's car had driven. What makes the case myseterious is that Katherine started walking toward her house one way, but her body was found past her house if she would have continued to walk that way. So that's why people theorize that she jumped on the back of her mom's car--her body was found on the same route the car went, and not along the route she was walking.

I'm not sure what to think in this case. Katherine could have decided it was too hot to walk and decided at the last minute to jump on the back of her mom's car. I don't know if Katherine's mother would have been driving fast enough to injure her fatally if she had climbed on and fell. It hard to imagine it was an abduction and she was kidnapped, murdered and put on the road all in 15 minutes time. I was reading a memorial page for Katherine and someone speculated that maybe Katherine had met a friend on their bike and decided to get on and fell off hitting her head and the friend panicked and fled. Just speculation of course.

I know whenever I put my car into drive or pull away, I always glance in the back of my rearview mirror. When Katherine's mom pulled away from the mailbox, I wonder if she checked her mirror. I'm saying this because if Katherine somehow jumped on the back of the car, her mom would have noticed she was gone, and not walking back to the house, as she would have been on the back of the car. In saying that, if her mom checked the mirror, you would have thought she would have seen her standing on the bumper.

I've never thought of that crystaldawn, maybe she was playing with a skateboard, or like you said riding a bike. This case still makes me wonder, not very many things can happen in 15 min.

Here's where I get stuck: The police dogs picked up Katherine's scent in the field, meaning that she walked past the mailboxes towards the empty field. This is where her scent stops. Is it possible for a young girl to hand her mother the mail, turn and walk in the direction of an empty field, suddenly change her mind, turn around, run back towards her mothers car, and get on the back on the car ALL before her mother drove away?

I don't think it's possible. I believe that foul play was involved in this case.

I agree. Earlier I had posted about the theory of grabbing her mother's car. I really think that she could have grabbed the car and tried to hang on, then fell hitting her head. I think she could also have grabbed the hinges as well as the door handle or top.

But the mom had stated that when she found Katherine, that her hair and clothes were neat, just like someone had laid Katherine out for her to find. If she had fallen off her mom's vehicle, wouldn't her hair and clothes be all dirty and messed up? Just a thought.

It seems that she most certainly fell off the back of the vehicle, because her injuries were consistent with falling. She may have rolled onto her back and died in that position. She didnt get all scratched up because she probably cracked the back of her skull and therefore didnt get any scratches on her face or body. Does anyone have access to the autopsy report? Also, remember, that witnesses and families are the most unreliable people around, they think they see things that they didnt, and dont report accurately. Science talks to me, its infallable!:D

I've often wondered if perhaps she was accosted by someone, and that person got scared off before they could finish the deed.

Also, she may have played in the vacant lot before. That would explain the dog finding her scent there.

I personally think that she jumped on to the back of the car and fell off.

The main area of heat on a car on a hot summer day in Texas is the hood above the motor and the fenders. Trust me. I tried to sit on my hood once after I had been driving it and almost burnt my cheeks!

Sorry I don't see a failed kidnapping working here. why? the time line. Random grabbings are rare although they do happen, I don't see a mobile suspect driving through a secured neighborhood grabbing a girl. There just would be easier targets out there before he gets to a random girl who just happened to get out of her mom's car and get the mail. Also there was no evidence mentioned that Katherine had any restraint or resistance marks on her body if she had put up a fight.

Someone trying to get at Bon Jovi through his manager? Why Bon Jovi would be easier to get to than going to Texas and stalking the managers family.. possible but seems like a bit of stretch.

Scent in the wooded area, K9's make mistakes they are not infallible (maybe he was tracking a cat or a rabbit). hey there was a case of a recent missing marine in an atlanta hotel, they brought in the dogs and they never located the marine who was found in the hotel maintenance room.

Hit and Run? If Katherine was hit by another car that car would leave marks and evidence (broken headlamps,side mirror,paint etc) no evidence was found in this case, again 15 minutes wouldn't leave the perp enough time to frame catherine clean the scene and flee..

So this sad case brings us a very sad likely answer:

A child trying to hitch a ride on an big SUV. If you've been in suv you know that back passenger side corner is is the hardest area to see. Let alone another kid in the car, the radio playing etc. She probably fell off, because it was too hot or lost her grip and hit her head. There is a reason kids need to where helmets when they ride bikes even a low speed fall can cause serious damage.

Guys, I have a solution. I have been working on this all evening. I have decided that it has to be a murder. And this is how I have come to my conclusion:

Go to www.google.com.

In the search box, type: Austin, TX Katherine Korzilius

My background data: Anybody who is a Bon Jovi fan (or enemy) knows who Paul Korzilius is. He is ALWAYS thanked on the Bon Jovi albums and is even in some of their videos (my reference being the video "Access All Areas," a backstage documentary).

Ok, so back to google. The 9th listing is a .pdf for the Texas Governor's State Music Directory file. Download it. Now, do a search for Paul Korzilius within the .pdf.

There he is, on page 18. Listed under BJM. Hmmm, wonder what that is. Could it be... Bon Jovi Management?! His house address is listed in a free statewide directory. Listed there is his phone number, his fax number, and even his EMAIL address! I even downloaded the FREE version of Google Earth. It IS a HOUSE address!

So there you go. If I can locate his house address in a matter of a couple of hours, any criminal can find him. Mr. Korzilius probably has made a lot of friends--and even more enemies--in the music industry. It is so sad, but very true. Whoever it was probably killed his daughter to get to him. The best way to hurt a person is to hurt that person's kid. I know this because I am a parent and I absolutely hate for my child to be in pain. I would much rather suffer the pain myself.

Now I am NOT saying I know who the killer is, but I doubt a six year old would have the strength to jump onto her mom's moving car (especially one as tall as a Suburban) with a broken finger. I also doubt the little girl would be able to get out of a struggle and jump from a moving car. She was probably picked up by the murderer, beaten, and then dumped in the middle of the street.

The only thing to explain now is the how her hair and dress were neatly arranged where she was found. Were they, in fact, actually neatly arranged? Or is that how Mom wants to remember her precious daughter?

I guess my case in point is if you are a famous, or have something to do with somebody famous, like Jon Bon Jovi, for example, do NOT list your home address with a professional organization such as the State of Texas Governor's Music Directory. It is just not smart. Use a business address in town. Preferably one with a good security staff.

Guys, I have a solution. I have been working on this all evening. I have decided that it has to be a murder. And this is how I have come to my conclusion:

Go to www.google.com.

In the search box, type: Austin, TX Katherine Korzilius

My background data: Anybody who is a Bon Jovi fan (or enemy) knows who Paul Korzilius is. He is ALWAYS thanked on the Bon Jovi albums and is even in some of their videos (my reference being the video "Access All Areas," a backstage documentary).

Ok, so back to google. The 9th listing is a .pdf for the Texas Governor's State Music Directory file. Download it. Now, do a search for Paul Korzilius within the .pdf.

There he is, on page 18. Listed under BJM. Hmmm, wonder what that is. Could it be... Bon Jovi Management?! His house address is listed in a free statewide directory. Listed there is his phone number, his fax number, and even his EMAIL address! I even downloaded the FREE version of Google Earth. It IS a HOUSE address!

So there you go. If I can locate his house address in a matter of a couple of hours, any criminal can find him. Mr. Korzilius probably has made a lot of friends--and even more enemies--in the music industry. It is so sad, but very true. Whoever it was probably killed his daughter to get to him. The best way to hurt a person is to hurt that person's kid. I know this because I am a parent and I absolutely hate for my child to be in pain. I would much rather suffer the pain myself.

Now I am NOT saying I know who the killer is, but I doubt a six year old would have the strength to jump onto her mom's moving car (especially one as tall as a Suburban) with a broken finger. I also doubt the little girl would be able to get out of a struggle and jump from a moving car. She was probably picked up by the murderer, beaten, and then dumped in the middle of the street.

The only thing to explain now is the how her hair and dress were neatly arranged where she was found. Were they, in fact, actually neatly arranged? Or is that how Mom wants to remember her precious daughter?

I guess my case in point is if you are a famous, or have something to do with somebody famous, like Jon Bon Jovi, for example, do NOT list your home address with a professional organization such as the State of Texas Governor's Music Directory. It is just not smart. Use a business address in town. Preferably one with a good security staff.

That's a lot of work and a lot of enthusiasm. And a lot of massive longshot scenarios turned into "probably."

That was 10 years ago so we have no idea if the access to the info was as simple as tonight, when you found it. The internet obviously wasn't nearly as popular, although certainly not in its infancy. Google was founded in 1998 so I doubt you would have received that search result in '96. Search engines in general weren't nearly as sophisticated 10 years ago. And Katherine Korzelius wouldn't have shown up in any search results until after her death. The father, perhaps. Of course, it didn't have to be the internet or a search engine if someone was that intent on murder. They could have obtained the info elsewhere.

My reliance on probability tells me to normally exclude extra and unknown variables, products of random speculation. I believe it was an accidental death. I probably stated that earlier in this thread although I'm not certain. My scenario requires exactly one variable: a little girl who was alone and out of sight of her family and somehow died on a hot day.

Once you start injecting angry people who are out to get Mr. Korzilius, etc., the likelihood diminishes by enormous percentage. That's what the conspiracy minded never fully grasp. More people and variables and speculation means LESS likely, not more. How do we know someone hated Mr. Korzelius that much? How frequent is it for someone to kill a family member, instead of the person they are targeting? I mean, right there, that's an incomparable stretch. How often is a child killed as a vengeful murder, with no intent at physical assault? Try to name a handful of UM cases with those realities, or even speculation along those lines. Murder in itself is extremely rare, much moreso than accidental death.

How did the person(s) know the family would be there at that particular day and time? That the girl would leave the car? That they wouldn't be spotted? That there wouldn't be evidence linking them to the murder?

It's not completely unlike DB Cooper/Richard McCoy. Give me the most basic explanation and I'll take my chances.

I just checked. My post was #12 on page 1, similar ideas. Except in tonight's post I forgot it required a 15 minute window.

I do sound a bit paranoid, huh?

I will tell you, though, I have been a crime victim. More than once. The first time, they (whoever "they" may be...) busted out my car window and stole my radar detector. $1600 worth of damage to my window and my rear fender (probably a brick or rock thrown to break the glass and it bounced off my paint, causing a large dent) for a $150 radar detector. Go figure. I was about 21 then.

Next, my house was vandalized. TWICE! The two main front windows were each broken out on two separate occasions. (Keep in mind, being only 23, I had no real enemies--or so I thought.)

About a year or so later, my son was kidnapped. I did not see him and had no idea of where he was for six weeks. I eventually found out my ex's relatives took him. I had to get a court order to get him back. That was pretty devastating.

And more recently, I now own a small chain of cellular phone stores. Four times in the past two years I have been robbed. I live in a completely different city now so I know it's not the same people.

I guess I am just tired of the craziness.

I am not using my experience to lash out or retaliate. I am just trying to understand the mind of a criminal so I can be more aware of things in my life I can change to better protect myself and those I love.

I do sound a bit paranoid, huh?

I will tell you, though, I have been a crime victim. More than once. The first time, they (whoever "they" may be...) busted out my car window and stole my radar detector. $1600 worth of damage to my window and my rear fender (probably a brick or rock thrown to break the glass and it bounced off my paint, causing a large dent) for a $150 radar detector. Go figure. I was about 21 then.

Next, my house was vandalized. TWICE! The two main front windows were each broken out on two separate occasions. (Keep in mind, being only 23, I had no real enemies--or so I thought.)

About a year or so later, my son was kidnapped. I did not see him and had no idea of where he was for six weeks. I eventually found out my ex's relatives took him. I had to get a court order to get him back. That was pretty devastating.

And more recently, I now own a small chain of cellular phone stores. Four times in the past two years I have been robbed. I live in a completely different city now so I know it's not the same people.

I guess I am just tired of the craziness.

I am not using my experience to lash out or retaliate. I am just trying to understand the mind of a criminal so I can be more aware of things in my life I can change to better protect myself and those I love.

Well gad. It's only natural to carry personal experience over to evaluation of life in general. If I had examples like that, especially the shocking aspect of your son being kidnapped for six weeks, I'm sure my outlook would be different, much less trusting. Actually, I had one devastating event but it was accidental.

This case may be a murder. I'm confident it wasn't but my probability analysis is hardly a 100% system.

Serpe.. sorry to hear about all those instances from your own personal experience.. do what you can to protect your property and most importantly take care of you and your son:)

But back to this case.. I think AWSI is right.. we may be stretching it, again why would a killer stalk a family for a day to kill the daughter of Jon Bon Jovi's Manager? Why not kill the manager or Jon Bon himself? Now there are some weirdo's out there but they can't all live in Texas or have the ambition to cross state lines just to kill JBJ's Manager's Daughter...

Plus the Stranger Danger theory doesn't work out when you figure in the timeline, the killer supposedly knew he only had a few moments to kill poor Katherine, "frame" her body so her mom would find it? And if its a stalker why doesn't he kill Katherine's brother when he comes to look for her, and how does he do it all without being spotted in the few minutes in between (how would a killer know he isn't going to be spotted killing Katherine on a public street? in an area that is at least decently populated from the re-enactment, in the afternoon when many people could be returning from work or running errands themselves?).

Now don't get me wrong I'm open to the possibility that a killer took Katherine's life, stranger stalkings do happen and maybe the manager or JBJ themselves were not the target, think Jon Bennett Ramsay case... but how does a killer do this all in 15 minutes on a public street.. I just haven't heard a good rationale for this yet.

That gets me back to the hit and run, perhaps the remorseful person laid Katherine out peacefully? (but again no evidence of that -car parts on Catherine or around the scene, that has been relayed in the case) or the Katherine making a costly mistake...and as for the heat of the day and her broken hand perhaps this is precisely the reason she fell off the truck?

Yea, soo...I totally forgot about this until a few minutes ago, but we are actually close family friends with the coroner/county medical examiner of the city of Austin who did in fact handle this case (Dr. Robert Bayardo...and yes, he was interviewed on the segment). And anyways, it only clicked for me a few minutes ago because we are seeing him tomorrow, and so I thought I'd ask here if anyone had any questions that he might be able to answer concerning this case?

I actually probably won't mention it tomorrow, because I highly doubt it's appropriate (we're attending the baptism of his 3 newest granddaughters...triplets), but I'd be glad to drop him an e-mail sometime this week? I mean, I don't think he's going to release any secret documents to me or anything lol, but I know that there are alot of questions surrounding this case from the members of this board...so I figured since I have access to a really good source of answers, I'd propose this to you all :).

All I can say about Katherine Korzilius is If she would've stayed with her
Mom, Nancy and her Brother, Chris in their Car together or maybe If she would've waited another time to walk home Then maybe She'd be alive
today to be a Teenager. :wave: :D I have the Unsolved Mysteries Episode
on tape and I watch it all the time. She was a Real Angel.

i found this at http://websleuths.com/forums... apparently, the incident wasn't in a 15 minute time frame but more than an hour before Katherine was found by the mom.

phylliyum:
"I saw this case on unsolved mysteries a few years ago, and then again a few days ago. Her story struck me as so sad....

Katherine's father, Paul Korzilius, was the personal manager for rock star Jon Bon Jovi. The two families were quite close (you could say they were even freinds) and often took vacations together, Paul's family going along on several of Bon Jovi's tours, as well.

Katherine's family lived in Texas in an area not quite upper-class, but not the typical suburb (somewhere near Austin, I believe). The mailboxes for the houses in that part of town were roughly one-eighth of a mile from the Korzilius house. Six-year-old Katherine often liked to walk from the house to the box assigned to their family, get the mail, and return home. The trip took somewhere around half an hour when she was in no hurry to reach home.

On August 7,1996, Nancy, Katherine's mother, had taken Katherine and her brother, Chris, for a day of shopping. Paul was out of town helping Bon Jovi to promote his new tour and the subsequent album. As they approcahed the mailboxes, Katherine asked if she could get out, pick up the mail, and walk the rest of the way home. Seeing no harm in this, Nancy let her daughter do as she wished. She left Katherine at the mailbox with the key, then headed for home. It was 4:15 P.M.

An hour later, Katherine had still not returned home. By this time, Nancy was in a panic. She had called the police, but was informed that, unless she had been missing for at least twenty-four hours, they could not declare Katherine missing. Angered and upset, Nancy pulled Chris into the family car and drove out to the mailboxes. When she did not see her daughter anywhere, she made a wide circle around the neighborhood.

She found Katherine's battered body laying in the middle of the road over a half a mile away from the house, obviously not on the path she normally took home. Frantic, Nancy pulled her daughter into the car and headed for the local hospital. Around six hours later, at 11:30 P.M., Katherine was pronounced brain-dead.

Hospital examinations before her death revealed a fractured skull and several bruises and uneven cuts on one hip, both knees, both elbows, the left shoulderblade, and the small of her back. The coronrer corroborated this, saying that it was most likely caused by either falling, jumping, or being thrown froma moving vehicle. There was no evidence of sexual assault; only physical trauma.

Later, the police sent the K-9 unit to track the girl's scent. Startng at the mailboxes, they had walked for perhaps five or six minutes when the trail veered off into a vacant lot, then disappeared, only to be picked up again where the body was found. Police and private detectives surmised that she encountered her attacker, ran into the lot to escape, but was then picked up and thrown into a vehicle. Whether she jumped out of the vehicle or if she was thrown was never discovered. But the coroner said that the fracture in her skull was of greater size and severity to have been caused by the fall; she had obviously been struck, possibly several times, in the head.

To this day, almost ten years later, this innocent girl's brutal murder goes unavenged and the killer walks free. The family has moved on, but there is a hole in their hearts and their lives that cannot and will not ever be filled.

Shortly after the incident, Jon Bon Jovi penned the song August 7, 4:15, a ballad about the fateful events of that day, and dedicated it to her memory. He said it was the least he could have done for the family, but wished he could have done so much more.

I have heard several theories about this case. One is that Katherine grabbed onto the back of her mother's car and fell off, and that her mother lied about finding her. This theory doesn't hold up with me for several reasons. another one I hear is hit and run, but then why would her body look so peaceful? hit and run victims do not USUALLY look that pleasent, and why would her scent have been picked up near the lot and her body not found near there?"

Personally I think that a resident of the neighborhood was going too fast, didn't see the child and hit her. A teenager, a frazzled mom...

Bump - Since I mentioned this case in the Joe Owens thread, I thought the newbies might want a shot at it. I agree, by the way, with Awsi Dooger's posts on this case - it seems to me that in all probability she jumped on the back of her mother's van, as the police suggested. Other scenarios require too many "variables," as Awsi Dooger puts it, in a very short time span. Although, thanks to Fonyaesss's post above, that time span is in question to some degree.

I think I may have posted more extensively in another thread on this case. I'll search, and, if so, repost.

Such a sad case...

I agree with you, mozart. I think despite peoples feelings about other theories (and the bloodhound evidence), the most likely scenario is that she jumped on her mom's vehicle. Nothing else makes sense.

Never tell a little kid they can't do something or tell them there is no way. Often times, they surprise you. Sadly, I think in this case that is exactly what happened. Even though her mom thinks she was "laid out" as if arranged, she could have fallen that way or even been concious long enough to roll over.

I feel so bad for the poor parents. :(

Is there somewhere online I can see this segment? I couldn't find anything... Please PM me.

Hey,
I'm sorry answering this theme so late but I just found it now. I'm also sorry for my englisch but I'm living in germany and I just have got englisch in school. Hope you can understand, what I mean. I also think that this is such a sad case.
I understand the theory with the car-grabbing and I also understand your various ideas why she should have did it. but im also not sure i a 6year old girl can jump on a driven car...

i just don't understand why you're always talking about 15 minutes!? i just read that it was taken about hours...

Hey,
I'm sorry answering this theme so late but I just found it now. I'm also sorry for my englisch but I'm living in germany and I just have got englisch in school. Hope you can understand, what I mean. I also think that this is such a sad case.
I understand the theory with the car-grabbing and I also understand your various ideas why she should have did it. but im also not sure i a 6year old girl can jump on a driven car...

i just don't understand why you're always talking about 15 minutes!? i just read that it was taken about hours...


Hi, Katrin -

Welcome to the board! :wave: We are happy to have you here.

Don't worry about your English. It is just fine... and I don't speak a word of German! :D

The 15 minutes is not accurate. It was quite a while before she was found.

As far as jumping on the car, it would have been difficult that day because of the heat, but not impossible. If I recall, she had done that before. The car would have been stopped briefly while she got out, which would have been enough time for her to do it.

I just think that makes the most sense based on the evidence.

she could have fallen that way or even been concious long enough to roll over.


I never even thought of that before! That makes some sense "if" she was on her Moms car. She could have fallen off and then rolled over.

I can't remember... were there marks on her face? Cause if she had fallen on her front and rolled over to her back, she would have had some sort of mark on her front side. Even if it was a small scrape.

Hi, Katrin -

Welcome to the board! :wave: We are happy to have you here.

Don't worry about your English. It is just fine... and I don't speak a word of German! :D

The 15 minutes is not accurate. It was quite a while before she was found.

As far as jumping on the car, it would have been difficult that day because of the heat, but not impossible. If I recall, she had done that before. The car would have been stopped briefly while she got out, which would have been enough time for her to do it.

I just think that makes the most sense based on the evidence.


hey,
thank you for the explanation :D
yeah, now I see, it makes sense...

What injuries did she sustain besides the skull fracture? Was she bruised or skinned as if she had been struck or fallen?

What injuries did she sustain besides the skull fracture? Was she bruised or skinned as if she had been struck or fallen?

According to various websites (including wikipedia) she did indeed have bruises and scrapes.
Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_7,_4:15)

Earlier in this thread, one user quoted that: "Hospital examinations before her death revealed a fractured skull and several bruises and uneven cuts on one hip, both knees, both elbows, the left shoulderblade, and the small of her back. The coroner corroborated this, saying that it was most likely caused by either falling, jumping, or being thrown from a moving vehicle. There was no evidence of sexual assault; only physical trauma."

I have wondered about this case for years after I first saw it televised. I googled forever trying to read more and refresh myself on the case and today I succeeded!
Anyway--
I am 98% positive Katherine fell off of her moms Suv.
1.) The too hot car/broken thumb theory seems to indicate EXACTLY why she fell off in the first place.
2) The bloodhounds most likely tracked her scent to the field because she had been there before.
3)Assuming the mom is correct in how she found Katherine ( neatly layed out), I see this as just a coincidence. The speed limit was 25, so if the mom was going 25-30mph and Katherine fell off, she probably literally just fell...didnt roll or bounce--the car wasnt going fast enough.
4) It was less than an hour after they dropped her off when they found her. They came home, unloaded the groceries, and then the brother went to lok for her for 5 mins..mom called the cops then jumped in her car and circled the road..a total of about 45 mins max.
5.)Picking up someone, putting them in the car and driving without having them securely strapped probably isnt a good idea when that person has a severe skull fracture.

Sorry for the essay :)
I think it would be extremely beneficial to see the autopsy report. But if there were no reports of car parts on the road and no evidence of microscopic car paint,metal on Katherine then she probably wasnt hit by a car ( although this would be my second theory?). It seems that hitting her head on the gravel road would leave bits of gravel and dirt in her hair, and wounds. If she was hit with a blunt object ( such as during a kidnapping), or with a fist, then this would have been apparent and look different then busting her head on the road.
Ok I need to stop now!

I have wondered about this case for years after I first saw it televised. I googled forever trying to read more and refresh myself on the case and today I succeeded!
Anyway--
I am 98% positive Katherine fell off of her moms Suv.
1.) The too hot car/broken thumb theory seems to indicate EXACTLY why she fell off in the first place.
2) The bloodhounds most likely tracked her scent to the field because she had been there before.
3)Assuming the mom is correct in how she found Katherine ( neatly layed out), I see this as just a coincidence. The speed limit was 25, so if the mom was going 25-30mph and Katherine fell off, she probably literally just fell...didnt roll or bounce--the car wasnt going fast enough.
4) It was less than an hour after they dropped her off when they found her. They came home, unloaded the groceries, and then the brother went to lok for her for 5 mins..mom called the cops then jumped in her car and circled the road..a total of about 45 mins max.
5.)Picking up someone, putting them in the car and driving without having them securely strapped probably isnt a good idea when that person has a severe skull fracture.

Sorry for the essay :)
I think it would be extremely beneficial to see the autopsy report. But if there were no reports of car parts on the road and no evidence of microscopic car paint,metal on Katherine then she probably wasnt hit by a car ( although this would be my second theory?). It seems that hitting her head on the gravel road would leave bits of gravel and dirt in her hair, and wounds. If she was hit with a blunt object ( such as during a kidnapping), or with a fist, then this would have been apparent and look different then busting her head on the road.
Ok I need to stop now!

Great post! I agree with the theory that she died from falling off her mother's SUV. It just makes more sense than the others. Chances are if someone kidnapped her they were try to get her out of the area as soon as possible and would have put her securely in their car and they would have been out of the area in seconds. You're right about the dogs tracking her scent there and I had never thought of that before....her and her brother had probably played there before which would explain that.

I'm digging up another old thread out of the cobwebs here....

Poor little Katherine's case is so sad. She was just a little girl enjoying a summer day and bit of big girl freedom of getting the mail for her mom. What a terrible thing to have happen.

I just read a few posts back where Katherine's mother called police to tell them that her six year old has just gone missing and they told her they couldn't do anything for 24 hours or 72 hours or some such nonsense!

Good grief! This happened in 1996! We KNEW about child predators by then. We didn't have our heads in the sand anymore. And a six year certainly wasn't a troubled teen who had run away from home and would be back the next day!

There's no excuse for that! Can you imagine calling 911 to say that you just dropped your six year old off at the neighborhood mailboxes and now she's missing, and they said sorry, you'll have to wait a day or two before we can start looking for her?

TracyLynnS...this is one of those cases that really stuck with me over the years. I feel terrible for the family and their loss, but I also never really suspected this was anything more than a tragic accident.

It seems to me the falling off the SUV was the most likely answer. :(

Yes, cmyweb, I think that's the most likely thing that happened. It was just a terrible accident.

not sure bout anyone else but the idea of her climbing on the back of the vehicle and holding on while they drove off seems to me she wouldnt get very far to where she ended up being found without having a good grip on anything cause she wouldn't be tall enough to hold on good at the top and or the door opener unless she was very tall for her age and im short myself and not tall enough to hold on good to the top just an idea

I wonder if maybe she wasn't standing on the back bumper and holding on to the hot handle of the dark back doors at all, as the accident reconstructionist surmized...

But could it be possible that she just sat on the back bumper of the big SUV (pretty big bumpers on some of them, big enough for a 7 year old) and she just held on to that or maybe held on to a trailer hitch that was connected to the bumper?

That would explain why her mom didn't see her in the rear view mirror, and also, a chrome bumper isn't going to be nearly has hot as a dark painted car in the TX heat.

It might be just me but the thought of her climbing on the back of the vehicle and holding on doesn't seem to be without hanging on for the time to be where she was found cause its not set up to someone hanging on to the back and it doesnt stike me to be tall enough at her age to hang on good to the top of the vehicle and the way the door handle isnt a good way to hold on for the length and distance to be found where she ended up unless she is tall for her age and im short myself and i would findd it very hard to hang on for any length of time and depending on how fast the mom was driving as well just a thought

Lanna,

What I meant was that maybe Katherine sat on the back bumper. On an SUV, the bumper is low enough to the ground that a 7 year old can sit on it comfortably. But an adult can't. An adult won't have enough room from the back of the bumper out to their thighs. That's not enough support for an adult's bottom, and it would make them sort of pitch forward.

But for a seven year old, they are small enough for the back bumper to fit them like a little chair. All she would have to do is sit on the bumper with her back against the back of the SUV doors, hold on to the bumper next to her knees or hold on to the trailer hitch next to her for support.

Katherine wouldn't have had to climb up onto the SUV and hold on to the back of it or hold on to the door handle to do this.

I'm just thinking, if she actually got onto the vehicle and fell off at some point, this could be a much more realistic way for her to do that, rather than for her to climb onto the back, and stand on the bumper, with not much to hold on to, as the accident reconstructionist was talking about.

edit: I just went back and read the story on the unsolved site. The Korzilius' investigator only considered two theories. One was that Katherine stood on the back bumper and held on to the SUV, when there was clearly no place to hold on to AND her mother would have seen her in the rear view mirror. They discounted that theory completely and never considered that Katherine could have sat on the bumper rather than stood on it. The other theory was that she was abducted and murdered and dumped in the middle of the street in her own neighborhood. Katherine's mother has another theory, that she was hit by a hit and run driver while she was walking in the neighborhood, but the autopsy report states that her injuries are inconsistent with a hit and run and ARE consisting with falling from or being thrown from a moving vehicle.

Great points TracyLynn!! I never knew what to make of this case but your post makes a lot of sense to me. I can totally see the kid sitting on the bumper and using the trailer hitch or something else to hold on. I bet that is what happened.

Great points TracyLynn!! I never knew what to make of this case but your post makes a lot of sense to me. I can totally see the kid sitting on the bumper and using the trailer hitch or something else to hold on. I bet that is what happened.

I never thought of it until Lanna mentioned Katherine not being tall enough to reach around to hold onto to anything. Then I started thinking, what do kids do around cars parked in the driveway? How do they climb around on them? etc..

Then I realized, I've seen lots of kids playing in their driveways and sometimes sitting on the back bumper of the car parked in the driveway. I even did it when I was a kid.

That led me to think that maybe Katherine did the same thing, but lost her grip going around the first sharp curve in the road.

The unsolved.com site has a map of the neighborhood showing the direction Katherine was supposed to walk, compared to the direction her mother drove the car.

Just watched the episode, and as always, came straight to this message board right after to see if it has been solved, and if not, what everyone else has said.

Okay, a lot of you are not going to like this, but I think in the interests of solving the case, it needs to be mentioned.

The thought occurred to me that perhaps, the murderer is ... gasp ... the mother. The only evidence for abduction is the bloodhounds, which most of you have discounted anyway. No witnesses or physical evidence. The only thing we are going by here is the testimony of the mother.

Is it possible that Katherine did or said something to upset her mother, and her mother responded by beating on her, and Katherine, to espape the beating, opened the door and lept out? Her mother said in the segment, "having driven her to emergency before . . .". My question is, "how many times had she taken her daugher to emergency", and "why did she need to go to emergency?" If the mother had beaten the child before, I think she was the most likely suspect. However, I don't know if there was a pattern.

We were all curious as to why the son was crying when he didn't find her. Most found that odd. Keep this in mind: when someone lies about what happened, there are usually true elements that get "twisted" a bit to fit the story. I have no doubt the boy was crying. However, what might have been his crying over being told to keep silent (or else ...) after just seeing his sister killed might have been "twisted" into him crying because he went out and did not find his missing sister. This sounds like one of those cases where a true part of the story might have been "twisted". Otherwise why would the boy cry? You'd think he would have assumed she would be at the neighbour's house - the one they ended up checking anyway. Personally, at that age, I would have been mystified, and would have assumed a dozen things (she is hiding and playing a prank, she stopped off at the neighbour's house, she stopped by the vacant lot and is playing around there, etc.), but I would not have been thinking abduction or murder - at least, that is not what would be on the forefront of my mind.

I do not know if the police ever investigated this angle, but considering the combination of Mr. Korzilius being as rich and famous as he was, and our general sympathy for and trust of a distraught mother's accounting of events surrounding the murder of her daughter, I might think that this possibility could be easily overlooked or dismissed.

Awsi Dooger said the simplest explanation is the most likely, and crystaldawn seconded that. To me, this is a more likely explanation than her grabbing onto the SUV, and certainly more so than the abduction (which did not end up in a sexual assault, nor a concealing of the body). What does everyone else think?

If Katherine's injuries were consistent with falling/being pushed from a moving vehicle, is it possible that someone did grab her and pull her into the car but she jumped out, hit her head and the guy saw how badly injured she was and left her?

Someone who is more familiar with the map of the area might be able to say whether anyone trying to leave the area would've been on the part of the road where she was found.

I don't suppose her clothing was examined for stranger DNA. :confused:

Just watched the episode, and as always, came straight to this message board right after to see if it has been solved, and if not, what everyone else has said.

Okay, a lot of you are not going to like this, but I think in the interests of solving the case, it needs to be mentioned.

The thought occurred to me that perhaps, the murderer is ... gasp ... the mother. The only evidence for abduction is the bloodhounds, which most of you have discounted anyway. No witnesses or physical evidence. The only thing we are going by here is the testimony of the mother.

Is it possible that Katherine did or said something to upset her mother, and her mother responded by beating on her, and Katherine, to espape the beating, opened the door and lept out? Her mother said in the segment, "having driven her to emergency before . . .". My question is, "how many times had she taken her daugher to emergency", and "why did she need to go to emergency?" If the mother had beaten the child before, I think she was the most likely suspect. However, I don't know if there was a pattern.

We were all curious as to why the son was crying when he didn't find her. Most found that odd. Keep this in mind: when someone lies about what happened, there are usually true elements that get "twisted" a bit to fit the story. I have no doubt the boy was crying. However, what might have been his crying over being told to keep silent (or else ...) after just seeing his sister killed might have been "twisted" into him crying because he went out and did not find his missing sister. This sounds like one of those cases where a true part of the story might have been "twisted". Otherwise why would the boy cry? You'd think he would have assumed she would be at the neighbour's house - the one they ended up checking anyway. Personally, at that age, I would have been mystified, and would have assumed a dozen things (she is hiding and playing a prank, she stopped off at the neighbour's house, she stopped by the vacant lot and is playing around there, etc.), but I would not have been thinking abduction or murder - at least, that is not what would be on the forefront of my mind.

I do not know if the police ever investigated this angle, but considering the combination of Mr. Korzilius being as rich and famous as he was, and our general sympathy for and trust of a distraught mother's accounting of events surrounding the murder of her daughter, I might think that this possibility could be easily overlooked or dismissed.

Awsi Dooger said the simplest explanation is the most likely, and crystaldawn seconded that. To me, this is a more likely explanation than her grabbing onto the SUV, and certainly more so than the abduction (which did not end up in a sexual assault, nor a concealing of the body). What does everyone else think?

Interesting idea for sure, but somehow I just feel that falling from the back of the SUV seems to be the most likely scenario. I think we would have to have more information to decide if the mom killed her. For example, as you said, was there any history of abuse at all, etc. I am quite sure that if the mother had taken the child to the hospital in the past for injuries related to abuse, then the police would have absolutely focused on the mother as a suspect. I imagine that the mother was questioned for sure, although you might be right that her fame and status allowed her to slip through the cracks.

I think you make quite a few assertions that are speculation (such as the "twisted" response by the brother). Overall, I think that the most reasonable conclusion, based on the evidence, is that she fell off the back of the SUV, particularly since, as TracyLynn said, the place where she fell was at the first sharp curve in the street.

Sad case.

Its a pretty simple case, she either sat on the back of the truck or got caught in the back and simply feel off and died. I dont think the mom did anything on purpose to her.

Katherine was the daughter of Bon Jovi's manager, Paul Korzilius. Anyone know of any update on this strange case?

Hi everyone! I've been watching eps of UM on YouTube recently, having forgotten what an intriguing show it was. Anyway, in my opinion this case is both haunting and extremely baffling. I (of course) don't know what happened to little Katherine, but I have some concerns about the SUV theory:

-Her finger in the splint. Would it even be possible for a small girl to get onto a large (and possibly moving) SUV with a finger in a splint? From the model SUV in the UM episode, the car's handle seemed too small (I could def. be wrong on this!) for even a child's hand to grasp onto, esp. in a manner that would have allowed her to "hold on" a good distance around the circle before falling off. I think it may be possible, just not very probable.

-Her unnoticed ride. How could she have a.) gotten on, and b.) fallen off without making any noise, without the mom or the brother seeing her, without any movement detected on the car, etc.? Again, I grant that it is possible, just extremely improbable. Of course, mom may have had the radio on, but still -- when someone even lightly presses on your car, you "feel" it, in a way. I realize Katherine was a little kid, and that this was a big suv, but still...it just seems highly unlikely that she could have clambered up and then fatally fallen off without being noticed by either driver or passenger.

-The process of getting on the SUV. In the UM reenactment, it shows Katherine's mom watch her start walking away from the mailbox, as mom is about to drive off in the other direction. Katherine would have had to turn around and move pretty fast to catch up with the car, then somehow "smoothly" climb on the car (which may have been moving by that point). Her distance from the car as her mom drives away just seems to make it that much more improbable that she hopped on.

Of course, I could be totally wrong; she could have been abducted by shape-shifting reptilian aliens for all I know. There are just as many issues with the kidnapper theory, the hit-and-run theory, the grudge against Bon Jovi theory, etc.

However, the "climbed onto the SUV theory" seems to be provable. Did LE ever stage some sort of reenactment of her getting onto the car, using a child of Katherine's size (with a splinted finger) and the same sort of car (and some floor mats)?

SheRaa: Just wanted to say welcome to the boards!!!! It's a great place! Good post too.

Her unnoticed ride. How could she have a.) gotten on, and b.) fallen off without making any noise, without the mom or the brother seeing her, without any movement detected on the car, etc.? Again, I grant that it is possible, just extremely improbable. Of course, mom may have had the radio on, but still -- when someone even lightly presses on your car, you "feel" it, in a way. I realize Katherine was a little kid, and that this was a big suv, but still...it just seems highly unlikely that she could have clambered up and then fatally fallen off without being noticed by either driver or passenger.

The process of getting on the SUV. In the UM reenactment, it shows Katherine's mom watch her start walking away from the mailbox, as mom is about to drive off in the other direction. Katherine would have had to turn around and move pretty fast to catch up with the car, then somehow "smoothly" climb on the car (which may have been moving by that point). Her distance from the car as her mom drives away just seems to make it that much more improbable that she hopped on.

For these two reasons particularly, I think the idea that my theory that the daughter jumped from the vehicle to escape her mother's abuse is more likely than the jumping on the back of the SUV theory.

Allow me to also say - it would be very unlikely for a girl falling off a SUV and cracking her skull to go unheard by the people in the vehicle. If you read accounts of people overhearing someone's skull being fractured, it is not exactly a quiet thing. When such a thing happens in sports (thankfully, it's very rare), everyone in the stadium hears it clearly. When Ace Bailey was hit illegally by Eddie Shore in a 1933 hockey game and cracked his skull, the sound was described as being akin to a baseball bat smashing a pumpkin, and everyone in the arena (to their chagrin) heard it. Cold Case Files did an episode on a couple of toughs who beat two men to death, and witnesses who stood quite some distance away described the same sound (bat hammering a pumpkin).

Interesting idea for sure, but somehow I just feel that falling from the back of the SUV seems to be the most likely scenario. I think we would have to have more information to decide if the mom killed her. For example, as you said, was there any history of abuse at all, etc. I am quite sure that if the mother had taken the child to the hospital in the past for injuries related to abuse, then the police would have absolutely focused on the mother as a suspect. I imagine that the mother was questioned for sure, although you might be right that her fame and status allowed her to slip through the cracks.

I think you make quite a few assertions that are speculation (such as the "twisted" response by the brother). Overall, I think that the most reasonable conclusion, based on the evidence, is that she fell off the back of the SUV, particularly since, as TracyLynn said, the place where she fell was at the first sharp curve in the street.

Sad case.

I agree that we do not have enough information, especially on her history of abuse. If she had made numerous trips to the hospital for various injuries, this would look suspicious. But what if she had only made a couple trips? The hospital staff would not necessarily suspect anything (they usually believe the story given for the injuries - especially when your husband is Bon Jovi's manager), and the police would not have considered two emergency trips to indicate child abuse. Then again, I don't think the police would have even checked with the hospital - I think they believed the mother's story and did not ever consider her a suspect.

Yes, the police should have considered the mother a suspect as the last one to see her alive and for the fact that she was her mother (good police work always starts by eliminating the suspects most closely related). However, we have to remember that there is a lot of shoddy police work done on many of these cases profiled on UM. kadrmas15 points this out quite frequently, and he is right about that. It would not surprise me if the ball was dropped here too.

Yes, much of this is all speculation. The "twisted" response I probably should have left out, because it was the weakest part of my argument - almost "an aside".

As for the "first sharp curve", however, that is not what the segment seems to show - neither on the map nor on the re-enactment shot of her body lying on the ground.

I really wish I could see the file for myself. Not, however, that I have the time for it. Hopefully, a fresh set of eyes can figure it out someday.

Yes, Sheraaa, welcome. And what a great first post! Excellent insights. I too have been watching old UM episodes again - but unlike you, I never did forget how great the show was!!!

For these two reasons particularly, I think the idea that my theory that the daughter jumped from the vehicle to escape her mother's abuse is more likely than the jumping on the back of the SUV theory.

In that case what we need here is the same damn thing as in the JonBenét Ramsey case--for the brother to talk and tell what he knows--even if it's just suspicions. Don't suppose he could have pushed her from the car and they concocted the whole story to cover up for him?

As a texan I can tell there is no WAY i believe she grabbed the SUV. If this happened between the months of may-august then no no no way. It is hot here in texas. 95 here is a huge difference from 95 up north. I am originally from Michigan and the texas humidity makes the difference. The sidewalk is hot, cars are burning hot etc.

I think this was either a hit and run or a failed abduction.

I'm not as familiar with this case as others, but I thought I'd chime in.

1. The whole SUV-ride theory sounds a little far-fetched IMHO. It explains the facts, but is that really what happened.:rolleyes:

2. My first thought in this case is that the facts are not correct here.
a. Someone is lying about their story.
b. The facts and the events are being misinterpreted.
c. There's a missing piece of evidence or a missing witness.

3. My first theory was that she was run over and dragged by accident. But I assume that theory has been ruled out.

In that case what we need here is the same damn thing as in the JonBenét Ramsey case--for the brother to talk and tell what he knows--even if it's just suspicions. Don't suppose he could have pushed her from the car and they concocted the whole story to cover up for him?

Cori, I think that is a good suggestion. I suggested child abuse just as a possibility, but there are others. Perhaps there was an intense sibling rivarly, and there was a fight that led to Katherine being pushed out by her brother. Of course, the brother could not be charged with any crime - he would be too young - but there would be a vested interest in covering it up, because the media would start to probe into what was going on in the Korzilius house to fuel such a sibling rivalry, and make a young boy capable of such an audacious thing. And when you are Bon Jovi's manager, you have to protect that "perfect family" image. Look at the extent Tiger went to, and look at the fallout he is suffering through now.

There are probably other scenarios that I cannot off hand think of. Either way, I really think the most likely explanation is that this was an "inside job". She was pushed or fell from her own mother's SUV.

The whole SUV-ride theory sounds a little far-fetched IMHO. It explains the facts, but is that really what happened.:rolleyes:



Bingo. To be honest, a theory that would propose that she was "abducted" not by people hiding in the vacant lot but rather by aliens in a flying saucer fits the facts too. But that's too far-fetched to be taken seriously.

At least ten arguments have been made here against the climbing on the SUV. Some of them are excellent, some are weaker. But when you put them all together, one by one they build up enough of a circumstantial case that the statistical probability of this happening are rather close to nil. Not nil, but close.

All of these have to be true for the SUV theory to work:

1. No one in the vehicle heard or saw (a) Katherine jump on, (b) hanging on, or (c) falling off and (d) cracking her skull, which makes a loud sound.

2. She managed to “hand her mother the mail, turn and walk in the direction of an empty field, suddenly change her mind, turn around, run back towards her mothers car, and get on the back on the car ALL before her mother drove away”. "The re-enactment showed Katherine's mom watch her start walking away from the mailbox, as mom is about to drive off in the other direction. Katherine would have had to (a) turn around and move pretty fast to catch up with the car, then (b) somehow "smoothly" climb on the car (which may have been moving by that point)".

3. She laid on the side of the street for an hour without anyone noticing.

4. She held onto the exterior of a vehicle in Texas for quite some time, even though “the main area of heat on a car on a hot summer day in Texas is the hood above the motor and the fenders” and “95 degrees in Texas is a huge difference from 95 up north”, specifically, it is too hot to handle;

AND

5a. If standing on the bumper, she managed to ride quite a ways (i) without a good grip as there was “clearly no place to hold on to” and (ii) do so with a broken thumb;

OR

5b. She managed to (i) sit on the bumper, but (ii) somehow slid off to the side while the SUV was going straight (she fell off long after the SUV navigated the sharp curve) (iii) from a bumper only eight inches off the ground, yet from such a short fall had extensive injuries to her body (multiple abrasions) as well as a broken skull.

6. And remember that “witnesses and families are the most unreliable people around, they think they see things that they didnt, and dont report accurately”. Not to mention that they lie if they actually committed the crime.

As Sheraa said, “I grant that it is possible, just extremely improbable”.

One other thing I just noticed: not only had her mother said she had taken her to emergency before (and implicit in how she said it and the words she used was that it had been more than once), but at the time of the incident, she had a broken thumb. These could be signs of child abuse.

The main thing that makes me think it was not child abuse or her brother's fault (especially her brother's fault) is why would they continue to pursue answers and get all this press if they had already been cleared of wrongdoing? There was no suspicion on the family. Why push their luck?

The main thing that makes me think it was not child abuse or her brother's fault (especially her brother's fault) is why would they continue to pursue answers and get all this press if they had already been cleared of wrongdoing? There was no suspicion on the family. Why push their luck?

It might be more suspicious if they did nothing.

Remember this case caught a lot of attention. Jon Bon Jovi's writing songs about the Katherine. They have to show some effort in pursuing this investigation.

All of these have to be true for the SUV theory to work:

1. No one in the vehicle heard or saw (a) Katherine jump on, (b) hanging on, or (c) falling off and (d) cracking her skull, which makes a loud sound.

2. She managed to “hand her mother the mail, turn and walk in the direction of an empty field, suddenly change her mind, turn around, run back towards her mothers car, and get on the back on the car ALL before her mother drove away”. "The re-enactment showed Katherine's mom watch her start walking away from the mailbox, as mom is about to drive off in the other direction. Katherine would have had to (a) turn around and move pretty fast to catch up with the car, then (b) somehow "smoothly" climb on the car (which may have been moving by that point)".

3. She laid on the side of the street for an hour without anyone noticing.

4. She held onto the exterior of a vehicle in Texas for quite some time, even though “the main area of heat on a car on a hot summer day in Texas is the hood above the motor and the fenders” and “95 degrees in Texas is a huge difference from 95 up north”, specifically, it is too hot to handle;

AND

5a. If standing on the bumper, she managed to ride quite a ways (i) without a good grip as there was “clearly no place to hold on to” and (ii) do so with a broken thumb;

OR

5b. She managed to (i) sit on the bumper, but (ii) somehow slid off to the side while the SUV was going straight (she fell off long after the SUV navigated the sharp curve) (iii) from a bumper only eight inches off the ground, yet from such a short fall had extensive injuries to her body (multiple abrasions) as well as a broken skull.

6. And remember that “witnesses and families are the most unreliable people around, they think they see things that they didnt, and dont report accurately”. Not to mention that they lie if they actually committed the crime.

As Sheraa said, “I grant that it is possible, just extremely improbable”.

One other thing I just noticed: not only had her mother said she had taken her to emergency before (and implicit in how she said it and the words she used was that it had been more than once), but at the time of the incident, she had a broken thumb. These could be signs of child abuse.

Fantastic post :) You've made me rethink this entire thing now!!! While I do think it is probable that she fell off the SUV, and the reenactment might not have really been exactly how the mother pulled away from the mailboxes, it is becoming harder to believe than I initially thought. Hmmm... Good one.

Also, like JonBenét, was killed within a short time of being taken with no signs of molestation--not SOP for most predators.

Also, like JonBenét, was killed within a short time of being taken with no signs of molestation--not SOP for most predators.

Also like JonBenet, the parents were rich and influential. A dangerous combination in these cases.

Fantastic post :) You've made me rethink this entire thing now!!! While I do think it is probable that she fell off the SUV, and the reenactment might not have really been exactly how the mother pulled away from the mailboxes, it is becoming harder to believe than I initially thought. Hmmm... Good one.

Thanks, mattc!

Actually, I think I might contact UM with this theory and see what happens.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I think I might contact UM with this theory and see what happens.

1. Is this case currently open by the local police?
If it's not open, i'm not sure what UM can do at this point.

2. Be careful. Remember that you are presenting a theory that potentially accuses the Korzillus family. They have money and probably have people they can hire that could make your life miserable.

3. IMHO, best bet would be to contact the local police detective who would be resposible for the case. Make sure you get a response from them. If you get nothing, call the local newspaper and see if their is a reporter that will run with your theory.

4. Also check Websleuths, you may find the case on their community website.

1. Is this case currently open by the local police?
If it's not open, i'm not sure what UM can do at this point.

2. Be careful. Remember that you are presenting a theory that potentially accuses the Korzillus family. They have money and probably have people they can hire that could make your life miserable.

3. IMHO, best bet would be to contact the local police detective who would be responsible for the case. Make sure you get a response from them. If you get nothing, call the local newspaper and see if their is a reporter that will run with your theory.

4. Also check Websleuths, you may find the case on their community website.

All excellent suggestions, Mastermind. Might be best to just let sleeping dogs lie. I would like the case solved, but I am not willing to go to extreme personal lengths to do so. If I decide to do anything, it will be #3.

i don't think it was her mother or brother who killed Katherine, this seems to me like an abduction gone wrong, she tried to escape, the killer pushed her out, realized what they did and set up the scene to make it look accidental, don't believe the mother did it because someone would've heard something, if she jumped on her mom's car that would've been easy to prove by fingerprinting and plus i think the brother would've told his mom something was up and they would've seen her body in the rear view mirror.

We're forgetting one important fact. If Katherine is holding onto the back of the truck there are a couple holes to this story.

One: her mother would see it. Think about this the next time you drive. You would see a person in your rearview mirror just by accident. Think of when a car is rapidly approaching you, your eyes automatically see it out of the corner of them. The movement alone and foreign object on the back of your truck would cause you to look and notice it

Secondly: if we are to believe her mother's account she SAW Katherine start walking the other way. I know the kid wasn't heavy but it is possible that while you are driving you might hear or feel something getting onto your truck

Analysing the entire segment, here's the things I noticed, especially concentrating on the map that is shown of the development where the Korzilius family lived:

http://www.unsolved.com/ajaxfiles/images/cases/une_katherine_korzilius3.jpg

The housing development
The housing development is based on a road which runs in a loop or circle.

There are 2 outlets, one facing NorthWest and one facing SouthWest. There is a Dead End/No Outlet to the extreme North named "Exton Cove" which could be considered a cul-de-sac.

The wooded lot is to the southeast. The mailboxes are located to the west side, on the right hand side of the road.

The mailboxes would seem to show that there were around 24/25 houses in the development, though we are not shown the houses or the actual development - only 2 of these we are shown which are the Korzilius house and their adjacent neighbors house which the mother called at.

From the video segment it can be assumed that the houses are only on the East section of the loop/circle (at the time of filming in 1996), as when it shows the mailboxes and the northbound an empty stretch of road can be seen with nothing but trees either side.

Here is the development as it looks today:

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/3019/eldercircle.jpg


The order of events
The mother was driving due north and would continue around the loop until she reached the house at the east.

Katherine instead decided to go south at least until she reached the parking lot in the southeast.

Because the mother had been driving and it was stated it was a hot 95 degrees, her car would've definitely been hot to the touch. It stated at the beginning that she had spent that entire day with the kids running errands around Austin.

The incident
From this point we could guess that someone was possibly waiting in the wooded lot, or instead maybe a vehicle had followed behind them and was waiting inside the mouth of the SouthWest outlet and called Katherine back to the car. Perhaps Katherine knew this person, maybe they even offered her a ride back to her house. Or maybe they simply told her to "jump on" and they'd drive her around to her house. Otherwise, it may have been a neighbor who had only just removed the car from the garage and driven towards the SouthWest outlet, so there's no way their vehicle would be hot yet.

If the hit and run theory holds true, maybe the driver (probably again a neighbor leaving their house) hit her at the point of the lot where the trail ran cold, then picked her up and drove around to the dead end/No Outlet (Exton Cove, the cul-de-sac away from the view of the main houses) then carefully dumped her and drove off.

It's possible here that if it was a friend the body fell off the ride and the neighbor got out to look, they became distressed and brushed Katherine's person down and laid her out straight (because they cared for her as a neighbor) but were scared of the consequences. They maybe didn't know she was dead but didn't want to face any consequences even if she wasn't. It wouldn't be nice if you hurt a neighbor's child in any way, let alone kill them.

Am pretty sure here that the theory of Katherine "rolling over" willingly on her own here is highly unlikely because (a) if you fall and hurt yourself or had some accident or incident your first reaction is unlikely to be to lie face down with your nose against concrete which would be very uncomfortable and so is more likely you would be face up (b) the coroner stated that her injuries were so serious they would have disabled her very being on first impact. The only way the "rolling over" could have occurred would be if it was "at speed". Her injuries both to the front and both are certainly consistent with a "roll" after a fall but not at a great velocity (perhaps from quite a slow speed, maybe 10mph?). The street signs said the limit in the area was 25mph but personally think this was too high and the injuries would've been much more at this rate. The other strange thing here in relation to the speed issue is that if we guess the vehicle was moving at a slow pace, her injuries were still pretty severe for a low velocity fall. This also leads me to believe that she may have fallen from a vehicle of a greater height, such as something like a jeep or an hummer that is more raised from the ground. I have studied the UM video carefully and Katherine is a head height above the window of the family vehicle, which makes it quite a low to the ground vehicle, which Katherine when she stood beside it the door was/is at knee height. A fall from such a vehicle even at slow moving speed surely could not inflict such injuries.

If it wasn't a friend, its just as possible that when the body fell, the perpetrator went back and readjusted and laid it flat, for the same reason, because it was a child and they felt bad.

Another possibility here is that someone could easily have been sitting parked anywhere between the vacant lot and the Korzilius house. Due to the angle and bending of the road it is not possible to see this from the mailboxes. At that point if and when the abductor picked up Katherine he could have bundled her into the car and within a short space of time driven northwards towards the Exton Cove No Outlet. Within such a narrow timeframe the mother and brother would already be in the house and packing their groceries. They maybe didn't even notice any vehicle pass the house. Their kitchen seemed to be somewhat secluded, maybe the house is set back from the main road slightly. Anyhow, it is possible then that as the vehicle drove northwards and as it approached Exton Cove Katherine jumped out of the passenger side of the abductor's vehicle, rolled maybe once or twice and landed where UM showed on the right hand side of the road. This makes perfect sense. On the other hand, the problem with the theory that she fell from her mothers vehicle is that when approaching Exton Cove from the left hand side, there is a rather sharp or curved bend that must be navigated, and after the vehicle had turned Katherine if she had lost her balance would have fallen leftwards and possibly rolled as the vehicle straightened up. If she had done so, it was more likely she would have landed in the grass or at least on the drainage section. Either way, she would not have fallen and landed at the angle which she was discovered. The fall is more consistent with falling from a passenger side.

The first person to leave the house after arriving was the son, who left just after arriving at the house I think UM said. We can assume the drive around to the house took no more than 5 minutes, maybe even took less. He walked to the south for let's say 5 minutes, maybe less (UM doesn't tell us), then back the same route, but said he didn't see Katherine. From this we can also assume he encountered no-one else either nor any traffic or surely he would have said so. Put all of this together though and it gives an extremely small timeframe for whatever happened to take place.

The mother also left her house an hour after the incident and also drove due south on the loop but again met no traffic or no mention of anyone passing her, so the perp obviously exited in the fastest possible manner (using the North West Barrett Lane outlet). I also feel that the perp used the North West outlet for exit as for approx 0.5-1 mile along this road it is heavily forested and there is no housing or other signs of life before it connects to the main River Hills Road where the perp then takes a north and can make a clean getaway (again on this road there are then no signs of life for miles).


The perp
There was obviously no mention on UM of any of the neighbors spotting any unknown traffic entering or exiting the development so either (a) the perp was a neighbor who was a known person who frequented the area and they didn't take any notice at them driving in and out or (b) the perp was an outsider who followed one of the routes outlined above.

Even after taking in all of the above however, I don't think the perp was an opportunist.

Either this means that
(a) The perp was a neighbor and the whole thing was an accident
(b) The perp was a neighbor and the whole thing was planned and he knew the area and the family habits
(c) The perp was a outsider and the whole thing was planned and he knew the area and the family habits

I think he analysed their habits and knew that at this time either 1 or 2 kids would walk back to the house that way. It just happened that on that day, it was only Katherine who made the walk in that direction. Had it been both kids maybe they could've fought the perp off.

It's a little more than two cents, so just my two dollar$ for you to chew on.


PS - The whole thing leads me to question though, why didn't the police check or ask about traffic going in and out within that hour and especially around the NorthWesterly outlet? Obviously it was 1996, but quite a lot of those type of developments have a security camera focused on both outlets.

Also, have been searching extensively and discovered that this development was first opened in the summer of 1995. The development was not completely finished and even the other houses that were in the development at the time as they were expensive may not have even been occupied hence why this case may lack eyewitnesses. May someone else may be able to suggest further.

EDIT: One thing that I hadn't quite noticed before but is a VERY interesting detail. Aug 7th (the day this happened) was Paul Korzilius birthday. What more of a sick and twisted birthday present could a one provide than to abduct/kidnap your children?!

Yeah, well, Patsy Ramsey's 40th birthday was just four days after JonBenét was killed.

Surely it's a very unusual detail though? Of 365 days to choose from this is the one?

I don't know if this was brought up in the segment or in this thread, but did the coroner check her body for heat burns? Something that might pinpoint the time when Katherine hit the ground. If the mother came home say at 4:30 and the coroner can pinpoint her injuries or burns (if any) to that time period she may have fallen off the car.

The other theory I'm working with is the idea she was hit by someone backing out of their driveway quickly.

OR, she was hit by a distracted driver. Maybe someone was looking down or on the seat next to them and didn't notice the car drifting over to her side of the road and hit her.

I don't think someone was trying to abduct her for some reason. If she fell out of a car at a low rate of speed it doesn't make sense. Usually if someone kidnaps a child they want to get away as quickly as possible. The only way I could think she fell out of a kidnappers car at low speed would be if she was struggling with the person who grabbed her and the driver didn't have their foot on the gas anymore. Maybe they were leaning over her and she jumped out or they opened the door to shove her out.

Has this been aired on Spike yet? I've been wanting to catch it but haven't been able to find it. I only remember the earlier version and would like to see it again.

I don't know if this was brought up in the segment or in this thread, but did the coroner check her body for heat burns? Something that might pinpoint the time when Katherine hit the ground. If the mother came home say at 4:30 and the coroner can pinpoint her injuries or burns (if any) to that time period she may have fallen off the car.

The other theory I'm working with is the idea she was hit by someone backing out of their driveway quickly.

OR, she was hit by a distracted driver. Maybe someone was looking down or on the seat next to them and didn't notice the car drifting over to her side of the road and hit her.

I don't think someone was trying to abduct her for some reason. If she fell out of a car at a low rate of speed it doesn't make sense. Usually if someone kidnaps a child they want to get away as quickly as possible. The only way I could think she fell out of a kidnappers car at low speed would be if she was struggling with the person who grabbed her and the driver didn't have their foot on the gas anymore. Maybe they were leaning over her and she jumped out or they opened the door to shove her out.

Not that we can always assume that a coroner is always right, but remember that he concluded that Katherine did NOT get hit by a car, and that her injuries were consistent with being thrown out of a car, of falling off of a car.

i don't think it was her mother or brother who killed Katherine, this seems to me like an abduction gone wrong, she tried to escape, the killer pushed her out, realized what they did and set up the scene to make it look accidental, don't believe the mother did it because someone would've heard something, if she jumped on her mom's car that would've been easy to prove by fingerprinting and plus i think the brother would've told his mom something was up and they would've seen her body in the rear view mirror.
I don't think her mother did it, either, but the line I bolded doesn't make sense. You said someone would have heard if her mother killed her. Well, someone did kill her and it seems no one heard anything... :(

Not that we can always assume that a coroner is always right, but remember that he concluded that Katherine did NOT get hit by a car, and that her injuries were consistent with being thrown out of a car, of falling off of a car.

That's a key piece of information right there.

I've always thought that either Katherine was the victim of a hit-and-run or she somehow did get onto the back of her mother's car and eventually fell off. I know the detective lady in the UM piece claimed that the trunk handle would have opened if Katherine held onto that, but would it have opened if the doors were locked? I think it's much more plausible to believe that Katherine held onto the trunk handle with her feet on the bumper. This way, she would have been crouching and wouldn't be seen in the rear view mirror by her mother. That only leaves the question of if Katherine did in deed walk away from the car with the mail. I wonder if the UM piece accurately portrays in detail the movements of Katherine when she received the mail.

I don't think someone was trying to abduct her for some reason. If she fell out of a car at a low rate of speed it doesn't make sense. Usually if someone kidnaps a child they want to get away as quickly as possible. The only way I could think she fell out of a kidnappers car at low speed would be if she was struggling with the person who grabbed her and the driver didn't have their foot on the gas anymore. Maybe they were leaning over her and she jumped out or they opened the door to shove her out.

The issue with this is, the mother mentioned that the neighborhood was exceptionally quiet on that particular day, moreso than usual.

The signs show that the speed limit for the area was 25mph maximum, so if a car had left the area at speed - someone would have noticed since it was so quiet. Either that, or someone knows something and just isn't talking.

The signs show that the speed limit for the area was 25mph maximum, so if a car had left the area at speed -someone would have noticed since it was so quiet. Either that, or someone knows something and just isn't talking
i think it was some kind of guy who just wanted to kill her for an unknown reason, maybe a sexual prediator, he tried to drive off, she stuggled, she was accidently thrown, he got upset and then set her up like he did, maybe someone does know something, i just don't think it was the mom, while the private investigator didn't help them, she didn't hurt them. i don't think she fell off her mom's car because her mom or brother would've noticed it, i always look in rear view mirrors, i would've noticed my sister falling off our car.

You said someone would have heard if her mother killed her. Well, someone did kill her and it seems no one heard anything...
sorry, let me rephrase this. ok, if the mom did it, someone would know about the family issues and would've spoke about it, mainly the brother. As a brother, if i EVER seen my mom kill my sister, i would tell, maybe not quickly, but i would tell, just not right away, maybe in years after i grow up, kinda like a movie i seen.

The issue with this is, the mother mentioned that the neighborhood was exceptionally quiet on that particular day, moreso than usual.

I'm puzzled what she meant by that. What made the it "exceptionally quiet" that day?.:confused:

I'm puzzled what she meant by that. What made the it "exceptionally quiet" that day?.:confused:

Perhaps the neighborhood usually had a lot of activity in the summer months (especially since kids were out of school). Maybe this is why Katherine's mother felt comfortable letting her 6-year-old walk home by herself as there were other children and parents in the area.

BUMP
Ok, this one has bothered me for years. It is a most perplexing case. I can't help but think about it whenever I here Bon Jovi's son on my IPOD (love the song by the way. It's a good tune and it's kind of haunting in its tone).

I just read through the posts on here and I promise I will [I]try[I] not to be too long winded here. But It has been noted on here that abuse is probable because the mother had taken her to the emergency room before and Katherine had a broken finger. WHAT?! Now I don't have kids, but I used to be one. I can tell you for sure that I was taken to the ER no less than 4 times before the age of 9. I was never abused in any way. i am suprised that so many people are chiming in on this and nobody has mentioned that. Going to the ER is part of being a kid. I don't know anyone in my own life that wasn't taken to the ER for stiches from a fall or something else kid related.

The other thing to note is that HELLO, Katherine had a broken finger already. Perhaps what the mother was refering to by having taken her to the hospital before was for that broken finger. Kids fall down and get hurt all the time. An ER trip for a 6 year old that obviously liked to play outside and be independant is not by any means a stretch nor should it be viewed as evidence enough to go to the police as signs of child abuse.

I think that if Katherine did not simply climb onto the back of her mothers SUV (which I highly doubt), then it was likely an accident/ hit and run. I think Katherine started out towards the field after leaving the mail boxes on her way home. I think a neighbor driving by either hit her or if it were younger teens messing around said "hey Katherine, hop on the back of my car and I will give you a ride home. It will be fun!" The girl may have known the person and done so (I once saw a 16 year old attempt the same thing and you know what? We took him to the ER moments later- a 16 year old!!!). Either way at this point, if a neighbor is responsible, they know who she is, the family routine (arguably) and panic and take her to the spot where she is found. presumebly away from their own home to limit any speculation of their involvement.

The only problem with a random killer/ kidnapper is the layout of the road. Why would they kidnap her at or near the field and then go further into the housing complex which is closer to the family (increasing there chances of being seen by someone) and possibly limiting there means of escape? This would be a very stupid perp if this is the case. If they were to kidnap her near the field, their quickest and easiest means of escape is right in front of them in the direction Katherine came from.

-I don't buy the "conspiracy" theory in this. Even if the family had been watched for some time by someone inteding to commit this crime there would be no way of knowing what time the family would return that day and if Katherine or her brother would definately separate from their mother in order to carry out a plan.

-The chances of a random killer or sexual predator just wandering into the remote area in which they lived and just happening upon Katherine at the right time seem far fetched to me.

-I don't discount the riding on the back of the car theory, but I find it unlikely. If Katherine grabbed the top of the vehicle, her mother WOULD have seen her in the rear view mirror. If she missed such an obvious thing, she should not be legally driving. I don't know if it would be possible for Katherine to hang on crouching as suggested in UM. Especially with a broken finger. Sitting on the bumper as suggested in this thread seems the most plausible if we go with this theory. But i still think the mother would have glanced in the rear view mirror to see her while driving away. That is just human nature, not to mention it is what most mothers would do.

-I think the most likely scenario is as I sad above. A neighbor hit and run or some variation of that theory. if that is indeed the case and they have kept quiet this long, it is likely we will never know what happened.

Well, dang I wrote another book here. oops.

Here's the thing: Katherine Korzilius's family paid a lot of money to a private investigator, not so much to find evidence as to what did happen to Katherine, as to prove that what the police theorized happened is not, in fact, the truth. That PI, then, gave the Korziliuses what they paid for: a plausible explanation for how it wasn't Mrs. Korzilius's "fault" or Katherine's "fault" that the little girl is dead.

I really just don't see a mystery here.

I really just don't see a mystery here.

The manner of death and the fact that a child is involved, are enough to warrant the speculation and further investigation.

The worst thing that could happen is that a pedophile remains on the loose because of a mistake in police investigation

Better safe than sorry.

Here's the thing: Katherine Korzilius's family paid a lot of money to a private investigator, not so much to find evidence as to what did happen to Katherine, as to prove that what the police theorized happened is not, in fact, the truth. That PI, then, gave the Korziliuses what they paid for: a plausible explanation for how it wasn't Mrs. Korzilius's "fault" or Katherine's "fault" that the little girl is dead.

I really just don't see a mystery here.

I understand what you mean, but you also have to assume that the PI did more investigative work than what was summarized in the UM segment. From the PI's perspective, the police had already decided it was an accident. The first logical step from there is to analyze that theory and point out any holes in it, if not disprove it immediately. There may not have been much more for her to go on given the circumstances.

It seems to me the police arrived at their conclusion because they could not find any evidence that said outright that foul play was involved. Well, just because no known evidence was found at the scene, doesn't mean there wasn't foul play.

The manner of death and the fact that a child is involved, are enough to warrant the speculation and further investigation.
i agree here
The worst thing that could happen is that a pedophile remains on the loose because of a mistake in police investigation
yep, that would be bad. Honestly, this case is very hard because if it was a pedophile wouldnt they take Kathrine with them???? it seems like the motive was to kill and then show what they did, but we dont know the motive because 1) the killer is still out there and 2) we dont know why Kathrine was the chosen victim, for all we know it's a hit and run case where the killer got nervous, then moved her body.

It seems to me the police arrived at their conclusion because they could not find any evidence that said outright that foul play was involved. Well, just because no known evidence was found at the scene, doesn't mean there wasn't foul play
it seems to me that the police are confused with this case. One thing is known, she somehow got hit by either a car or some weapon, but i cant think of what it would be now. The fact is, whoever did this, NEEDS to be punished. They killed this poor girl, then layed her on the side of the road for someone to find.

Personally, I don't buy into "the car was too hot too touch" angle. Yea, its hot in Texas, but the sun would have to be beating down on your car that day for it to be that hot. Its not like its the hood of your car that deals with the sun and engine and is scorching hot. Plus, her mother had been driving it out all day running errands, so its possible that the car wasn't very hot at all since it was in constant motion.

Also, the UM segment pointed out a part of the neighborhood that her scent had been tracked to. That doesn't really mean anything. After all, Katherine did live on that street. Its possible that she played in that area a day before the accident and her scent still lingered. Its also possible that she was hit by a driver and knocked off in that direction. Then, the driver feeling bad, went to get her and placed her in the street for someone to notice her and take her to the hospital.

As a brother, if i EVER seen my mom kill my sister, i would tell, maybe not quickly, but i would tell, just not right away, maybe in years after i grow up, kinda like a movie i seen.

Yeah, well, let's hope Burke Ramsey sees the same movie.

Yeah, well, let's hope Burke Ramsey sees the same movie
investigators have cleared the Ramsey's parents throught DNA evidence. i dont think they did this crime either, but i do think it's someone they know, maybe an uncle, neighbor or family friend.

Yeah, well, let's hope Burke Ramsey sees the same movie
investigators have cleared the Ramsey's parents throught DNA evidence. i dont think they did this crime either, but i do think it's someone they know, maybe an uncle, neighbor or family friend.

Yes, I am glad you mentioned that. The Ramseys are innocent. They were under such a microscope after the crime that going to the bathroom was made out to make them appear guilty. The media took this one too far and sadly the killer likely got away because of it.

I have not doubted the Ramseys innocence since I read the profile in John Douglas's book, "The Cases That Haunt Us". That man is a wizard and he feels that they are innocent. Plus he breaks down the crime in detail showing how unlikely it would be that anyone in the family did it.

Now we just need to get Douglas to profile Katherine Korzilius's case...

I have not doubted the Ramseys innocence since I read the profile in John Douglas's book, "The Cases That Haunt Us".
yeah, Douglas is good. I thought it was suspicious, but i wouldn't have charged the Ramseys. i believe in good proof, not just a bit of it.
Now we just need to get Douglas to profile Katherine Korzilius's case
yeah, hers is such a weird case, if i had to guess. the person who did this tried kidnapping her, she jumped out and hit her head then he just laid her out for someone to find or he killed her with a blow to the head or somehow making her unconsicious, then laid her out to show the world what he did.

This one has always made me scratch me head. So many what ifs....The whole thing about her scent being picked up in the vacant lot and then being found with her clothes "straight" as the mom said. That's definitely odd to me...who would take the time to make the little girls clothes and hair straight if they were trying to kidnap her or if they killed her? In broad daylight?

This one has always made me scratch me head. So many what ifs....The whole thing about her scent being picked up in the vacant lot and then being found with her clothes "straight" as the mom said. That's definitely odd to me...who would take the time to make the little girls clothes and hair straight if they were trying to kidnap her or if they killed her? In broad daylight?
that's why i want this case solved, answers.

I have to remember that this happened in the early 90s. I keep thinking this should be a Forensic Files sort of case. But I'm sure that Katherine's clothing, fingernails etc was checked for DNA (hairs, fibers that may have come from her attacker, skin under the nails in case she was able to scratch her attacker, etc.) For some reason, I just get the feeling that if forensics then were as developed as it is now, her case could probably be solved by now.

"I have to remember that this happened in the early 90s."

It happened in the mid-to-late 90's: August 1996.

"I have to remember that this happened in the early 90s."

It happened in the mid-to-late 90's: August 1996.

IN fact, the 14th anniversary of Katherine's passing is tomorrow, August 7th. RIP Katherine:(

I just thought of a theory in the accidental death category.

Katherine was, in fact, holding on to her mother's car, but she was in a blind spot (or her mother might have just not noticed her because she was too concerened about something else), so when Katherine fell off and her mother did not notice. Just a theory, though.

But if she was murdered, I hope they can find the person who did it.

R.I.P. Katherine Korzilius:(

I'm just having a hard time believing any child doing something like this as climbing on the back of a vehicle & as they are falling off make no kind of noise whatsoever. I think a child would scream or make some type of noise cause they are falling off the vehicle.

We had a similar model suburban they had, now this was before cars had molded bumpers. I seem to remember there was a gap between the bumper and the body. She could have gotten her splint jammed in there and fell off.

I'm just having a hard time believing any child doing something like this as climbing on the back of a vehicle & as they are falling off make no kind of noise whatsoever. I think a child would scream or make some type of noise cause they are falling off the vehicle.


Yep, it seems very likely that there would be some kind of noise that would get the attention of her mom and brother, who were both in the vehicle.

I wonder if the windows were up or down. Could be that they were closed and the a/c was blasting loudly, drowning out a child's scream? Maybe mom and son were arguing and didn't hear anything. Maybe they had the music up too loud to hear her.

I know that last one is kinda unlikely.... mom and young son cranking up the radio, but I do remember than when my kids were young, we'd do silly stuff like that in the car, and sing along, and even kinda dance, just having a good time.

The "hit and run", possibly by a neighbor scenario is a good theory too, imo. I may have posted this before, but about 15 years ago, a young teenage girl in our area was killed, crossing in a crosswalk on a 5 lane road. The driver fled the scene.

Turns out that 3 years later, it was found out to be a neighbor of hers, the dad of one of her friends. He had successfully hidden his damaged car in a garage and never took it to be repaired. This happened in a medium sized suburb (you michiganders might remember this case from Canton, MI). The odds of it being her neighbor, in a suburb that large, were pretty low.

Also, that road (I think it was M153, Ford Road) was the main road through there. It went from Detroit, through some suburbs, out past Canton, on to US14, which led to I 94 and Chicago. Point is, it was a well traveled road and the killer could have been anyone, from anywhere.

I can definitely see a similar thing happening to Katherine. Their neighborhood was small and IIRC, was still under construction, so there weren't a whole lot of neighbors to be witnesses. If it was a hit and run, it could have been a scared neighbor or even one of the construction workers who were in and out of the neighborhood. (Scared neighbor fits this part, imo, if the story about her hair and clothes being neatly arranged is true.)

I always thought of medical examiners as being completely truthful and accurate in their reports, but in recent years, I have seen so many cases of deliberate cover ups (the boys on the tracks) and incompetence (too many to list), that I finally realized that the doctor in Katherine's case could have misread her injuries as being "thrown or falling" from a vehicle rather than being "hit" by a vehicle.

I wonder if her parents have considered a second, independent, autopsy to confirm or refute the original findings.

If I'm remembering right, Mrs. Korzilius said the brother was crying when he FIRST reported that Katherine hadn't gotten home yet. Not sure what significance if any that would have but it always struck me as unusual. Maybe he was just a more sensitive child than my boys but I guarantee you my kids would not have been crying at that point. It would have been "hey! wasn't he/she supposed to come straight home? What are you going to do to them for disobeying?"
I've always sort of wondered if perhaps Katherine had told him that next time they stopped for the mail she was going to catch a ride on the back of the car and surprise her mother. Farfetched I know because he would probably have told his mother that after Katherine was found, but I can't come up with any other reason for him to cry before he knew what had happened to his sister. Just rambling I guess. Probably means nothing at all. :confused:

That's exactly what I thought too. My kids would not be crying already. That sounded weird to me right off the bat. This case is one of the most mysterious and I hope they find out what happened to that little girl!

That's exactly what I thought too. My kids would not be crying already. That sounded weird to me right off the bat. This case is one of the most mysterious and I hope they find out what happened to that little girl
i disagree, i think it's normal for that to happen, especially if the girl hasnt done anything like that. The brother may have been worried that she was kidnapped. it's not mysterious in my view that he cried before they found out what happened.

I thought the brother crying before the situation was known to be serious was weird too.

Was that how the whole thing happened or did UM put those scenes in to quickly alert the viewers that something was really wrong?

This case has baffled me from the start. I strongly disbelieve that she jumped on the back of her Mom's car, because she asked her Mom if she could walk home...why would she suddenly change her mind?

I'm with the people who say it was a hit and run...perhaps if it was a neighbour, they brought her into the car to take her to a hospital, but then realized she was brain-dead, so they placed her on the ground..?

I don't find the brother crying all that unusual, really. Some kids are more sensitive than others, and some are more aware of the dangers in the world. I know when I was a kid (and you can attribute much of this awareness to being a UM viewer at that age) I always worried if my mom was late getting home, I'd automatically start having thoughts of her being carjacked or otherwise harmed. This kid might have had similar thoughts racing through his brain.

I don't find the brother crying all that unusual, really. Some kids are more sensitive than others, and some are more aware of the dangers in the world. I know when I was a kid (and you can attribute much of this awareness to being a UM viewer at that age) I always worried if my mom was late getting home, I'd automatically start having thoughts of her being carjacked or otherwise harmed. This kid might have had similar thoughts racing through his brain.
i agree, i also dont find the crying brother suspicious.

BUMP
Ok, this one has bothered me for years. It is a most perplexing case. I can't help but think about it whenever I here Bon Jovi's son on my IPOD (love the song by the way. It's a good tune and it's kind of haunting in its tone).

I just read through the posts on here and I promise I will [I]try[I] not to be too long winded here. But It has been noted on here that abuse is probable because the mother had taken her to the emergency room before and Katherine had a broken finger. WHAT?! Now I don't have kids, but I used to be one. I can tell you for sure that I was taken to the ER no less than 4 times before the age of 9. I was never abused in any way. i am suprised that so many people are chiming in on this and nobody has mentioned that. Going to the ER is part of being a kid. I don't know anyone in my own life that wasn't taken to the ER for stiches from a fall or something else kid related.

The other thing to note is that HELLO, Katherine had a broken finger already. Perhaps what the mother was refering to by having taken her to the hospital before was for that broken finger. Kids fall down and get hurt all the time. An ER trip for a 6 year old that obviously liked to play outside and be independant is not by any means a stretch nor should it be viewed as evidence enough to go to the police as signs of child abuse.

I think that if Katherine did not simply climb onto the back of her mothers SUV (which I highly doubt), then it was likely an accident/ hit and run. I think Katherine started out towards the field after leaving the mail boxes on her way home. I think a neighbor driving by either hit her or if it were younger teens messing around said "hey Katherine, hop on the back of my car and I will give you a ride home. It will be fun!" The girl may have known the person and done so (I once saw a 16 year old attempt the same thing and you know what? We took him to the ER moments later- a 16 year old!!!). Either way at this point, if a neighbor is responsible, they know who she is, the family routine (arguably) and panic and take her to the spot where she is found. presumebly away from their own home to limit any speculation of their involvement.

The only problem with a random killer/ kidnapper is the layout of the road. Why would they kidnap her at or near the field and then go further into the housing complex which is closer to the family (increasing there chances of being seen by someone) and possibly limiting there means of escape? This would be a very stupid perp if this is the case. If they were to kidnap her near the field, their quickest and easiest means of escape is right in front of them in the direction Katherine came from.

-I don't buy the "conspiracy" theory in this. Even if the family had been watched for some time by someone inteding to commit this crime there would be no way of knowing what time the family would return that day and if Katherine or her brother would definately separate from their mother in order to carry out a plan.

-The chances of a random killer or sexual predator just wandering into the remote area in which they lived and just happening upon Katherine at the right time seem far fetched to me.

-I don't discount the riding on the back of the car theory, but I find it unlikely. If Katherine grabbed the top of the vehicle, her mother WOULD have seen her in the rear view mirror. If she missed such an obvious thing, she should not be legally driving. I don't know if it would be possible for Katherine to hang on crouching as suggested in UM. Especially with a broken finger. Sitting on the bumper as suggested in this thread seems the most plausible if we go with this theory. But i still think the mother would have glanced in the rear view mirror to see her while driving away. That is just human nature, not to mention it is what most mothers would do.

-I think the most likely scenario is as I sad above. A neighbor hit and run or some variation of that theory. if that is indeed the case and they have kept quiet this long, it is likely we will never know what happened.

Well, dang I wrote another book here. oops.

Great analysis, and I almost entirely agree with you. This is one of my favorite "later UM" cases and very sad, especially since it could've been so easily prevented. Even though I also tend to try to look at every angle (it's part of how I am, and I think being UM fans alot of us have the same tendencies), I also don't believe Katherine's mom was abusive or anything.

I just looked at some Google Earth pictures of the neighborhood (the cool thing about residential areas is they tend to change the least over time, so the current clear pics are probably the same as it was in '96). There's one in January 1995 where Elder Circle was already constructed, so I'm sure it was at least somewhat populated at the time. It's in black and white so I can't totally tell. Although I couldn't find the field they were referring to, which looks like it's a house by now.

Having said that though, I don't think it was some random creeper in the empty lot, beings that it was an upscale, safe neighborhood and it just seems like too much of a coincidence. I also believe if Kat fell off her mom's car she would've at least screamed and someone would've heard her.

The "neighbor giving her a ride and later panicking" theory tends to make the most sense, but logically if she couldn't hold onto her mom's SUV due to it being hot and having a broken thumb, that would've been the same for someone else's car. I wonder if there's a random chance there was a criminal or a weirdo tried to abduct her that already lived in the neighborhood. That would be a way to explain her further injuries if she tried to escape, as well as ending up on the opposite end of the circle.

BUMP


-The chances of a random killer or sexual predator just wandering into the remote area in which they lived and just happening upon Katherine at the right time seem far fetched to me.

I like your post, Guardian, but I disagree with this. Strange twists of fate can happen. The Dorothy Donovan case is a great example of this. It's possible Katherine ran into a random nutball.

About the whole idea that Katherine was riding on the back of her mom's car, I want to know what kind of personality Katherine had. People always say that all children will do crazy things. I disagree with such an idea. If Katherine wasn't the dare devil type, I doubt she would jump on the back of her mother's vehicle. Heck, even when I was her age, I wouldn't even entertain the thought of jumping the back of my parent's car. If Katherine wasn't the type to take big risks, it's doubtful she'd jump on the back of her mom's car.

The Dorothy Donovan case is a great example of this. It's possible Katherine ran into a random nutball.
About the whole idea that Katherine was riding on the back of her mom's car, I want to know what kind of personality Katherine had. People always say that all children will do crazy things. I disagree with such an idea. If Katherine wasn't the dare devil type, I doubt she would jump on the back of her mother's vehicle. Heck, even when I was her age, I wouldn't even entertain the thought of jumping the back of my parent's car. If Katherine wasn't the type to take big risks, it's doubtful she'd jump on the back of her mom's car.
i agree 100%, i think it was a random nutball who likely wanted to sexually assault her, she gave him a fight, he pushed her out of the car, possibly while moving, saw what he did and laid her out to be found.

I always felt it was some teenager or neighborhood kid. When I was growing up a neighborhood teen got in her moms car and was only suposed to be sitting in the car. Not sure if the teen had permit or license at the time but she backed car out into the court we lived in and talked my sister and her younger sister who were rolling skating into holding on to the door. The door had the window all the way down. and the kids held on why she drove , rolling them on their skates. it only lasted a few minutes before the teenagers mother came out had her reparked the car grownded her. my sister and her friend got lectured they were only like 7 or 8 years old. but this shows you stupied things that kids do. even a kid on bikes , skooter . skate board . motor bike. could had her get on and she could have fell off and hit her head. in the death was instantly or she had the wind knocked out of her when she fell she wouldn't have screamed out. didn;t some one say her her body was found on a curve or bump on the road? thats enough for some one to fall the handle bars on bike or a skate board or skooter and cracked her head. itsd possibler they rolled her over to see if she was still alive and just left her there cause they were scared. i think a kid would be capable . exspecially a teenager of not talking about thid for years. i would be cruious to know if the police talked the kids i n the neighbor hood. see they saw her that day. from what the map that posted on her looks like a pretty biug neighbor hood maybe lots of kids in the neighbore hood.:)

I wasn't totally discounting the possibility of some random nut case wandering into the area. I was just going on the known info of how and where she was found in the road. She was laid out so that someone would find her quickly. From the possibility I suggested, a neighbor that is scared of the consequences, yet still concerned enough, might very well leave the body where it was found. If some random nut driving through, why not at least attempt to hide the body? Also, if some random nut, you have to assume they kidnapped her, then drove through housing complex towards a more populated area? That just doesn't make sense. A random offender is gonna grab her and get the hell out of there. Not drive through the property. Like I said I don't completely discount the random nut factor, but it doesn't seem as likely as someone that lives in the area to me. Of course, someone that lived in the development may have abducted her too. Either way it seems to me to be someone that lived near by.

I am so confused by this case.. I am not sure what happened to this poor child.. I think that it may have been an accident.. and the person is too scared to come forward and say so as they feel like they may be charged with murder whatever happened to her or whoever killed her is not yet solved whatever happened to katherine is just another mystery yet to be solved i hope that they find the killer or if she was killed or not i think it was just a freak accident kids will do silly things like jump on cars and let go and they don't know the dangers kids are very trusting and maybe the brother just felt that something was wrong that day maybe he really loved his sister he had nothing to do with her death and if he did he is playing it out good until this day. r.i.p. katherine korzillious

I know the "hot car" theory has been talked about a lot, but I have something to say about that. I've been to Texas in the summer. July and August are brutal in the heat and there are times when it is excruciating to touch a car. Even in L.A. on a hot day, you don't want to touch your car. I have to agree that especially considering this was Texas in August, the car would have been too hot to touch. Not to mention, I highly doubt she would have climbed on with one hand unusuable. When I was six, I broke my arm and made great usage of my other arm. But even then, I would not have been confident to climb fences, let alone just on the back of cars in that condition. I used to climb on the back of my dad's van when it was parked (NEVER when it was moving) but not after I only had one arm to use. And I doubt she would have been able to do that without anyone noticing. Not to mention, she was seen walking the other way before her mother drove off. And I think the position she was found in IS a huge issue. I do not believe you can be hit by a car or fall and land so perfectly and smoothed out. I believe someone did lay her out.

I know the "hot car" theory has been talked about a lot, but I have something to say about that. I've been to Texas in the summer. July and August are brutal in the heat and there are times when it is excruciating to touch a car.
This is what keeps me from completely accepting the accident theory, even though I know it's the simplest. I cannot imagine her grabbing onto the car without having to immediately let go. I lived in Texas for 21 years, and this is unthinkable to me.

Not to mention, she was seen walking the other way before her mother drove off. And I think the position she was found in IS a huge issue. I do not believe you can be hit by a car or fall and land so perfectly and smoothed out. I believe someone did lay her out.

I've always felt that the fact that the body was "laid out" has gotten too much attention. We only have the mother's words on the condition she was found in. I'm not saying its not possible but we're looking at a very terrifying situation where the mother was likely in shock and relayed the perception she saw at the time. I'm not sure this point even matters but I feel compelled to point it out.

I wasn't totally discounting the possibility of some random nut case wandering into the area. I was just going on the known info of how and where she was found in the road. She was laid out so that someone would find her quickly. From the possibility I suggested, a neighbor that is scared of the consequences, yet still concerned enough, might very well leave the body where it was found. If some random nut driving through, why not at least attempt to hide the body? Also, if some random nut, you have to assume they kidnapped her, then drove through housing complex towards a more populated area? That just doesn't make sense. A random offender is gonna grab her and get the hell out of there. Not drive through the property. Like I said I don't completely discount the random nut factor, but it doesn't seem as likely as someone that lives in the area to me. Of course, someone that lived in the development may have abducted her too. Either way it seems to me to be someone that lived near by.It could have been an act of impulse, assuming it was a random individual. Maybe a random predator saw Katherine, tried to abduct her, but then met with strong resistance from Katherine. At the last minute, the predator aborted the abduction by pushing her out and fleeing the scene. The random predator might have not known the area well, hence, why he/she drove around the property. Also, the predator might have been driving poorly since he/she could have been trying to pacify Katherine in the car. These are just possibilities though. As you said, a neighbor may have tried to abduct Katherine as well.

I know the "hot car" theory has been talked about a lot, but I have something to say about that. I've been to Texas in the summer. July and August are brutal in the heat and there are times when it is excruciating to touch a car. Even in L.A. on a hot day, you don't want to touch your car. I have to agree that especially considering this was Texas in August, the car would have been too hot to touch. Not to mention, I highly doubt she would have climbed on with one hand unusuable. When I was six, I broke my arm and made great usage of my other arm. But even then, I would not have been confident to climb fences, let alone just on the back of cars in that condition. I used to climb on the back of my dad's van when it was parked (NEVER when it was moving) but not after I only had one arm to use. And I doubt she would have been able to do that without anyone noticing. Not to mention, she was seen walking the other way before her mother drove off. And I think the position she was found in IS a huge issue. I do not believe you can be hit by a car or fall and land so perfectly and smoothed out. I believe someone did lay her out.

There are probably as many ways to land after being struck by a vehicle as there are ways to be struck. I'm certain that a highway patrolman can tell you numerous ways they have found people after accidents. They may have even unbuckled a few dead people.

I just don't see any evidence that this girl was abducted or that any attempt was made to abduct her. It appears that she fell off of her mother's vehicle or she accidentally struck by a driver who then fled the scene.

After driving down Elder Circle last week while visiting relatives, it seems even more unlikely to me that Katherine's death was related to an attempted abduction. The loop on which they lived is quite secluded from the main road (off of which you probably wouldn't drive unless you were trying to get directly to the neighborhood - does that make sense? There wouldn't be any aimless cruising in the area unless you were a looky-loo like myself).

The only way I could see attempted abduction being a possibility was if there was construction in the area (ie house-building) or if it was someone doing business (yard work, etc) on Elder Circle or Exton Cove. It was about 4:30 pm when we drove by and all was quiet - we saw one man out jogging and a family of deer.

After driving down Elder Circle last week while visiting relatives, it seems even more unlikely to me that Katherine's death was related to an attempted abduction. The loop on which they lived is quite secluded from the main road (off of which you probably wouldn't drive unless you were trying to get directly to the neighborhood - does that make sense? There wouldn't be any aimless cruising in the area unless you were a looky-loo like myself).

The only way I could see attempted abduction being a possibility was if there was construction in the area (ie house-building) or if it was someone doing business (yard work, etc) on Elder Circle or Exton Cove. It was about 4:30 pm when we drove by and all was quiet - we saw one man out jogging and a family of deer.

But if it were a neighbor as I am theorizing, that would explain them being in the area. I don't feel this is an abduction case. If it was not an accident, I think it was a neighbor as I specified in my earlier post. All just theory of course, but it makes sense to me.

Interesting that you have been to the scene perl. Do your relatives live in Elder Circle?

After driving down Elder Circle last week while visiting relatives, it seems even more unlikely to me that Katherine's death was related to an attempted abduction. The loop on which they lived is quite secluded from the main road (off of which you probably wouldn't drive unless you were trying to get directly to the neighborhood - does that make sense? There wouldn't be any aimless cruising in the area unless you were a looky-loo like myself).

The only way I could see attempted abduction being a possibility was if there was construction in the area (ie house-building) or if it was someone doing business (yard work, etc) on Elder Circle or Exton Cove. It was about 4:30 pm when we drove by and all was quiet - we saw one man out jogging and a family of deer.

perl, so do you agree that it was probably someone that lived/lives in that neighborhood accidentally hitting her/hit-and-run or her accidentally falling off or from their vehicle if they drove/rode by and coerced her into playing around and hanging on while they drove/rode?

perl, so do you agree that it was probably someone that lived/lives in that neighborhood accidentally hitting her/hit-and-run or her accidentally falling off or from their vehicle if they drove/rode by and coerced her into playing around and hanging on while they drove?

Honestly, I just have no idea. It's weird how the mom had to drive to the neighbor's house, though. The neighborhood is really built up now and houses, although not zero lot line homes by any means, are not spaced exceptionally far apart.

I wonder if UM did the taping in the actual neighborhood? I recognize the brick "sign" at the entrance to the street but the mailboxes look different (unless they are now no longer used as mailboxes and houses now have individual ones). They were encased in brown wood-type material that looked as if it had been there for awhile as opposed to the steel box with the USPS logo shown in the segment.

My relatives don't live in the neighborhood (otherwise you know I'd be digging way deeper!) but I'd been bugging my mom to take me by there sometime and it was relatively close to the mall so she indulged me.

This is what keeps me from completely accepting the accident theory, even though I know it's the simplest. I cannot imagine her grabbing onto the car without having to immediately let go. I lived in Texas for 21 years, and this is unthinkable to me.

Heck I live in Minnesota and cars get very hot in July and August! Can't imagine the Texas heat!

This case is so sad. And count me in on the mom saying "her body was laid out" as unreliable. A parent seeing their kid flat out on the road is NOT going to be thinking clearly so I just can't take what she says as factual. I am NOT implying that she is lying, just that her memory could have played tricks on her.

Was the theory addressed if it could have been a hit and run?

I guess I have to agree about the laid out theory since her mother was in shock. (It would be nice to hear her brother's testimony). But I still don't think she could have grabbed on in the heat, let alone with a finger in splints.

The more time that goes on, the more I figure this case is similar to the Ruby case where they fell through the ice. I think this is a sad case where a young girl died in an accident holding onto her own mother's van. Just like the Ruby case where I think the simplest explanation is the most accurate one, they fell through the ice.

A lot of things don't make sense here. And again I think we are just looking for things that just aren't there. I think it was just a sad and unfortunate accident.

I saw this one for the first time the other day and wanted to add some thoughts.

If this was a hit and run, surely the autopsy would have indicated that. Wouldn't she have a massive bruise and internal bleeding? The examiner said her injuries were consistent with falling from a car, not being hit by one. Unless he is lying (and why would he?), hit and run is most likely out.

About Katherine being "laid out" on the pavement- it's possible that she didn't pass out right away when she hit her head. She could have fallen from her mother's car or jumped out of a moving car, hit her head, and wandered around a bit, disoriented. Don't head injuries make people want to lie down and go to sleep? She might have lied down on her stomach by herself, without anyone putting her there.

The speed of the car- some people were saying that 25 mph isn't fast enough to cause a head injury or to make someone fall off a car. I strongly disagree. One time when I was young and dumb, I was hanging with some friends, sitting on the hood of one of their cars. As a joke, my friend started driving the car (probably about 5 mph. 10 at the absolute most. We were barely moving). I thought he was going to drive off so I jumped off the hood of the car, thinking it would be no big deal. I landed on my feet, and the force caused me to fall down and actually roll over! All from going less that 10mph. It really doesn't take much.

I still can't decide if I think she grabbed the car or was abducted. The fact that she was found so far from her house makes me think someone grabbed her and she jumped out of their car. Such a terribly sad case.

The thing that's been bothering me lately is how Katherine was found face down in the street. If she had been "laid out" for her mother to find, it seems like human inclination would be for someone to place her on her back. In fact the first thing her mother did in the segment was roll her over onto her back.

I especially cannot imagine someone placing her on the concrete face down when it's super hot outside. Especially if they cared enough or felt guilty enough to smooth her clothes, hair, shoes, etc.

The only scenario that seems reasonable to me at this point is that maybe a person with lawn service or other utility truck saw her walking in the heat and asked if she wanted to hang on for a quick trip home.

Whatever happened to the mail anyway? I forget - did she hand it to her mom and then decide to walk home?

Whatever happened to the mail anyway? I forget - did she hand it to her mom and then decide to walk home?

Yep. She handed the mail to her mother and asked to walk home



If this was a hit and run, surely the autopsy would have indicated that. Wouldn't she have a massive bruise and internal bleeding? The examiner said her injuries were consistent with falling from a car, not being hit by one. Unless he is lying (and why would he?), hit and run is most likely out.

Exactly. I don't understand why hit and run would be a plausible explanation. Katherine suffered a fractured skull. So the more logical scenario is that she fell from a moving vehicle thus fracturing her skull. The impact of the fall might not have knocked her unconscious, but she could have turned over on her belly and went unconscious thereafter. Her dad mentioned that she probably did not take another step after her injury was sustained.

I believe Katherine could have been hanging on the the door handle, in a crouching position. I know the investigator said the door would have opened, but what if it were locked? As for the car being too hot, I think it depends on some factors that could make it likely that the car wasn't too hot. They were apparently running errands. I wonder if the car was parked under shade or if it was exposed to sunlight. Also, a moving vehicle would have wind speed that could potentially cool it down.

I believe Katherine could have been hanging on the the door handle, in a crouching position. I know the investigator said the door would have opened, but what if it were locked? As for the car being too hot, I think it depends on some factors that could make it likely that the car wasn't too hot. They were apparently running errands. I wonder if the car was parked under shade or if it was exposed to sunlight. Also, a moving vehicle would have wind speed that could potentially cool it down.

I agree. When the doors are locked (especially if it were a car with automatic locks that locked the door after reaching a certain speed) there is no way that the back door would open. As for the car being too hot, on any hot summer day after driving around the wind would have cooled it down considerably. The fact that she was found on the route that her mother and brother took leads me to believe this was a tragic accident. Anyone else think her parents were strangely unemotional in their interviews?

I don't think shade or wind could cool down a hot car enough in Texas, to be honest. Any Texans have an opinion on this one, considering the summer heat? Also, wasn't she seen walking in the opposite direction, therefore not giving her enough time to grab onto the vehicle? I don't necessarily believe that she had to have been abducted due to the scent in the vacant lot (it could have been there from earlier walks) but the fact that it stops draws suspicion. I do agree that the door being locked would have stopped it from coming open (the PI didn't consider the possibility).

I don't necessarily believe that she had to have been abducted due to the scent in the vacant lot (it could have been there from earlier walks) but the fact that it stops draws suspicion.

I've never really bought the abduction theory either just for the mere fact that her scent was there. She could have been playing at that lot in the days prior.

I'm also bothered by the logistics of where the lots is versus where her body was found. If somebody had abducted Katherine and took her to that lot, then why drive with her around the circle instead of escaping through the front of the neighborhood? Also, from the re-enactment, Katherine's body was positioned on the right side of the road along the route her mother took home. That would be the opposite side of the road if the abductor took Katherine from the lot, past her house, to the place where her body was found. It just seems most logical that she fell off the back of the car.

I don't think shade or wind could cool down a hot car enough in Texas, to be honest. Any Texans have an opinion on this one, considering the summer heat? Also, wasn't she seen walking in the opposite direction, therefore not giving her enough time to grab onto the vehicle? I don't necessarily believe that she had to have been abducted due to the scent in the vacant lot (it could have been there from earlier walks) but the fact that it stops draws suspicion. I do agree that the door being locked would have stopped it from coming open (the PI didn't consider the possibility).

I've been to Texas before and it does get pretty hot (even though its more of a dry heat which seems to be more bearable than the heat here on the East coast). On the date of her death, according to the Farmer's almanac, the high was 99 and the low was 77. Since it was around four o'clock we can assume the temperature was somewhere in the upper 80's, lower 90's. While that is still fairly hot, I still think a car would be cool enough to the touch after driving around in it.

i know i am a minority in this case, but i stay with what i said months ago. I feel that someone TRIED to abduct her and she either fought back and was likely pushed from the car when she was fighting the killer picked her up and then set her nicely on the pavement, that's my view, i just dont see this being a hit and run and i dont think it was her falling from her mom's car.

What were her injuries besides the fractured skull? I know it was ultimately ruled that she appeared to have either jumped or been pushed from a moving vehicle. Forgive me if I got some of the facts wrong, it's been a minute since I last saw this particular episode although I do remember it.

This is out there but I was wondering if it's possible a car was not involved at all in what happened to Katherine. Maybe she got harassed by some other kids from the neighborhood and they coud have pushed/fought with her a little too hard resulting in her injuries.

As I stated above, it's an out there theory. But I too was wondering what happened to the mail.

While I am all for a trained dog sniffing for her scent and having it "stop" at the bushes my question is this: We know polygraphs can be wrong. We know human eyewitnesses can and have made genuine mistakes. Why is it so hard to assume an animal can be mistaken?

I don't think shade or wind could cool down a hot car enough in Texas, to be honest. Any Texans have an opinion on this one, considering the summer heat? Also, wasn't she seen walking in the opposite direction, therefore not giving her enough time to grab onto the vehicle? I don't necessarily believe that she had to have been abducted due to the scent in the vacant lot (it could have been there from earlier walks) but the fact that it stops draws suspicion. I do agree that the door being locked would have stopped it from coming open (the PI didn't consider the possibility).
I fail to see how driving a car around in sunny 90-something degree weather would cool it off. It cools off on the inside with the a/c on. The exterior would cool off if it had been parked in the shade for a period of time.

I fail to see how driving a car around in sunny 90-something degree weather would cool it off. It cools off on the inside with the a/c on. The exterior would cool off if it had been parked in the shade for a period of time.

Even if you don't turn on the A/C in a blistering hot day and just roll the windows down, the wind forced caused by driving around will naturally cool down a car considerably.

While I am all for a trained dog sniffing for her scent and having it "stop" at the bushes my question is this: We know polygraphs can be wrong. We know human eyewitnesses can and have made genuine mistakes. Why is it so hard to assume an animal can be mistaken?
an animal can be mistaken, but my problem with the falling from mom's car is, didnt mom look out the rear view mirror and see her walking??? add to it, i think the mom or brother would've noticed something, plus i dont see her catching up to the car. i tend to go with my original theory.

an animal can be mistaken, but my problem with the falling from mom's car is, didnt mom look out the rear view mirror and see her walking??? add to it, i think the mom or brother would've noticed something, plus i dont see her catching up to the car. i tend to go with my original theory.

I think it's possible that she jogged around the back of her mother's car before she drove off and hopped on the back trying to hitch a ride home, and she probably ducked down so her mother/brother couldn't see her. She was a small child so she wouldn't have to duck down far.

I think it's possible that she jogged around the back of her mother's car before she drove off and hopped on the back trying to hitch a ride home, and she probably ducked down so her mother/brother couldn't see her. She was a small child so she wouldn't have to duck down far.
i understand the theory, but a car going slow is usually pretty hard to catch and wouldnt the mom notice that her daughter is walking in the mirror and wonder, hey where is she???? i tend to think it was an abduction gone wrong, she died when she either fell or was pushed from the car and he took the body and laid it out to be found.

But if she's grabbing onto the BACK of the vehicle and the other windows are down, it's not going to impact the back of the vehicle. And being August Texas, even if so the wind would not be able to cool it down enough- I feel pretty certain about this just because I know how scorching summers are there. And if she was wearing a finger splint, would she have felt confident enough to or have been able to grab onto the back of the vehicle. That just doesn't seem likely to me.

let me tell you I live in Texas and in August its hot. There is no wind here in the summer. Its hot, very hot. I've stated before that there is no way that she could have grabbed that car. In the summer when you first get in your car its very hot. You have to crank the AC for 20 min for it too cool off on the inside. its like a Sauna. You cannot sit on your hood in the summer nor the trunk.

I think someone hit her or an abduction gone wrong.

let me tell you I live in Texas and in August its hot. There is no wind here in the summer. Its hot, very hot. I've stated before that there is no way that she could have grabbed that car. I think someone hit her or an abduction gone wrong.
yep, honestly, the hotness isnt what's getting me, i just cant see how no one would notice that she fell. i think this was an abduction that failed and she was likely pushed from the car, the abductor say what they did, and placed her where she was found.

an animal can be mistaken, but my problem with the falling from mom's car is, didnt mom look out the rear view mirror and see her walking??? add to it, i think the mom or brother would've noticed something, plus i dont see her catching up to the car. i tend to go with my original theory.

In the re-enactment they seem to show that the mother watches her walk away. How accurate that is I am not sure. The place Katherine was found didn't seem like a very long drive either being on the back of a truck.

I guess it is possible that the mother sees her daughter in the rearview mirror, but it was a rather large vehicle and she was a small girl. Stranger things have happened I will say.

The only thing that puzzles me is that there are no witnesses to ANYTHING. No one saw her abducted, no one saw her hanging from the back of the truck. No one saw her body get dumped.

The problem with the abduction theory (and I mentioned this in my previous post) is the location where Katherine's body was found. If somebody grabbed her as she was walking back towards her house and took her to the field, why then drive her around Elder Circle to the back of the neighborhood? The exit of the neighborhood was closer to where Katherine was last seen and the direction of her house. It just doesn't make sense.

The problem with the abduction theory (and I mentioned this in my previous post) is the location where Katherine's body was found. If somebody grabbed her as she was walking back towards her house and took her to the field, why then drive her around Elder Circle to the back of the neighborhood? The exit of the neighborhood was closer to where Katherine was last seen and the direction of her house. It just doesn't make sense.
i dont think someone took her to a field, she possibly ran to the field and got caught there, put in the car they drove and likely she was fighting the driver back, and then (where the body was found) she was likely pushed from the car when the driver was fighting with her to keep her in, the driver saw what they did, fixed her up and left.
In the re-enactment they seem to show that the mother watches her walk away. How accurate that is I am not sure. The place Katherine was found didn't seem like a very long drive either being on the back of a truck.
The only thing that puzzles me is that there are no witnesses to ANYTHING. No one saw her abducted, no one saw her hanging from the back of the truck. No one saw her body get dumped.
yeah and even though re-enactments sometimes arent accurate, IF she did watch her walk away, in my book there's no way the girl catches the mom's car because i believe the car would be too fast for her to catch. this is a puzzling case and the fact is there arent any witnesses (that we know of).

i dont think someone took her to a field, she possibly ran to the field and got caught there, put in the car they drove and likely she was fighting the driver back, and then (where the body was found) she was likely pushed from the car when the driver was fighting with her to keep her in, the driver saw what they did, fixed her up and left.


Regardless if she was at the field or not, the place where her body was found just doesn't corroborate with an abduction. Katherine was last seen walking in the opposite direction of where her mom's car was heading, towards home. So if a kidnapper snatched her up, then he would have had to drive around Elder Circle to the back of the neighborhood where he disposed of her in the street. It just doesn't make sense. It makes more sense that the kidnapper would grab her and speed away at the front of the neighborhood (where the mailboxes are).

She was found along the route that her mother took home so, to me, it just seems most logical that she was in fact on the back of her mom's car.

Regardless if she was at the field or not, the place where her body was found just doesn't corroborate with an abduction. Katherine was last seen walking in the opposite direction of where her mom's car was heading, towards home. So if a kidnapper snatched her up, then he would have had to drive around Elder Circle to the back of the neighborhood where he disposed of her in the street. It just doesn't make sense. It makes more sense that the kidnapper would grab her and speed away at the front of the neighborhood (where the mailboxes are).

She was found along the route that her mother took home so, to me, it just seems most logical that she was in fact on the back of her mom's car.

I agree. An abductor would have had to go in the opposite direction of the exit of the neighborhood which makes no sense. And if this was the result on an abduction gone awry, this had to be the luckiest kidnapper in the world to just happen upon Katherine walking home unattended near an abandoned lot. What are the odds that some creep is out trolling this upper class neighborhood at four o'clock in the afternoon (a time when most adults would either be arriving home or already there) for some child to kidnap? This couldn't be a planned attack unless this person was following Katherine's mother home, which seems unlikely.

I agree. An abductor would have had to go in the opposite direction of the exit of the neighborhood which makes no sense. And if this was the result on an abduction gone awry, this had to be the luckiest kidnapper in the world to just happen upon Katherine walking home unattended near an abandoned lot. What are the odds that some creep is out trolling this upper class neighborhood at four o'clock in the afternoon (a time when most adults would either be arriving home or already there) for some child to kidnap? This couldn't be a planned attack unless this person was following Katherine's mother home, which seems unlikely.

I'm in complete agreement. Also, if the abductor snatched Katherine up and drove around Elder Circle, then wouldn't they have crossed paths with Katherine's mom (going the opposite direction)??

Regardless if she was at the field or not, the place where her body was found just doesn't corroborate with an abduction. Katherine was last seen walking in the opposite direction of where her mom's car was heading, towards home. So if a kidnapper snatched her up, then he would have had to drive around Elder Circle to the back of the neighborhood where he disposed of her in the street. It just doesn't make sense. It makes more sense that the kidnapper would grab her and speed away at the front of the neighborhood (where the mailboxes are).

She was found along the route that her mother took home so, to me, it just seems most logical that she was in fact on the back of her mom's car.

i may be wrong here but i think thats a completely wrong assessment. My interpretation is that the mom dropped her off to get the mail, and then that the mom and the son sped off to their home. I assumed the mail box, and thus where katherine was going, and the way her family was headed was 2 DIFFERENT directions. I also thought her body, was found on the OPPOSITE side of the neighborhood circle thing. Nowhere near where the mailbox was, and nowhere near where the families home was. Thats the REAL puzzling part. She was headed to a mailbox in the opposite direction of her house and where the car was going. And then her body was found nowhere near the mailbox and in fact the opposite side of the complex/circle thing.

Am I wrong here in my analysis?

I agree. An abductor would have had to go in the opposite direction of the exit of the neighborhood which makes no sense.

As for the above, if the abductor didn't know the neighborhood well, he may not have known it was/is a dead end.


You should really read my post #115:
http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showpost.php?p=4379699&postcount=115


a post by Guardian #127:
http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showpost.php?p=4433452&postcount=127


and a post by TracyLynnS #145:
http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showpost.php?p=4463448&postcount=145


They're all pretty long, but good amount of detail in them which may suggest answers to some of the above questions.

i may be wrong here but i think thats a completely wrong assessment. My interpretation is that the mom dropped her off to get the mail, and then that the mom and the son sped off to their home. I assumed the mail box, and thus where katherine was going, and the way her family was headed was 2 DIFFERENT directions. I also thought her body, was found on the OPPOSITE side of the neighborhood circle thing. Nowhere near where the mailbox was, and nowhere near where the families home was. Thats the REAL puzzling part. She was headed to a mailbox in the opposite direction of her house and where the car was going. And then her body was found nowhere near the mailbox and in fact the opposite side of the complex/circle thing.

Am I wrong here in my analysis?

Just for clarification purposes:

http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac216/brian222_2010/korzilius1.jpg

What I'm trying to say is this: Katherine was last seen walking from the mailboxes towards her home (where the red line is going). Her mother drove around the circle in the opposite direction. So assuming that Katherine kept walking towards her house and a kidnapper snatched her up between the mailboxes and her house, then why would he drive all the way around Elder Circle only to dump her off near Exton Cove Ct? If she was abducted, then it would have made so much more sense for her kidnapper to pick her up and quickly escape from the exit of the neighborhood instead of making an unnecessary loop around Elder Circle.

What I'm trying to say is this: Katherine was last seen walking from the mailboxes towards her home (where the red line is going). Her mother drove around the circle in the opposite direction. So assuming that Katherine kept walking towards her house and a kidnapper snatched her up between the mailboxes and her house, then why would he drive all the way around Elder Circle only to dump her off near Exton Cove Ct? If she was abducted, then it would have made so much more sense for her kidnapper to pick her up and quickly escape from the exit of the neighborhood instead of making an unnecessary loop around Elder Circle.

If the abductor was from out of town he may not have known that to the north was a dead end. Or he may have panicked and forgotten.

Just for clarification purposes:

http://i901.photobucket.com/albums/ac216/brian222_2010/korzilius1.jpg

What I'm trying to say is this: Katherine was last seen walking from the mailboxes towards her home (where the red line is going). Her mother drove around the circle in the opposite direction. So assuming that Katherine kept walking towards her house and a kidnapper snatched her up between the mailboxes and her house, then why would he drive all the way around Elder Circle only to dump her off near Exton Cove Ct? If she was abducted, then it would have made so much more sense for her kidnapper to pick her up and quickly escape from the exit of the neighborhood instead of making an unnecessary loop around Elder Circle.

yeah, thats what i said although the image you posted only shows how katherine was headed and not where her mom and brother were headed and where her body was found.

Katherine being on the back of her moms car also has a major problem as she wasnt found a few hundred feet from when the car took off. One would think, having a broken thumb, and it being a hot day, the car hot to touch, that had she been on the back of the car she would have gotten on, stayed on for a little while, and if the theory is to be believed, fallen and died just a short time from getting on the car. The map and layout show she had to have gotten quite a bit of a ride on the back there. if one views elder circle as what it is, a circle, you can take the car route, from the mailbox and visually see, that thats about half the circle, 50 percent of it. Did the car really go half around Elder Circle AND THEN she fell off the car? Seems absurd to me. thats half a mile at least. Even a small girl like Katherine, would have been seen in the back of the car, in the rear view mirror. Again, did her mom not check the real view for half a mile? Given it was a summer day, 95 degrees, shadows are also present. A kid even of her small stature would cast a visible shadow, I have a hard to thinking either the mom would not have seen katherine in the rear view, or her shadow.

if she was on the back of the car, with a healthy body, she wouldnt have made it far given what we know about cars and the heat in texas. factor into that her arm being injured... well...

also the longer she stays on the back of the car raises the likelihood she would have been seen in the rear view mirror. Is it at all likely the mom NEVER checked the rear view mirror once driving halfway around the circle? Not once?

Regardless if she was at the field or not, the place where her body was found just doesn't corroborate with an abduction. Katherine was last seen walking in the opposite direction of where her mom's car was heading, towards home. So if a kidnapper snatched her up, then he would have had to drive around Elder Circle to the back of the neighborhood where he disposed of her in the street. It just doesn't make sense. It makes more sense that the kidnapper would grab her and speed away at the front of the neighborhood (where the mailboxes are).
She was found along the route that her mother took home so, to me, it just seems most logical that she was in fact on the back of her mom's car.
I admit, the place where the body is found is odd, but i think it's also VERY hard to believe that she can grab onto the back of her mom's car, first off, if a car is driving about 25 MPH, it's hard to catch it especially for a young girl, 2nd if she did grab on, she would have to hold on for a pretty long time and i think she would've fell off sooner if she grabbed her mom's car. The abduction theory may not look good, but that's what i think happened, abduction gone wrong, guy tries to kidnap her, she fights back and when he's trying to driver out of the neighborhood, she is pushed from the car, he sees what he does, sets her up and leaves.

Katherine being on the back of her moms car also has a major problem as she wasnt found a few hundred feet from when the car took off.
The map and layout show she had to have gotten quite a bit of a ride on the back there. if one views elder circle as what it is, a circle, you can take the car route, from the mailbox and visually see, that thats about half the circle, 50 percent of it. Did the car really go half around Elder Circle AND THEN she fell off the car? Seems absurd to me. thats half a mile at least. Even a small girl like Katherine, would have been seen in the back of the car, in the rear view mirror. also the longer she stays on the back of the car raises the likelihood she would have been seen in the rear view mirror. Is it at all likely the mom NEVER checked the rear view mirror once driving halfway around the circle? Not once?
Agree here too, i also said something about the ride, add to it, (if the story her mom tells is accurate) she would've been at least some feet from the car, so Katherine would have to run to the car fast enough to catch it and not be noticed, i just cant see it.

Agree here too, i also said something about the ride, add to it, (if the story her mom tells is accurate) she would've been at least some feet from the car, so Katherine would have to run to the car fast enough to catch it and not be noticed, i just cant see it.

The same goes for the abduction theory. If an abductor would prowl around a neighborhood until he came upon the first unattended child, he sure didn't put up much of a fight to keep Katherine in the car. And how much of a struggle could she have posed? She was a small child with a splint on her hand, and I can't imagine a grown man having trouble subduing her. So why snatch her up only to throw her out mere seconds later? That doesn't make sense.

yeah, thats what i said although the image you posted only shows how katherine was headed and not where her mom and brother were headed and where her body was found.

Katherine being on the back of her moms car also has a major problem as she wasnt found a few hundred feet from when the car took off. One would think, having a broken thumb, and it being a hot day, the car hot to touch, that had she been on the back of the car she would have gotten on, stayed on for a little while, and if the theory is to be believed, fallen and died just a short time from getting on the car. The map and layout show she had to have gotten quite a bit of a ride on the back there. if one views elder circle as what it is, a circle, you can take the car route, from the mailbox and visually see, that thats about half the circle, 50 percent of it. Did the car really go half around Elder Circle AND THEN she fell off the car? Seems absurd to me. thats half a mile at least. Even a small girl like Katherine, would have been seen in the back of the car, in the rear view mirror. Again, did her mom not check the real view for half a mile? Given it was a summer day, 95 degrees, shadows are also present. A kid even of her small stature would cast a visible shadow, I have a hard to thinking either the mom would not have seen katherine in the rear view, or her shadow.

if she was on the back of the car, with a healthy body, she wouldnt have made it far given what we know about cars and the heat in texas. factor into that her arm being injured... well...

also the longer she stays on the back of the car raises the likelihood she would have been seen in the rear view mirror. Is it at all likely the mom NEVER checked the rear view mirror once driving halfway around the circle? Not once?

Based on the UM episode, her mother drove the car in the opposite direction that Katherine was headed so she went up and around Elder Circle.

I realize that the UM segment shows Katherine handing the mail to her mother, walking away from the vehicle, and Katherine's mom promptly pulling the car away. However, we don't know how accurate the re-enactment truly is. Perhaps her mother sorted through the mail before driving away and in the meantime Katherine thought it would be fun to climb on the back of the car and ride home.

I think Katherine's ability to stay on the vehicle depends on the speed in which they were traveling and the curves/turns. It's very possible that she could have hung on until the mother was going too fast around curves. I can't answer whether the mom looked in the rearview mirror or not, since different people have different habits. But I've always believed that it was more likely that Katherine hung on to the back of the car in a crouching position, holding onto the back door handle. If that door was locked then there's no way it would have opened (as the investigator in the segment suggested).

Perhaps her mother sorted through the mail before driving away and in the meantime Katherine thought it would be fun to climb on the back of the car and ride home. I think Katherine's ability to stay on the vehicle depends on the speed in which they were traveling and the curves/turns. It's very possible that she could have hung on until the mother was going too fast around curves. I can't answer whether the mom looked in the rearview mirror or not, since different people have different habits.
but that's my biggest issue, i think she would've seen her and sure re-enactments arent always accurate, i just cant see both the brother and mom not noticing that Katherine isnt on the car and i just cant see her hanging on that long.
The same goes for the abduction theory. If an abductor would prowl around a neighborhood until he came upon the first unattended child, he sure didn't put up much of a fight to keep Katherine in the car. And how much of a struggle could she have posed? She was a small child with a splint on her hand, and I can't imagine a grown man having trouble subduing her. So why snatch her up only to throw her out mere seconds later? That doesn't make sense.
like i said, MINE may not make sense, BUT neither does the whole Katherine running to the car, grabbing on and staying on.

like i said, MINE may not make sense, BUT neither does the whole Katherine running to the car, grabbing on and staying on.

Yet one of them is correct. She either grabbed onto the back of the car (my opinion) and fell off, or it was a kidnapping gone wrong and she was pushed out of the car.

In all honesty this is the only two theories that I believe are possible. Of all the pages discussing the theories these are the only two that ever get brought up. I honestly can't even think of another possible theory even being a devil's advocate.

Yet one of them is correct. She either grabbed onto the back of the car (my opinion) and fell off, or it was a kidnapping gone wrong and she was pushed out of the car.

In all honesty this is the only two theories that I believe are possible. Of all the pages discussing the theories these are the only two that ever get brought up. I honestly can't even think of another possible theory even being a devil's advocate.

What about the hit and run theory?

What about the hit and run theory?

I think the coroner ruled that out due to the position her body was found in, and the injuries she sustained. He concluded she fell from a car, whether or not she was pushed is a whole other issue.

Yet one of them is correct. She either grabbed onto the back of the car (my opinion) and fell off, or it was a kidnapping gone wrong and she was pushed out of the car.

In all honesty this is the only two theories that I believe are possible. Of all the pages discussing the theories these are the only two that ever get brought up. I honestly can't even think of another possible theory even being a devil's advocate.

Don't forget the neighbor (adult or teenager) giving-her-a-ride/joyride-gone-wrong theory where she fell off their vehicle. This is also possible, since the neighbor would definitely be fearful of saying something after seeing what happened to her.

i think the grabbing onto the back of the vehicle is completely out of line, very wrong. remember at the beginning when she is dropped off Katherine wanted her independence by being a 'big girl' in which she could walk home. i dont think all of a sudden she would decide to hop on the back, especially with her injured hand/thumb or finger.

it could have been a hit and run but by accident, with another mother hitting the girl, thus feeling sorry for her and placing her on the street in a nice way, signalling her remorse for the girl.

i kinda agree with the other person who said they thought the abductor kept on driving with her, and didnt realize that the circe on the other end was a circle. then turned around while panicking at the same time. leading the kidnapper to pull over and place her gently on the street. at first i thought the kidnapper threw her out of the car or she jumped, only for him to straighten up her dead body. but now i think that he hit her head many times, drove away, got confused with the neighborhood and eventually pulled his car over and CARRIED her out of his vehicle and laid her down.

Don't forget the neighbor (adult or teenager) giving-her-a-ride/joyride-gone-wrong theory where she fell off their vehicle. This is also possible, since the neighbor would definitely be fearful of saying something after seeing what happened to her.

you said why would someone be trolling around at 4pm in the afternoon when people are returning home. well of all the kidnappers out there, not all are on "stand by" waiting for the next kid who walks by. sometimes kidnappers steal little kids in the moment - there might be some man who parked his car and was taking a walk who wants to kidnap a girl some day, but sees today is his day.

also maybe this stranger knew that the family and little girl usually picked up mail around the same time every day, so he staked out the mailbox area, but out of view of the mother when she was driving. maybe in the empty lot the car was hidden behind some trees/bushes.

I agree. An abductor would have had to go in the opposite direction of the exit of the neighborhood which makes no sense. And if this was the result on an abduction gone awry, this had to be the luckiest kidnapper in the world to just happen upon Katherine walking home unattended near an abandoned lot. What are the odds that some creep is out trolling this upper class neighborhood at four o'clock in the afternoon (a time when most adults would either be arriving home or already there) for some child to kidnap? This couldn't be a planned attack unless this person was following Katherine's mother home, which seems unlikely.

i kinda agree with you when you said a neighbor could have accidentally hit her and felt bad and placed her on the side of the road. i think that the person felt very guilty and when putting her body on the side of the street, placed her face to the ground so she would not have to look at the poor girls face when leaving her. WHAT WAS key here is that remember in the story - she was still alive after the attack. then died shortly after. well maybe if it was a hit and run, they realized the girl was still alive, and placed her to the side of the street so someone else could clearly see her and call the ambulance.

could it be an uncle of the girls? the postman? a policeman? tv repair man with a van? maybe one of these people tried to kidnap her but



maybe the person who hit her was a nearby neighbor or someone just driving through and didnt know the area and all of a sudden hit the girl.I wasn't totally discounting the possibility of some random nut case wandering into the area. I was just going on the known info of how and where she was found in the road. She was laid out so that someone would find her quickly. From the possibility I suggested, a neighbor that is scared of the consequences, yet still concerned enough, might very well leave the body where it was found. If some random nut driving through, why not at least attempt to hide the body? Also, if some random nut, you have to assume they kidnapped her, then drove through housing complex towards a more populated area? That just doesn't make sense. A random offender is gonna grab her and get the hell out of there. Not drive through the property. Like I said I don't completely discount the random nut factor, but it doesn't seem as likely as someone that lives in the area to me. Of course, someone that lived in the development may have abducted her too. Either way it seems to me to be someone that lived near by.

Based on the UM episode, her mother drove the car in the opposite direction that Katherine was headed so she went up and around Elder Circle.

I realize that the UM segment shows Katherine handing the mail to her mother, walking away from the vehicle, and Katherine's mom promptly pulling the car away. However, we don't know how accurate the re-enactment truly is. Perhaps her mother sorted through the mail before driving away and in the meantime Katherine thought it would be fun to climb on the back of the car and ride home.

I think Katherine's ability to stay on the vehicle depends on the speed in which they were traveling and the curves/turns. It's very possible that she could have hung on until the mother was going too fast around curves. I can't answer whether the mom looked in the rearview mirror or not, since different people have different habits. But I've always believed that it was more likely that Katherine hung on to the back of the car in a crouching position, holding onto the back door handle. If that door was locked then there's no way it would have opened (as the investigator in the segment suggested).

I totally agree. We are basing our theories on the reenactment, but this could be totally inaccurate. I'm trying to put myself in the position of pulling up to a set of mailboxes before entering my neighborhood. I can see myself flipping through the mail briefly, then driving off and not feeling the need to check the mirrors all the time: Remember, this is/was a pretty secluded neighborhood. Plus, with the radio on perhaps, and the mom talking to her son, I can see how Katherine got on the back undetected.

Remember, the place where she fell off was right after the first curve, which would be the place to fall off, versus a straight road.

I also think this idea that a abductor fought with Katherine, pushed her out of the car, and then went and positioned her on the road sounds crazy. If a person is capable of kidnapping a child, why would they suddenly care how the child is found? They'd want to get out ASAP.

I think she got on her mom's car, fell off, and the mom doesn't want to possibly think that she somehow overlooked this.

I also think this idea that a abductor fought with Katherine, pushed her out of the car, and then went and positioned her on the road sounds crazy. If a person is capable of kidnapping a child, why would they suddenly care how the child is found? They'd want to get out ASAP.



Exactly. Also, why would a kidnapper even abduct Katherine only to throw her out of the car moments later? I can't imagine Katherine put up much of a fight seeing that she was a petite six year old and had a splint on her finger. The kidnapper could have drawn more attention than necessary if he would have dumped Katherine out of the car and gotten out to fix her.

I don't know why we are still discussing about the hit and run possibility when the medical examiner said her injuries were consistent with being thrown from the vehicle rather than being hit by a vehicle. So that leaves two possibilities: she was thrown from her mother's vehicle or she was abducted and thrown from the would-be kidnapper's vehicle. I think the first scenario is most likely and the most sensible conclusion.

didnt she give the mail back to her mum? she got it out took it to the mum then told her she was going to walk home.

same here. i dont think she would of held onto the back of the car. wouldnt the mum have noticed her walking off. she couldnt of quickly ran and caught up. plus she had a broke thumb or something.
plus the way she was lying if she had fell she would of rolled or something at least when she hit the ground, not just fell straight off flat on her face arms by her side. u know.
its so weird though have no idea what could of happened?!

maybe someone picked her up on a bike and she fell off and they panicked. could of been another kid.

just been reading some more on this and read someone's theory the mother did it. i think there is something to that. maybe it was a accident and she didnt want to take the blame. maybe the girl jumped from her car coz the mum was yelling at her . or if she did hitch a ride i think the mother would of had to know.
plus a few things dont seem to add up
in the mysteries re-enactment it shows the girl getting the mail giving it to the mum and then asking to walk home and the mum watches her for a little as she wanders off. then she says its 15 minutes later and shes not back

yet i then read a few things from the mother saying she gave the girl the keys and left her there

ok for one, if she gav her the keys there is no way she would of had time to check the mail, get it out and then jump on the back of the car, plus she would of had the keys in her hand.

then i read the mother said it was nearly a hour til she went looking for her.

ok one...what kinda mother waits nearly a HOUR. also why not go for a walk down the street BEFORE ringing the police? youd look pretty stupid if u rang the police saying shes missing then walking outside and shes playing with a friend a few yards down...you know?

i dunno. something is really fishy in this case.

i mean i guess someone could of adbucted her and it went wrong and she fell and died so they fled. but i duno..they would of had to know the exact time she would be walking home, and THAT she would be walking home. what are the chances a child abducter just HAPPENED to be waiting near the vacant lot in hopes a kid walks past on there own.

i think thats patently ridiculous. the idea the mom wouldnt check the rear view mirror, really? Where was her brother sitting in the car? If he was in the back seat I assume the mom looked back there, or looked in the rear view at least once to see how her son was. This was in the summer, in the hot summer of texas. katherine couldnt have gotten on the car and not left a shadow. additionally with an injured arm she couldnt hold onto anything anyways.

I totally agree. We are basing our theories on the reenactment, but this could be totally inaccurate. I'm trying to put myself in the position of pulling up to a set of mailboxes before entering my neighborhood. I can see myself flipping through the mail briefly, then driving off and not feeling the need to check the mirrors all the time: Remember, this is/was a pretty secluded neighborhood. Plus, with the radio on perhaps, and the mom talking to her son, I can see how Katherine got on the back undetected.

Remember, the place where she fell off was right after the first curve, which would be the place to fall off, versus a straight road.

I also think this idea that a abductor fought with Katherine, pushed her out of the car, and then went and positioned her on the road sounds crazy. If a person is capable of kidnapping a child, why would they suddenly care how the child is found? They'd want to get out ASAP.

I think she got on her mom's car, fell off, and the mom doesn't want to possibly think that she somehow overlooked this.


so a small child, in insanely hot summer heat, jumped on the back of a SUV, with an injured arm no less, undetected, didnt leave any type of shadow, and somehow rode literally halfway around the loop and then fell off. This makes no sense. if she was injured, as her hand was, what could she have held on to without hurting her arm? Additionally, grabbing onto the back of the SUV is going to be painful because of the heat. So this small child ignored her arm in pain, and ignored the seering pain of the sun on the SUV, and somehow stayed on the vehicle

the idea she hitched a ride on the car by running to it, is absurd. Think of the noise she would make when climbing on the back. Think of that noise again, as she is supposedly running to get on there. Wouldnt the child have screamed as she fell from her mom's SUV? Wouldnt the hotness of the car cause her to shout in pain? How about her using her injured arm to get on the vehicle, dont you think this child would have made some noise?

To me, the evidence of her grabbing onto the back of the car is lacking, extremely lacking.

the idea that as she is on the back of the SUV she crouches, thus you cant see her or her shadow is absurd as well. How could she crouch? And how long can one maintain such a position?

All the evidence of her hitching a ride on the back of the car, hinges on the idea this small child could be silent and stomach the pain of inflaming her injured arm, her being silent and not screaming as she felt the warmth of the car.

All the factors lead me to believe she should have fallen off not far from the mailboxes. making it halfway around the circle, literally 50 percent around the circle, is absurd

how long can a six year old kid, hang onto the back of her moms car, crouched, in searing summer heat, with an injured arm, on the back of a car thats mighty hot to touch?

just been reading some more on this and read someone's theory the mother did it. i think there is something to that.
The mom hired her own private investigator to dispute the coroner's ruling/theory that is was an accident caused by Katherine falling off the back of the car. If the mom killed her, why wouldn't she just accept the official ruling and put the whole thing to rest. Doesn't make sense to me.

coz she doesnt want to be blamed.

the idea she hitched a ride on the car by running to it, is absurd. Think of the noise she would make when climbing on the back. Think of that noise again, as she is supposedly running to get on there. Wouldnt the child have screamed as she fell from her mom's SUV? Wouldnt the hotness of the car cause her to shout in pain? How about her using her injured arm to get on the vehicle, dont you think this child would have made some noise?

To me, the evidence of her grabbing onto the back of the car is lacking, extremely lacking.

the idea that as she is on the back of the SUV she crouches, thus you cant see her or her shadow is absurd as well. How could she crouch? And how long can one maintain such a position?

All the evidence of her hitching a ride on the back of the car, hinges on the idea this small child could be silent and stomach the pain of inflaming her injured arm, her being silent and not screaming as she felt the warmth of the car.

All the factors lead me to believe she should have fallen off not far from the mailboxes. making it halfway around the circle, literally 50 percent around the circle, is absurd

It's also absurd to assume that an abductor attempted to kidnap Katherine and this guy was unable to subdue her enough (even though her arm was in a splint) so he aborts his plan and shoves her out of the car. But then this guy stops, gets out, and positions Katherine's body very neatly on the ground INSTEAD of taking it and disposing of it elsewhere. Honestly which scenario seems more plausible?

exactly, thats why im going more with the mum theory. coz what are the chances there is a child abducter in that EXACT spot at that exact time, in hopes her mum will let her walk home on her own, it just doesnt seem to likley. even if there was, WHY dump her on the other side of the road. u know, why not just dump her where u try to abduct her. it seems to farfecthed, that he would risk getting caught lying her out on the road. i think it was some sort of accident or her mum knows more then she is letting on.

exactly, thats why im going more with the mum theory. coz what are the chances there is a child abducter in that EXACT spot at that exact time, in hopes her mum will let her walk home on her own, it just doesnt seem to likley. even if there was, WHY dump her on the other side of the road. u know, why not just dump her where u try to abduct her. it seems to farfecthed, that he would risk getting caught lying her out on the road. i think it was some sort of accident or her mum knows more then she is letting on.

Why try to abduct her at all only to throw her out of the car mere seconds later? Also if someone did attempt to abduct Katherine, wouldn't there have been "defensive" wounds found on her or some type of bruising/abrasions on her body if that were in fact the case?

coz she doesnt want to be blamed.
But she wouldn't have been blamed. The coroner's theory was that it was an accident that occurred without the mother's knowledge. If she purposefully killed her own daughter and didn't want to be blamed, there would no sense in disputing the official ruling.

Why are people like mattc still bringing up that impossible "Katherine was holding on to her mom's car" theory when its been ruled out for over a decade now? Come on. Seriously. Come on. This is silly.

And for the people that are speculating on the hit and run theory, explain to me how the police dogs would trace her scent to a vacant lot blocks away then.

how long can a six year old kid, hang onto the back of her moms car, crouched, in searing summer heat, with an injured arm, on the back of a car thats mighty hot to touch?

Less than an eighth of a mile, it would seem.


Why try to abduct her at all only to throw her out of the car mere seconds later?

I have wondered about this - Katherine was missing for an hour before her mother went looking for her, but many people assume she had to have been dead within a few minutes. Couldn't she have been gone to the field where the dogs tracked her scent, been abducted, then taken to where she was found in an attempt to give her back? An hour is plenty of time to, say, abduct someone then change your mind and try and take her back, only to have her leap out of your car and hit her head. I don't think it's remotely implausible that someone could've tried something and found that they didn't have the stomach for it, so they try to get her back alive (i.e. why she had no additional injuries). Most people aren't killers, even ones who commit other crimes.

Or any other number of scenarios that could take an hour. I guess my main point is: Is there some evidence that she was necessarily dead a couple minutes after she started walking home, or is there an entire hour to work with?

I have wondered about this - Katherine was missing for an hour before her mother went looking for her, but many people assume she had to have been dead within a few minutes. Couldn't she have been gone to the field where the dogs tracked her scent, been abducted, then taken to where she was found in an attempt to give her back? An hour is plenty of time to, say, abduct someone then change your mind and try and take her back, only to have her leap out of your car and hit her head. I don't think it's remotely implausible that someone could've tried something and found that they didn't have the stomach for it, so they try to get her back alive (i.e. why she had no additional injuries). Most people aren't killers, even ones who commit other crimes.

Or any other number of scenarios that could take an hour. I guess my main point is: Is there some evidence that she was necessarily dead a couple minutes after she started walking home, or is there an entire hour to work with?

What exactly would this abductor do for almost an entire hour with Katherine? The autopsy report listed no signs of sexual assault and no defensive wounds, and concluded that she died as the result of falling from a vehicle. I just don't see this guy being able to subdue her for almost an hour (without leaving any marks or bruises on her) only to put her back in the road where her mother left shortly before. Why not just kill her and leave her in the abandoned lot where the dogs tracked her scent?

What exactly would this abductor do for almost an entire hour with Katherine? The autopsy report listed no signs of sexual assault and no defensive wounds, and concluded that she died as the result of falling from a vehicle. I just don't see this guy being able to subdue her for almost an hour (without leaving any marks or bruises on her) only to put her back in the road where her mother left shortly before. Why not just kill her and leave her in the abandoned lot where the dogs tracked her scent?
No, I'm not saying he'd be doing something for a whole hour, just that there's an hour unaccounted for so any theories as to what happened have to fit in an hour, not a couple minutes like is often presented in this thread. In my head, the scenario I outlined would be maybe 10-20 minutes, depending on how far away the vacant lot is. Longer than "throwing her out of the car mere seconds later," but easily able to fit within an hour. I'm just trying to point out that theories do not have to fit within a couple minute time-frame, because she was gone for an hour. In other words, if the argument is "it can't be abduction because who'd abduct a kid for five seconds," it's worth pointing out that she was actually gone for up to an hour. Doesn't mean it took the whole hour.

As to why not just kill her, again, most people, even criminals, don't just kill people. People do start crimes, lose their stomach then attempt to "fix" it. If criminals operated entirely logically they probably wouldn't abduct people in the first place.

No, I'm not saying he'd be doing something for a whole hour, just that there's an hour unaccounted for so any theories as to what happened have to fit in an hour, not a couple minutes like is often presented in this thread. In my head, the scenario I outlined would be maybe 10-20 minutes, depending on how far away the vacant lot is. Longer than "throwing her out of the car mere seconds later," but easily able to fit within an hour. I'm just trying to point out that theories do not have to fit within a couple minute time-frame, because she was gone for an hour. In other words, if the argument is "it can't be abduction because who'd abduct a kid for five seconds," it's worth pointing out that she was actually gone for up to an hour. Doesn't mean it took the whole hour.

As to why not just kill her, again, most people, even criminals, don't just kill people. People do start crimes, lose their stomach then attempt to "fix" it. If criminals operated entirely logically they probably wouldn't abduct people in the first place.

It's quite possible that she was hit by someone who was wealthy in the community, and out of fear of losing their "social status", they decided to high tail it before they could be implicated.

I had originally read that the police were very certain that she had been thrown from a car, not hit by one, so I assumed "hit and run" was off the table. There do seem to be a couple of articles that insist that the cops think she was hit, though. If the wounds are consistent with being hit by a car, then I agree that your scenario is the mostly likely.

Why are people like mattc still bringing up that impossible "Katherine was holding on to her mom's car" theory when its been ruled out for over a decade now? Come on. Seriously. Come on. This is silly.

Because it's not necessarily impossible, and it hasn't been ruled out. Just because the mom says it didn't happen doesn't mean it didn't. Even in the UM segment, there were conflicting opinions. Some said it was impossible, others said it was possible. I mean, I don't really think she held onto the car either, but saying it's impossible may be a stretch.

Besides, I don't think anyone is saying she rode around back there for an hour. She may have tried to hang onto the car but then fell off and hurt herself.

There do seem to be a couple of articles that insist that the cops think she was hit, though. If the wounds are consistent with being hit by a car, then I agree that your scenario is the mostly likely.

Do you have any links to those articles? I had also assumed hit and run was off the table because the corneror said she didn't have injuries consistant with being hit by a car. If there are reports saying she did have those injuries, that could change things in a big way.

I still think she hit her head, maybe trying to get away from an abductor. She might have wandered around a bit, dazed, before finally lying down on the pavement unconscious. I don't remember- was Katherine dead when her mother found her or did she die at the hospital later?

Do you have any links to those articles?

Actually, I was just coming back to say that I totally overstated that. I remembered reading it and didn't look the sources back up until after I hit "post," which I should have. This is what I get for posting in class.

Anyway, there's this: http://nut.bz/28ev5cf1/. Honestly, I'm skeptical of it since, you know, it doesn't cite anything at all. Apart from that one article, the theory seems to mostly be based on the fact that it's a hit-and-run in the Bon Jovi video. So disregard my previous statement - I can't find any sourced articles that say it might have been a hit-and-run. I really should've double-checked that first, sorry.

In regards to the "hanging on the car theory," I completely agree with you. It may not be likely, but if the theory is "She couldn't have hung off the back of the car because she'd fall off," well... If she hung off the back, then she DID fall off, and quickly, too. Obviously she couldn't get a good grip on it. I do think it's unlikely, but not impossible.

And to answer your last question - She was unconscious when her mom found her and died in the hospital.

Another thing I just thought of, if Katherine was in fact holding on to the back of her mother's car, how exactly did she die? I can't imagine her mother flooring the gas pedal, so I don't think she would have exceeded 15 mph (since she was driving in a residential area). Also, Katherine would have almost instantly lost her grip and fell from the car when her mom started driving away (since she had the splint on her hand), so that would put the mom's speed even lower when she fell from the car. Could that slow speed really cause her death, let alone that position she was found in? Maybe a broken bone or two, but not death.

Another thing I just thought of, if Katherine was in fact holding on to the back of her mother's car, how exactly did she die? I can't imagine her mother flooring the gas pedal, so I don't think she would have exceeded 15 mph (since she was driving in a residential area). Also, Katherine would have almost instantly lost her grip and fell from the car when her mom started driving away (since she had the splint on her hand), so that would put the mom's speed even lower when she fell from the car. Could that slow speed really cause her death, let alone that position she was found in? Maybe a broken bone or two, but not death.

I suppose if she'd hit her head directly on the concrete she could have had a massive fracture. As I recall, she wasn't dead at the scene but died hours later in the hospital - so essentially she was brain dead. Remember Natasha Richardson? She fell while skiing and suffered such a hemorrhage that she later died.

Another thing I just thought of, if Katherine was in fact holding on to the back of her mother's car, how exactly did she die? I can't imagine her mother flooring the gas pedal, so I don't think she would have exceeded 15 mph (since she was driving in a residential area)

I would think that she lost her grip as the car sped up and hit her head on the concrete. Don't underestimate the impact of falling from a car at 15-20 mph. I jumped off my friend's car once when it was barely moving (probably 5-10 mph), and I was stunned at how hard the impact was. I fell to the ground and rolled.

Rewatched this sequence recently and noticed her mother make a really strange comment that I'd never noticed before...

When she found Katherine in the road she said something like:

"I knew I shouldn't move her but I couldn't just leave her there on the pavement"


Now, if you had found your child in a bruised and bloodied state, not breathing, in the middle of the road - do you think that would that be your first thought - "I had better not move them"?


I would imagine it would be something more like panic, fear, hysteria, a sense of urgency - any or all of these and more.

I mean that's really only possible if she for whatever reason decided to keep walking past her house. I would have suggested that maybe she kept walking to meet her mom and brother again before they got home, you know being a silly kid and doing silly things that kids do. But that more then likely doesn't work because if she somehow got to the location before her mom and brother drove by before getting home they would have seen her laying in the road. Also if she had kept walking or running thinking she would meet mom and brother before she got home it's more then likely she would have seen the SUV in the driveway.

So unless she kept walking even if the mom and brother got home I'd pretty much rule out the hit and run theory.

Here's a crazy theory that I'm just going to throw out because sometimes it's the craziest theories that end up being fact. What if the mother allowed her kids to do dangerous things for whatever reason and she actually allowed her to ride on the back bumper and ended up killing her daughter? I only bring this up because the mother had mentioned that she had brought Katherine to the emergency room before. How did she get the broken thumb she had?

Like I said I'm just throwing this out there because it's a thought I had, and given how passionate this board is at keeping these threads going I figured It would be interesting to hear what you all think, and I'm guessing you're all going to think it's the craziest theory that's been brought up.

Honestly I'm of the opinion she either was thrown or jumped out of the car of the person that attempted to abduct her, and who's to say that someone who did yard work in that neighborhood who was a child molester/murderer wasn't stalking her or waiting for the right moment to abduct her.

Honestly I'm of the opinion she either was thrown or jumped out of the car of the person that attempted to abduct her, and who's to say that someone who did yard work in that neighborhood who was a child molester/murderer wasn't stalking her or waiting for the right moment to abduct her.

Why would this person be intent on abducting Katherine only to ditch his plan seconds after abducting her? It's not like she could have put up much of a struggle considering the splint on her hand.

i agree, i think the mother is suss. i mean, something seems wrong about things she says. i mean, how hard is it for her to remember if she gave the keys to the girl, or watched her walk away.
like in the re-enactment it showed the girl giving the mail and keys to the mum then walking off.
but then i read something the mum said about leaving the keys with her and then driving off. i mean, wouldnt u watch ur kid walk off? also if she had the keys and mail why would she jump on the car, and where was the mail?
so that means she must of given her the mail in the car then walked off, so how could the mum not notice that the girl was away from the car when she drove off??
i dunno i think shes hiding something.
i also thought it was weird the comment about not touching her body. i mean so she knew she was dead? a mothers first instinct would be to pick her up and make sure shes alive or something.
and why wait like half an hour to go look for her?

I posted these pics in the UM Location thread. Since this one is still going strong, I thought I would post them here as well.

________________________________________________________________

KATHERINE KORZILIUS:

Died on August 7, 1996 in Austin, Texas. All the areas of interest on Elder Circle are highlighted on a map in the UM segment.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Katherine5.jpg

This is the community mail boxes where Katherine and her mother parted. Katherine went right, her mother and brother went left.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Katherine2.jpg

This is the driveway leading to the Korzilius home. Too many trees hide the view so it's not really visible from the street.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Katherine3.jpg

Katherine's body was found here:

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Katherine1.jpg

30 yards from the community mail boxes was a vacant lot. K-9 units picked up Katherine's scent here. This is where people believe she was either abducted or where she received the injuries that caused her death. As you can see, it's not a vacant lot anymore.

http://i922.photobucket.com/albums/ad64/andy80_bucket/Katherine4.jpg

Thanks so much for this! Some of the descriptions I read were just inaccurate and made the layout very confusing, so it's great to see the actual scale and locations.


Why would this person be intent on abducting Katherine only to ditch his plan seconds after abducting her? It's not like she could have put up much of a struggle considering the splint on her hand.

Because they were intent on abducting her then changed their mind? Like I said before, people change their minds mid-crime and try to "fix" it. And there, again, "ditch his plan SECONDS after abducting her" - there's actually an hour she was missing. He could've changed his mind at any point up to an hour after taking her. Maybe he got her in the car, was taking her to a secondary location, and five minutes in realized it wasn't like his fantasy and he didn't want to go through with it. It happens, and it could've taken longer than "seconds." I do not understand the insistence that this all went down in less than a minute.

i mean, how hard is it for her to remember if she gave the keys to the girl, or watched her walk away.
...
i also thought it was weird the comment about not touching her body.

Why is it weird that the mother thought "I shouldn't move her"? I don't know about the rest of you, but I've had "do NOT move an injured person, it may make it worse" drilled into me since middle school health class. I really don't see how "She's still breathing and I may make it worse if I move her" is weird or suspicious. Neither, in my opinion, is the fact that the mother doesn't remember every detail of this particular instance of a common occurrence - Katherine walked home from the mailbox all the time. So she doesn't remember some stuff about it. Think about your own routines. Could you really tell me the particulars of the glass of water you poured this morning? What cup did you use? Exactly how full was it? Did you set it down at some point before you finished it? Where? People just don't pay that much attention to routines.

Because they were intent on abducting her then changed their mind? Like I said before, people change their minds mid-crime and try to "fix" it. And there, again, "ditch his plan SECONDS after abducting her" - there's actually an hour she was missing. He could've changed his mind at any point up to an hour after taking her. Maybe he got her in the car, was taking her to a secondary location, and five minutes in realized it wasn't like his fantasy and he didn't want to go through with it. It happens, and it could've taken longer than "seconds." I do not understand the insistence that this all went down in less than a minute.

I don't think I've ever heard of a crime where a guy grows a conscience and tries to fix his error. There is no evidence whatsoever in the autopsy report suggesting Katherine was abducted. No signs of any type of struggle were found. I don't know why you keep saying ther was an entire hour that she was missing. Straight from the UM website, "Katherine had left her mother’s car headed in one direction on Elder Circle, but less than ten minutes later she was found on the opposite side of the circle half a mile away." The odds would be just about astronomical for there to be an unknown child abductor roaming the area (at the same exact time Katherine decides to walk home in the opposite direction of her mother) who just so happens to come upon her and attempt to abduct her, but she puts up some sort of a struggle and he throws her from his vehicle and speeds off, for all of this to occur in less than ten minutes. Couple that with the fact that this happened at four o'clock in the daytime in a gated community would also make the abduction theory unlikely as well.

The fact that she was found in the opposite direction she was supposed to have walked home (and the direction her mother drove in) tells me she somehow did manage to get on the back of her mother's car and fall off along the way. I still think this nothing more than a tragic accident.

Thanks for the pictures dynoguy88, it's always nice to have a visual that's not so confusing.

I don't think I've ever heard of a crime where a guy grows a conscience and tries to fix his error.

When I took my RAD classes they said sometimes the best thing is to talk and humanize yourself because rapists have been known to change their minds once you're no longer an object to them. It's a common self-defense strategy that's championed by any system I can think of. Peter Kurten took at least one woman all the way out into the woods to kill her, then changed his mind and lead her back to town instead. I know I've read about others, it's just harder to look up crimes that didn't happen. I remember reading about one serial killer who'd gotten the woman in his truck but she started talking about her family so he just dropped her off somewhere. I want to say Joel Rifkin, but I'm not sure. I'll have to see if I can find the right name.

Straight from the UM website, "Katherine had left her mother’s car headed in one direction on Elder Circle, but less than ten minutes later she was found on the opposite side of the circle half a mile away."

Interesting. The wikipedia entry for "August 7, 4:15" says it was an hour. I asked in my first post if that was accurate, and no one said anything so I assumed it was. This article (http://tinyurl.com/6a292en) says she was gone half an hour. Websleuths says an hour, as does the UM Wiki. Does anyone know for sure how long she was gone? All of these sources have been wrong at times.

Bump...

They just replayed this case on UM today and I gotta give my 2 cents on it.


- First of all, letting your 5-6 year old kid walk home unattended, even for a short time, is some bad parenting. I don't want to harp on this, but you are asking for bad things to happen when you leave your kids unattended outside.

- I don't believe the theory that she was hanging off of the back of the car. I don't buy for one second that two people in the car wouldn't have seen her in the rear view mirror. This theory seemed laughable to me and one of those "grabbing at straws" theories.

- I also don't believe she was an abduction victim. This was a VERY young girl, so she couldn't have put up that much of a fight, and there was no evidence of sexual assault either. Also, why abduct a kid, basically drive in a half circle, and then throw her out of the car? By all appearances, completely motiveless, poorly thought out, & a lousy job of hiding the body. That's the worst abduction plan ever!

- My belief is that she was accidentally hit by a car, probably by a neighbor. The person that ran her over panicked. Put the body in his or her car, and then left it in the pathway for her mother to find. This would fit in with how she appeared to be laid out as described.

Of course I'm only basing this on what was presented in the segment.

Yeah, I'll never believe the "hanging on the back of the car" theory. I know people say that wind would cool the car down, but she has some fingers in a splint; also, I've been to Texas in the summer and it would burn to even try, even if the car was in the shade. I believe Texan residents have posted on here testifying to the difficulty of that.

After watching the case again, I've changed some of my views. The foiled abduction theory does seem plausible to a degree in that she was found on the opposite side of the circle despite heading off the other way and her scent was found in the vacant lot. However, I would have to wonder how she could have foiled the abduction, being so small and her fingers in a splint. Could she have struggled so much that the would-be-kidnapper flung her out of the car? That doesn't make so much sense to me. I think a hit-and-run would be the most plausible explanation. The way that the child was laid out on the pavement would suggest this to me; I don't believe for a minute that a child could fall or be hit and land perfectly. Someone realized their error, then laid her out that way, I believe. However, I also am wondering why she was found the opposite way that she was supposed to be walking in. Did her mother see her walking the way she had intended or just guess that she did?

I re-watched some of this episode today and I have a few questions. How old was her brother and why did he come back in the house crying because she had not made it back home yet? Seemed like a safe, quiet area, why the crying on his part? Could he have seen something, or known of someone in the area that was abusive?

I re-watched some of this episode today and I have a few questions. How old was her brother and why did he come back in the house crying because she had not made it back home yet? Seemed like a safe, quiet area, why the crying on his part? Could he have seen something, or known of someone in the area that was abusive?
my guess is that he didnt see her up the street and then feared the worst, this case is one where people have different views and unlike some cases i see where they may come from, but i have the same theory that i had and until proven wrong cant change it.

According to the autopsy results Katherines injuries were consistant with a fall from a car , not from being hit by a car. So if we believe these findings we can rule out accidental hit and run. The small time frame IMO makes an abduction explanation unlikley. A 6 year old is not going to be able to put up much of a defense againts an abductor. The idea that Katherine would have been able to foil an abduction so quickly is unlikely. The time from when Katherine was last seen to being found is small. The explanation that seems the most logical to me is that she fell from the back of her mothers car. However, I do not believe that for three reasons. Reason 1: I do not think a six year old with a finger in a splint is going to be able to grab onto a hot car for a joy ride. 2. What 6 year old is even going to think to do such a thing?
The third reason is I have a hard time believing that the mother picked her duaghter up and drove her to the hospital instead of screaming hystericaly and altering neighbors to call 911. I just have concerns about the mothers story.

mjak

The third reason is I have a hard time believing that the mother picked her duaghter up and drove her to the hospital instead of screaming hystericaly and altering neighbors to call 911. I just have concerns about the mothers story.
mjak

Oh that's a very good point. What if the mother made the story up as a cover up to some mistake she made.

The case is weird for sure as nothing about it makes any sense.