Does anyone remember when Unsolved Mysteries aired the episode about the abduction and murder of Rachael Runyan? I seem to remember on that episode that a few years later that someone found some things written on a wall indicating that they knew who murdered her.

Does anyone remember when Unsolved Mysteries aired the episode about the abduction and murder of Rachael Runyan? I seem to remember on that episode that a few years later that someone found some things written on a wall indicating that they knew who murdered her.

That's one of the many UM segments that I have never forgotten. I remember the part about the graffiti made by someone claiming to be Rachel's killer.

It's been 25 years since Rachel's murder. Since she was three years old at the time of her murder, that means she would be 28 now. :(

By the way, it was recently announced that Rachel's murder was being reopened. Check out the article at the link below for more details.

http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/PrRel/praugust262007.htm

"It's been 25 years since Rachel's murder. Since she was three years old at the time of her murder, that means she would be 28 now."

^ You do that too Kane? - Sometimes yeah it sorta hits me and I realize that Runyan, Gary Grant Jr., Nyleen Kay Marshall, The Baskins all these kids would all be adults now. Some are dead and some may be living. Its just so sad - For example this June marks the 20th anniversary of the kidnapping of Kerry Lynn Nixon and this past August was when Ives/Henry were run over by the train. Its just mind boggling sometimes for me how much time has passed now.

"It's been 25 years since Rachel's murder. Since she was three years old at the time of her murder, that means she would be 28 now."

^ You do that too Kane? - Sometimes yeah it sorta hits me and I realize that Runyan, Gary Grant Jr., Nyleen Kay Marshall, The Baskins all these kids would all be adults now. Some are dead and some may be living. Its just so sad - For example this June marks the 20th anniversary of the kidnapping of Kerry Lynn Nixon and this past August was when Ives/Henry were run over by the train. Its just mind boggling sometimes for me how much time has passed now.

It may not necessarily be something you dwell on every day, but the thought of how one's life may have turned out if he or she had lived inevitably crosses your mind. It's hard not to think of what might have been if the lives of young murder victims such as Rachel Runyan hadn't been cut so painfully short. I have no doubt that Rachel's parents have wondered what kind of life Rachel would be having if she were alive today.

Have any books been written about the kidnapping and murder of Rachael Runyan? I am asking as I like to read true crime novels, and I have found that some of the cases aired on Unsolved Mysteries did end up in print.

Have any books been written about the kidnapping and murder of Rachael Runyan? I am asking as I like to read true crime novels, and I have found that some of the cases aired on Unsolved Mysteries did end up in print.


Not to my knowledge. If there were I book out, I definitely would have read it though!!

There is hope in this case: Police have a suspect who lives in New Mexico. His sister was about to tell the police that he had confessed to her murder, but she recanted when she heard her brother could face the death penalty, and after the suspect himself threatened her. Once this happened, police lost their key witness. This case was recently re-opened, and there is a huge reward now. Cops are still looking for witnesses in this case.

Anybody hear about this?

This is another one of those UM cases were they seemed to jump on the satanism angle a little too much. Though the case may have nothing to do with satanism.

It happeded twice before with the Satanic Grandmother case and the con artists that wrote 666 on the walls of the victims homes.

Even in the Omar the Arsonist case they highlighted that angle a little too much.

Rachel Runyans murder may be nothing more than the act of a deranged pedophile.

I understand what you're saying, but Satanic cults were the "hot topic" of the 1980's... of course they were going to play it up.

I understand what you're saying, but Satanic cults were the "hot topic" of the 1980's... of course they were going to play it up.

Yeah, especially after that Geraldo special.

This is another one of those UM cases were they seemed to jump on the satanism angle a little too much. Though the case may have nothing to do with satanism.

It happeded twice before with the Satanic Grandmother case and the con artists that wrote 666 on the walls of the victims homes.

Even in the Omar the Arsonist case they highlighted that angle a little too much.

Rachel Runyans murder may be nothing more than the act of a deranged pedophile.

I don't blame them for playing it up. After all this is exactly what was written on the wall of the bathroom. It was a 666 symbol. Why not believe it?

Is she the little girl they thought might have been murdered for a "snuff movie"? I thought that no snuff movies were thought to actually exist, but I think Stack was asking the audience if anyone had seen this snuff video. Did they ever find out if a snuff movie was the motive?

Is she the little girl they thought might have been murdered for a "snuff movie"? I thought that no snuff movies were thought to actually exist, but I think Stack was asking the audience if anyone had seen this snuff video. Did they ever find out if a snuff movie was the motive?

I am not sure, I do not think anything has come up. But let's be honest, who would come forward if they had seen a "snuff" movie? A person watching this in the first place is a dirtbag to start. This isn't a movie that you accidentally rent at Blockbuster or anything

I am not sure, I do not think anything has come up. But let's be honest, who would come forward if they had seen a "snuff" movie? A person watching this in the first place is a dirtbag to start. This isn't a movie that you accidentally rent at Blockbuster or anything

If I recall, the thinking was that someone could have been watching what they thought was kiddie porn (not much better, honestly), but was, in fact, a snuff film. I could imagine that a paedophile could still find murder troubling enough to make an anonymous call, although I wouldn't hold my breathe.

The police officers in this segment were kinda weird too, Asking for copies and not the actual tape or pictures of it themselves. And I know they played the satanist thing up a bit but this one made sense since there was a satanic symbol as a signature on the wall in the bathroom.....I dont know how individuals like this can live with themselves especially to such a young person.

This was yet another interracial crime with a White victim. It happens so frequently in the USA it is not even news. If the races were reversed, it would be brought up for decades. Disgusting wouldn't even begin to describe this double standard.

The police officers in this segment were kinda weird too, Asking for copies and not the actual tape or pictures of it themselves. And I know they played the satanist thing up a bit but this one made sense since there was a satanic symbol as a signature on the wall in the bathroom.....I dont know how individuals like this can live with themselves especially to such a young person.

Re: the message written in the bathroom stall. I wonder if there was more to the message than what was shown on UM. Based on what we did see, I don't know how the police could conclude with any degree of certainty that it was definitely written by Rachel's killer.

The "snuff film" angle seems pretty out there as well. The type of crime that was committed here is typically the work of a male pedophile, probably acting alone.

This was yet another interracial crime with a White victim. It happens so frequently in the USA it is not even news. If the races were reversed, it would be brought up for decades. Disgusting wouldn't even begin to describe this double standard.

You're rhetoric about the interracial crimes on white people is getting quite annoying. If the races were reversed, you would not hear a PEEP about it on ANY national news scale. The fact that this case was profiled on UM shows that it was a nationally well known case that got a lot of exposure.

You're rhetoric about the interracial crimes on white people is getting quite annoying. If the races were reversed, you would not hear a PEEP about it on ANY national news scale. The fact that this case was profiled on UM shows that it was a nationally well known case that got a lot of exposure.

TheCars1986 - I like your posts and if you think my comments are out of place or the timing is off, I can respect that. But the interracial aspect of crime is not something that people are still ignoring. If you were born in 1986, we are of a similar age, but times have changed. I do not wish to derail threads and I apologize if I have done that in the past.

In all of UM, I can only recall two Black-on-White crimes and both were explicitly addressed as "racial" crimes; Poloma Martin and Kenneth Dungee. But when the crime was Black-on-White - Charles Holden's mother, Rachel Runyan, Micki Jo West, and more - it was never discussed as being racial. In fact, the episode about "Debbie", the woman who was shotgunned in the face just outside Winston-Salem, North Carolina which aired on March 22, 1990 was so explicit about this that Robert Stack made the point that race should be ignored.

Having been exposed to this sort of media my entire life [before the internet], I was flabbergasted to see just how uncommon White-on-Black crime is compared to the reverse. Don't trust me, just examine the racial homicide statistics in the USA:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/tables/ovracetab.cfm

If you put these numbers in per-capita terms, the disparity boggles the mind. Black people are literally upwards of 20-50 times more likely to attack a White person than the reverse.

So yes, this information is extremely important, TheCars1986. You find my posts annoying and I find the suppression of facts pertaining to the over one million White women raped by Black men in the past 50 years to be slightly more than annoying, so please forgive me for not tolerating propaganda which condones that. The media that I grew up with was the exact opposite of reality. The internet is exposing this more and more on a daily basis. If you read the comments attached to many news articles, you will see that my views are quite common.

Meanwhile, if a White person merely offends a Black person it is national news:

http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm529889.html

If my rhetoric is annoying, refute it. Don't vaguely claim that White-on-Black crime is suppressed as it is not. The now waning traditional/mainstream media jumps on every possible White-on-Black crime it can and claims it is racial in nature. In 2005, over 30,000 White women were raped by Black men. Zero Black women were raped by White men as shown in the collected evidence:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus0602.pdf

Scroll to Table 42 ---> 32,443 White women raped by Black men, zero Black women raped by White men.

But what was the biggest story of the following year? The Duke lacrosse scandal which was a rape accusation that turned out to be fraudulent. The media is so desperate to accuse White people of interracial crime that they even jump on cases which have no evidence at all supporting them.

As for Black victimization being suppressed, this may be so if the perpetrator is Black, but never the case if the perpetrator is White. Perhaps that is what you meant to say. Sadly, Black-on-Black crime is so common that it is not deemed newsworthy, hence, it doesn't get the coverage that it potentially deserves. Bill Cosby was ostracized as an Uncle Tom because he had the courage to address this. Sadly, Bill Cosby's concerns did not fit in with the politically correct narrative and he was shut down. White-on-Black crime, however, is talked about constantly.

The hilarious part is, the media says White-on-Black crime is suppressed while talking about it constantly, which makes people think it is suppressed. Kind of like how Fox News is "Fair and Balanced" because the scrolling marquee says so. :lol:

As to the Rachel Runyan case, it did get national attention but that wasn't my point - my point is that the race aspect was never mentioned.

As I said, I do not wish to derail threads to talk about race and crime as I feel there is a time and a place to do so and UM threads may not be the place for that. If that is your concern, point noted. However, if you feel that my facts are wrong, please address where you think they are. You will find that I am particularly open-minded, perhaps even to a fault.

I think a point he was trying to make is noone really cares what color a person is in these segments....just that they are happening to humans. And anyone who spends an inordinant amount of time thinking about race in a crime unless its an obvious "hate crime" then they just arent getting what we are trying to strive for in america.

I think a point he was trying to make is noone really cares what color a person is in these segments....just that they are happening to humans. And anyone who spends an inordinant amount of time thinking about race in a crime unless its an obvious "hate crime" then they just arent getting what we are trying to strive for in america.

That is a nice idea but in reality, when various groups are forced to mix, at best, they simply get along. At worst, it leads to conflict and violence. I too wish everyone could get along with one another, but we live in no such world.

Race always mattered on UM [and in general in the media of that era] when the crime is White-on-Black and I gave two examples to that effect: Poloma Martin and Kenneth Dungee. Whereas in the case of "Debbie" who was shotgunned in the face and left to die in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Robert Stack explicitly instructed people to ignore race. So yes, this was a clear, conscious agenda, one that can no longer be sustained due to the internet.

White people are in fact the victims of interracial crime 90% of the time - the racial disparities are astounding and to have grown up under a media and educational system which led me to believe the opposite is something I consider a form of abuse. When one race of people is 20 times more likely to attack another race than the reverse and exactly the opposite is projected as true, this is insidious brainwashing which can hurt a lot of innocent people and in fact has no doubt led in some part to the rape of over one million White women and the murders of over 50,000 White people in the past 50 years. This is not funny - it is serious and needs to be specifically addressed by race, which the media had no problem doing for years when the victims were Black. But then, this is the same media which was outraged by the murder of 21-year-old Matthew Shephard in 1998 but said nothing of the murder of 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising by two homosexuals the next year.

Why does this matter to me? Because I have two small children, ages one and two, and I refuse to live in a society where they can be targeted, raped, and murdered by non-Whites and not a word of that be mentioned. If you don't believe me, in 2009 in my city, a teacher's aide cut the hair of an Aboriginal boy and it was national news:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/05/21/thunder-bay-hair.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20090530074337/http://www.canada.com/news/Family+betrayed+after+teacher+cuts+hair/1620958/story.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20090527033155/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/family-outraged-after-students-hair-cut/article1150002

http://www.wawataynews.ca/archive/all/2009/5/28/NAN-calls-for-justice-and-accountability-in-haircutting-incident_16830

Meanwhile, this past September, a 17-year-old Aboriginal boy assaulted and hospitalized a 90-year-old White woman - and nary a peep from the national media:

http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/162920/Teen-arrested-in-connection-with-assault-on-90-year-old

Now could you imagine if the races were reversed? It would be national media coverage - as shown, even something as relatively minor as cutting the hair of a non-White makes the national news. So yes, this has been an ongoing and conscious deception campaign and I feel the need to squash it where it stands.

If we lived in a society where all the television shows said that women were more violent than men would you object to me pointing out the irrationality and lack of evidence to support such a bizarre view?

You may call me a lot of things but I am simply honest and these issues need to be addressed, specifically by race. And "hate crimes" against White people are ignored all the time. Just Google the brutal racial hate crime against Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom which the mainstream media only eventually covered because the internet forced it to do so, kicking and screaming. To the contrary, the murder of James Byrd, Jr. was basically covered 24/7.

So yes, there is an appalling double standard and this is not a close call. As a father and a husband I refuse to allow that.

I know that everyone - even those who disagree with me - realize what I'm saying holds true. My goal on this site is to not mention this excessively and in fact only discuss it sparingly. I consider this to be a non-political board which is why I like it. People don't seem to express strong views on here one way or the other and it just seems to be a board full of online detectives wishing to solve these mysteries. I intend to contribute quality to this board and not derail threads to discussions of political or unrelated matters. However, there is some relevance which is why I brought it up in this thread.

I don't want to stray too far from the topic here, this is an Unsolved Mysteries message board after all, so this is the last time I'll address the "racial" crimes profiled on UM.

In all of UM, I can only recall two Black-on-White crimes and both were explicitly addressed as "racial" crimes; Poloma Martin and Kenneth Dungee. But when the crime was Black-on-White - Charles Holden's mother, Rachel Runyan, Micki Jo West, and more - it was never discussed as being racial. In fact, the episode about "Debbie", the woman who was shotgunned in the face just outside Winston-Salem, North Carolina which aired on March 22, 1990 was so explicit about this that Robert Stack made the point that race should be ignored.

You can put O'Neal Moore, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and possibly the Reggie Miller church arsonist under "white-on-black" crimes profiled on UM. You can't see the difference in a case like O'Neal Moore and "Debbie"? Really? "Debbie" was targeted by a sicko (regardless of race) for a sexually motivated crime. She was raped and was almost murdered. This was not done explicity because she was white and her attacker was black. O'Neal Moore on the other hand WAS killed because of his skin color. There's a huge difference between the two. Just because a black person committs a crime on a white person does not automatically make it a "race" related crime. The same goes for white on black crime. It's just a sick bastard committing a crime on another human being. That's why Stack made it known that the crime was not racially motivated. Because it's obvious that it wasn't.

Having been exposed to this sort of media my entire life [before the internet], I was flabbergasted to see just how uncommon White-on-Black crime is compared to the reverse. Don't trust me, just examine the racial homicide statistics in the USA:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/tables/ovracetab.cfm

If you put these numbers in per-capita terms, the disparity boggles the mind. Black people are literally upwards of 20-50 times more likely to attack a White person than the reverse.

Everyone else on this board has been "exposed" to the same sort of media for their entire lives as well. No one else sees the things your seeing, however. You also failed to mention that not only has the black-on-white crime risen over the years, but white-on-black has as well (to a lesser extent). And you also failed to mention that the majority of crimes committed are of the same race. So that argument that "blacks are more likely to commit crimes against whites" is irrelevant and wrong. In 2005, 42% of crimes committed were black on black, 44.6% was white on white. The remaining 10% (a small amount if you consider the number of crimes committed in this country every year) is the mixed race crimes. Just what statistics are you seeing when looking at that chart? It's obvious that most crimes are committed against persons of the same race.

So yes, this information is extremely important, TheCars1986. You find my posts annoying and I find the suppression of facts pertaining to the over one million White women raped by Black men in the past 50 years to be slightly more than annoying, so please forgive me for not tolerating propaganda which condones that. The media that I grew up with was the exact opposite of reality. The internet is exposing this more and more on a daily basis. If you read the comments attached to many news articles, you will see that my views are quite common.

This is not "extremely important". I'm not quite sure what agenda you're trying to push, but doing so on an Unsolved Mysteries message board seems like such a waste of time. A rape by definition is a sexually motivated crime. It doesn't matter what race the victim or the perpetrator is, because the crime is NOT race related. It's a motive of a sexual nature. Here's a link that proves that the majority of Hate Crimes (racially motivated, violent and nonviolent) are committed by white people. Scroll down to Table 12.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/hc0309.pdf

Meanwhile, if a White person merely offends a Black person it is national news:

http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm529889.html

I don't see how an article posted on unsolvedmysteries.com could be considered national news. If this were true, it would have been reported everywhere (because it's just plain wrong) but this is the first I've ever heard of it.

If my rhetoric is annoying, refute it. Don't vaguely claim that White-on-Black crime is suppressed as it is not. The now waning traditional/mainstream media jumps on every possible White-on-Black crime it can and claims it is racial in nature. In 2005, over 30,000 White women were raped by Black men. Zero Black women were raped by White men as shown in the collected evidence:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus0602.pdf

Scroll to Table 42 ---> 32,443 White women raped by Black men, zero Black women raped by White men.

I'm looking at Table 42 right now and apparently do not see the same thing you are reporting as fact. There were 194,270 reported sexual assaults on white people (nowhere on this table does it designate female or male) in 2006. Of that total number, 50% of them were committed by other WHITE people. As a matter of fact, the "Unknown race/Not Known" was higher than the total number committed by blacks. So again, your argument is wrong and you've twisted the statistics to fit your agenda.

But what was the biggest story of the following year? The Duke lacrosse scandal which was a rape accusation that turned out to be fraudulent. The media is so desperate to accuse White people of interracial crime that they even jump on cases which have no evidence at all supporting them.

I don't really remember this being a race issue at all. It was more of an issue of privileged rich, college kids allegedly sexually assaulting a woman. When a woman (regardless of race) comes forward and says several members of a popular College's sports team just gang raped her, it's going to be national news EVERY SINGLE TIME. Of course she was lying, and she was lambasted accordingly by the media (that you like to criticize as having a hidden agenda). Just google "Crystal Mangum" and you'll see.

The hilarious part is, the media says White-on-Black crime is suppressed while talking about it constantly, which makes people think it is suppressed. Kind of like how Fox News is "Fair and Balanced" because the scrolling marquee says so. :lol:

What news programs are you watching? You do know about Fox News' slogan, so I guess I see my answer. And if that's where your getting your facts from, I rest my case.

I think a point he was trying to make is noone really cares what color a person is in these segments....just that they are happening to humans. And anyone who spends an inordinant amount of time thinking about race in a crime unless its an obvious "hate crime" then they just arent getting what we are trying to strive for in america.

Seconded. I personally find a person of any race that feels the need to continuously bring up racism and talk about things as viewed in a racial context as tiresome. Not only that, but such time spent obcessing over and discussing racial context promotes further negative ideas and actions.

You can't see the difference in a case like O'Neal Moore and "Debbie"? Really? "Debbie" was targeted by a sicko (regardless of race) for a sexually motivated crime. She was raped and was almost murdered. This was not done explicity because she was white and her attacker was black. O'Neal Moore on the other hand WAS killed because of his skin color. There's a huge difference between the two.

That's my point, UM purposely selected White-on-Black crimes which always had racial motivation and not once did the opposite. This was done intentionally to give the viewers the impression that White people were more racist. UM, however, was what I would deem to be very low on the propaganda scale.

Here's a link that proves that the majority of Hate Crimes (racially motivated, violent and nonviolent) are committed by white people. Scroll down to Table 12.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/hc0309.pdf

That's because the FBI classifies Hispanics as "White" in the offender category to purposely make it look like White people are committing more crime:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Classification_of_Hispanics

But when Hispanics are the victims, they get their own separate category. This is purposely done to make White people look like they murder more than they do.

Hate crime laws are also completely biased towards White people. The fact remains that 90% of interracial crime in the USA is against White people yet somehow any small infraction committed by a White person against a Black person is considered a "hate crime". Hate crime legislation is completely biased against White people so for you to use that as a measurement that White people are somehow more racist is simply wrong. The tool purposely targets Whites to give that exact impression.

Note a hate crime apparently:

http://www.sullivan-county.com/wcva/liberal_racism.htm

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/true-crime-in-nashville/channon-christian-christopher-newsom-murders-why-not-hate-crimes

I would suspect you live in an all-White enclave and that is why you are unrealistic on these matters. But by 2050, there will be no more all-White enclaves to flee to. At that point, I imagine every White person will have realistic views on race and crime.

I would suspect you live in an all-White enclave and that is why you are unrealistic on these matters. But by 2050, there will be no more all-White enclaves to flee to. At that point, I imagine every White person will have realistic views on race and crime.

If you consider the Washington D.C./Baltimore Metro area an "all-White enclave", than sure I live in one. People are most afraid of what they don't understand. It seems like you obviously do not have a solid grasp not only on reality, but also with race relations. It's obvious to me that you've lived a very sheltered, narrow minded, lily-white existence. I suggest broadening your horizons and stop perpetuating a "fear" that's nonexistent. People like you are the reason Fox News is still on the air.

If you consider the Washington D.C./Baltimore Metro area an "all-White enclave", than sure I live in one. People are most afraid of what they don't understand. It seems like you obviously do not have a solid grasp not only on reality, but also with race relations. It's obvious to me that you've lived a very sheltered, narrow minded, lily-white existence. I suggest broadening your horizons and stop perpetuating a "fear" that's nonexistent. People like you are the reason Fox News is still on the air.

I tend not to like drama on the board, but I tend to agree with this. Matt youve come on and alot if not most of your posts are about race. It is kinda getting annoying to be reading posts and then see these ones where your straying away from any sort of fact based reality and trying to lead people into this hate crime fantasy world you seem to live in. Please I beg of you to stop with this nonsense as its not wanted here....like I said before when we post here and watch UM we arent looking to see how many blacks or how many whites are committing crimes, we are appaled that a human can do this to another human. Noone gives a crap what color the victim or the suspect was

Not sure if this has been posted here yet, but here is some latest info about her case: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865550988/Does-arrest-offer-new-lead-in-30-year-old-Rachael-Runyan-case.html?pg=all

It's obvious to me that you've lived a very sheltered, narrow minded, lily-white existence. I suggest broadening your horizons and stop perpetuating a "fear" that's nonexistent. People like you are the reason Fox News is still on the air.

Black males at 6% of the American population are responsible for 50% of the murders. It's simply a fact:

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain

Noone gives a crap what color the victim or the suspect was

Last I checked, there are full entitlement industries dedicated to blaming things on people of European descent, so yes, race apparently is a factor as long as it is White people being blamed. Only when I attempt to put some of these things in context is it apparently a problem. Perhaps if I didn't need to hear about how horrible White people were every day I would drop the issue.

On that note, I respect the fact that this board is predominantly apolitical and I do not have a problem dropping the issue of race here as it can distract from the primary subject matter of the threads. Broadly in society, I will not drop it though, until people stop blaming my race for everything that is wrong in the world. I am tired of members of my race being scapegoats.

As to how this relates to UM, I explained that in this post in this thread:

In all of UM, I can only recall two Black-on-White crimes and both were explicitly addressed as "racial" crimes; Poloma Martin and Kenneth Dungee. But when the crime was Black-on-White - Charles Holden's mother, Rachel Runyan, Micki Jo West, and more - it was never discussed as being racial. In fact, the episode about "Debbie", the woman who was shotgunned in the face just outside Winston-Salem, North Carolina which aired on March 22, 1990 was so explicit about this that Robert Stack made the point that race should be ignored.

So it's alright for Robert Stack to mention race when the perpetrator was White and the victim was Black - which was almost never -but when the perpetrator was Black and the victim was White - which comprised more than 90% of all interracial crime cases on UM, roughly the same stats as in the USA today - then we should ignore race?

Until these double standards which are obvious to anyone who takes even a casual glance at the race industry are dropped, I will continue to post facts. I apologize if facts offend anyone.

I'm wearied of clicking on a thread only to see it has become the twenty-third explanation of Matt C's world view instead of what's in the actual title.

Like I've mentioned before, there's about 9 bajillion other forums on which one could pontificate to his or heart's content. Instead of apologizing once again about straying wildly OT, one could always just post somewhere else. It's really not that difficult.

I'm sorry, but what does race have to do with this horrendous crime? Seriously? When I hear someone innocent, like this poor child, was brutally murdered, I could care less about the race of the victim or the perpetrator. It's justice I'm concerned about.

And for the record, you're dead wrong about only representing white racists on UM. Remember the case of Malaika Griffin? Look it up.

But to finalize my post, I go with what Robert Stack said in the case of "Debbie:" It is important not to fixate on race. These are real people, real victims, and far more important to think about than racial arguments. Whoever committed this crime is a sick, sick individual and should be caught and hopefully is already behind bars for another crime. I came to this thread hoping to see an update or some sort of lead, not racial debates. Sad.

I'm wearied of clicking on a thread only to see it has become the twenty-third explanation of Matt C's world view instead of what's in the actual title.


AMEN!

I agree MattC with the vast majority of other posters who think your posts are getting really old!! This is a forum to discuss cases that were profiled on UM NOT to ram your opinions and politics down everyone's throat. If you continue to keep posting in this fashion and keep being argumentative you will be removed.

but when the perpetrator was Black and the victim was White - which comprised more than 90% of all interracial crime cases on UM, roughly the same stats as in the USA today - then we should ignore race?


Unless you have defined categorical classes, recorded frequency, and then graphed that data after watching EVERY single of episode of Unsolved Mysteries' 1987-2002 run, "90%" is infactual. As it seems you appear to have great respect for statistical data, it seems ironic you would throw out an arbitrary percentage without, I presume, completing the research and creating the product(s).

Speaking of statistics, let's talk about fbi.gov:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/violent-crime

Please observe the y-axis on the "Violent Crime Offense Figure". You'll notice the point of origin is (1,440,000) and is located at the top of the axis rather than the bottom. This is intentional.

If the point of origin began at (0) or a much smaller value, and if it was located at the bottom of the axis, the graph would be shaped very differently. In fact, if you begin the point of origin at (0) and at the bottom, and set the y-axis values at by 100,000 increases of 1,000,000 to a top value of 1,500,000, you'll find that the stupendous drop in crime is far less great than what the FBI's graphic leads the average individual to conclude. In fact, it will show that through years 2006-2008, the crime rate held very steadily. It is nearly a straight line, actually. It does show a gradual decrease in violent crime from years 2008-2010, but the graph shape is not nearly as dramatic as that in the FBI graph.

The conclusion: the FBI's graphics are misleading. You even mentioned intentional manipulation of data in an early post yourself when you pointed out that there was no "Hispanic" class for an offender statistical table or graph, only "White" (I have no idea if that's factual or not, but it would cause misleading conclusions). If you know data representations may be grossly flawed, why do you continue to use the same sources in support of your arguments?

Try making your own data graphics from the raw data some of these websites will give you. Get an introductory statistics textbook if you don't already have one. Play around with it. You'll find things aren't at all always what they seem.


And by the way: news articles aren't good observational resources at all. Neither are personal anecdotes. Neither is scientific.

Just Google the brutal racial hate crime against Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom which the mainstream media only eventually covered because the internet forced it to do so, kicking and screaming.

By the way, I'm originally from Knoxville, TN and was acquainted with both Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom personally. It was a MASSIVE media story and an EXTREMELY publicized trial. Trust me, no news outlet was coerced by the apparent mystical forces of the internet into covering it.

You don't have a flaming clue what you're talking about.

By the way, I'm originally from Knoxville, TN and was acquainted with both Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom personally. It was a MASSIVE media story and an EXTREMELY publicized trial. Trust me, no news outlet was coerced by the apparent mystical forces of the internet into covering it.

You don't have a flaming clue what you're talking about.

I had never heard of this case before and I just read an article- how sickening. I'm so sorry, Meg. What an awful crime.

I had never heard of this case before and I just read an article- how sickening. I'm so sorry, Meg. What an awful crime.

I appreciate that. Before I myself get too far OT, I just want to make clear how Channon and Chris's murders became associated with white racist ideology across the country. Matt C is not the first person to use that case, and he probably gleaned it from some "white power" website if I had to wager. It's all right here:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/newsom.asp

In 2007, I was a junior at the University of Tennessee, where Channon and Chris were also students. Their murders shocked the entire campus. Students and faculty alike grew more wary of being there late into the night, even though the murder scene was a few miles outside campus. There hadn't been a homicide of that magnitude since Blair Adams in 1996 (and it definitely got a lot more media coverage than Blair's murder). Lifelong residents, such as myself, were absolutely stunned. Knoxville is not known for violent crime.

So--with concern for Channon and Chris as human beings being at about zip--a handful of independent white racist nutjobs hijacked the story, twisted it into some crazy (and not wholly factual) version of events gleaned from very early reports and retracted statements to fit into their own bizarre theories of widespread oppression against white people (I know, it's difficult to stifle a chuckle at that phrase), and spit out their vitirol all over the internet. Thus the chain letter e-mail in the Snopes.com analysis and variations thereof. It really hurt the families and friends of Channon and Chris, and it still does. Their parents aren't racists, nor do they think what happened was a hate crime--which, by the way, was and is the conclusion of the Knoxville Police Department.

I'll tell you--those of us who remember and were effected by it DO NOT like the deaths of those poor people turned into racial propaganda. They themselves would never have condoned that particular brand of garbage, and we deeply resent the selfishness evident in those who saw only the color of everyone's skin and nothing more. They only want to continue to further their wacked-out agenda.

That's all I wanted to say.

How did this veer off the original topic of Rachel Runyan? :confused:

I agree, we need to get back on topic.

I was reading some internet articles and it says that she was abducted in front of her brothers (UM didn't mention that, just said at a playground). I don't know their ages at the time but I'm assuming they are the ones in helped making a composite sketch. Police now seem to have a strong suspect in the case. I read someone's comments on another site that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence against him but they still need more evidence or witnesses to come forward. They also said he has threatened potential witnesses and they believe Rachael's body was exhumed by authorities. I wonder if they still believe the sickening 'snuff film' was the reason she was taken. I don't know if she was raped and I don't really want to know but there might be dna that would conclusively point to the killer. It would be such great news if they could arrest the person responsible as this is one of the most sickening cases ever profiled on UM.

Here's an article from March of this year with a little more info on the abduction.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53615377-78/runyan-rachael-police-eborn.html.csp

I agree, we need to get back on topic.

I was reading some internet articles and it says that she was abducted in front of her brothers (UM didn't mention that, just said at a playground). I don't know their ages at the time but I'm assuming they are the ones in helped making a composite sketch. Police now seem to have a strong suspect in the case. I read someone's comments on another site that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence against him but they still need more evidence or witnesses to come forward. They also said he has threatened potential witnesses and they believe Rachael's body was exhumed by authorities. I wonder if they still believe the sickening 'snuff film' was the reason she was taken. I don't know if she was raped and I don't really want to know but there might be dna that would conclusively point to the killer. It would be such great news if they could arrest the person responsible as this is one of the most sickening cases ever profiled on UM.

Here's an article from March of this year with a little more info on the abduction.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53615377-78/runyan-rachael-police-eborn.html.csp
I have to agree crystaldawn. This is one of the worst segments I remember watching...having 2 daughters myself I don't know how I could go on if that happened to my daughter. ON the flip side I don't see how someone could do that crime. I hope this person is brought to justice.

I agree, we need to get back on topic.

I was reading some internet articles and it says that she was abducted in front of her brothers (UM didn't mention that, just said at a playground). I don't know their ages at the time but I'm assuming they are the ones in helped making a composite sketch. Police now seem to have a strong suspect in the case. I read someone's comments on another site that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence against him but they still need more evidence or witnesses to come forward. They also said he has threatened potential witnesses and they believe Rachael's body was exhumed by authorities. I wonder if they still believe the sickening 'snuff film' was the reason she was taken. I don't know if she was raped and I don't really want to know but there might be dna that would conclusively point to the killer. It would be such great news if they could arrest the person responsible as this is one of the most sickening cases ever profiled on UM.

Here's an article from March of this year with a little more info on the abduction.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53615377-78/runyan-rachael-police-eborn.html.csp

I do recall them looking at a black male, who looks alot like the composite, as a suspect but I forget his name. He is already in prison for another crime/crimes. I wonder if after 30 years that they could find any DNA on her body linking her to her killer?

what the heck does race have to do with the rachel runyan case? did i miss something? seriously, its 2012, i'm black, my hubby is white our daughter is a beautiful mix of both of us...it saddens me that in this day and age it is still brought up...

this case really scared the crap outta me.....wasnt it a special alert?

what the heck does race have to do with the rachel runyan case? did i miss something? seriously, its 2012, i'm black, my hubby is white our daughter is a beautiful mix of both of us...it saddens me that in this day and age it is still brought up...

All I said was that the killer is a black male, given by witnesses and a composite sketch of the suspect was drawn up.

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/427959_484800214870991_1890900604_n.jpg

Sorry for getting out there myself, CD (and all). My latest posts would've been better as pm's.

Rachel Runyan. As far as the wall message is concerned, I think it might be a red herring. There's nothing specific in the message, no time or date or anything particular (like the Dexter Stefonek "Hotjock" writing) with the exception of the "Satanic" figures, which were frightening cultural things at the time. It makes me think of how something like "Pig" written in blood on a wall might have a heightened fear factor in the late '60s and early '70s. Satanic symbols scared people in the '80s.

All I said was that the killer is a black male, given by witnesses and a composite sketch of the suspect was drawn up.

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/427959_484800214870991_1890900604_n.jpg

It wasn't you. If you look back to the previous page in this thread, you'll see that we have a forum regular who loves to preach about their views on race and how white people are just so oppressed. :rolleyes:

Sorry for getting out there myself, CD (and all). My latest posts would've been better as pm's.

Rachel Runyan. As far as the wall message is concerned, I think it might be a red herring. There's nothing specific in the message, no time or date or anything particular (like the Dexter Stefonek "Hotjock" writing) with the exception of the "Satanic" figures, which were frightening cultural things at the time. It makes me think of how something like "Pig" written in blood on a wall might have a heightened fear factor in the late '60s and early '70s. Satanic symbols scared people in the '80s.

The only other conceivable possibility is that the full text of the graffiti was not shown on UM. If this is true, there may have been some additional information, perhaps a detail about the mechanics of the crime that weren't reported to the public, that convinced authorities that the message was authentic. Truthfully, I hope this is the case. If not, any sicko could pen a vague message about a high profile case on any bathroom stall in America and count on a national response.

I have always found this case difficult to assess because of the lack of "factual" detail and the over-focus on other details and hearsay that may ultimately mean nothing - the graffiti, the Satanism, the snuff film allegations. While I think focusing on the more disturbing elements of the crime was probably done to heighten sensationalism, it makes drawing any real, fact based conclusions difficult. For example, was Runyan raped? I always assumed that she was, but I can't recall if that fact was disclosed on the broadcast (though it may have been inferred because of the snuff fillm angle). Knowing a basic detail like this can tell us some things about the offender. Such knowledge may prove more useful in identifying and flushing out the person who committed this crime then bizarre hearsay about snuff movies and Satanic boogeymen.

Just my $0.02.

The only other conceivable possibility is that the full text of the graffiti was not shown on UM. If this is true, there may have been some additional information, perhaps a detail about the mechanics of the crime that weren't reported to the public, that convinced authorities that the message was authentic. Truthfully, I hope this is the case. If not, any sicko could pen a vague message about a high profile case on any bathroom stall in America and count on a national response.

I have always found this case difficult to assess because of the lack of "factual" detail and the over-focus on other details and hearsay that may ultimately mean nothing - the graffiti, the Satanism, the snuff film allegations. While I think focusing on the more disturbing elements of the crime was probably done to heighten sensationalism, it makes drawing any real, fact based conclusions difficult. For example, was Runyan raped? I always assumed that she was, but I can't recall if that fact was disclosed on the broadcast (though it may have been inferred because of the snuff fillm angle). Knowing a basic detail like this can tell us some things about the offender. Such knowledge may prove more useful in identifying and flushing out the person who committed this crime then bizarre hearsay about snuff movies and Satanic boogeymen.

Just my $0.02.

The detective they interviewed on UM said his informant claimed she was sexually molested and then murdered on the alleged snuff film (they exist from the SOS case, so there is no reason to immediately discount the existence of a snuff film in the Rachel Runyan case).

The detective they interviewed on UM said his informant claimed she was sexually molested and then murdered on the alleged snuff film (they exist from the SOS case, so there is no reason to immediately discount the existence of a snuff film in the Rachel Runyan case).

The information about the snuff film came from a jail house informant, IIRC. Without further corroboration, it's hardly a reliable source. Also, at the time the segment was made, the US was going though "Satanic Panic" so there was often a Satanic element attached to cases like Runyan's.

I did find it interesting that the detective acknowledged the existence of the film though. Historically, police have disavowed the existence of snuff films.

The information about the snuff film came from a jail house informant, IIRC. Without further corroboration, it's hardly a reliable source. Also, at the time the segment was made, the US was going though "Satanic Panic" so there was often a Satanic element attached to cases like Runyan's.

I did find it interesting that the detective acknowledged the existence of the film though. Historically, police have disavowed the existence of snuff films.

I may be remembering this wrong, but I thought when they showed this case on the Farina version they downplayed the whole "snuff film" angle. They may not even have acknowledged it.

I may be remembering this wrong, but I thought when they showed this case on the Farina version they downplayed the whole "snuff film" angle. They may not even have acknowledged it.

I've never seen the Farina version, so I can't comment. It was definitely a crucial part of the original (Stack hosted) story. The police actually implored the audience to contact them or to send a copy of the video to the police department, anonymously if need be. They even showed a photo of Runyan wearing a blue dress and mentioned that she wore the same dress on the day she was abducted so she might be wearing it in the film.

You can find the original segment through the usual channels.

EDIT: Just watched the Stack version. It's less than 3 minutes in duration. Little info is given. I read some in depth articles about this case a few years ago on Newsbank. I'll see if I can dig them up and post them here.

All I said was that the killer is a black male, given by witnesses and a composite sketch of the suspect was drawn up.

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/427959_484800214870991_1890900604_n.jpg
no it wasnt you at all, you didnt say anything out of line. I feel really horrible for this little girls family it is so horrible that this happened but then to write it on a bathroom stall with a satanic symbol ( am I correct?) what in the heck? :mad:

The information about the snuff film came from a jail house informant, IIRC. Without further corroboration, it's hardly a reliable source. Also, at the time the segment was made, the US was going though "Satanic Panic" so there was often a Satanic element attached to cases like Runyan's.

I did find it interesting that the detective acknowledged the existence of the film though. Historically, police have disavowed the existence of snuff films.

This is all true. I don't discount the possibility that--given the wall message as we saw it was the complete message--the detective perhaps finds a claim that a snuff film exists more credible if there's what he perceives to be a Satanic element to the case. After all, someone who venerates the traditional western embodiment of evil itself would certainly be capable of murdering a little girl on film, right?

Reminds me of the Ellender case.

This is all true. I don't discount the possibility that--given the wall message as we saw it was the complete message--the detective perhaps finds a claim that a snuff film exists more credible if there's what he perceives to be a Satanic element to the case. After all, someone who venerates the traditional western embodiment of evil itself would certainly be capable of murdering a little girl on film, right?

Reminds me of the Ellender case.

Given the fact that we are watching and discussing this case now, in 2012, I can't help but wonder if it's a hindsight is 20/20 type deal. I mean, we have the advantage of knowing that "Satanic Panic" was just that - a panic, with little to no corroborating evidence that such fears were reality based. I suppose you could lump the snuff film urban legend in there as well. Don't hear too much about those anymore either. Yet with the internet we can watch terrorists beheading US citizens, etc (while not constituting the true definition of a snuff film, its probably the closest comparison one can draw) Ergo, it blows my mind that not one bonafide example of such a film has ever been located to date. Also, isn't it interesting that NONE of the current press on Runyan mentions this stuff - about the Satanic graffiti and the film?

Getting back to Rachel Runyan specifically, I can't shake the feeling that this is the work of a violent pedophile acting alone. Again, the current press on the case seems to substantiate this view as well including some comments by Runyan's father who even admitted he knows the man's name.

This segment was very short, but I found a link that has quite a bit more info, including a picture of a car like the one the suspect drove, and pictures of the playground she disappeared from.

http://truecrimediva.com/rachael-runyon-still-no-justice-almost-33-years-later/

Horrible crime. What's really agonizing about this case is that for 25 years, they've said multiple times the case is close to being solved, but it's never happened yet. We need to get this guy off the streets.

This segment was very short, but I found a link that has quite a bit more info, including a picture of a car like the one the suspect drove, and pictures of the playground she disappeared from.

http://truecrimediva.com/rachael-runyon-still-no-justice-almost-33-years-later/

Horrible crime. What's really agonizing about this case is that for 25 years, they've said multiple times the case is close to being solved, but it's never happened yet. We need to get this guy off the streets.
Yes one of my worst cases. Just makes me feel terrible

Yes one of my worst cases. Just makes me feel terrible

I skip over it pretty frequently on my disc. I have to kind of emotionally prepare myself for it.

although "Satanic Panic" brought on by the likes of Geraldo and Sally Jesse was common in the 80's and early 90's (I remember being told KISS was short for Knights in Satan's Service, AC/DC = Anti Christ, Devil's Child) and that Gloria Vanderbilt gave her earnings to the Church of Satan), there were real losers who bought into it and lived that lifestyle, probably because it was being talked about as something that was "out there" and they wanted to "belong." I remember outcasts in school burning tats into their arms with wire hangers and bragging about murdering cats. Yes, I went to a winner school. In any case, i don't think it's too out of the realm of possibility for one of these genetic wastes to take it further and murder an innocent "in the name of lucifer" or something. Or at least do so and pin it on the influence of a completely innocent ol' Scratch.

Did the department that worked on this case keep the clothing that was found? If so, have they ever tested it for DNA samples?

This seems like a case in which the Cold Justice team might be able to help with and make some progress.

I skip over it pretty frequently on my disc. I have to kind of emotionally prepare myself for it.

Completely agree.

My little one is just about Rachael's age when she was abducted. I often wonder if these old UM segments have shaped me into the "helicopter parent" that I will admit to sometimes being...

Completely agree.

My little one is just about Rachael's age when she was abducted. I often wonder if these old UM segments have shaped me into the "helicopter parent" that I will admit to sometimes being...

I have two little ones also. I'm the same way.

The most creepy part of this segment for me has to be the photo of a smiling Rachel in a sundress where RS says: "This is the dress Rachel was wearing when she disappeared. She may be wearing it in the film" :eek: .

The most creepy part of this segment for me has to be the photo of a smiling Rachel in a sundress where RS says: "This is the dress Rachel was wearing when she disappeared. She may be wearing it in the film" :eek: .

No doubt. That is a very eerie part. The whole case is just pure evil.

Was Rachel Runyan the little girl that was found in a ditch? I just seem to remember a clip on UM of them carrying her out in a body bag. It was a side story to another segment. Maybe Nyleen Kay Marshall. Either way she was a blonde haired girl wasn't she?

Yes, she was a beautiful little blonde girl. I can't remember where they found her body. There was graffiti left in a bathroom after her death that was allegedly from the killer and implicated Satanism in her death.

Hope that jogs your memory.

When did the graffiti appear in this toilet? If it was 1986 onwards the Satanic Panic was in full swing with all the ludicrous heavy metal suicide stuff, McMartin Preschool, Geraldo etc. Not sure quite how the cops came to promote the video angle-maybe they had been watching Videodrome or Hardcore.

It was absolutely in the midst of "satanic panic," which is why I didn't go on too much about it. I'm pretty sure it was a hoax, but I could always be mistaken.

From the official UM youtube account:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oULVdSX-tJ0

Racheal's Mom retells the case and pleads for help.

It was hard to watch Rachel's mom but I'm glad she hasn't given up hope. I'd like to see this solved

It was absolutely in the midst of "satanic panic," which is why I didn't go on too much about it. I'm pretty sure it was a hoax, but I could always be mistaken.

She was abducted in 1982. The satanic panic issue didn't really go into overdrive until the late 80's. But that note still could have been a hoax. I don't think we'll ever know.

I've looked through that park online and it's not an ideal place to kidnap someone. The park is tiny but you have to drive through a big open field to get to it. It's not placed on a corner where you can make a quick, clean getaway. It's also disappointing that there weren't more children or adults at the park that day to get more eyewitness accounts.

She was abducted in 1982. The satanic panic issue didn't really go into overdrive until the late 80's. But that note still could have been a hoax. I don't think we'll ever know.

I've looked through that park online and it's not an ideal place to kidnap someone. The park is tiny but you have to drive through a big open field to get to it. It's not placed on a corner where you can make a quick, clean getaway. It's also disappointing that there weren't more children or adults at the park that day to get more eyewitness accounts.

She was referring to the graffiti I asked about-which was 1986 when the panic was underway with the McMartin preschool, Dungeons And Dragons, Heavy Metal hidden lyrics, Night Stalker etc.

She was referring to the graffiti I asked about-which was 1986 when the panic was underway with the McMartin preschool, Dungeons And Dragons, Heavy Metal hidden lyrics, Night Stalker etc.

Bad reading comprehension on my part. I was thinking of the note with the 666 on it. My bad.

Disregard.

Bad reading comprehension on my part. I was thinking of the note with the 666 on it. My bad.

Disregard.

It's all good, friend. :)

The thing about the graffiti is that any random "el sicko"
Could have wrote that BS. Graffiti in stalls back then was like a YouTube commenter

What really kicked Satanic Panic into overdrive was none other than the worthless turd known as Geraldo Rivera. Yep, the same guy who didn't find anything in Al Capone's vault, the same guy who gave away war strategies on live television, was out there trying to whip America into a frenzy over Satanists.

A quote from Geraldo from Wikipedia: "Estimates are that there are over 1 million Satanists in this country... The majority of them are linked in a highly organized, very secretive network. From small towns to large cities, they have attracted police and FBI attention to their Satanic sexual child abuse, child pornography, and grisly Satanic murders. " Wiki goes on to state "Critics counter that more credible estimates are about 10,000 adult members of religious Satanic churches, temples, and grottos as well as 10,000 solitary practitioners of Satanism; Rivera's claims of ritualistic abuse, conspiracy, and criminal activity remain unsubstantiated."

I've also been reading the Jacob Wetterling book and Geraldo managed to rear his ugly head into that issue as well. While the Wetterlings had received tons of support, assistance and volunteer work from community members, and the local media had done an excellent job of getting Jacob's case out there to the public, there was one person who did more harm than good. Geraldo Rivera. He arrived into the area shortly after Jacob's abduction to do a piece for his trash talk show, and the Wetterlings were initially optimistic as this meant national coverage. The segment on Jacob on Geraldo's show ended up being nothing more than a sensationalistic piece that hardly featured Jacob and instead grossly exaggerated the number of stranger child abductions out there.

I wish something would happen to Geraldo Rivera. Perhaps we can send him to Mars to find out if there's life there? Maybe attach a message that states "if you don't like him, keep him as our free gift."

Geraldo was just feeding off the nonsense that had been spouted for 3 years by that point. The big problem is the SRA networks-over here despite our SRA panic of the late 1980's/early 1990's put to bed by a 1994 government report that said it didn't exist there are still groups who push it as being real-incredibly Private Eye recently pointed out in some places they teach it to social workers via government outsourcing.

Hello everyone. I've researched this case for a while & wanted to let y'all in on some info that I assume most of you are not aware of. The lead suspect in this case is Melvin Joe Reeves. He has lived all over Utah & New Mexico since Rachael's death.

In January 2011, there was an amber alert issued & the suspect was taken into custody after chocking his gf & kidnapping their 5 month old son. If you look up his name, you can read the article as well as another one which doesn't mention the suspects name but confirms his link to Rachael's murder.

He currently lives in Williamsport, PA with his girlfriend, step son, and now 5 year old child.

Please LIKE/SHARE "Justice For Rachael Runyan" FB page to help Rachaels killer be brought to justice!

I know that "satanism" was played-up in a lot of UM cases, but I always thought this was one where it was played-up to a ridiculous degree. I mean, a symbol on a bathroom stall? I know cops have to take this stuff seriously, but what ISN'T written on a bathroom stall?

I have seen 666 on so many bathroom stalls, I'm beginning to think the devil needs some ex-lax.

I always thought Runyan was an unfortunate case of "lone pedophile comes across child, takes advantage of the opportunity" and not a satanic cult/snuff film/etc.

Hello everyone. I've researched this case for a while & wanted to let y'all in on some info that I assume most of you are not aware of. The lead suspect in this case is Melvin Joe Reeves. He has lived all over Utah & New Mexico since Rachael's death.

In January 2011, there was an amber alert issued & the suspect was taken into custody after chocking his gf & kidnapping their 5 month old son. If you look up his name, you can read the article as well as another one which doesn't mention the suspects name but confirms his link to Rachael's murder.

He currently lives in Williamsport, PA with his girlfriend, step son, and now 5 year old child.

Please LIKE/SHARE "Justice For Rachael Runyan" FB page to help Rachaels killer be brought to justice!

I recall reading about that. Sad that he's still roaming the streets.

I recently came across this segment.

Very disturbing. I hope the person/people responsible are caught soon.

Such a sad case

Hello everyone. I've researched this case for a while & wanted to let y'all in on some info that I assume most of you are not aware of. The lead suspect in this case is Melvin Joe Reeves. He has lived all over Utah & New Mexico since Rachael's death.

In January 2011, there was an amber alert issued & the suspect was taken into custody after chocking his gf & kidnapping their 5 month old son. If you look up his name, you can read the article as well as another one which doesn't mention the suspects name but confirms his link to Rachael's murder.

He currently lives in Williamsport, PA with his girlfriend, step son, and now 5 year old child.

Please LIKE/SHARE "Justice For Rachael Runyan" FB page to help Rachaels killer be brought to justice!
Did you known Rachel or her family?

I saw the guy you named's photo the other day it did look like the sketch on UM.

Police said they had been given a tip by an informant that stated that Rachael was kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered on camera as part of a snuff film. This immediately reminded me of the Nicolas Cage film "8mm" and last seasons "True Detective". I'm wondering what about that tip leads them to believe its a fact? This kind of stuff happens all the time where police get a bad tip. The detective in this segment seemed to be going toward the route of the snuff film based on one tip. Seems odd.

Police said they had been given a tip by an informant that stated that Rachael was kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered on camera as part of a snuff film. This immediately reminded me of the Nicolas Cage film "8mm" and last seasons "True Detective". I'm wondering what about that tip leads them to believe its a fact? This kind of stuff happens all the time where police get a bad tip. The detective in this segment seemed to be going toward the route of the snuff film based on one tip. Seems odd.

I always found this surprising. I thought the police denied such films existed anyway.

Police said they had been given a tip by an informant that stated that Rachael was kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered on camera as part of a snuff film. This immediately reminded me of the Nicolas Cage film "8mm" and last seasons "True Detective". I'm wondering what about that tip leads them to believe its a fact? This kind of stuff happens all the time where police get a bad tip. The detective in this segment seemed to be going toward the route of the snuff film based on one tip. Seems odd.

When I was a kid, I found the "snuff film" aspect of the case the scariest part, other than the graffiti in the restroom.

As I got older, I wondered if UM played up the "snuff film" aspect in order to push the urgency of finding Rachael's killer...

I always thought the "snuff film" bit was vintage 1980s small town policing. A few tips with dubious, horrifying accusations roll in--at the height of a national satanic panic--and the investigators swallow it hook, line, and sinker. It's like when you follow your local police department on Facebook and they're posting some citizens' warning with a long-passed-around photo of a razor blade taped to a gas nozzle that Snopes discredited a decade ago.

Police said they had been given a tip by an informant that stated that Rachael was kidnapped, raped, tortured and murdered on camera as part of a snuff film. This immediately reminded me of the Nicolas Cage film "8mm" and last seasons "True Detective". I'm wondering what about that tip leads them to believe its a fact? This kind of stuff happens all the time where police get a bad tip. The detective in this segment seemed to be going toward the route of the snuff film based on one tip. Seems odd.

Most likely that they were getting nowhere with the case & clinging onto anything. Also in context the Satanic Panic was in full swing in the 1980's & snuff propaganda had been around since the early 1970's thanks to Ed Sanders & various feminist groups after that ridiculous film came out in the mid 1970's.

I always found this surprising. I thought the police denied such films existed anyway.

I think they are defining a snuff film as a film that was professionally produced and done FOR PROFIT. If this is the definition we're talking about, then there have been no such films found (and many people have looked). For example, there were urban legends that certain films released in the 70's and 80's had actors killed on screen. These were investigated and all the actors were found alive. Cannibal Holocaust is probably the best example of this (the director had to produce the actors in court to prove they were alive).

If we define "snuff film" as a psychopath who makes a video of someone he kidnapped and killed, then I am positive those exist. But that's different than doing it for monetary gain.

I think they are defining a snuff film as a film that was professionally produced and done FOR PROFIT. If this is the definition we're talking about, then there have been no such films found (and many people have looked). For example, there were urban legends that certain films released in the 70's and 80's had actors killed on screen. These were investigated and all the actors were found alive. Cannibal Holocaust is probably the best example of this (the director had to produce the actors in court to prove they were alive).

If we define "snuff film" as a psychopath who makes a video of someone he kidnapped and killed, then I am positive those exist. But that's different than doing it for monetary gain.

Yes. I believe another variant are those Faces/Traces of Death type documentaries that have a mix of fake and real death footage, most of the examples of the latter category being captured inadvertently. We could also add to the list the growing number of terrorist videos of beheadings and such. The major distinction in these examples is that the videos are not being made for profit. The "for profit" element is germane to the pure definition of a snuff film. Someone once stated it this way (and I find this is a good way to remember it): if the killers realized the camera battery was low, they would postpone the murder until the battery could be recharged.

The snuff film the detective in the Runyan segment is referring to is the "for profit" variant which is the stuff of legend.

Yes. I believe another variant are those Faces/Traces of Death type documentaries that have a mix of fake and real death footage, most of the examples of the latter category being captured inadvertently. We could also add to the list the growing number of terrorist videos of beheadings and such. The major distinction in these examples is that the videos are not being made for profit. The "for profit" element is germane to the pure definition of a snuff film. Someone once stated it this way (and I find this is a good way to remember it): if the killers realized the camera battery was low, they would postpone the murder until the battery could be recharged.

The snuff film the detective in the Runyan segment is referring to is the "for profit" variant which is the stuff of legend.

Just saw this case for the first time in a long time on Amazon. I can't believe UM fell for the snuff film nonsense. This is the kind of hysteria that led British MPs to think horror movies needed to be banned during the Video Nasties craze. Speaking of which, does anyone remember the horror movie "Snuff", which was just a repackaged Charles Manson movie (which was excruciatingly boring) that had some awful looking effects added at the end to make it look like the actors were being killed on camera. It had the tagline "A film that could only be made in South America where life is cheap" on the coverbox.

Anyway, I just can't believe police officials would think snuff films were real. Perhaps, as others have suggested in this thread, it was just a ploy to try and get some leads.

Also in context the Satanic Panic was in full swing in the 1980's

The warnings of stranger danger were in full swing in the 80's as well. If Rachel were alive today, she would be a year older than me. And the way her abduction was carried out (a stranger pulling up in his car offering candy) was the quintessential, #1 sign that you were in deep trouble, if you were a kid.

By the time I was in 1st grade - 3rd grade in the late 80s, commercials and PSA's of stranger danger on TV were endless. And much like the anti drug PSA's of that time, they were really dark and succeeded in scaring the hell out of you.

I don't have the proof to back it up, but if I had to guess, I would say child abductions through the promise of candy were never higher than they were in the 80s.

Just saw this case for the first time in a long time on Amazon. I can't believe UM fell for the snuff film nonsense. This is the kind of hysteria that led British MPs to think horror movies needed to be banned during the Video Nasties craze. Speaking of which, does anyone remember the horror movie "Snuff", which was just a repackaged Charles Manson movie (which was excruciatingly boring) that had some awful looking effects added at the end to make it look like the actors were being killed on camera. It had the tagline "A film that could only be made in South America where life is cheap" on the coverbox.

Anyway, I just can't believe police officials would think snuff films were real. Perhaps, as others have suggested in this thread, it was just a ploy to try and get some leads.

You have to remember that this segment aired in 1989, long before the internet was around to dispel these myths & people including law enforcement in most areas likely believed garbage like Geraldo's laughable Satanic show the year before, SRA, the church etc. There are still groups out there promoting SRA to health professionals, care workers & law enforcement.

I understand what you're saying, but Satanic cults were the "hot topic" of the 1980's... of course they were going to play it up.

Yeah, especially after that Geraldo special.


Oh man...that Geraldo special.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/70235/SUNSET-STORY-CALLED-MOST-DIFFICULT-ONE-TV-CREW-HAS-DONE.html

This article was written just after the Rachael Runyan segment was filmed--the Unsolved Mysteries crew recounts "This is the most difficult story our crew has ever had to do." Very interesting.

Oh man...that Geraldo special.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Urqiqjp4SMc

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/70235/SUNSET-STORY-CALLED-MOST-DIFFICULT-ONE-TV-CREW-HAS-DONE.html

This article was written just after the Rachael Runyan segment was filmed--the Unsolved Mysteries crew recounts "This is the most difficult story our crew has ever had to do." Very interesting.
I don't recall ever seeing a reenactment of the abduction. I'm wondering if it was either cut out for syndication or just entirely.

In any case, this is one of the most appalling crimes featured on the show. More recent articles have mentioned something about a suspect, so I'm hoping it will be solved soon.

I don't recall ever seeing a reenactment of the abduction. I'm wondering if it was either cut out for syndication or just entirely.

There was no reenactment of the abduction, of the parents finding out of the abduction and of the discovery of the body...nothing. There was also no interviews with Rachel's mother or of her two brothers who witnessed the abduction.

There was no reenactment of the abduction, of the parents finding out of the abduction and of the discovery of the body...nothing. There was also no interviews with Rachel's mother or of her two brothers who witnessed the abduction.

If anything, this would have been one of the easiest segments to film because it was so short. It just stated what law enforcement knew. It showed a picture of the note, a picture of Rachel and that was about it.
Okay, then the copies I've seen are the full segment. I guess they filmed it and then just decided to cut it (the abduction I mean), based on the article UMlover posted. Perhaps Rachel's family found it too painful to be interviewed on camera, too.

Okay, then the copies I've seen are the full segment. I guess they filmed it and then just decided to cut it (the abduction I mean), based on the article UMlover posted. Perhaps Rachel's family found it too painful to be interviewed on camera, too.

I can see why they probably decided against showing a reenactment of the abduction given Rachel's age. It's kind of like the Nyleen Kay Marshall segment where the scene does a fade away transition before the man can reach her. It's got to be really difficult to instruct a 3 year old actress to portray the terrifying ordeal of being taken by a stranger.

This one really does keep me up at night. What's so frustrating is the difficulty in sorting through leads to find out what's legit and what's a hoax.

Take the note in the restroom for instance--Satanic Panic was larely debunked, yes, but the thought of not following up on a (potentially) correct lead is harrowing. But you know, it could be a false lead I guess.

I can't decide what's more disturbing--murdering a 3-year-old girl or taking false credit for the act.

People regularly make false claims-attention seekers, sad people who think they are being funny or clever-it often happens when there is a renewed police appeal for information in the media. This individual provided no new clues/stuff that the cops had withheld from the public, just some graffiti ala the stuff with Johnny Gosch. The cops have to follow up, but unless somebody else saw the person doing it then they have nothing to go on.

Rachael was an eerie precursor to JonBenet Ramsey as both were child beauty queens. Although Rachel's Little Miss Sunset was a fun, local thing that no one took as serious unlike JonBenet or Toddlers and Tiaras.

If I was doing a re-enactment of Rachael's abduction for a modern UM, I'm not sure i would use an actual 3 year old actress rather than a small statured older child that can understand acting and know that what she is filming isn't real.