if you not familiar with the case she was a 24 year old woman from lander, wy that disappeared while running at a park.

her husband has been a suspect since the beginning but some factors don't seem to add up. a camper saw a blonde in a truck driving fast at 4:45pm. She later identified the truck as one similar to Amy's husbands. at this time her husband was at home making a phone call. the house was 45 minutes away from the national park amy went running at.

I watched this and didnt know how to feel. people I watched it with felt since he wouldnt take the lie detector and the fact he got remarried and lives in the house he and amy bought just days before her disappearance shows he isnt really grieving.

I was wondering what your thoughts are on this case? There has been no update and Amy has never been found. My own opinion is that she was abducted and buried somewhere. I dont feel her husband is guilty based on the not taking a polygraph test. how many cases have we seen people take and pass one and later on be arrested for the crime at hand? many!

I wish all of these cases were updated. I really feel for the families not knowing what happened to their loved ones.

entire story: http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/b/bechtel_amy.html

I think the husband is 100% innocent.

I think it was Dale Wayne Eaton. His own family puts him in the area of Amy's disappearance at the same time.

wow I didnt even know he was a suspect or connected at all to this case

wow I didnt even know he was a suspect or connected at all to this case

Yep, the area where Amy Bechtel's car was found was Loop Road, where Eaton traveled to go fishing. Eaton had told his brother he was going fishing at one of their favorite spots, which Eaton would have to take Loop Road to get to. Eaton's brother reported this to authorities, but they dismissed it.

This case was a botched investigation because they were convinced that Steve did it, and nobody else did.

Here's the thread which mentions Eaton as a suspect.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=170038&highlight=Bechtel

I think the husband is 100% innocent.

I think it was Dale Wayne Eaton. His own family puts him in the area of Amy's disappearance at the same time.

I agree. Before I even knew that Eaton was a suspect, I questioned why they were so focused on her husband other than the simple fact that he is her husband.

The only question I have is that when Eaton killed Lisa Kimmel, he dumped her body. Would he not have dumped Bectel's body as well? If not, what did he do with it? If he did dump her body, I wonder if it was eaten by wild animals.

If I'm correct she was jogging when she disappeared...which means she was fair game for anybody.

There's nothing here that definitely points to the husband as the suspect over a stranger. This sounds more like a stranger attack. A rape/murder.

The husband deserves some blame her though..by refusing the polygraph he essentially delayed the process of clearing him. Esentially there is nothing to clear him with, so how could the police not still focus on him. The police have to be thorough and focus on clearing the people the victim knows before going after the stranger murders.

I tend to believe that it is better to simply take a polygraph and do what the police ask than not to. You just run too much of a risk in making yourself a suspect by refusing to do what they ask.

If I'm correct she was jogging when she disappeared...which means she was fair game for anybody.

There's nothing here that definitely points to the husband as the suspect over a stranger. This sounds more like a stranger attack. A rape/murder.

The husband deserves some blame her though..by refusing the polygraph he essentially delayed the process of clearing him. Esentially there is nothing to clear him with, so how could the police not still focus on him. The police have to be thorough and focus on clearing the people the victim knows before going after the stranger murders.

I tend to believe that it is better to simply take a polygraph and do what the police ask than not to. You just run too much of a risk in making yourself a suspect by refusing to do what they ask.

I agree but since he lawyered up, his attorney said he would never recommend that a client take a polygraph. His attorney probably convinced him of all the harm that could happen if the results come back inconclusive. But if I were innocent, I'd take it to clear my name.

I can understand why he didnt take one though. if your nervous it reads you as lying.

I dont remember what case it was but a guy said he went to the gas station with his friend and she met up with 2 guys she knew and left with them. she weas never seen again. he took THREE lie detectors and passed them all.

when they did the update the friend that passed the lie detectors admitted to raping and killing the woman.

Gary Ridgeway passed one of his lie detector tests as well. However, it's understandable that Bechtel's husband hesitancy would cause him to come under increased suspicion.

Besides homicide, it's also possible she was attacked by a grizzly or mountain lion in the park. I had an encounter with a black bear years ago in Wisconsin while hiking, so it can happen (thankfully the bear ran off). Shoshone National Forest covers a pretty large area, so it would have made a search more difficult.

As far as I've read it was never determined if she even managed to run that day or if she was parked at her usual spot.

Besides homicide, it's also possible she was attacked by a grizzly or mountain lion in the park. I had an encounter with a black bear years ago in Wisconsin while hiking, so it can happen (thankfully the bear ran off). Shoshone National Forest covers a pretty large area, so it would have made a search more difficult.

Never thought about that. Good pull.

Another theory that comes to mind is that she might have been killed accidently by illegal hunters. Perhaps they dumped her body someplace.

It's interesting that you bring up grizzly bears, soilentgreen. I don't want to give anyone any ideas, but my forensic anthropology professor once told our class that if she wanted to get away with a murder, she would feed the victim to grizzly bear. They so utterly destroy their prey, that you wouldn't be able to tell who/what actually killed them.

Now, I don't actually think that anyone fed Bechtel to a grizzly bear! However, I'm not sure if an animal attack scenario would make it easier or harder for her to find. I actually think it might make it easier, because you would probably at least find evidence of an attack, even if you didn't find a body.

Now having flashbacks of the movie Grizzly Man. /shudder

It's interesting that you bring up grizzly bears, soilentgreen. I don't want to give anyone any ideas, but my forensic anthropology professor once told our class that if she wanted to get away with a murder, she would feed the victim to grizzly bear. They so utterly destroy their prey, that you wouldn't be able to tell who/what actually killed them.

Now, I don't actually think that anyone fed Bechtel to a grizzly bear! However, I'm not sure if an animal attack scenario would make it easier or harder for her to find. I actually think it might make it easier, because you would probably at least find evidence of an attack, even if you didn't find a body.

Now having flashbacks of the movie Grizzly Man. /shudder

The problem with that is it's extremely rare that grizzlies and mountain lions kill people. And you DO often find remains of people who've been attacked by animals so your professor is wrong on that.

Look at Timothy Treadwell and Amy Huginart. There were PLENTY of bears and even wolves to consume all their remains but they found their complete skeletons with most of the flesh still on.

Some articles about Amy here
http://z13.invisionfree.com/PorchlightUSA/index.php?showtopic=504

It's interesting that you bring up grizzly bears, soilentgreen. I don't want to give anyone any ideas, but my forensic anthropology professor once told our class that if she wanted to get away with a murder, she would feed the victim to grizzly bear. They so utterly destroy their prey, that you wouldn't be able to tell who/what actually killed them.

This reminds of the scene in Goodfellas where they tried to feed the guy to the lions. :lol:

As good an idea as this is I see some problems with doing this

1.if the polar bear is a captive animal, the animal could die, defecate or vomit the remains. Someone could come across the remains and make it out as something. A ring, belt buckle or watch could be found.

2. You would have to feed the victim to the bear alive. This may be problematic and time consuming. The bear might not be that interested in the guy.

3. Getting access to a live polar bear is difficult in an of itself. I guess you could break into the zoo(Goodfellas). Your average criminal certainly couldn;t do it. Only a criminal organization like Cosa Nostra or the Russian Mob.

4. Getting rid of the body may be meaningless if someone rats on you and says that he witnessed you feeding the guy to the Polar Bear.

5. Ditto for a camera inside viewing the whole thing. Even a wire tap.

6. The polar bear could also destroy another piece of evidence as well...namely yourself!!!


If you think about it, we've seen the best way to dispose of a body in UM.
Dave Bochs and NLO.

I can understand why he didnt take one though. if your nervous it reads you as lying.



You won't be nervous if you are innocent though. Not gut wrenchingly nervous that's for sure. Think about this for a second:

This is where a polygraph gets you. If your wife asks you a question and you have a guilty conscience before she asks you then you will automatically become nervous - on the inside. If you are innocent you aren't primed for anything and it would catch you off guard. You are innocent so you are more relaxed. The polygraph picks up that stuff.

By the way a polygraph is NOT something that can convict you. It can clear you, but not convict you. It is purely circumstantial evidence. Also remember Mike Morris? The man accused of killing his wife and another woman with the same name - Mary Morris. It was thought to be a hit gone wrong. Anyways, he didn't take a lie detector test. In fact, before he was questioned he sough legal advice. That's right, before he was questioned. He wasn't even a suspect at the time. Co-operation will go a long ways in helping clear your name. Don't rule out Amy Bechtel's husband. That camper who saw his truck could have had a descrepancy in the times.

This reminds of the scene in Goodfellas where they tried to feed the guy to the lions. :lol:

As good an idea as this is I see some problems with doing this

1.if the polar bear is a captive animal, the animal could die, defecate or vomit the remains. Someone could come across the remains and make it out as something. A ring, belt buckle or watch could be found.

2. You would have to feed the victim to the bear alive. This may be problematic and time consuming. The bear might not be that interested in the guy.

3. Getting access to a live polar bear is difficult in an of itself. I guess you could break into the zoo(Goodfellas). Your average criminal certainly couldn;t do it. Only a criminal organization like Cosa Nostra or the Russian Mob.

4. Getting rid of the body may be meaningless if someone rats on you and says that he witnessed you feeding the guy to the Polar Bear.

5. Ditto for a camera inside viewing the whole thing. Even a wire tap.

6. The polar bear could also destroy another piece of evidence as well...namely yourself!!!


If you think about it, we've seen the best way to dispose of a body in UM.
Dave Bochs and NLO.

Well, obviously, there are some points my professor didnt think through very well, i.e., how to find a grizzly bear. :) The bear-in-captivity solution poses all of the complications you've listed here. However, the point is not that the remains won't be found, it's that a medical examiner would be unable to determine that the death was caused by you rather than the grizzly (whether or not the victim was alive when the grizzly went to town).

Sorry to hijack the thread. Ahem...Amy Bechtel....

Although I want to say that Amy's husband did it. I just can't. He wouldn't have had the time to follow Amy, kill her, get rid of her body, and get home to make the phone call in 45 minutes; he didn't have enough time. Another theory comes to mind for me; if she was hiking up in the mountains maybe she hurt herself, got injured somehow and wasn't able to make it back. I know it's been searched but there's tons of places she could have gone missing out there and never been found, it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack. She also could have fallen to her death in a ravine or gulley or something, you never know. What bothers me most though is if she was kidnapped/murdered why would the perpetrator leave her car there? It doesn't make sense. Don't you think they would have gotten rid of it either moved or gotten rid of it in a different location, to make it seem like she was never in the vicinity of the park?

Although I want to say that Amy's husband did it. I just can't. He wouldn't have had the time to follow Amy, kill her, get rid of her body, and get home to make the phone call in 45 minutes; he didn't have enough time. Another theory comes to mind for me; if she was hiking up in the mountains maybe she hurt herself, got injured somehow and wasn't able to make it back. I know it's been searched but there's tons of places she could have gone missing out there and never been found, it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack. She also could have fallen to her death in a ravine or gulley or something, you never know. What bothers me most though is if she was kidnapped/murdered why would the perpetrator leave her car there? It doesn't make sense. Don't you think they would have gotten rid of it either moved or gotten rid of it in a different location, to make it seem like she was never in the vicinity of the park?

That's a good point about the car. Especially considering that Dale Wayne Eaton is rumored to be the perpetrator. In Lisa Kimmel's case, he buried her car on his property so that it would never be found. I wonder if he were involved, why would he do a complete 180 and leave the car there knowing his history?

Ok folks, I read on a website where a woman posted that Amy was having an affair. Amy had a diary or journal that had some hints to an affair. I read that a jealous girlfriend/wife may have ran amy off the road killing her and they desposed of the body. Apparently there was a guy in the car I dunno if the guy was just the womans friend or the guy who was cheatinig! So that may explain the blonde woman and guy in a camper type vehicle. They had a truck similar to her husbands.

That's a good point about the car. Especially considering that Dale Wayne Eaton is rumored to be the perpetrator. In Lisa Kimmel's case, he buried her car on his property so that it would never be found. I wonder if he were involved, why would he do a complete 180 and leave the car there knowing his history?

Eaton could have grabbed her while she was running. The car would have no evidence tying Eaton to her disappearance. And plus even a small change in the way he does something could cause police to rule him out.

He also may not have had time to go back and get the car.

Ok folks, I read on a website where a woman posted that Amy was having an affair. Amy had a diary or journal that had some hints to an affair. I read that a jealous girlfriend/wife may have ran amy off the road killing her and they desposed of the body. Apparently there was a guy in the car I dunno if the guy was just the womans friend or the guy who was cheatinig! So that may explain the blonde woman and guy in a camper type vehicle. They had a truck similar to her husbands.

Where did you read this at? Please provide a link.

here: http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm35004.html

I doubt its true, but I dunno what if it was??

here: http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm35004.html

I doubt its true, but I dunno what if it was??

I have no idea if that is a real story or just a rumor but I do know that you can trace where a website originated from and if the police believed it was a credible lead, they could trace this website and find out who the author is and question them. Its very strange that this person flat out says a name as the killer. If this is just a rumor, the author of that website can be sued for slander. I wonder if its more than just a rumor.

Hi all,

I live in Lander and have for the past 7 years. Steve still lives here with his new wife & seems to be a perfectly normal person who has gone on with his life.

The link referencing Cherokee Brown never went any where. It's considered a hoax perpetuated by a teenager, according to the LPD. Amy wasn't known to be having an affair and to be honest, this is not the sort of town you can keep that sort of thing quiet in. There wasn't a journal found of Amy's. There was a journal found of Steve's and it listed nothing about Amy having an affair. I'm truly surprised the person who posted that hasn't been sued by the parties involved, including Amy's family for trying to sully her name.

The general consenus around town is that a car full of people who lived on the reservation were drinking heavily and drove up the loop road, hit Amy, panicked, packed her in their car, took her body back to the reservation and buried her. The police are aware of this lead and had many, many people call them and tell them this is what the rumor mill is saying. The problem is, no one can/will identify who any of the people are, so they have no one to investigate to find out if it is true or not.

There are still some people in Lander who believe Steve is guilty, but there are probably just as many people who no longer believe it. He's still here, he's been married since 2004, him & his wife are active in the community and seem to have a happy, healthy relationship.

As to a bear or mtn. lion getting Amy....it does happens just about every year around here, but, there's always evidence suggesting such a thing happened & search & rescue are well trained in what to look for. When search & rescue finds no evidence of such, they always deem a disappearance as foul play. A few years ago, we had a hiker disappear in late fall and they didn't find him before winter set in. The next summer, they re-organized the search party and found his bones and were able to determine that he was on a bluff, fell off and, more than likely, died from the fall, and his body was later scavenged by coyotes. It seems pretty far fetched that in 13 years her bones haven't been found, which should be the case if an animal got her.

Wow, that is definitely some interesting information, Chance. I always wondered why Steve would not cooperate with the police? That part never made sense, especially if you would like to have your wife found? He seemed to have moved on rather quickly. Just my personal opinion, I would have a very hard time moving on and getting remarried if my husband mysteriously disappeared and the case was still not closed. I hope they find Amy one day and her family can have some closure. Seems like Steve has already found his closure...

I understand why Steve wouldn't want to take a lie detector with how unreliable they are. I personally don't think he had anything to do with her disappearance. Has anyone heard the theory that the Lil Miss killer may have been responsible for Amy's disappearance? What are your thoughts?

I understand why Steve wouldn't want to take a lie detector with how unreliable they are. I personally don't think he had anything to do with her disappearance. Has anyone heard the theory that the Lil Miss killer may have been responsible for Amy's disappearance? What are your thoughts?

I personally think Steve is innocent as well. As to what really happened is anyone's guess, but the three most likely are:

-She was killed by a serial killer.
-She was attacked by an animal and killed.
-Her death was accidental and whoever killed her covered it up.

I'll have to rewatch the segment to make my mind up and elaborate further, so I think I'll go watch it and post back later.

i am unfamiliar with this case. will have to read up on it. but just by reading everyones posts on here i have read the husband didnt do it coz he made a phone call?
what info is on this. you mean there was a call at his house logged for this time? how do they know HE made the call?

It's cases like this that always make me pray that I'm never asked to take a lie detector test. I mean, if Steve Bechtel's attorney advised him not to take one, then he should follow that advice, but unfortunately, many people will always see the refusal to take a lie detector as an admission of guilt, no matter what.

It's cases like this that always make me pray that I'm never asked to take a lie detector test. I mean, if Steve Bechtel's attorney advised him not to take one, then he should follow that advice, but unfortunately, many people will always see the refusal to take a lie detector as an admission of guilt, no matter what.

I've always thought that if something like this ever happened to me (God forbid), I wouldn't feel the need to hire an attorney, nor have any qualms about being a suspect. I was watching this show on Investigation Discovery (can't recall the name right now) where a woman was killed and her current boyfriend was on the phone with her while she was being killed and actually heard everything on the phone. LE's investigation led them to the woman's ex-husband who they questioned extensively. They gave him a polygraph test and he failed the question of, "Do you know who killed your ex-wife?" and obviously the police began to focus on him more and more. But then their investigation led them to one of the woman's recent ex-boyfriend's who eventually was determined to be the one who killed her. The police then explained the ex-husband's "failed" question on the test as he suspected he knew who killed his ex-wife and when he answered "No" to "do you know who killed your ex-wife" it registered that as a deceptive answer. So that shows you right there how unreliable lie detector tests are. But for me personally, with nothing to hide, why not take one?

...The general consenus around town is that a car full of people who lived on the reservation were drinking heavily and drove up the loop road, hit Amy, panicked, packed her in their car, took her body back to the reservation and buried her. The police are aware of this lead and had many, many people call them and tell them this is what the rumor mill is saying. The problem is, no one can/will identify who any of the people are, so they have no one to investigate to find out if it is true or not...

So the drunken indians did it? :confused: I'm not trying to put words in anyone's mouth, that's just what it sounds like to me. When crimes happen, people tend to think, "It can't possibly be one of us...it must be an outsider." It also sounds suspiciously like the plot to about 1,000 books/movies that use the "I know what you did last summer..." kind of story. I'd be interested to know if there is actually any evidence whatsoever for this theory...or really any of the theories in the Bechtel case. This is truly a mystery. Poor Amy!

I've always thought that if something like this ever happened to me (God forbid), I wouldn't feel the need to hire an attorney, nor have any qualms about being a suspect. I was watching this show on Investigation Discovery (can't recall the name right now) where a woman was killed and her current boyfriend was on the phone with her while she was being killed and actually heard everything on the phone. LE's investigation led them to the woman's ex-husband who they questioned extensively. They gave him a polygraph test and he failed the question of, "Do you know who killed your ex-wife?" and obviously the police began to focus on him more and more. But then their investigation led them to one of the woman's recent ex-boyfriend's who eventually was determined to be the one who killed her. The police then explained the ex-husband's "failed" question on the test as he suspected he knew who killed his ex-wife and when he answered "No" to "do you know who killed your ex-wife" it registered that as a deceptive answer. So that shows you right there how unreliable lie detector tests are. But for me personally, with nothing to hide, why not take one?

Yes, I definitely think this type of scenario might apply to Steve Bechtel because even if he is innocent, his answers on a lie detector test could indicate deception. The main reasons Steve became a suspect were because of his weird journal writings and some people's beliefs that he may have been abusive and controlling towards his wife, and I'm sure he doesn't want to be put into a position where he could be hooked up to a machine and asked: "Did you abuse your wife?". Even if the abuse allegations weren't brought up during the test, Steve's unwillingess to talk about them could still register as deception.

I don't know if Steve was really abusive or not, and in fact, the story about Amy's rather nonchalant reaction to the discovery of her bruise might indicate that the couple liked to participate in rough sexual acitivity consensually. If Steve did abuse his wife, however, this could be a case of him not having anything to do with her disappearance, but still having something to hide.

I've always thought that if something like this ever happened to me (God forbid), I wouldn't feel the need to hire an attorney, nor have any qualms about being a suspect. I was watching this show on Investigation Discovery (can't recall the name right now) where a woman was killed and her current boyfriend was on the phone with her while she was being killed and actually heard everything on the phone. LE's investigation led them to the woman's ex-husband who they questioned extensively. They gave him a polygraph test and he failed the question of, "Do you know who killed your ex-wife?" and obviously the police began to focus on him more and more. But then their investigation led them to one of the woman's recent ex-boyfriend's who eventually was determined to be the one who killed her. The police then explained the ex-husband's "failed" question on the test as he suspected he knew who killed his ex-wife and when he answered "No" to "do you know who killed your ex-wife" it registered that as a deceptive answer. So that shows you right there how unreliable lie detector tests are. But for me personally, with nothing to hide, why not take one?

I saw that too! It was "Nightmare Next Door" on Investigation Discovery. Kinda weird because her ex boyfriend had broken into her home and sent an IM to her current boyfriend from her computer who then called her about it as she hadn't had enough time to make it home and she hadn't even made it in the front door yet! Very sad, chilling case. Cant remember her name though...