Mike Riemer's skull found [Archive] - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

castiron

04-13-2011, 04:38 PM

I live in the area but had not heard of the story until recently, because it's now the talk of the town!

It was interesting to find so much about the case online. It didn't take me long to get up to speed on such an amazing mystery.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/04/13/1624026/discovery-of-trappers-skull-adds.html?storylink=rss_xml

Here is a very good news article about the recent find. I noticed that they can not determine anything about Riemer's death from the skull. It also mentions that the grandmother noticed a big difference in Crystal after she was found.

She told The News Tribune she sensed her granddaughter had seen something or knew something.

“She’s always looking around,” Conrad said at the time. “She’s withdrawn. Her personality definitely isn’t the same.”

It also mentioned Riemer's father passed away in 1993.

And here is a video clip about the discovery. It mentions that Crystal is living nearby in Tacoma, has a child, and is not making a public statement at this time.

http://www.king5.com/news/Skull-near-Mineral-from-man-disappeared-in-1985-119705239.html

Now for my input. The town of Elbe is both on the way to Mt. Rainier National park, a hot spot for winter hiking, snowshoeing, cross-country skiing and innertubing. So a lot of tourists do go thru the town on the way to the mountain for winter activities. There are a few restaurants and mom & pop convenience stores in Elbe and it is often used as a bathroom stop. There are no public restrooms available (one is actually currently being built) but people would stop any way, sometimes the restaurant would let people use the bathroom--I'm not sure what the policy was in 1983. My point is that a lot of people would be around the area, even in winter.

The town of Elbe is also on the way to the national forests where one could (after buying a permit) chop down a Christmas tree. There are also many tree farms in the area, where you can buy a tree--they chop it down right there on the farm for you.

The town of Elbe is also right next to the Nisqually river, where Riemer had his traps set. You can walk down to the river from the main highway. The Nisqually empties into Alder Lake, which is just on the other side of Elbe. You can access that lake also from the town and the highway.

I did not see the UM episode but someone mentioned the re-inactment involved a boat. There's nothing in the articles referring to a boat at all, so I don't know why that was included on UM. The area of the Nisqually river near Elbe is very rocky, I just can't see someone casually launching a boat at that area. Farther up or farther down, yes, but not near where his truck was found.

The logging road where the truck was found, was further up into the woods, beyond the river. This is where Riemer's friends didn't even think of searching, they just searched where they knew his traps were set. The town of Mineral and Elbe are next to each other, I live here and don't even know where the official boundary is, it is mostly wooded area between the 2 towns. What complicates the case is that even tho the towns are so close to each other, they are in different counties. Elbe is in the large Pierce county, along with Tacoma, Puyallup, Spanaway. The town of Mineral is in the poorer and much smaller Lewis County.

Now about the Kmart in Spanaway. There are 2 ways to reach Elbe. The shortest way from Puyallup is on the Mountain Highway, thru South Hill, thru Graham, and then thru Eatonville. I imagine Riemer and Robinson took this route to get to Elbe, since they lived in Puyallup. It is the shortest distance. The other way would not only be out of their way, but the road is curvier, has several hairpin turns you have to slow down to 10 MPH to navigate and takes a lot longer.

The second way is on Highway 7, thru Spanaway, past the other side of Eatonville (you don't actually pass thru that town, tho there are roads you can take to get you there), past Alder, and then into Elbe. At Elbe, you either turn right to go to Mineral or stay straight to go to Mt. Rainier.

Now, whoever dropped off Crystal at the Spanaway Kmart most likely took Highway 7. In 1983 much of the area was the boonies, the sticks and was not built up at all. It is still not built up very much. It's a 2-lane road, very curvy, hair-pin turns, with trees and rock formations towering on both sides. Not far from Elbe is the tiny town of Alder, don't blink, oh, you just missed it kind of town. A post office and convenience store is about all there is. After Alder you drive and drive and drive and think you're almost to Spanaway but no, it's a clearing with some estates (farms or houses with a lot of acreage) but still no town. Drive and drive, the road seems endless.

Now, I'm not sure exactly, since it was 1983, but I'm guessing that Kmart was the very first strip mall or shopping center once you finally got into Spanaway after the long drive on the 7. There may have been a store here, a gas station here, but the area before Kmart even now is mostly auto repair and junk yards. I believe at that time, next to the Kmart was also a grocery store and also a Dairy Queen was on the other side of the parking lot.

I can speculate the person taking Crystal on his/her way back to town. Took the 7 either because he/she didn't know it was the long way back, was aiming toward the Spanaway side vs. the Puyallup side, or wanted the privacy of the less-traveled, more rural route. I can imagine wondering what to do with the child on this long drive back to "civilization." The Kmart shopping center would provide a place to use the bathroom, maybe clean up?, and drop the child off somewhere busy enough not to be seen doing it but also where the child would be found. [I shudder at the thought of the person having instead left the child anywhere else, either back at Elbe or anywhere from Elbe to Spanaway, where it was mostly forest. The poor child would have probably wandered lost among the trees and never have been found.]

I also speculate maybe the person initially went to one of the other stores, or even the Dairy Queen. Maybe promise the child something to eat, sat her down at a table, got up to use the restroom and slipped out. And then Crystal, not knowing what to do, wandered over to the Kmart. I believe she was found outside in the parking lot, not inside the store. I've wondered if the police questioned employees in the neighboring stores also when they found her at the Kmart.

I actually shop at that Kmart. Now there are huge Walmarts that most people go to, I guess I'm a hold-out and go to the near empty Kmart. It will certainly be creepy the next time I go there now that I know the story.

Kane

04-13-2011, 08:39 PM

Finally, something new about this case! I always thought he was dead.

I wasn't surprised when it was confirmed that Mike Riemer was in fact dead. Now the question is whether or not he killed Diana and/or the other two people. Regardless, I am currently inclined to believe that Diana Robertson, Ruth Cooper, and Stephen Harkins were killed by the same person. But whether it was Michael Riemer or a third party is, of course, anybody's guess.

Although the theory of Michael Riemer being the killer carries some weight, I recall that, during an interivew in the UM segment, his father was convinced that he was innocent. Michael "Lloyd" Riemer, Sr. mentioned that Mike's coat was in the truck, adding that there were at least two or three miles to walk out of the area before reaching a main road. Since Mike and Diana's disappearances occurred in the month of December, Michael Sr. wasn't convinced that Mike would have left his coat behind if he had killed Diana. Needless to say, he was convinced that his son was dead. In fact, I still remember him saying, "they got him first."

Sadly, Michael Sr. didn't live long enough to find out what had happened to his son. He died in 1993. :(

sdb4884

04-13-2011, 10:33 PM

Thanks for the update, it sheds some light on the case finally.

mozartpc27

04-13-2011, 11:59 PM

!

Hadn't checked the site in awhile - what a development!

I am inclined at first blush to think that this is a murder/suicide situation, even though I have previously argued that Riemer is likely a victim. The truth is I should reserve any and all judgments until a complete forensic investigation is completed.

ScaryFog

04-14-2011, 02:38 AM

I know its been 25 years, but if Mike killed himself, there should be some evidence of how he did it. If it was suicide, there are only so many ways you can do that in the woods. A gun shot is the easiest way to do that in the woods. If he shot himself, then there should be a bullet hole in the skull with the gun nearby. If there is no visible damage to the skull, then how did he die? How else can you kill yourself in the woods? It points stronger to the theory that he was stabbed to death like Diane.

Another thing that points to a serial killer is the sock evidence. Diane and Ruth, (the female from the other couple killed), both had a tube sock tied around their neck. And from the UM segment, the socks were the same.

I think the confirmation of Mike's death, the fact that the skull was not able to point to cause of death, along with the sock evidence points to a serial killer.

But what make's me point away from the serial killer is the fact that Crystal was taken to a safe location. Does this serial killer have some odd set of rules that allows him to kill adults, but not kids? And I know that Crystal was only around 2, but for her to have no recollection of a stranger driving her home seems strange. She knew that mommy was in the trees, couldn't she have also said that mommy and daddy did not drive her to the store? Did the killer manage to hide his appearance for the entire time? That then suggests that it was someone who cared about her. Maybe it was Mike who did it. Maybe he heard about the sock evidence and tried to make it look like the serial killer, but then later on killed himself out of regret.

Or maybe Mike was the serial killer. But how many times do serial killers end like this? If they kill themselves, its usually because they are surrounded by police.

I don't know. This is just such a bizarre case. The next step is to continue searching the area where Mike's skull was found for more of his bones. If they find his ribs with multiple stab wounds, then he was killed. Until they get that confirmation that he was killed, the idea that he committed suicide is always going to be there.

samiam82

04-14-2011, 03:47 AM

Let's not forget the impact this news must have on their daugher Crystal. She has lived her life without either of her parents, and amid a lot of speculation. She's just gotten confirmation her father is definitely deceased, but still no real answers...this is a fascinating case, but I keep thinking of the devastation she must continue to feel...

that being said...

If Riemer was responsible for Diana's death (or other deaths), and this was a murder/suicide, it would possibly explain why he left his coat in the truck. He left his daughter where she would be safe and returned to Diana and then went off to kill himself.
If he knew the land so well and felt such extreme guilt, he could have gone to a place to commit suicide where he thought he wouldn't be found.....

Hambone2421

04-14-2011, 08:31 AM

But what make's me point away from the serial killer is the fact that Crystal was taken to a safe location. Does this serial killer have some odd set of rules that allows him to kill adults, but not kids? And I know that Crystal was only around 2, but for her to have no recollection of a stranger driving her home seems strange. She knew that mommy was in the trees, couldn't she have also said that mommy and daddy did not drive her to the store? Did the killer manage to hide his appearance for the entire time? That then suggests that it was someone who cared about her. Maybe it was Mike who did it. Maybe he heard about the sock evidence and tried to make it look like the serial killer, but then later on killed himself out of regret.

I agree. I've always kinda thought that Mike may have killed Diana and driven his daughter to town hoping that she would be found and returned home safely because, as you said, do serial killers really care about a 2 yr old?? But at the same time, Mike also runs the risk of his daughter being kidnapped by a pedophile or a rapist when he could have just dropped her at a friends house.

I think the most likely scenario is that both Mike and Diane were killed. Possibly while setting traps, they ran into this serial killer. But the real mystery here is how did little Crystal get all the way back to KMart in town and who took her?

NellieBlyArmy

04-14-2011, 08:48 AM

If he shot himself, then there should be a bullet hole in the skull with the gun nearby. If there is no visible damage to the skull, then how did he die?

The gun not being nearby - it's been over 25 years since this happened. The skull could've been carried away from the gun by an animal. There's simply not going to be an intact crime scene in the middle of the wilderness over 2 decades later.

No visible damage to the skull - It's a partial skull. If you follow the link in this story: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/119697924.html then you get to the story that gives a better description of the skull:
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/118944274.html
It could be that there's no bullet hole, it could be that there's a bullet hole in another part that hasn't been found yet.

TheCars1986

04-14-2011, 10:24 AM

The location of Riemer's remains (a mile away from Diana) would not indicate a remorseful man who committed suicide after killing his girlfriend. If he did murder Diana and then planned on killing himself, just as someone said above, he could have left Crystal with family or friends, knowing for certain she was safe. Whoever dropped Crystal off obviously had no regard for her safety. And by leaving Diana's body in the wilderness to transport Crystal 30 miles away would risk the body being discovered before he returned. And if he did return to Diana's body, why take off his coat, ditch his truck, and hike a mile just to kill himself? A man who's on the verge of suicide does not plan out minute details about taking his coat off to cast suspicion away from him. What would he have to lose? Why not just kill yourself right next to Diana, or in the truck? Like Riemer's father said, "They got him first."

TheCars1986

04-14-2011, 10:36 AM

Apparently it was Riemer's fully intact skull that was found, and there were no signs of a gunshot wound. Unless he decided to shoot himself in the chest several times (an unlikely way for someone to commit suicide), it seems unlikely that he killed himself. Here's a snippet from an update article:

"The fully intact skull of Michael Lloyd Riemer, 36, was found by a hiker on March 26.

“At least we can rule out a gunshot wound to the head,” Stacy Brown, a chief deputy with the sheriff’s office, said.

No other bones or clothing were found at the scene in a follow-up investigation.

Riemer’s remains were discovered about a mile from where his girlfriend’s remains were found February 1986."

You can read the whole article here: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/apr/12/remains-those-tacoma-man-missing-1985/

wiseguy182

04-14-2011, 12:55 PM

And I know that Crystal was only around 2, but for her to have no recollection of a stranger driving her home seems strange. She knew that mommy was in the trees, couldn't she have also said that mommy and daddy did not drive her to the store?

i don't recall anything from when i was 2. additionally, the whole experience was probably so traumatic, that her brain forgot all about the incident as a coping mechanism, which is quite common.

Apostapler

04-14-2011, 07:18 PM

i don't recall anything from when i was 2. additionally, the whole experience was probably so traumatic, that her brain forgot all about the incident as a coping mechanism, which is quite common.

You are absolutely right in both counts. Children under a certain age lack the ability to put events in a chronological order or relate them to a progression of events as a whole, which is why people don't remember things until they are able to learn to narrate an event.

NellieBlyArmy

04-15-2011, 10:05 AM

Thanks for the link, TheCars1986! It's so frustrating that this is half-solved.

Corky Kneivel

04-19-2011, 02:58 PM

TheCars1986

04-19-2011, 04:50 PM

broommy

04-19-2011, 05:37 PM

This is so strange. There are so many facts that could lead to Mike actually doing it. Many times when a person is stabbed that many times, it could be a crime of passion. I know that dropping the little girl off at Kmart shows little regard for her, but it shows some. Then again, I would think that if Crystal could remember her mother in the trees, she could remember if it was her dad that took her to Kmart. I just don't know.
It is also possible that Mike knew of these other murders and did not initially intend to kill him self when he killed Diana. He could have tried to make it look like she was a victim of the first killer by tying the sock around her neck. He could have felt so bad after doing it that he just dropped Crystal off and killed himself. Maybe he bought socks and poison to kill himself before he dropped Crystal off. That would explain why there was no damage to the skull.

NemechekFan87

04-19-2011, 06:18 PM

Wow, what a surprise that Mike's skull has been found after 25 years or so. From the beginning I thought that he had left Crystal at the store, and then drove into the woods, killed Diane, and then vanished. But maybe after dropping Crystal off he killed Diane, and then killed himself. There is a NASCAR driver, Derrike Cope, who is from Spanaway Washington. Maybe he knows something about this case... ;)

MegtheEgg86

04-19-2011, 11:17 PM

Look forward to your insight on the case.

I do as well.

Perhaps it's premature, but as soon as I got the news it confirmed a gut feeling I have always had: that he'd turn up deceased eventually not far from Diana. Something happened to that man, and he didn't do it to himself. I am convinced.

Apostapler

04-20-2011, 02:42 AM

I do as well.

Perhaps it's premature, but as soon as I got the news it confirmed a gut feeling I have always had: that he'd turn up deceased eventually not far from Diana. Something happened to that man, and he didn't do it to himself. I am convinced.

Same here. Occam's razor and all that. It was the simplest solution where everything fit.

kane7474

04-20-2011, 03:11 AM

I always thought this was the blatant act of a serial killer. However until the discovery of Riemer's remains I was convinced the killer was Riemer himself. The obvious similarities between this and the Cooper/Harkins case are are undeniable. There is no way this wasn't the work of the same killer. We have matching tube socks tied in exact same knots around womens necks. We have the men's bodies found around a mile from the women. Both crimes happened in a heavily wooded area within 15 miles of each other. Im convinced this is the work of a very brazen serial killer that is more then familiar with the areas the bodies where found in.

With Riemer being found it seems more info is beginning to open up. I posted an article recently that talked about another couple that turned up murdered before Harkins and Cooper. Police where trying to connect these two crimes at one time.I also wonder know if Tonya van cyberg and Jay Cook where not victims of the same killer. Isnt it odd for a serial killer to pursue couples like this?? Seems to be a possible trademark.

dynoguy88

04-20-2011, 10:55 AM

i don't recall anything from when i was 2. additionally, the whole experience was probably so traumatic, that her brain forgot all about the incident as a coping mechanism, which is quite common.

I have an excellent memory and I can remember a ton of things from age 3. But age 2 is really pushing it. I've never met anyone who can remember THAT far back. In Crystal's case, this could be a blessing just for her psyche alone.

But people can repress traumatic events at any age and sometimes even the slightest things can trigger them later in life. I wonder how she's doing these days. Today, she would be 28 years old.

RobinW

04-20-2011, 11:59 AM

I have an excellent memory and I can remember a ton of things from age 3. But age 2 is really pushing it. I've never met anyone who can remember THAT far back. In Crystal's case, this could be a blessing just for her psyche alone.

But people can repress traumatic events at any age and sometimes even the slightest things can trigger them later in life. I wonder how she's doing these days. Today, she would be 28 years old.

At least one of the recent articles on this case stated that she now has a child of her own, but has thus far declined to comment on this new development. Hopefully, she's gone on to live a happy fulfulling life, but I don't think she's too keen to revisit this traumatic event.

I'm more convinced than ever that this was the work a serial killer who drew the line at murdering a small child. The killer obviously had some concern for Crystal's safety since he drove her 30 miles to a public area, and anybody who really didn't care about her fate would have just left her in the woods to die since she never would have been found in time. However, if Mike was the one who dropped her off at the K-Mart, I think he would have at least made a brief phone call to a friend or relative to let them know Crystal was there and to come pick her up. Remember, she was placed in foster care for several days before anyone even figured out who she was. This sounds like a killer who did hope the child would survive, but wasn't going to risk discovery by going the extra mile to make sure she was placed in safe hands.

This always makes me of think of the UM case about the two teens from Texas who went on the tri-state killing spree and brutally murdered four people for no reason, yet they still left the young child of one of the victims unharmed. And these were the same two brutes who took pleasure in sadistically beating and torturing two elderly men for several hours! Even the most vicious killers sometimes don't have the stomach to harm children.

Hambone2421

04-20-2011, 12:07 PM

kane7474

04-20-2011, 01:46 PM

I agree. Also with the fact that this was a heavily wooded area where the bodies were found, I wonder if its someone who lives off the land out there. Maybe someone who targets campers or people who are together but alone out in the wilderness. I had posed this question after Mike's remains were found but, I wonder if there have been any similar murders after this? If not, then odds are that the killer is either dead or in jail.
If you go back on the other Riemer forum and look through the articles you will see there where several murders in the area before but I really dont know of any after. One murder was of an older man who lived in a trailer not far from where Diana was found. His car was taken and found in Tacoma. There was a prositute taken in Tacoma who's body was found in this same wooded area. Then you have Crystal showing up in Spanway. If this is the same killer he keeps leaving us a trail back to the Tacoma area. There was another young girl who's car broke down near Elbe. Her body also was found not far from Diana. I think that happened two months before Mike and Diana where murdered.
I think its the work of one killer who possibly worked in logging or was an avid hunter. Either way he would have had extensive knowledge of these wooded areas. I think he dropped Crystal off in Spanway because he was on his way home and it was a convienant place. I think he stopped using this wooded area because after Mike and Diana went missing the area was crawling with police and searchers. With Mike's father being retired game warden alot of law enforcement came out to help. Im sure the killer heard of the search parties and all the attention the missing couple where getting. He knew that area was to hot to go back to killing in and moved on.

Hambone2421

04-20-2011, 02:27 PM

I think he stopped using this wooded area because after Mike and Diana went missing the area was crawling with police and searchers. With Mike's father being retired game warden alot of law enforcement came out to help. Im sure the killer heard of the search parties and all the attention the missing couple where getting. He knew that area was to hot to go back to killing in and moved on.

Excellent point.

I still have a hard time believing that a person who could brutally murder people would have the compassion to drop off a child in a public place. This may have been mentioned already, but how far was the convenience store where she was found from the actual murder location? Is it off base to think she may have wandered there alone?

Apostapler

04-20-2011, 08:21 PM

Wasn't it something like 30 miles away?
I don't put it past a serial killer to spare her and see that she was safe. Lots of them have compassion for children, work with children, have their own families...

*shudder*

dks64

04-20-2011, 11:06 PM

Thanks for the update! This is one of the UM segments that always stuck out in my head. I always leaned towards innocent, that's what my gut told me, and finding his skull makes my feelings on this case even stronger.

rhzunam

04-21-2011, 01:46 AM

I don't know why it's so tough for people to believe that a guy wouldn't kill that kid. I remember some event about how a serial killer was so specific that murdering any person a different way they do or the race or type of person was enough to discount cases from being related. I think it was mentioned in the unambomber/ zodiac killer mystery. If that it's true then it's totally understandable how somebody who murders couple, would not want to kill a kid. Plus she was so young, he probably figured out that there was no chance of her identifying him or being a good witness, like it proved to be in the end.

TheCars1986

04-21-2011, 09:39 AM

Hambone2421

04-21-2011, 11:53 AM

Rapists and child murderers are specifically targeted in prison based off of this "code" by other murderers and felons. It's not a stretch at all that a serial killer would spare a small child. Maybe the killer lives near Spanaway which is why the K-mart store was picked as a location to drop Crystal off.

Good points.

Plus, I cant remember who posted it, but if Mike did kill Diana and then himself, why would he drop his daughter off in a public area instead of in front of a friend or family member's home? Very strange case. I would put this one up there with Dave Bocks and Eric Tamiyasu when it comes to endless unanswered questions.

castiron

04-21-2011, 12:35 PM

If you go back on the other Riemer forum and look through the articles you will see there where several murders in the area before but I really dont know of any after. One murder was of an older man who lived in a trailer not far from where Diana was found. His car was taken and found in Tacoma. There was a prositute taken in Tacoma who's body was found in this same wooded area. Then you have Crystal showing up in Spanway. If this is the same killer he keeps leaving us a trail back to the Tacoma area. There was another young girl who's car broke down near Elbe. Her body also was found not far from Diana. I think that happened two months before Mike and Diana where murdered.

Spanaway is on the way to Tacoma, just follow the same highway. I'd guess the killer lived in Tacoma and stalked the victims in the Elbe/Mineral area. Or lived in Elbe/Mineral and often traveled to the Tacoma area. Anyone who lives in Elbe/Mineral usually travels to Puyallup or Spanaway anyway to grocery shop at least. Like I've said, I live in Elbe and often shop at the very same Kmart in Spanaway.

kane7474

04-22-2011, 03:14 AM

Excellent point.

I still have a hard time believing that a person who could brutally murder people would have the compassion to drop off a child in a public place. This may have been mentioned already, but how far was the convenience store where she was found from the actual murder location? Is it off base to think she may have wandered there alone?
I beileve it was right at 33 miles away.

kane7474

04-22-2011, 03:17 AM

Spanaway is on the way to Tacoma, just follow the same highway. I'd guess the killer lived in Tacoma and stalked the victims in the Elbe/Mineral area. Or lived in Elbe/Mineral and often traveled to the Tacoma area. Anyone who lives in Elbe/Mineral usually travels to Puyallup or Spanaway anyway to grocery shop at least. Like I've said, I live in Elbe and often shop at the very same Kmart in Spanaway.

With you living in Elbe Id like to know if you have been on the logging road where the truck was found? Im wodering if its just basically a make shift road that only logging trucks used or do people often drive on them to get back in the woods? Im wondering how it is that the truck was never seen by the searchers if it was sitting in the middle of a dirt road?

castiron

04-22-2011, 10:19 AM

There are many logging roads in the area, so I don't know which one the truck was found. I imagine there are some that are so overgrown, they are unusable, but many are used by hunters or hikers.

They are usually packed dirt but overgrown on the sides. They can be driven on but you're breaking branches. Riemer's friends commented on how they should have noticed the broken branches where the truck was found. They were so concentrated on the the area around the trap lines, they didn't search elsewhere. They searched with a plane as well, but I don't see how they could see anything from above except near the open areas near waterways, there is so much tree coverage.

kane7474

04-22-2011, 12:39 PM

SageSlowdive

04-24-2011, 09:57 AM

Apostapler

04-24-2011, 01:22 PM

spark19

04-24-2011, 07:20 PM

Wow, wow, wow, wow, WOW!!! Sorry, this case has intrigued me for years (ever since I saw it on one of crystaldawn's DVDs). I'd always come here and research for any relevant articles, and was always surprised that there was just nothing new. Ever. I even spent a weekend last month reading through a 20+ page thread of alot of back and forth :lol:

So imagine my surprise logging in here today and seeing this. Like Kane, I had come to the conclusion that this was the work of a serial killer, but that that killer was still Riemer. Now, definitely going with the serial killer theory but that this wasn't Riemer's doing at all. If Riemer did kill Diana, take Crystal to the store, then kill himself out of remorse or whatever, there would be no reason for the sock. Or to kill himself a mile away. Sure, remains can be carried off by animals, but if he had been killed / killed himself near Diana, his remains would have been found in the initial search. Plus the lack of bullet hole in the complete skull is very telling. This is someone who hunts, and would have quite the choice of firearms. Why opt for poison, which tends to be slower and painful? I doubt he would stab himself - again, slow and painful. I mean, I guess he could have picked up a bunch of sleeping pills at the K-Mart, but he doesn't strike me as the type.

However, for Crystal to be taken to safety, maybe the killer was someone who knew Diana/Mike/their family. Which is why there would be mercy for the child. I understand that serial killers (and even rapists for that matter) can have a very specific MO. And maybe children would be where he (or she, but most likely he) would draw the line. But from what some of the posts here are saying, some of the cases that are being discussed as also having occurred in the area at the same time were of lone individuals. That still doesn't rule out he would draw the line at children, but if Diana & Mike were the victims of the same killer as Harkins & Cooper, and/or the man living in the trailer nearby, and/or the prostitute from Tacoma, and/or the stranded motorist - it would seem the killer has less of a type/MO.

Still such an intriguing case. And even though there are still an endless amount of questions, I really think that with Mike having been found (and obviously having been there for quite sometime, given the state of the remains) rules out the murder/suicide. And obviously rules out him going off and living his own life in complete anonymity.

And of course, I have so much morbid curiosity surrounding Crystal. Silly me had even tried to find her on facebook and myspace. I mean, I guess I'm the exception because I do actually have one distinct memory from age 2. But it is the only memory. I just don't think it is out of the realm of possibility that something could mark you so much you would carry that with you as you aged. But I'm sure that type of memory would be the first you would repress if you could.

TheCars1986

04-25-2011, 09:06 AM

Oh good lord, here we go.

People, they found his skull! Time to come to the realization he was killed and the killer took Crystal to the K-Mart.

Alright. Anyways, thank goodness this case has finally been solved.

Not necessarily solved yet. A serial killer may still be on the loose. Hopefully whoever was responsible is in jail or dead.

EDIT: I also agree with SageSlowdive about people still harping on the fact that Riemer may have been Diana's killer. Remember what the detective said in the segment? "We can’t prove he’s alive and we can’t prove he’s dead. If we could show that he was dead, then it would be my belief that there’s an unidentified third party who’s going around killing people out there." To me that suggests there is other evidence implicating a third party in this case.

kane7474

04-25-2011, 11:15 AM

http://truecrimediary.com/index.cfm?page=cases&id=125

Check this out. This may be the closest thing we have seen yet to an actuall suspect in the case. Seems we have a survivalist type serial killer that was known to murder couples. It is known that he killed a couple while they slept on a beach in Vancouver and then vanished. Also seems he may have been in the area around the time of Cooper/ Harkins as well as Riemer/Robertson murders. This man was killed by police in 2009.

Hambone2421

04-25-2011, 03:53 PM

castiron

04-25-2011, 03:55 PM

the man living in the trailer nearby

I talked to a local who was here in the 80's (I've only been here a couple of years). He said the man was a retired pastor who worked with troubled youth in Tacoma. There was speculation that some of the kids he was trying to help either followed him home or came home with him. So his case may not be related to all the others.

chacha6581

04-25-2011, 07:20 PM

WOW. I never thought that Mike R. killed his bm, and abandoned his daughter. It just never made sense to me, especially if he wanted to do a murder/suicide thing, it would have made sense to leave his daughter with someone before heading out to the woods.
I always thought the killer either killed Mike first, by sneaking behind him, and then killed Diana, maybe while Crystal was in a vehicle or sleeping. Most women will abide by a strangers orders to protect their child.
Or perhaps the killer found Diana alone with Crystal, killed Diana and waited for Mike to emerge from the trees, perhaps hearing Diana or Crystal screaming or crying. Maybe he heard a gunshot and came running.
I know some people believe that a murderer would have just killed the child, but I do not. I have heard about children, elderly, animals, etc being spared in a murderous spree, so maybe this is the case. I think the murderer did not want to leave the child out in the cold, in the elements, and just dropped her off somewhere where she would be found.
Although he could have used the child to is benefit. Maybe he used the child as a way for the couple to be discovered, he could have been excited by newspaper articles, etc..

MegtheEgg86

04-25-2011, 10:22 PM

samiam82

04-26-2011, 02:21 AM

what about the possibility that the killer was known to the victims and therefore had a connection to the little girl? might have spared her because of the connection? like a family member or friend?

kane7474

04-26-2011, 03:15 AM

After reading more about Burgess I came up with a few more interesting tid bits that may link him to Riemer/Robertson and Harkins/Cooper.

At one time he was somewhat of a religous freak and killed the two lovers on the beach in Vancover because they where unmarried and sleeping together. He shot them in the head while in sleeping bags. This would be the same case with Cooper/Harkins. Also in another couple murder that he is suspected of, the victims dog was shot. Again same as Cooper/Harkins.
Also, with the first couple he murdered he took there Identification cards out,tore and left them by the victims. It was recently stated that a tatered ID card was found near Riemer's skull. Also the fact that he was religous may be why he spared Crystal. He would have seen the unmarried couple with a child as sinners as he did the couple in Vancover. But ofcourse the child would be totally innocent. If indeed he was a suspect that would be a very viable explanation.

TheCars1986

04-26-2011, 08:41 AM

Wasn't Burgess an outdoorsman who "lived off the land"? If this were true, how did he get Crystal to Spanaway?

kane7474

04-26-2011, 11:16 AM

Wasn't Burgess an outdoorsman who "lived off the land"? If this were true, how did he get Crystal to Spanaway?
Yes he lived off the land but the guy had to have transportation at some point. Im sure if he could commit murder and elude police, stealing a car would not be too far out of his realm of possibilities. He was a known theif also. When he was killed in 2009 the shotgun of a man that went missing in the mountains was found with Burgess. What actually got him caught was breaking into cabins and stealing supplies. There is also the possibility that he drove Crystal in Mike's truck to Spanway and then brought it back. Though I doubt that because Diana's body was found right by the truck so its a little hard to beileve he would bring the truck back and park it right next to Diana's body.

It was stated that he worked odd jobs for cash and he could have very well been stealing money and possesions off his victims which would have allowed him to purchase a cheap vehicle.

kane7474

04-26-2011, 11:24 AM

I talked to a local who was here in the 80's (I've only been here a couple of years). He said the man was a retired pastor who worked with troubled youth in Tacoma. There was speculation that some of the kids he was trying to help either followed him home or came home with him. So his case may not be related to all the others.
Well it was my understanding he was a retired Pastor and wasn't involved in anything when he was murdered but I could be wrong. His car was stolen and showed up in Pullyup. I would think if this was the work of kids he was dealing with that the police could have solved this pretty easy but who knows.

Let me ask you something else.
Has there been many murders or bodies turning up in this area since you have lived there? Seems it was quite common in the mid 80s and Im just wondering if it still goes on now.

RobinW

04-26-2011, 01:09 PM

At one time he was somewhat of a religous freak and killed the two lovers on the beach in Vancover because they where unmarried and sleeping together. He shot them in the head while in sleeping bags. This would be the same case with Cooper/Harkins. Also in another couple murder that he is suspected of, the victims dog was shot. Again same as Cooper/Harkins.
Also, with the first couple he murdered he took there Identification cards out,tore and left them by the victims. It was recently stated that a tatered ID card was found near Riemer's skull. Also the fact that he was religous may be why he spared Crystal. He would have seen the unmarried couple with a child as sinners as he did the couple in Vancover. But ofcourse the child would be totally innocent. If indeed he was a suspect that would be a very viable explanation.

Wow, that is quite an excellent theory about his potential motivation for murdering the couple and sparing the child! Given his survivalist tendencies, it's entirely possible that they could have just wound up crossing paths by chance that day in the woods. Of course, the only issue is how Burgess would have known that Mike and Diana were unmarried. It's worth noting that Mike was 36 and Diana was only 21, so he could have very well had a problem with the couple's considerable age difference, though, looking at a photograph of the two of them together, it wouldn't be glaringly obvious to an outsider that Mike was 15 years older.

kane7474

04-26-2011, 02:54 PM

Wow, that is quite an excellent theory about his potential motivation for murdering the couple and sparing the child! Given his survivalist tendencies, it's entirely possible that they could have just wound up crossing paths by chance that day in the woods. Of course, the only issue is how Burgess would have known that Mike and Diana were unmarried. It's worth noting that Mike was 36 and Diana was only 21, so he could have very well had a problem with the couple's considerable age difference, though, looking at a photograph of the two of them together, it wouldn't be glaringly obvious to an outsider that Mike was 15 years older.

Well lots of different scenrios are possible here. This guy was known to live in wooded areas and Riemer was a trapper. They may well have crossed paths and time or two. Burgess could have known a little something about the couple from run ins with Riemer while he was checking traps.
Also I dont know how long Burgess maintained his religous freak status. Obviously he let that go at some point and was just kiling to be killing like any other serial killer. He is not suspected of any crimes against children though. This again shows that he may have had no desire to harm Crystal no matter what his reasoning could have been for murdering the parents.

TheCars1986

04-26-2011, 03:08 PM

Well lots of different scenrios are possible here. This guy was known to live in wooded areas and Riemer was a trapper. They may well have crossed paths and time or two. Burgess could have known a little something about the couple from run ins with Riemer while he was checking traps.
Also I dont know how long Burgess maintained his religous freak status. Obviously he let that go at some point and was just kiling to be killing like any other serial killer. He is not suspected of any crimes against children though. This again shows that he may have had no desire to harm Crystal no matter what his reasoning could have been for murdering the parents.

But if Burgess was living in the wilderness as a hermit, it wouldn't really make any sense for him to take Crystal out of the woods. A hermit would be more inclined to leave her there. Unless he had some warped moral code and knew Crystal would never have survived on her own and decided to take her to a safe place.

RobinW

04-26-2011, 03:41 PM

But if Burgess was living in the wilderness as a hermit, it wouldn't really make any sense for him to take Crystal out of the woods. A hermit would be more inclined to leave her there. Unless he had some warped moral code and knew Crystal would never have survived on her own and decided to take her to a safe place.

Well, one thing I've always believed from the start is that no matter who the killer was, they took a genuine interest in Crystal's well-being. While abandoning a two-year old in a public place isn't the safest thing in the world, it's definitely preferable to leaving her alone in that secluded wooded area where she NEVER would have been found in time.

castiron

04-26-2011, 08:08 PM

Well it was my understanding he was a retired Pastor and wasn't involved in anything when he was murdered but I could be wrong. His car was stolen and showed up in Pullyup. I would think if this was the work of kids he was dealing with that the police could have solved this pretty easy but who knows.

We were talking about the Riemer skull (more about that when I answer your next question) and I was bringing up the other cases to him, the girl who's car broke down and the pastor. He was pretty sure it was the kids in the pastor's case. He didn't know much about the other girl.

Let me ask you something else.
Has there been many murders or bodies turning up in this area since you have lived there? Seems it was quite common in the mid 80s and Im just wondering if it still goes on now.

There was one case (3-5 years ago?) where a body (of a boy) was found but part of the skull was missing! So when the skull was originally found, a lot of people thought it was from that body, but turned out to be Riemer. I wasn't here when the boy's body was found, I've been trying to dig up more info of that case.

Last year, another boy (Austin King) went missing and he was found in the woods in Morton (30 minutes south of Mineral). But he was killed by a friend over a girlfriend.

http://www.theolympian.com/2010/11/12/1437011/chehalis-bail-set-at-2-million.html

In the 80's, this area was less populous. It was just after nearby Mt. Saint Helens erupted. The economy was bad and the main industry (logging) was very bad with mills closing down. Mineral at this point was even considered a Ghost Town! As the years have gone by, the entire area has been built up, more tourist opportunities have grown to replace the lost lumber jobs. It's still the poorest county (Lewis) in the state, but not so "in the sticks" as it used to be. So I can see how it was considered a dumping ground in the 80's.

The whole of western Washington seems to have been a dumping ground, as others have noted, "This is Washington we're talking about, must be the rain." Maybe we owe more to Starbucks than anything, lol. I grew up under the darkness of the Green River Killer. I played at many of the spots they later found a body, shudder, I'm fortunate I never discovered one!!

castiron

04-26-2011, 11:44 PM

Also, with the first couple he murdered he took there Identification cards out,tore and left them by the victims. It was recently stated that a tatered ID card was found near Riemer's skull.

This is a major clue, in my opinion. I remember reading about the tattered ID next to the found skull and thought that was really weird. Unless the killer was going thru his wallet and throwing things out of the wallet, why would it have been there? Or the killer's way of saying, "this person no longer exists" or "this person doesn't deserve to live" or something like that.

kane7474

04-27-2011, 03:08 AM

This is a major clue, in my opinion. I remember reading about the tattered ID next to the found skull and thought that was really weird. Unless the killer was going thru his wallet and throwing things out of the wallet, why would it have been there? Or the killer's way of saying, "this person no longer exists" or "this person doesn't deserve to live" or something like that.
I agree, its just so hard to imagine an id card lasting 25 years and staying near the remains. It makes me wonder if Riemer's body wasnt somehow concealed and then for whatever reason was uncovered. But then you have to wonder where the rest of his remains are if that was the case.

TheCars1986

04-27-2011, 11:14 AM

kane7474

04-27-2011, 03:00 PM

Obviously the police aren't going to release relevant info on the ID card just yet, but if the ID Card belongs to someone other than Riemer (which I'm assuming it does, or it would have been identified as belonging to Riemer), you instantly have a person of interest in this case.
Well I really cant imagine a killer leaving his own id card with a victim. If it was someone like Burgess then I cant even imagine him having an id.

kane7474

04-27-2011, 03:07 PM

MegtheEgg86

04-27-2011, 10:29 PM

Crystal may have seen this and thats why she mentions her mom being in the trees with no mention of Dad. She may not have been aware her father had been shot.

The initial reaction is often "Oh no mention of Dad, so it follows he killed her." I've always felt like what probably happened is probably exactly what you described--she didn't even know her father had been killed.

kane7474

04-28-2011, 03:12 AM

The initial reaction is often "Oh no mention of Dad, so it follows he killed her." I've always felt like what probably happened is probably exactly what you described--she didn't even know her father had been killed.
Ya I think her not mentioning her dad was one of those clues some of us used to point the finger of guilt at him. Ofcourse with his body being found now I know I was wrong and there could be another explanation for her only mentioning her mother.

TheCars1986

04-28-2011, 09:53 AM

You know they said that when Crystal went to the foster parents home that the woman brought her to the hospital to have scrapes and bruises checked out. This could possibly be a clue in itself.

Could it be that Mike was shot first at a distance and then Diana, in a panic picks up Crystal and runs into the heavy brush? Obviously shes gonna get some scrapes and bruising from running into the tree branches. Diana may also have fallen with her. The killer may not have shot Diana becuse he didnt want to risk hitting the child. Diana could have been screaming for help which made the killer more nervous and frenzied. This could explain why when he caught up with her she was stabbed so many times. His adrenaline was pumping and in a frenzied state of mind stabbed her repeatedly until she was quiet. Crystal may have seen this and thats why she mentions her mom being in the trees with no mention of Dad. She may not have been aware her father had been shot.

The scrapes and bruises could just as easily been the result of a normal two year old being a two year old. Although the scenario with Diana running with Crystal in her arms is very likely as well. I just shutter to think that Crystal was awake when all of this was happening. While there's no way to tell for sure who died first, IMO I think neither Riemer nor Diana knew what happened to the other. If Riemer was killed at a distance checking his traps, and Diana heard a gunshot or even multiple shots, there wouldn't be that much cause for alarm, since Riemer was armed with a .22 when checking his lines. That's why (if Riemer was killed first), I don't even think Diana knew what happened.

castiron

04-28-2011, 09:55 PM

Let me ask you something else.
Has there been many murders or bodies turning up in this area since you have lived there? Seems it was quite common in the mid 80s and Im just wondering if it still goes on now.

Oh gee, here's another one. In Morton, which is about 30 minutes from Mineral/Elbe. Just as wooded of an area.

http://lewiscountywa.gov/sheriff/skeletal-remains-found-near-morton

They are not saying where, but did say off the highway. So probably the same Highway 7 (or further South on Highway 12.)

kane7474

04-29-2011, 03:34 AM

Oh gee, here's another one. In Morton, which is about 30 minutes from Mineral/Elbe. Just as wooded of an area.

http://lewiscountywa.gov/sheriff/skeletal-remains-found-near-morton

They are not saying where, but did say off the highway. So probably the same Highway 7 (or further South on Highway 12.)
Its amazing to me that these bodies arent noticed until they decompose and nothing is left but bones. Seems like a fully clothed body would be so much more noticeable then a skeleton. Odd but seems to be the case quite often

castiron

04-29-2011, 04:04 PM

I would think so too. Maybe the clothes just blend in too well but bones give a better contrast. I think I'm going to wear bright orange everyday for the rest of my life.

TheCars1986

04-29-2011, 04:25 PM

I would think so too. Maybe the clothes just blend in too well but bones give a better contrast. I think I'm going to wear bright orange everyday for the rest of my life.

Probably not a bad idea.

XCalibur

05-01-2011, 09:26 AM

kane7474

05-01-2011, 12:34 PM

It looks like I might have dropped the ball on this one. I always thought Mike did it. He still could have before he died I suppose, but he is not out there anymore anyway. That in itself is a pretty big revelation.
I also beileved that Riemer was the killer. With the evidence that we had before us I thought it was the most logical conclusion. However, obviously with the evidence we have now this view has changed. Now with Riemer being found it seems more information is becoming available. I had never heard of Joeseph Burgess before Riemer got back into the public eye. Im hoping that the investigators preserved evidence from both crime scenes (Cooper Harkins and Riemer Robertson) and can find some spec of dna that will link Burgess to the crimes. There is bound to be some hairs or fibers from the killer on Diana or Ruth Cooper as well as the truck as it appears the killer moved it.[

Drakken

05-02-2011, 10:58 AM

kane7474

05-03-2011, 03:24 AM

Well, the UM segment didn't depict Mike Riemer in the brightest of lights. It was natural for many to assume that Riemer was the most likely suspect, being an abusive, violent, and jealous lover, even though the evidences at hand clearly showed that it was unlikely that Riemer could have done it unless he was some criminal mastermind and insensitive to cold. Riemer was presumed guilty here before he was even found.

I mean, nothing packed in the car? The daughter driven by someone she couldn't recognize (would Riemer be stupid enough to wear a mask even though his daughter would recognize his scent, his looks, his body type, his voice, and all the rest)? The coat left in the truck? The sock tying to the Cooper Harkins murder? All of these have been convulated to fit in the theory that Mike did do it, when Occam's Razor would tell us that it's more probable that a stranger did it.

Riemer wasn't a mastermind of evil, he was an impulsive man with lack of self-control and foresight. While he could have premeditated murder, he would have found an excuse to have the daughter sent away if it had been his intention, and Crystel would have said "Daddy hurt Mommy". Nothing on the scene shows premeditation by his part. In fact, everything indicates that Riemer wanted to start anew and make amends, which every violent spouse does: buy flowers to apologize only to keep on beating later.

It is a good lesson: when we make up our mind about a suspect, we can skewer the evidence so that it fits the story. That is why the past crimes or reputation of an accused is not allowed in a court of law without permission by a judge.

Not to get too far off the subject here but honestly I dont think anyone solely based the idea of his guilt on him being abusive. Nor would he have to be a criminal mastermind to pull this off. What exactly is a criminal mastermind anyway? If anyone truly fit that description you wouldnt even know their name because they would never have been caught for anything.

One thing that Im sure really stuck out with alot of people was the fact that Diana's Mother stated that Mike had told Diana that he could kill her and get away with it. Then ofcourse you have him being a skilled outdoorsman and able to live off the land if need be. He also worked jobs that would have allowed him to remain anonymous. Joeseph Burgess was wanted for double murder and was able to hide for 37 years so why would it be unthinkable that Riemer could have done the same?

Also through in that the other tubesock murder was right in the area he ran trap lines in. So he was known to be in this area and carrying a firearm. He had been violent to Diana before and infact had a January court date for domestic violence.

There had been two prior reports of domestic violence between the couple which did not result in him being charged. Diana being stabbed repeatedly seemed to display a crime of passion and anger so again this made people wonder about him. Then ofcourse you have his body never turning up even though according to LE the area was thouroughly searched. The killer made no effort to hide Diana so why hide Mike? So again this made people look at him as the suspect.
So there was a certain degree of evidence that pointed at Mike but as Im sure we could all agree its irrelevant now

TheCars1986

05-03-2011, 09:08 AM

Not to get too far off the subject here but honestly I dont think anyone solely based the idea of his guilt on him being abusive. Nor would he have to be a criminal mastermind to pull this off. What exactly is a criminal mastermind anyway? If anyone truly fit that description you wouldnt even know their name because they would never have been caught for anything.

One thing that Im sure really stuck out with alot of people was the fact that Diana's Mother stated that Mike had told Diana that he could kill her and get away with it. Then ofcourse you have him being a skilled outdoorsman and able to live off the land if need be. He also worked jobs that would have allowed him to remain anonymous. Joeseph Burgess was wanted for double murder and was able to hide for 37 years so why would it be unthinkable that Riemer could have done the same?

Also through in that the other tubesock murder was right in the area he ran trap lines in. So he was known to be in this area and carrying a firearm. He had been violent to Diana before and infact had a January court date for domestic violence.

There had been two prior reports of domestic violence between the couple which did not result in him being charged. Diana being stabbed repeatedly seemed to display a crime of passion and anger so again this made people wonder about him. Then ofcourse you have his body never turning up even though according to LE the area was thouroughly searched. The killer made no effort to hide Diana so why hide Mike? So again this made people look at him as the suspect.
So there was a certain degree of evidence that pointed at Mike but as Im sure we could all agree its irrelevant now

I think Drakken was saying for Mike to have pulled this murder off and gotten away (under the presumption that he was still alive) would have taken someone with an extremely high level of intelligence. And the fact that Crystal accompanied them would suggest that there was absolutely no premeditation on the part of Riemer, something a smart criminal usually would plan out. Most people assumed this was a "heat of the moment" killing, and since most people assumed Riemer was the guilty party, that would almost be unheard of that a man who just murdered his girlfriend in a jealous rage vanished without a trace or leaving any evidence behind.

As to his remains never being found until recently that is not 100% indicative that he was hidden. Simply may have been overlooked, considering there was snow on the ground when Diana was found. And Riemer's connection to Cooper and Harkins was very thin, to say the least. I'm sure there were hundreds of other people in the area who had frequented (be it camping, or trapping, hiking, etc.) the area they were killed in.

kane7474

05-03-2011, 11:10 AM

I think Drakken was saying for Mike to have pulled this murder off and gotten away (under the presumption that he was still alive) would have taken someone with an extremely high level of intelligence. And the fact that Crystal accompanied them would suggest that there was absolutely no premeditation on the part of Riemer, something a smart criminal usually would plan out. Most people assumed this was a "heat of the moment" killing, and since most people assumed Riemer was the guilty party, that would almost be unheard of that a man who just murdered his girlfriend in a jealous rage vanished without a trace or leaving any evidence behind.

As to his remains never being found until recently that is not 100% indicative that he was hidden. Simply may have been overlooked, considering there was snow on the ground when Diana was found. And Riemer's connection to Cooper and Harkins was very thin, to say the least. I'm sure there were hundreds of other people in the area who had frequented (be it camping, or trapping, hiking, etc.) the area they were killed in.

I still dont get this idea that he would have to be highly intellegent to get away. Burgess got away with murders for over three decades and sure didnt appear very intellegent to me. I think Riemer's connection to Cooper and Harkins was a little better then thin. He was known to be armed and in the same area they where found in. Now consider he was last known to be with a woman who was found just like Cooper with sock around her neck. Then ofcourse consider that he was missing for 25 years.

I wonder if any of Mike's guns where found in the truck? Burgess was known to take firearms from people he killed.

TheCars1986

05-03-2011, 02:57 PM

I still dont get this idea that he would have to be highly intellegent to get away. Burgess got away with murders for over three decades and sure didnt appear very intellegent to me. I think Riemer's connection to Cooper and Harkins was a little better then thin. He was known to be armed and in the same area they where found in. Now consider he was last known to be with a woman who was found just like Cooper with sock around her neck. Then ofcourse consider that he was missing for 25 years.

I wonder if any of Mike's guns where found in the truck? Burgess was known to take firearms from people he killed.

Det. Neiser interviewed on UM stated that if they could prove Riemer was dead he would believe there was an unknown serial killer lurking around. That would indicate that they had evidence to suggest someone other than Riemer was responsible. But since they couldn't rule out his death (obviously because they never found him for 25 years) he always remained a suspect. Riemer was a suspect not because of the abuse towards Diana, nor because of the partial connection between his trap line route and where Cooper and Harkins were found, but solely because they did not find his remains initially.

crystaldawn

05-03-2011, 06:36 PM

kane7474

05-04-2011, 03:14 AM

Not sure if this has been posted but here's an old article with some details about the couple found dead not far from where Diana's body was:

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle911/files/2011/04/Aug.-28-1985-Stephen-Harkins-and-Ruth-Cooper-P-I-clip-300-dpi.pdf

Yes I think we posted that one on the other forum. Another unmarried couple killed and found separated in a remote area.

Corky Kneivel

05-05-2011, 06:00 PM

wow. wowee wow wow. Further convinces me that they were both killed that day by the same assailant (who wasn't Reimer) and that the assailant then drove Crystal to the market and dropped her there.

I have more to say but time won't allow...to be continued...

I never added anything because I it looks like all the supposing I would do has been done by others, as well as myself in the other long Reimer post. I had always thought Burgess looked good for this having been aware of that scumbag since the Cutshall/Jones murder up in Jenner** (a beeyootiful stretch of land in NorCal) and again being reminded of him at the time of his 2009 death. I was so disappointed upon learning that his DNA didn't match any found at the Jenner crime scene. The provided links have been very informative and appreciated.

I guess I will state again that I've always been of the opinion that Mike and Diana (and Crystal) were victims of a 3rd party assailant that day. I didn't think Mr. Reimer was responsible, despite the domestic battery being such a strong indicator that he could have been, because I felt everything we knew stacked against the possibility. I don't think an unsub murderer and rapist dropping Crystal off at the K-Mart is as implausible as I do the circumstances necessary for Mike to have been the killer.

** aside from the rambling writings left in that shack near the murder scene, police have also released some drawings and engravings made on some driftwood found near the bodies. the faces found scrawled on the driftwood have been described as "demonic". i'll see if i can link any of the old newspaper articles from the Sacramento Bee that featured pictures of them.

RobertStax

05-11-2011, 05:14 AM

I agree, its just so hard to imagine an id card lasting 25 years and staying near the remains. It makes me wonder if Riemer's body wasnt somehow concealed and then for whatever reason was uncovered. But then you have to wonder where the rest of his remains are if that was the case.

Thinking about the logistics of it you have to wonder about his body in general. Did the killer choose to kill Riemer first as common sense would imply and then move his 200+lb body a full mile afterwards? Or was Riemer taken into the woods alive and then killed at the site where he was found? The other evidence being found at the site leads me to believe that Riemer was in fact killed there but that mile of separation seems like a pretty big distance.

In any case the tragedy with solving this case is the huge gaps in the timing of it all.

The two months between December 1985 and February 1986 were crucial, a lot of evidence was allowed to corrode away and I find it pretty likely that the killer may have returned to the scene of the crime at least to move or bury Mike's body. The note is another bizarre piece of evidence. Assuming Riemer was murdered, did he even write it? And if he didn't then why would the killer have gone the extra mile to write it? Seems like an obvious way to pin the crime on Riemer but that theory only makes sense if the killer was somebody who knew the victims.

TheCars1986

05-12-2011, 01:28 PM

The note is another bizarre piece of evidence. Assuming Riemer was murdered, did he even write it? And if he didn't then why would the killer have gone the extra mile to write it? Seems like an obvious way to pin the crime on Riemer but that theory only makes sense if the killer was somebody who knew the victims.

I think the note was simply something Riemer wrote to Diana, possibly as a way to apologize for the way he had been treating her. I doubt the killer had anything to do with the note, and it's nothing more than a red herring in this case.

kane7474

05-13-2011, 03:18 AM

I think the note was simply something Riemer wrote to Diana, possibly as a way to apologize for the way he had been treating her. I doubt the killer had anything to do with the note, and it's nothing more than a red herring in this case.
I agree with that.

Jaxxson15

06-19-2011, 02:49 AM

What about the small amount of blood inside the truck. How can so little blood be inside and none outside???

TheCars1986

06-19-2011, 12:39 PM

What about the small amount of blood inside the truck. How can so little blood be inside and none outside???

Perhaps the killer had blood on him when he got inside of the truck. Both murders most likely occurred outside of the truck, and Diana's body was found two months after they went missing, which would explain the abscence of blood outside of the truck.

LaurierCrimmajor

03-29-2012, 02:54 PM

Just a brief preface on serial killers: Much like the 'satanic panic', I usually don't place too much credence in the prevalence of an 'unknown serial killer' in cases where there is a viable suspect, because much of the information distilled on the number of legitimate serial killers operating at any given time is largely overestimated by the media(if it bleeds, it leads etc.) and the actual number is alot more conservative(thus rarer).

From there, a large percentile of serial killers traditionally murder people who are regarded as the 'missing missing', this may include prostitutes, runaways, drug addicts, the homeless and basically, those who won't have people to look for them if they were to disappear in the first place. Often times, we're talking about transient, marginalized victims whose last location can't be nailed down to a last known home address/whereabouts and it's so much harder to search for a missing person if there's little trail to follow. I'll refer to the Robert Pickton case as a fine example of the type of victim more likely to be unfortunately exploited.... Now, it's obvious that serial killers don't JUST target this demographic, however again, it becomes less and less likely that a couple will be the victim statistically, out of the pool of operating serial killers. It absolutely does occur, but is rare in the grand scheme of serial killings. We've all seen Zodiac's murders and various other serial killers who have murdered couples, however they are more the exception rather than the norm....

This case is quite fascinating, because for myself I'd normally think the husband had something to do with it because occum's razor is my lifeblood lol and patterns, inconsistencies and minute details usuallly nail the husband into a corner and give great promise into following leads that he is a suspect. NOW....given the new information that Mike's skull has been found, it sheds a whole new light on the case, to which I pay special attention to the daughter being left outside of the grocery store, which is quite telling and odd. I refer to the film, Heat in which De Niro's character kills the second guard for the sheer reason of "why leave a living, breathing witness". If, per chance this is the work of a serial killer(very well could be), the surviving daughter is quizzical to me. Surely, if the suspect is of the disorganized type, the little girl would not be regarded as a threat in the flurry of the moment and may have been disgarded at the grocery store if only so he could get away(and did not desire to kill her as well) without putting much thought into it.

The little girl having said her mommy was in the trees leads me to think she was around the murders(so sad), but the killer obviously did not have any concern of being recognized(as someone the little girl was familiar with would be)so for me, it narrows down the suspects a tad.....

Now, traditionally psychopaths(we don't use sociopaths as a diagnostic category and have amalgomated the classification into the psychopathy checklist depending on the model being used) would most likely want to rid themselves of the problem of the little girl by murdering her, so going out of the way to see to her safety(ever so minimum) poses the risk of a) getting seen and b)wasting valuable time to escape is another statistical rarity in my books. Now, serial killer pathology may not ascribe to children and I've worked with offenders who have a 'code of conduct' that excludes children, so MAYBE a serial killer did drop the little girl off....but I'd wager against it.

For me, this has the markings of an acquaintence murder(statistically quite probable) or possibly even a robbery gone wrong. I'd love to dig deeper into how much of a suspect Riemer was in the other case, because knocking down leads of WHO KNEW he was a suspect in these other cases could give some insight into the family.friends/LLO of THOSE victims, who potentially were looking for revenge and took it out on Riemer and his wife....leaving the innocent little girl out of it. But, if UM is just throwing it out there that he's a serial killer, I place doubt in that idea.

Not stating gospel here, but there are various alternatives to this case, which is why it is quite fascinating. Is there somebody killing couples? COULD be a strong possibility, but given the history of the couple WITH the surviving daughter, seems unlikely in my book. INTRIGUING? Hell yes and something I'd run down....but not my first choice.

Murder-suicide is my #1 leaning. I'd hazard against a serial killer here if only because there's viable leads elsewhere and the surviving daughter feels like too much of a loose end.

Apologies for such a long post. I just found this case quite interesting and thought I'd share my two cents.

TheCars1986

03-29-2012, 03:08 PM

Murder-suicide is my #1 leaning. I'd hazard against a serial killer here if only because there's viable leads elsewhere and the surviving daughter feels like too much of a loose end.

I've always thought it was entirely possible that someone who killed Diana and possibly Riemer was someone known to the couple. The "serial killer" theory was only brought about because of the eerie similarities betweeen Riemer/Robertson and Cooper/Harkins. Police believed whoever killed Ruth Cooper and Stephen Harkins also murdered Diana Robertson (and now possibly Riemer). Of course, their killer could have been known to all four of them, but that's purely speculation.

kane7474

04-14-2012, 10:32 PM

Look at Joseph Henry Burgess. He committed similar murders to this and was known to be in that area. He was a survivilist and could live off the land. Look into him in the other posts, I really think this is the person responsible for Riemer, Robertson and the other couple as well as a host of other similar murders. Burgess remained missing until being killed by police just a few years ago.

TheCars1986

04-16-2012, 04:45 PM

economistman192

05-29-2012, 10:22 AM

I'm not convinced that Reimer killed his wife. The tube sock aspect makes me think that this is definitely the same killer and that he was making a statement to the police. I'm sorry for his wife, but I find myself feeling cold about Reimer, as a wife beater and animal trapper - I'm not saying he deserved it, but maybe before his death he experienced what it is like to fear someone, to have to run away in terror because you may be overpowered. I'd love to start a separate thread for psychics and UM cases - meaning people who psychic ability and who are part of this forum. I think psychics aren't brought in enough in cases like this - and I love the UM episodes where psychics like Catchings and Allison and Myer were brought in. I feel that Reimer was a victim here too - and that he wouldn't have done anything to harm his daughter. If the daughter could say, "Mommy's in the trees" and "Grandma" then I think, if asked, she could say, "daddy hurt mommy" or something like that because she was clearly at the scene. Sad story all around.

TheCars1986

05-31-2012, 10:17 AM

samuke

07-22-2012, 03:04 PM

Did anyone consider Crystal's statement of "Mommy's in the trees" to be inconsequential? I mean, part of the reason they were out there was to pick a Christmas tree, wasn't it? Not to mention she knew her parents were out there for trapping...

That being said, has anyone considered that Reimer was trying to run when he was killed? Besides the idea that animals may have dragged his parts from another location, it's quite possible that maybe he was trying to get away and caught and killed or shot from a distance as he ran. I agree with what someone said previously, that it's possible the reason he wasn't found was the fact that it was snowing (the road had been snow covered).

MegtheEgg86

07-22-2012, 04:04 PM

Did anyone consider Crystal's statement of "Mommy's in the trees" to be inconsequential? I mean, part of the reason they were out there was to pick a Christmas tree, wasn't it? Not to mention she knew her parents were out there for trapping...

Yes, I felt that way and I agree. I always took that to mean Crystal was probably trying to say Diana was simply in the forest--as they ALL were that day.

That being said, has anyone considered that Reimer was trying to run when he was killed? Besides the idea that animals may have dragged his parts from another location, it's quite possible that maybe he was trying to get away and caught and killed or shot from a distance as he ran. I agree with what someone said previously, that it's possible the reason he wasn't found was the fact that it was snowing (the road had been snow covered).

It's certainly possible. Two things I've never understood about the Mike-did-it-and-then-committed-suicide theory are why even take Crystal along (if it's premeditated) or why take her to a K-Mart instead of to her grandmother or grandfather (if it wasn't premeditated--and why return to the woods to commit suicide?), and if Mike was responsible and killed himself, why was he not found WITH Diana? Why move off to a different location?

We also don't know for sure if Mike had a firearm and it's been concluded he didn't shoot himself in the head. Excluding that, that doesn't leave many options for committing suicide but hanging (which would've been VERY visible) or something like wrist-cutting, which doesn't really fit the circumstances nor someone like Mike Riemer.

I think Mike being nearby but in a different location points more towards him being murdered than committing suicide. Cars mentioned that he felt because Crystal only mentioned her mother, her father was probably killed first and elsewhere. I agree with that conclusion and think whomever killed Mike and Diana either did it in the early morning or in the evening: the best times for Mike to be checking traps and thus separated from camp. Diana was also found in her sleeping bag, which I think is also in line with that theory.

MegtheEgg86

07-22-2012, 10:39 PM

I need to correct myself. Diana wasn't found in a sleeping bag; Steven Harkins was. I still think Mike was out doing something related to his trap lines or providing for camp, however, when he was accosted.

WishfulDreamer

07-23-2012, 06:56 PM

MegtheEgg86

07-24-2012, 12:07 AM

Have Reimer's other remains been recovered? I'm guessing no, but it'd be interesting to see if the bones had marks indicating stabbing like what happened to Diana. I have to rewatch this segment as I've forgotten how the other couple was killed.

It doesn't seem like it. I know they have a pretty intact skull (IIRC one of the mandibles was broken but found very near the actual skull) but apparently nothing else. It would be massively helpful if the rest of Mike's remains were found. It could possibly clear him completely.

I just don't know what to make of the Harkins/Cooper murders. Those two were shot, while Diana was stabbed 17 times I think. The tube sock is weird too.

dks64

07-24-2012, 03:23 PM

It's certainly possible. Two things I've never understood about the Mike-did-it-and-then-committed-suicide theory are why even take Crystal along (if it's premeditated) or why take her to a K-Mart instead of to her grandmother or grandfather (if it wasn't premeditated--and why return to the woods to commit suicide?), and if Mike was responsible and killed himself, why was he not found WITH Diana? Why move off to a different location?

We also don't know for sure if Mike had a firearm and it's been concluded he didn't shoot himself in the head. Excluding that, that doesn't leave many options for committing suicide but hanging (which would've been VERY visible) or something like wrist-cutting, which doesn't really fit the circumstances nor someone like Mike Riemer.

I think Mike being nearby but in a different location points more towards him being murdered than committing suicide. Cars mentioned that he felt because Crystal only mentioned her mother, her father was probably killed first and elsewhere. I agree with that conclusion and think whomever killed Mike and Diana either did it in the early morning or in the evening: the best times for Mike to be checking traps and thus separated from camp. Diana was also found in her sleeping bag, which I think is also in line with that theory.

This is my theory too. It fits almost perfectly too. It wouldn't make sense to take the child to the area in the first place, Mike would have insisted on leaving her behind to be safe with family. I know I've said this before, but even before his remains were found, I was 99.99% convinced of his innocence.

WishfulDreamer

07-24-2012, 05:50 PM

I just don't know what to make of the Harkins/Cooper murders. Those two were shot, while Diana was stabbed 17 times I think. The tube sock is weird too.
If it was a third party who did this, I don't think it was the same person(s) who committed this crime on the couple. I don't think Diana would be stabbed 17 times and the other couple shot. The amount of stabbing makes me think crime of passion. That being said, the third party could very well have known the couple. But nutcases have been known to do overkill as well without knowing the person.

I also don't think much about the "Mommy is in the trees" comment. They were in the woods, doesn't divulge much. I think if she could say that she would have said something about blood or expressed fear if she'd witnessed the murders. I'm trying to think about how Mike and his girlfriend were accosted by this person and how Crystal would have been shielded from the crime. It makes me wonder if the third party is indeed a group, more than one person to gang up on the couple. And Meg, your theory about being early morning or in the evening is so chilling. They would have been separated and off-guard for sure. And I'd forgotten that Diana had been lying there for two months. Did they check for sexual assault or just jump the gun and pin it on Mike?

I think what makes Mike so suspect to people even after his death has been verified is the sparing of Crystal. I can understand speculation since would a killer so vicious that he stabbed a woman nearly twenty times and killed another person be empathetic enough to take a young girl to safety? We've discussed it repeatedly on this board, I know. It also seems weird that Mike wouldn't drop her with family or would just choose a random store to leave her at outside where she could have been abducted or hurt running into traffic. And it seems weird that a vicious killer would risk being seen with the child and would spare her rather than leaving her in the cold. But of course, the killer may have done that because he knew or realized that she couldn't yet speak a lot. I'm still unconvinced either way on this one, to be honest. I'm starting to lean more towards the third party than I ever did before, but a lot of questions nag at me. I will say that I think Mike's note in the car had nothing to do with the crime. I think it was there and got covered in blood at the crime but wasn't written after he did it as a sick message or anything. He was probably apologizing for the fights they'd had or something. I know Crystal was probably asked who dropped her off and whatever questions they could at the time. I think if she was able to say "Mommy is in the trees" she would have been able to say "Daddy left me here" or something to that effect? I don't have children though so who knows. She was so young, of course, and they had no idea that her parents were in the woods at the time.

I wonder how long Crystal was standing there outside the store because it would have been great if someone had witnessed her being dropped off. I really feel for her. She's about thirty now and I remember the article she wrote from 1999 asking where he was, having to grow up wondering if her dad was dead or a murderer and missing her mother. I really hope she's having a good life now.

MegtheEgg86

07-25-2012, 04:12 PM

I wonder how long Crystal was standing there outside the store because it would have been great if someone had witnessed her being dropped off. I really feel for her. She's about thirty now and I remember the article she wrote from 1999 asking where he was, having to grow up wondering if her dad was dead or a murderer and missing her mother. I really hope she's having a good life now.

Yes, and I'm curious as to what time exactly Crystal was spotted outside K-Mart. All we know from the segment is that she was discovered in the afternoon, but it's possible she could've been dropped off earlier and wasn't noticed for some time as she was wandering about. Or was K-Mart even the intended "drop-off" point? I'd like to know what was around the store area in 1985. I guess it's possible Crystal may have even wandered over there from somewhere else. K-Mart = plenty of people, and lost people--even very little kids--tend to gravitate towards populated areas.

I hope she is having a good life too. It must hurt losing both parents and not knowing what happened.

castiron

07-30-2012, 05:08 PM

'd like to know what was around the store area in 1985. I guess it's possible Crystal may have even wandered over there from somewhere else. K-Mart = plenty of people, and lost people--even very little kids--tend to gravitate towards populated areas.

That's a very good point. I speculated in one of these threads, that there was a Dairy Queen in the same parking lot, and perhaps the person brought her there, maybe to the bathroom, clean up, and then snuck out. But that would probably be way too obvious.

I drive by that Kmart several times a week. And EVERY time, I think about Crystal. I believe there was a grocery store and some smaller stores in the same strip. Next time I drive by, I'll try to see what's behind the store--perhaps a neighborhood of older houses or mobile home park (popular in that area). I wonder if the person could have lived nearby and Crystal simply wandered off from the home.

At the time, it was the first shopping area you came to from the main highway. I don't know exactly, but I believe there would be large stretches of forest in that area. Even now, there are patches of undeveloped area where a child could be dropped off, unseen. The person could have pointed out the direction to go, saying, maybe something like, "mommy is over there" or "grandma is over there"... pure speculation.

One thing, the Kmart would be a busy place, a Saturday near Christmas. At the time, there were no Walmarts or Targets, Kmart was king.