Was there every any concrete evidence to rule out her boyfriend "Rob."??? Such as proof he was on the phone with her at the time of abduction? Or anything????

Not that was mentioned on the segment, but without question he was ruled out as a suspect rather quickly. We are talking about a girl who disappeared off the face of the earth in the general area where 2 other confirmed adult stranger abductions had taken place within a relatively short period of time. Clearly there was active serial killers in this area and probably more than 2 or 3.

From everything I have read about the case and other potentially linked crimes, no person connected to this case in any way thinks Rob Schafer has anything at all to do with Angela's disappearance.

Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but personally I find any negative comments or suspicion cast on Rob to be ignorant and distasteful. Consider what he has had to live with for over 20 years now. God bless him and I pray that he is still among us, hopefully able to have gotten past this tragedy to whatever extent possible.

Was there every any concrete evidence to rule out her boyfriend "Rob."??? Such as proof he was on the phone with her at the time of abduction? Or anything????

Rob is his real name. Rob Schafer to be exact. He passed a lie detector test so there is your evidence that he was innocent. On the flip side of the coin, there hasn't been a single thing to point towards Rob being involved. Nothing.

I think the whole "Rob Schafer did it" nonsense was started by OldSchoolTv, easily one of the most worthless posters in the entire history of this forum, for so many reasons that I won't go into them because it would be a marathon-length post.

Rob is his real name. Rob Schafer to be exact. He passed a lie detector test so there is your evidence that he was innocent. On the flip side of the coin, there hasn't been a single thing to point towards Rob being involved. Nothing.

I think the whole "Rob Schafer did it" nonsense was started by OldSchoolTv, easily one of the most worthless posters in the entire history of this forum, for so many reasons that I won't go into them because it would be a marathon-length post.


This. There was never any concrete evidence to suspect the boyfriend, Rob. Let alone needing concrete evidence to rule him out.

HE DIDN'T DO IT.

:)

There. I feel better. Poor Rob. Of all the boyfriends/husbands on UM, I think my heart broke the most for him.

I didn't think that Rob was involved, either....not for a second. I know there has been some speculation about Angela being abducted by Kenneth McDuff during his crime spree....that's not a bad theory, considering McDuff was not afraid of plucking women right off of the street.

Whoa, I never accused Rob of doing anything, I'm saying where was the evidence to rule him out. Which, you provided he past a lie detector test (which is not impossible even in the event of being guilty, and or lying.) The UM segment doesn't do a great job of ruling him out and inquiring minds such as myself have to cover all our bases. I've seen one too many cases, where it became all to convenient for the significant other to be all to closely involved in the incident where foul play has taken place. And they usually are the cause of it.

With that being said, my prayers go out to everyone who was effected in any way in this tragedy.

Such an eerie series of events.

And I appreciate all the feed back but nothing said on this thread has scientifically ruled out Rob Schafer as a suspect from a Forensic stand-point You may call it ignorance, I call it forensics. And I'm sorry I have to feel that way. No need to spark an arguement, a lie detector test has been passed ten-fold by people whom have lied, that's not forensic evidence. I'm just stating the (little to none) facts available to Me.

Whoa, I never accused Rob of doing anything, I'm saying where was the evidence to rule him out. Which, you provided he past a lie detector test (which is not impossible even in the event of being guilty, and or lying.) The UM segment doesn't do a great job of ruling him out and inquiring minds such as myself have to cover all our bases. I've seen one too many cases, where it became all to convenient for the significant other to be all to closely involved in the incident where foul play has taken place. And they usually are the cause of it.

With that being said, my prayers go out to everyone who was effected in any way in this tragedy.

Such an eerie series of events.

Sorry, we get very passionate about Rob. :)

If I recall correctly, his younger brother heard him on the phone. The busted tranny would have been checked I'm sure. And I think the timeline was pretty rock solid that it had to have happened the way he said it did. But that's without going back and researching.

If I recall correctly, his younger brother heard him on the phone. The busted tranny would have been checked I'm sure. And I think the timeline was pretty rock solid that it had to have happened the way he said it did. But that's without going back and researching.

When I read that second sentence I thought to myself, wait they arrested a transvestite in this case!? :lol:

When I read that second sentence I thought to myself, wait they arrested a transvestite in this case!? :lol:


We've solved it! ELIZABETH CARMICHAEL DID IT!!!!!! :lol:

We've solved it! ELIZABETH CARMICHAEL DID IT!!!!!! :lol:

:lol:

..a lie detector test has been passed ten-fold by people whom have lied, that's not forensic evidence. ...

I agree with you there :) I have lost count and quite frankly I shudder each time I hear about any unsolved case were cops say so and so was cleared because they passed a lie detector test ......... TBH if my freedom depended on even I could beat the lie detector test easily ......... I`m not surprised they are not given too much consideration in courts....

I agree with Necco. I'm pretty sure that the police checked his car to confirm his story and that he was not lying about the transmission. In any case, the window of opportunity for him to do anything was so small, particularly to the extent that she hasn't been found for over twenty years. (Kind of like the Tara Breckinridge case-I doubt with that window of opportunity Wayne Hecker committed the crime even if his demeanor was frustrating to watch and he made questionable statements). I know they did extensive searches for Angela in the area, but I bet the abductor probably drove her a considerable distance away from the crime and was not an area resident. That is probably the reason the crime is still unsolved today.

When I read that second sentence I thought to myself, wait they arrested a transvestite in this case!? :lol:

LMAO! I thought so, too!!!! I was thinking "What tranny? I don't remember any transgendered person being involved in this case?" LOL.

And now, for everyone's reading displeasure, the original "Rob did it" post from January 2007, six and a half years ago.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=192807&highlight=hammond

Wow, what a way to accuse a perfectly innocent man of a horrible crime. OldSchoolTV's main argument for Rob's guilt is that he didn't get the license plate number. Notice how everyone, myself included, shoot down that theory pretty quickly. And yet, the crazy theory still lingers on to this day, like an obnoxious neighbor that just won't move.

I suspect this and other similarly crazy theories were born out of someone's desire to look creative and impressive by thinking outside the box. It's like someone was saying "Hey everybody, look at me, I came up with this wild idea about a case" and then try to pass it of as the rational truth. On what is the most discussed case on this forum. I'm not impressed, and I don't buy it. Sometimes the cases are less mysterious than people make them out to be.

Whoa, I never accused Rob of doing anything, I'm saying where was the evidence to rule him out. Which, you provided he past a lie detector test (which is not impossible even in the event of being guilty, and or lying.) The UM segment doesn't do a great job of ruling him out and inquiring minds such as myself have to cover all our bases. I've seen one too many cases, where it became all to convenient for the significant other to be all to closely involved in the incident where foul play has taken place. And they usually are the cause of it.

As said, the broken transmission could be checked. Also, he was babysitting his little brother who would have most likely witnessed the phone call and Rob leaving the house in a hurry in the middle of it. Also, since he was watching his little brother while his mom was out, he wouldn't have had much time to be away from the house and do anything. On top of that, the phone records would be easy to verify that he was on the phone with her at the time of the abduction.

As you said, the UM segment doesn't do a good job of ruling him out, but I think that is because at the time the UM segment was filmed he was not a viable suspect from LE's perspective. Unfortunately, given the relatively short length of UM segments, they do not have time to provide details on every suspect they have cleared when there are more important details to discuss. I would have loved to see a full hour show dedicated to the investigation on this one though.

And now, for everyone's reading displeasure, the original "Rob did it" post from January 2007, six and a half years ago.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=192807&highlight=hammond

Wow, what a way to accuse a perfectly innocent man of a horrible crime. OldSchoolTV's main argument for Rob's guilt is that he didn't get the license plate number. Notice how everyone, myself included, shoot down that theory pretty quickly. And yet, the crazy theory still lingers on to this day, like an obnoxious neighbor that just won't move.

I suspect this and other similarly crazy theories were born out of someone's desire to look creative and impressive by thinking outside the box. It's like someone was saying "Hey everybody, look at me, I came up with this wild idea about a case" and then try to pass it of as the rational truth. On what is the most discussed case on this forum. I'm not impressed, and I don't buy it. Sometimes the cases are less mysterious than people make them out to be.
R

I read through everyone's theories as to why Rob Schafer is not guilty and its still all circumstancial. Not one thing on there except the transmission could prove his innocense. Unless, there is some way you can purposely blow a transmission, at that point prosecution would have a strong as case proving he was guilty, as he was innocent. But, since he has been cleared as a suspect legally, then he is cleared in my book to I suppose.

R

I read through everyone's theories as to why Rob Schafer is not guilty and its still all circumstancial. Not one thing on there except the transmission could prove his innocense. Unless, there is some way you can purposely blow a transmission, at that point prosecution would have a strong as case proving he was guilty, as he was innocent. But, since he has been cleared as a suspect legally, then he is cleared in my book to I suppose.


Of course you CAN blow a transmission on purpose. But how does that make a strong case for prosecuting him? Because, in theory, if he wanted to, he could have broke his car? Well, I can sink a boat (and have - don't worry, it was mine) but you still can't pin the Titanic on me.

Rob lost his fiancee and his child that night. He is innocent.

Well, I can sink a boat (and have - don't worry, it was mine) but you still can't pin the Titanic on me.

I thought of a tasteless Larry Race joke here.

Rob lost his fiancee and his child that night. He is innocent.

Everything indicating his innocence has pretty well already been said, so I won't repeat it. This is what I do have to add, though: I've never seen anyone on UM try as hard to hold it together when he probably just really wanted to break down as Rob Schafer did. There's so much real pain on his face and in his eyes during that interview. It hurts to watch.

I thought of a tasteless Larry Race joke here.



Everything indicating his innocence has pretty well already been said, so I won't repeat it. This is what I do have to add, though: I've never seen anyone on UM try as hard to hold it together when he probably just really wanted to break down as Rob Schafer did. There's so much real pain on his face and in his eyes during that interview. It hurts to watch.


Oh, I didn't even think of Larry Race when I typed that. DOH.

Nyah, it was a dinghy we used to sink in like 3 feet of water for fun. We'd play 'shipwreck'. Then we'd drag it up from the bottom and start all over again.

In all seriousness though, I think Rob Schafer is tied for most heartbreaking interview on UM for me. The other being Jennie Pratt asking why anyone would hurt her the way she was hurt, because it is so obvious she cannot even conceive of causing someone so much pain.

Oh, I didn't even think of Larry Race when I typed that. DOH.

Nyah, it was a dinghy we used to sink in like 3 feet of water for fun. We'd play 'shipwreck'. Then we'd drag it up from the bottom and start all over again.

That sounds fun! :)

In all seriousness though, I think Rob Schafer is tied for most heartbreaking interview on UM for me. The other being Jennie Pratt asking why anyone would hurt her the way she was hurt, because it is so obvious she cannot even conceive of causing someone so much pain.

Agreed. I hope so much she's happy and well today, because she certainly deserves to be.

R

I read through everyone's theories as to why Rob Schafer is not guilty and its still all circumstancial. Not one thing on there except the transmission could prove his innocense. Unless, there is some way you can purposely blow a transmission, at that point prosecution would have a strong as case proving he was guilty, as he was innocent. But, since he has been cleared as a suspect legally, then he is cleared in my book to I suppose.

Actually, the case against Rob would get laughed out of the courtroom. What I think you're forgetting (or not taking into account) is the lack of evidence that Rob did do this. There are no eyewitness accounts, no forensic evidence (DNA, blood, fingerprints, etc), no history of violence on Rob, nothing. There is NO case. Zero, zip, zilch.

R

I read through everyone's theories as to why Rob Schafer is not guilty and its still all circumstancial. Not one thing on there except the transmission could prove his innocense. Unless, there is some way you can purposely blow a transmission, at that point prosecution would have a strong as case proving he was guilty, as he was innocent. But, since he has been cleared as a suspect legally, then he is cleared in my book to I suppose.

I beg to differ.

-The transmission supports his story.
-He passed a lie detector test.
-Witnesses in the area described the same truck with a similar looking male driving around the area where Angela was abducted from.

He's innocent. Time to move on.

Actually, the case against Rob would get laughed out of the courtroom. What I think you're forgetting (or not taking into account) is the lack of evidence that Rob did do this. There are no eyewitness accounts, no forensic evidence (DNA, blood, fingerprints, etc), no history of violence on Rob, nothing. There is NO case. Zero, zip, zilch.

Well, there would be a sufficient lack of evidence considering she was no where to be found. And you're absolutely right, I'm playing prosecutor here so naturally I'm not compiling any evidence to prove he was innocent.

And, my main point WAS and STILL IS, is there anything that is NOT circumstancial to rule him out. And from what I know, and what you guys have provided Me the answer is NO.

BUT, out of respect for him, I got my answer and he is legally cleared in this case. So we can stop discussing it now.

A couple other threads on Angela Hammond's case. Her brother posted in the longer thread. There are quite a few others, if you do a search on the boards here. Lots of info in those older posts.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=255607&highlight=angela+hammond

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=143239&highlight=angela

http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/h/hammond_angela.html

Actually, the case against Rob would get laughed out of the courtroom. What I think you're forgetting (or not taking into account) is the lack of evidence that Rob did do this. There are no eyewitness accounts, no forensic evidence (DNA, blood, fingerprints, etc), no history of violence on Rob, nothing. There is NO case. Zero, zip, zilch.

For me, his innocence was proved through the people that could corroborate the timeline that night.

*A huge group of friends could corroborate that Rob and Angela were at the barbecue that day and when they left.

*Rob's parents could corroborate being gone that night to leave him in charge of watching his little brother.

*Angela's friend Kyla Engeman could corroborate Angela picking her up after dropping Rob off and the two hanging out around the town square until 11:15ish.

*Phone records could corroborate a call being placed from that phone booth to the Shafer home shortly after.

*Rob's little brother could corroborate Rob babysitting him that evening and Rob running out of the house when he did.

*Police could corroborate (according to an article in the 60 page Angela Hammond thread) that Rob was already at the police station shortly before midnight.

With that in mind, let's say for the sake of argument that Rob is guilty. After a 25 minute phone conversation (and phone records corroborate that time), that would leave him roughly no more than 20 whole minutes to leave the house, abduct Angela, kill her, dump the body somewhere for safe keeping, quickly get his car to the outskirts of town, break the transmission AND get to the police station to report a phony kidnapping. That's an extremely short window of time to get all those critical things done. And take into account that here were are 20 years later and the body still hasn't been found. That would make this 17 year old kid from a tiny country town one of the most brilliant and evil murderers in history. Not to mention one of the best actors in history given his heartbreaking testimony on Unsolved Mysteries.

If that isn't enough to convince you that Rob couldn't have done it, there's always this quote from an article from the other Angela Hammond thread.

"Two witnesses told police they saw a white man with a mustache wearing a dark colored baseball-style cap sitting in the truck near the telephone booth Hammond was using. The witnesses' description is similar to the one Hammond gave her fiance moments before the line went dead."

That's pretty compelling too.

Thats all circlestantial. your not geting all the inromation. They're could of been a chance hes gulty.
(In case it's not obvious, this post was intended as a joke)

THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC Evidence at all in this case. DNA, fingerprints, etc as obviously there is nothing to "forensically" prove she was murdered. Therfore, looking for such evidence to support Rob's innocence is preposterous.

Absolutely everything is "circumstantial" in this case. All we have are a set of circumstances and law enforcement's evaluation of such.

Rob is a victim. Please, someone step in and put a stop to the ridiculous notion that because no scientific evidence exists that means he is prosecuteable.

This entire thread and the continuous replies that "everything is circumstantial to support his innocence" is absurd. Everything is circumstantial to support my innocence as well as EVERYONE ELSE WHO HAS POSTED ABOUT THIS CASE.

Anybody who dismisses circumstantial evidence like the OP doesnt know a thing about criminal cases in the US.

The following is an encore presentation of a previously presented future update of the Angela Hammond case:

"Stack: The suspect was driving a late 1960s or early 1970s two-tone green Ford pickup truck. The back window was completely covered by an opaque decal of a fish jumping out of water, which may look like this. There is a $16,000 reward being offered for leads in the case of Angela Hammond.

The screen does that digital fade thing, and the Unsolved Mysteries 'Update' music rises. We fade into a shot of a small, shack-lke home, clearly in the middle of nowhere. The two-tone green pickup truck is in the driveway.

Stack from beyond the grave: Update! Following a decades-long investigation that involved three different law enforcement agencies, and thanks to a tip from one of our viewers, an arrest has been made in the murder of Angela Hammond. Investigators were led to the home of <insert name here> by researching the truck Angela described on the telephone, and by combining that research with a tip from a viewer who knew <insert name here>.

Cuts to helpful viewer being interviewed.

Helpful Viewer:I had known <insert name here> for several years, and he had repeatedly bragged about killing a girl named Angela in Clinton, Missouri several years ago. At first I thought he was just kidding because I was sure Rob had done it, but after he showed me the pictures, the video tape, and the notarized confession, I knew there was something to this.

Cuts to footage of <insert name here> being led away to a police station in hand cuffs. We hear the voice of an investigator, and then the footage shifts to him.

Disappointed Investigator:In searching <insert name here>'s home, we found a detailed, written plan for the crime, as well as a detailed, written confession, a videotape of <insert name here> committing the crime, photographs of <insert name here> disposing of her remains, and a manuscript titled, How I, <Insert Name Here>, and No One Else, Murdered Angela Hammond. At that point, we stepped up our interrogations of Rob. At one point we held him for questioning for three and a half months. But Rob wouldn't break, so we were left with little choice but to pursue <insert name here> as our primary suspect.

Cut to Stack in a spooky location

Stack from Beyond the Grave:In-credibly, despite the arrest, there are many who are still not convinced of Rob's innocence.

Cut to random kook

Random Kook: If we're so sure Rob isn't guilty, how come the police haven't said Rob is totally innocent of all wrongdoing in any capacity for his entire life, before or since the murder? Sure, maybe this guy had some role in Angela's murder, but that still makes Rob guilty of NOT being involved. Think about it.

Cut back to Stack

Stack from Beyond the Grave: Despite a multi-national interpol investigation, and hundreds of millions of unfounded accusations from our viewers, no evidence has surfaced that would link Rob to Angela's murder. However, in a combined action among the governments of the G20 nations, a special intergalactic investigative force has been assembled, and its leaders have pledged to look for evidence from Earth to Alpha Centurai. A $700 trillion dollar reward is being offered for evidence leading to an arrest of Rob in this case. If you have any information, contact your interstellar bureau of investigation, or call our toll-free number, 1-800-876-5353."

Fin

You win the internet!

I :rofl: when I read the statement from Random Kook.

Great "update" mozart!

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

between mozart's post and the dog fighting a lobster with a wooden spoon, I'm turning off the internet and becoming a cloistered nun. there's nothing awesome left out there to discover. :)

Mozart's post was indeed epic. I read it several times and could not stop laughing. Quite the talent!

:rotflmao:

Well, I'd LIKE to say I appreciate the accolades, but to be honest I am much more concerned about the lack of concentration on the important subject of this thread: figuring out how to pin this on Rob. Let's get it together everyone.

For example, some people cite the occurrence of similar disappearances around the same time and in the same general area as the Hammond disappearance as evidence that points to a serial killer and away from Rob.

Nonsense, I say. It's evidence that ROB is a serial killer!

Now COME ON. Let's get it together. I want 5 new creative ideas about how Rob really did it by the end of the day.

Well, I'd LIKE to say I appreciate the accolades, but to be honest I am much more concerned about the lack of concentration on the important subject of this thread: figuring out how to pin this on Rob. Let's get it together everyone.

For example, some people cite the occurrence of similar disappearances around the same time and in the same general area as the Hammond disappearance as evidence that points to a serial killer and away from Rob.

Nonsense, I say. It's evidence that ROB is a serial killer!

Now COME ON. Let's get it together. I want 5 new creative ideas about how Rob really did it by the end of the day.

Most would say his transmission failing and his car being found in the middle of the town actually supports his story, but I disagree. I would tack Rob to be an athletic type of person, so IMO, it would be more fitting for him to murder Angela, abandon his car and then trek through the town carrying Angie's body all over God's creation trying to find a place to dump it. This of course is all apart of a weird fitness regimen that Rob grew accustomed to. Which would also explain the other women who disappeared under similar circumstances.

Most would say his transmission failing and his car being found in the middle of the town actually supports his story, but I disagree. I would tack Rob to be an athletic type of person, so IMO, it would be more fitting for him to murder Angela, abandon his car and then trek through the town carrying Angie's body all over God's creation trying to find a place to dump it. This of course is all apart of a weird fitness regimen that Rob grew accustomed to. Which would also explain the other women who disappeared under similar circumstances.

This is golden.

In all seriousness, I think this crime is a pure example of a person being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A dangerous predator happened to be out and took a chance of an opportunity to abduct a young woman he saw to be alone and vulnerable in a rural, empty area. It really bothers me they haven't even found her body AND she was pregnant at the time. Really, we can only hope this guy has been busted for another crime and isn't wandering around. Even then, her family still has to deal with never finding her and knowing what happened. I still find it a little difficult to believe that NO ONE has recognized that fish decal. More than likely he removed it immediately after the crime, but wouldn't someone have noticed it before? A neighbor, acquaintance, coworker? Maybe we're looking at a loner type of individual or something because I would think at least one person would call in recognizing it after all those years of syndication and this case being shown on all 3 networks (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this case was shown on NBC,CBS, and Lifetime).

In all seriousness, I think this crime is a pure example of a person being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A dangerous predator happened to be out and took a chance of an opportunity to abduct a young woman he saw to be alone and vulnerable in a rural, empty area. It really bothers me they haven't even found her body AND she was pregnant at the time. Really, we can only hope this guy has been busted for another crime and isn't wandering around. Even then, her family still has to deal with never finding her and knowing what happened. I still find it a little difficult to believe that NO ONE has recognized that fish decal. More than likely he removed it immediately after the crime, but wouldn't someone have noticed it before? A neighbor, acquaintance, coworker? Maybe we're looking at a loner type of individual or something because I would think at least one person would call in recognizing it after all those years of syndication and this case being shown on all 3 networks (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this case was shown on NBC,CBS, and Lifetime).
Great way to sum it up. I completely agree.

Mozart, your name truly does you justice. That work of art, above, is the greatest thing I have ever read.