1956 Reynolds Mystery - Ideas for Thought
"The following is additional input [ideas for thought] on the Mildred Anne Reynolds
Unsolved Mystery, 13 March 1956.
Nephew didn't ride home with her that day. WHY? And how did he end up getting home that particular day? Did someone ride home with her that day?
On 23 March 1956 only 10 days after the car fire according to [Woodward News] – Victim’s Father told reporters, he thought his daughter's death was accidental……
WHY? The inquest jurors had just determined they did not believe the death was accidental and recommended further investigation. This statement
made by the victim’s father is somewhat out in left field so early in the investigation… .isn’t it?
Why was his opinion so convincingly established in such short order? Why were all the evidentiary facts being overlooked, so early on in the investigation?
Expended shell casings found and not linked to case? Why? No further mention of individual that was interviewed and responsible for expended shell casings. Why?
Was mystery shooter a juvenile or a high profile individual in the community? Owner of firearm had to walk three miles to get to scene? Was this a juvenile without transportation and hormones out of control?
Buttons torn from blouse found behind vehicle. Not attributed to events of the crime/accident? Why? Shoe found approximately 250 feet away [in front of vehicle] with traces of blood.
Grassy area disrupted where assault presumably occured? Was this area hidden from view of the road? Planned rendezvous? Assault? Or possibly [both] with pre-determined sequence of events?
Mention of two different farmers at scene? Both apparently were first eyewitnesses to the scene [other than perpetrator] and consequently ended up on the board of inquest.
Easily accessible fuel product accelerants:
1. LP [liquefied petroleum] or Butane fuel.
2. Diesel or Gasoline.
3. Thinner Products from paint store or supplier. As in lacquer thinner, mineral spirits, acetone, etc.
4. Airplane fuel. Jet fuel [JP-8].
Source of immediately available fuel accelerants not specifically common to the scene and easily transportable.
1. Fuel Service Vehicle, as in a commercial fuel truck making deliveries to farms.
2. Farm Service Pickup with large capacity fuel service tank in the bed.
Question... Who, close to the case, would have and did have immediate and common access to any of the above fuel sources, had the opportunity to do the crime, was closely acquainted with victim, and had motive to do the deed. And in what respect was each individual that might come to mind, closely associated with the investigation, and possibly linked to any of the above fuel sources.
The accelerants stated in the paragraph/s
immediately following could possibly be relative to any of the fuels/liquids listed above. What fuel/product could have been used to ignite a
fire that would create such intense heat and be readily available and easily accessible to use for accelerant?
Liquid Propane, probably within a tank in the pickup bed that was at the scene and was driven by the perpetrator.
In a rural area, many farm pickups have been converted to LP fuel and have tanks in the bed and many have a filler [transfer] hose attached
or carried within to fuel farm tractors, etc., as you well know. It would have been easy enough to open the filler valve on the LP [liquefied
propane] tank with the transfer hose attached and literally 'spray' the inside of the vehicle she [Anne] was driving, then carefully and
with caution set it afire in maybe a pre-planned scenario.
Maybe, from a distance, for safety's sake just expend a round, or two, or three of ammunition into the vehicle through the windshield to cause
the volatile fire. A very small spark could have easily ignited the LP fuel. It would have been easily within the realm of possibility for a skilled individual to shoot 3 rounds of ammunition, or even one, through the windshield while using the other one or two rounds earlier to frighten the deceased and cause her to veer off the road.
Any projectile remaining within the vehicle, would have melted [as did the windshield] and probably would never have been found or recovered.
Most incendiary damage is said to have been at left rear of vehicle. The gas filler cap is located in that area on a 1949 Chevrolet [if my memory serves correctly]. Was something
[a rag] stuck in the tank filler neck and then ignited? Or was a prepared molotov cocktail thrown inside the vehicle after the interior was
saturated with the accelerant as the perpetrator/s escaped?
Was someone waiting, knowing she would be on her way home and knew her normally traveled route. Or did someone follow behind her to a point, then passed and overtook her. The perpetrator/s then proceeding on to the next section line [as outlined] after turning around, coming back toward her and blocked the road so she could not proceed further, and at this point caused the chain of events that eventually resulted in her death.
These ideas are presented, in hopes that someone will remember a particular person or persons with easy and immediate access to any of the accelerants above at the time of the crime. Could the perpetrator possibly have been associated with any of the accelerants above either through employment, occupation, or use of same on a regular basis? Who would have been personally acquainted with the victim, had knowledge of her daily routine, and be inclined to commit this heinous crime? Thanks for your pursuit of the truth in this case."
| View or Add Comments (0 Comments)
| Receive
updates ( subscribers) |
Unsubscribe
