The Oakland County Child Killer
Brass Tacks

New Lenox, IL

#21627 Jul 22, 2014
Les wrote:
<quoted text>
No argument. I can only guess why they told me they believe me and it was time to shut down all the arm chair detectives. Cooper's press conference shot down Chris Busch, blue Gremlins, Physohex soap, dog hairs, and 12 gauge shot guns. She tried backtracking on the long held evidence that tied the four known victims to the same killer.
It is my belief they are satisfied that they solved he case and are now in protection mode.
Thank Goodness for Kym Worthy and Wayne County, at least they are able to address the Dog hair and the Busch issue because they do not have to kow tow, answer to, or kiss Miss Jessica's ass.
Just sayin

Macomb, MI

#21628 Jul 22, 2014
Here are some of the problems I have with your story.

1. Punky had a naked picture of a young girl in his pocket while playing softball. It was hanging out and you grabbed it.

2. The soap is a claim you make with no corroborating proof.

3. The gremlin is a and paint job are claims you make with no corroborating proof.

4. Punky was at the cabin and he would not let his friends in. No corroborating proof.

5. The dog was buried but no proof it was ever dug up. So this means no corroborating proof.

6. Carried a shotgun around. Another claim with no corroborating proof.

7. You found pictures of victims. No corroborating proof.

Sorry Les, but as I have said from the start. All of your evidence it seems fall in the category of you having the knowledge and people just need to believe you. Only digging up the dog would be real circumstantial evidence. Unless this was or is done, your claims are simply claims.

If you factor in all of the other stories and claims you have made here on this site you lose a lot of credibility.
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21629 Jul 22, 2014
Brass Tacks wrote:
<quoted text>Thank Goodness for Kym Worthy and Wayne County, at least they are able to address the Dog hair and the Busch issue because they do not have to kow tow, answer to, or kiss Miss Jessica's ass.
I don't have a feel for Kym Worthy. I know she was a Chris Busch believer but they do work with the task force who told me they believe I am right.
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21630 Jul 22, 2014
Just sayin wrote:
Here are some of the problems I have with your story.
1. Punky had a naked picture of a young girl in his pocket while playing softball. It was hanging out and you grabbed it.
2. The soap is a claim you make with no corroborating proof.
3. The gremlin is a and paint job are claims you make with no corroborating proof.
4. Punky was at the cabin and he would not let his friends in. No corroborating proof.
5. The dog was buried but no proof it was ever dug up. So this means no corroborating proof.
6. Carried a shotgun around. Another claim with no corroborating proof.
7. You found pictures of victims. No corroborating proof.
Sorry Les, but as I have said from the start. All of your evidence it seems fall in the category of you having the knowledge and people just need to believe you. Only digging up the dog would be real circumstantial evidence. Unless this was or is done, your claims are simply claims.
If you factor in all of the other stories and claims you have made here on this site you lose a lot of credibility.
Would a polygraph work for you? Dozens of witnesses? Dog DNA? I can back up 95% of my claims. Be more specific on my other claims. Then I can respond to your statements.
Unfounded general attacks on me are simple and defensive on your part.
Ursula

Saint Clair Shores, MI

#21631 Jul 22, 2014
Les wrote:
The comment about Cooper joggled my memory.
It has long been told that one victim was shot with a 12 gauge shot gun. That should be the easiest thing to solve for the whole case but Cooper even wants to take that evidence away. Punky kept a 12 gauge shot gun in the trunk of his car 24/7/365. Jim took it when Punky tried to kill himself with it. Jim still has the gun. I understand it is possible to determine the actual gun if enough evidence was saved.
OK, a simple question is in order here. How can you know Jim still has this particular gun and not know whether Gray seized the dead dog nor what any of the "good evidence" was that Gray claimed in the execution of that warrant?
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21632 Jul 22, 2014
Ursula wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, a simple question is in order here. How can you know Jim still has this particular gun and not know whether Gray seized the dead dog nor what any of the "good evidence" was that Gray claimed in the execution of that warrant?
In the fairness of love and war this is a two way street. You answer mine and I will answer yours. Oh I feel that the feeling you were referring to.
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21633 Jul 22, 2014
Ursula wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, a simple question is in order here. How can you know Jim still has this particular gun and not know whether Gray seized the dead dog nor what any of the "good evidence" was that Gray claimed in the execution of that warrant?
It would be a super long shot if Jim sold the gun because it orginally belonged to his father.
I am the only one that knows exactly where the dog is buried. If they found the note they would have contacted me. Gray would not tell me what evidence he found except that it almost got trashed.
Brass Tacks

New Lenox, IL

#21634 Jul 22, 2014
Just sayin wrote:
Here are some of the problems I have with your story.
1. Punky had a naked picture of a young girl in his pocket while playing softball. It was hanging out and you grabbed it.
2. The soap is a claim you make with no corroborating proof.
3. The gremlin is a and paint job are claims you make with no corroborating proof.
4. Punky was at the cabin and he would not let his friends in. No corroborating proof.
5. The dog was buried but no proof it was ever dug up. So this means no corroborating proof.
6. Carried a shotgun around. Another claim with no corroborating proof.
7. You found pictures of victims. No corroborating proof.
Sorry Les, but as I have said from the start. All of your evidence it seems fall in the category of you having the knowledge and people just need to believe you. Only digging up the dog would be real circumstantial evidence. Unless this was or is done, your claims are simply claims.
If you factor in all of the other stories and claims you have made here on this site you lose a lot of credibility.
Spot on.
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21635 Jul 22, 2014
Just sayin wrote:
Here are some of the problems I have with your story.
If you factor in all of the other stories and claims you have made here on this site you lose a lot of credibility.
Last I knew dozens of witnesses is corroborating evidence. There is enough evidence available that they don't need my testimony. They just needed to be lead to the water.

In the case of the Missing Michigan Deer Hunters the case was solved with dozens of witnesses and polygraph. The OCCK case has much more damning evidence. Much easier to solve.
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21636 Jul 22, 2014
Remember I am claiming the case is solved. Just not publicly. I am claiming as many of you do that the authorities have reasons for not making their beliefs public. This has turned into a financial matter. Federal grants to help their whole program and law suit avoidance. I believe even ego and politics are part of the equation. I am even saying I was told of a plan to shut off the public from the evidence. Jessica Cooper is banking on no one believing me. The MSP want badly to come out with what they know.

Since: Jan 13

Hyattsville, MD

#21637 Jul 22, 2014
Brass Tacks wrote:
<quoted text>Spot on.
More like thumb tacks as your mindfame is wack...
I have a simple question for you and I hope you can answer it...if LES's facts are nothing but hearsay why isnt it enought to convict??? ROBERT L ANGLIN was sentenced to life in prison with no parole based on the words of another felon...another convict stated that robert said that he did it...ie hearsay...so if someone can get a life sentence for the murder of cynthia cadieux two years after the fact based on another felons "word" then why is it TOTALLY impossible for an innocent citizen to be taken seriously???
You government shills have been bashing LES for years and anyone with half a brain can understand why...i e les is right and they know it...notice the only posts are bashing les...if you think hes wrong just ignore him...yet your conscience won't let a sleeping dog tell the truth so you call him names...go ahead and call me cray cray and say I was sent to the puzzle factory, my jah jah knows I've pieced it together enougj that truth and redemption are soon coming...ie you fools keep bashing les while I keep adding it up and getting shut down...no worries mon, jah will provide the answer the feds keep hidden...hugs...

This whole investigation is a bunch of hogwash...just rinse and repeat while feds hide all the lies and deceat...TRUST
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21638 Jul 22, 2014
Jessica Cooper refuses to authorize digging up the dog under the rule that you can't charge a dead man with a crime. I understand Ray Anger even had to use his own funds to exhume Norberg's body.
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21639 Jul 22, 2014
Pill Fickleson wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a simple question for you and I hope you can answer it...if LES's facts are nothing but hearsay why isnt it enought to convict???
I am an eyewitness. The issues that you call hearsay have living eyewitnesses.
Kevin

Detroit, MI

#21640 Jul 22, 2014
I did talk to a friend of punkys. He did verify to story les tells about punky at the cabin. It was around punkys birthday and during the time Jane Allen was missing. Punkys friends went up to the cabin to surprise punky for his birthday. When the friends arrived punky was upset and would not allow his friends in the cabin. The cabins windows were boarded up from the inside. They knew something was wrong. They thought he ha a girl in the cabin with him.
Kevin

Detroit, MI

#21641 Jul 22, 2014
I know this really doesn't prove anything. I bring it up because every time I tested les' story I found him to be telling the truth.
Kevin

Detroit, MI

#21642 Jul 22, 2014
You may not like him and that would be understandable. But what if he is telling the truth. At one time Jackie was so convinced her brother was the occk that she and les offered to pay for the DNA testing.
Kevin

Detroit, MI

#21643 Jul 22, 2014
Reasoning wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah as soon as they suggested that a OCCK suspect is still alive, Les thinks it's him that they are talking about. Where is the proof?
During one of my meetings with the MSP det gray showed me the room where all the occk files and suspect sketches were kept. He had the dry erase board in the room with about ten suspects names. Les' name was on the board along with Richard Lawson and David norberg.
Les

Grand Rapids, MI

#21644 Jul 22, 2014
Kevin wrote:
You may not like him and that would be understandable. But what if he is telling the truth. At one time Jackie was so convinced her brother was the occk that she and les offered to pay for the DNA testing.
Glad to hear from you Kevin. It's safe to come in the water now. The sharks have dissappeared. The bullheads are still nibbling. Kevin talked to Jackie when she flipped out and defiantly told him she destroyed critical evidence.
Kevin

Detroit, MI

#21645 Jul 22, 2014
Jackie did admit to me that she destroyed evidence. She did so before les went to the police knowing that he would not be able to produce the evidence for the police and hurt his credibility.
She pretended to be helping Les when actually she was trying to protect her family secret. Only after her mothers house was raided by the police and her mother started selling off her inheritance did she show her true colors.
Not-Babs

Jackson, MI

#21646 Jul 23, 2014
Just sayin wrote:
Here are some of the problems I have with your story.
1. Punky had a naked picture of a young girl in his pocket while playing softball. It was hanging out and you grabbed it.
2. The soap is a claim you make with no corroborating proof.
3. The gremlin is a and paint job are claims you make with no corroborating proof.
4. Punky was at the cabin and he would not let his friends in. No corroborating proof.
5. The dog was buried but no proof it was ever dug up. So this means no corroborating proof.
6. Carried a shotgun around. Another claim with no corroborating proof.
7. You found pictures of victims. No corroborating proof.
Sorry Les, but as I have said from the start. All of your evidence it seems fall in the category of you having the knowledge and people just need to believe you. Only digging up the dog would be real circumstantial evidence. Unless this was or is done, your claims are simply claims.
If you factor in all of the other stories and claims you have made here on this site you lose a lot of credibility.
Who waits for corroborating proof to investigate? Isn't that what an investigation is looking for?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Clooney's restraining order 1 hr stoned luck aka ... 18
In Touch Weekly on the JonBenet Ramsey case 3 hr Undrtheradar 101
News Twenty Times the JonBenet Ramsey Murder Has Bee... 4 hr stoned luck aka ... 7
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 18 hr icu2 449
Sig 20 hr stoned luck aka ... 61
20th anniversary: JonBenet Ramsey case Fri Heloise 28
Radaronline FOIA - JonBenet Ramsey case Fri Just Wondering 26
More from around the web