Putting Things Together (Discussion)

Ron Tammen wiring some cans together

Do you have a question or comment that’s more general in nature–something that extends beyond a specific blog post and synthesizes, extrapolates, and/or puts two and two together? Here’s a good place to write down these sorts of comments and questions.

Feel free to chime in!

28 thoughts on “Putting Things Together (Discussion)

  1. I’ll share one point I’d never considered before finding this site. I had a sort of blind spot for the possibility Ron rode away in someone else’s car. Nothing earth shattering in that, but I’m amazed it never entered my mind. That particular point is probably why I’d always leaned to the Fraternity Prank Gone Wrong Theory.

    1. I know, right? It just makes so much sense. And unless he hitchhiked, which I don’t believe he did, now we have ourselves a conspiracy. (PS. Thanks for using the new page!)

    1. Based on evidence I gathered, I believe that the lengthy post from Anonymous was written by an imposter. After nine days, I pulled it plus my comments.

  2. Well, if I was a well meaning friend of the Miami personnel mentioned, and wanted to defend them, I’d have written something a lot like that. It seemed a bit obvious. I almost said so on the thread. But as I wasn’t sure, I let it go.

    1. Sure, but I can’t have someone misrepresenting their area of expertise. Because it’s my blog, I can’t let things go so easily. As a result, I’ve removed the anonymous feature so people need to put a name to what they’re saying.

  3. Did you ever look into GEDmatch.com? Just browsing the site and saw that on the blood test post.

    1. I’m glad you asked. Marcia Tammen’s DNA had not been added to GEDmatch before she’d passed away. After she died, it would have been really, really difficult to get past the privacy issues for a third party to do so. Not impossible, but difficult and time-consuming. As an alternative, Robert Tammen is in the process of having his DNA tested. When he receives his results, he’ll be uploading them to GEDmatch.

    1. Ralph Smith was my pseudonym for Logan Corbin, the former Oxford cop. That lead was that someone reportedly saw Ron in a car with a woman from Hamilton on the night of Ron’s disappearance and then, after a while, they drove away.

  4. Okay, I forgot you identified him. There’s an awful lot of material here. 😉

    In my mind, if Switzer was the antagonist, the woman in the car seems a lot more likely. That had always seemed a bit of an outlier to me. How exactly was everyone communicating/coordinating? But if someone ON CAMPUS was pulling the strings, well then…

    1. Add some aliases to the mix and it does get a little confusing. 😜So yeah, Switzer may have been pulling the strings from campus or maybe he was coordinating with someone from Wright Patt? Another commenter (Brett N) has said that he thinks that’s where Ron was driven that night, which seems like a reasonable hypothesis to me.

  5. I gave Black Vault another shot today. It’s not very user friendly. And I tried to use your instructions in the header, and really couldn’t follow them. In particular,

    “Jot down the document number from the index and then find it in one of the four folders of the searchable and downloadable database.”

    I could use some specifics on exactly where to plug in that file number. I bet (hope?) I’m not the only one.

    1. Ok, sorry about that. It’s definitely tricky. So you know how when you open a folder, you just see a list of numbers? Those numbers correspond to the document numbers in the index. (The index also refers to it as the “MORI ID#,” whatever that means 🤷🏻‍♀️, but it’s called the document number at the top of the index.) For the most part, the numbers run consecutively in the index and the folders, but then they’ll inexplicably jump to a different prefix. Also, just because a document number may be smaller than another one doesn’t mean it’s in an earlier folder.

      So as an example, the first doc number in the index is 17352. I think that may be the smallest number as well. Let’s say you want that one. The index isn’t very copy/pastable, so you’ll need to write down or type that number in a running list of the docs you want to look at. You then go to the folders to see if you can find it. The doc numbers in the folders have lots of zeroes in front of them—ignore those. And then you just hunt for your number. As it so happens, #17352 isn’t in folder 1 or 2—it’s in folder 3. Once you’ve found the document, then you try to figure out if it’s useful or not—redactions and all. It’s a very tedious process, but it’s pretty cool when you think you’ve stumbled onto something relevant. Does that help? Thank you for your efforts! 🙏

  6. A surprisingly nice letter from the CIA. I bet that almost makes you nervous. December 8, 2022. 3 years to the day after the first confirmed case of Covid. I think. Okay, a rather specific day when we’re talking 18 months out, but whatever.

    1. It’s so funny though…it sounds super nice, but then when you reread it, they’re saying “don’t call us again until that date or else you’re going to push us further behind. If you still don’t hear from us by then you can call us, and then we’ll give you another date.” They’re wily.

  7. It’s odd that just as it’s odds against finding a document proving your case, it’s also odds against finding a document disproving. Sometimes I step back and think “Maybe it just was a frat prank gone bad and nobody talked.” Well, if that’s it, that’s it. Short of a deathbed confession, that secret won’t be discovered.

    The point is that either way, whatever happened, happened, regardless of the ability to document it. I’d really like to know. I’ve swung from being skeptical of the CIA involvement to thinking it did happen that way. There’s just an awful lot of smoke around Miami U at that time to think there wasn’t a fire. The obstructions tossed up by the various agencies sure look like the actions of people with something to hide. But I still accept it’s possible there wasn’t anything to it. I don’t know, just some big picture idle thoughts about the affair.

    1. I know what you mean. I truly do. But as you say, there’s just too much weirdness. The expunged fingerprints are a huge clue that this is more than nothing. And I love that part of the story so much because it’s so serendipitous that he was printed as a kid. And then there are the Miami officials–who were covering things up then and who are still acting strangely, I might add. Obviously I’m biased, but I really do think we’re heading in the right direction.

    2. Something occurred to me as I was answering a question about Ron’s Social Security number last night. It has to do with the university’s actions. As you know, someone from the university interviewed Carl Knox’s former secretary relatively recently, and I believe it happened sometime in the 2001-2008 timeframe. (I think it’s closer to the latter part of that timeframe, but at this point, I’m not ready to reveal everything I know or think I know.) I think whoever conducted that interview learned things about the university’s investigation that the university didn’t want to make public. That list of forbidden words would be a really good starting point, imo.

      Well…remember how Butler Co’s cold case detective (Frank Smith) reopened the investigation into Tammen’s disappearance in 2008? He contacted the university at around the same time, and they sent him some background information, mostly concerning the whereabouts of Ron’s family members. (It’s the type of info that development offices collect on their alumni, I presume.) If someone from the university had recently interviewed Carl Knox’s secretary and discovered some things and they didn’t let Detective Smith know about it? Um, that seems…unwise. I’m not saying that’s how things happened, but it’s something I’m now wondering about.

  8. While the original players in the Tammen saga are all late 80’s at the youngest, whoever interviewed AD was surely much younger. While time is running out on much of the case in terms of first hand witnesses, this particular point surely doesn’t face such a pressing deadline, no pun intended. Maybe there’s nothing to report, but I’d sure like to hear firsthand from the interviewer to that effect. No particular stunning revelation here, but it’s been in the back of my mind a while and decided to mention it.

    1. True. Also, keep in mind that the interviewer and the summary writer–if they’re two different people–know about the blog and may secretly stop by from time to time to read what people are saying. When you and others comment, consider those individuals as part of your audience. Maybe a future point that you make could convince them to come forward.

  9. Last line of the Carl Knox notes:

    “Did he owe Univ any money?”

    Pathetic. For a while, I thought that a Miami rep visiting the Tammens allegedly for payment was a big clue. I thought that was surely a cover story for something more important/sinister/something. Over time, I think it was simply an ill-advised but legitimate visit to collect money. Unbelievable.

    1. Yep: collect the money, ignore possible leads, alter the timeline, don’t mention which book was left open, don’t repeat certain words to reporters, but, by all means, keep the mystery going by telling ghost stories at Halloween. Interesting crisis response strategy.

  10. I strongly recommend you read I’ll Be Gone in the Dark, by Michelle McNamara. It’s her account of a private investigation of the Golden State Killer. I just finished it in two days. If you’ve heard of it, you know she died before the book was finished. I surely hope for better things for you!

    Anyway, the process was oddly analogous to your efforts. This line, among many, seems apt to AGMIHTF: “We live in a swipe-right, blip-scan culture of clickbait, 140-character arguments, and thirty-second viral videos. It’s easy to get someone’s attention, but it’s almost impossible to keep it.”

    1. That’s reeeeallly good. It hits so close to home, it literally brought tears to my eyes. I haven’t read her book, but it’s been on my list for a long time. Thanks for the suggestion–it sounds like something for this weekend.

      Just a few thoughts: even though I feel invisible a lot of the time, as if I’m the only one who seems to care about this or that document or whether or not someone responds to an email, I can’t let it drag me down. I know everyone has their own life to live. I just have to keep going because I honestly think this might be why I’m here. Weird, I know. Also, it’s almost as if some entities–namely, the FBI, CIA, and yes, Miami University–would love for me to lose interest and move on. I think they know by now that’s not going to happen.

      I think we seemed to have more attention and commenters in the beginning because, before I started the blog, it had been so long since anything had been reported on Tammen. Also, I’d been sitting on some pretty big stuff, which I revealed every few weeks over two years. Now, the discoveries are more incremental and, I’ll admit it, a little more in the weeds. I get it. It’s fine. This site will be here for people to check into on occasion, and hopefully, to draw in new followers as well. It’s an important story and hopefully, eventually, it’ll get out there. By the way, a very big thank you to you and several others who have been just as committed to this story as I am. Your comments and questions have been invaluable. I truly mean that.

    2. OMG! I was reading “I’ll Be Gone in the Dark” today, and I just got to page 54 where she’s talking about how much of a true crime fan she is. So much so, that when she meets someone and finds out where they’re from, she immediately thinks of “the nearest unsolved crime.” And her VERY FIRST EXAMPLE is: “Tell me you went to Miami University of Ohio, and every time I see you I’ll think of Ron Tammen, the wrestler and bassist in the school jazz band who walked out of his dorm room on April 19, 1953–his radio playing, the light on, his psychology book open–and vanished, never to be seen again.” 🤯 Did that surprise you as much as it surprised me? Thank you again for the suggestion!

  11. Yeah, I somehow forgot to mention her reference to Ron! That line sure jumped out at me, although it escaped my memory logs. I think you’d have heard from her by now if she was still alive.

    I was also floored by one one of the strong suspects in the case, I forget the name, but he checked ALL the boxes. I put myself in a jury box and uhhh, sort of think I may have found him guilty. Then DNA proved he wasn’t involved. Just a little reminder to not be too quick to assume an answer.

    I came here to ask if you could post somewhere a listing of your current FOIA and other information requests. It’s hard to keep the players straight without a scorecard.

    1. No worries! I’m actually glad you didn’t mention that part because I about died when I read it. It was a great book. Thanks so much for the recommendation. I related to her sooooo much. She could really write, and so can Patton!

      As for your idea for a FOIA scorecard—I’ve honestly been mulling over that same idea, and thinking about how I might do it. I’ll definitely add it to my to-do list. 👍 Thanks!

      Currently, I’m putting finishing touches on the next blog post, which has to do with the fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis. (It’s tangentially related to my Tammen research because of all the military records that were lost.) As far as I know, this will be the first time that this story is being told publicly. I’m pretty sure it’ll be ready to go by tomorrow–stay tuned.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 GB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.