Lorraine, I must respectfully disagree that Lane Bryant (parent company: Charming Shoppes, which also owns Catherines Plus Sizes and Fashion Bug) is a wonderful company. I was a store manager for 8 years with this company, and I am appalled at how little regard they have for their employees. However, customers are treated very well, as they should be. And that excellent customer service comes from the "store level" employees, not the brass who are only motivated by $$$/greed and good PR. Please don't misunderstand, I am not a bitter former employee. I really loved my job and the customers, but the principles and principals of this company completely sickened me. I am very glad I decided to leave. I will also be glad when they catch the person responsible for the Tinley Park tragedy. I am confident they will.

I know this is a very old posting but I just stumbled upon this article while doing a search for updates on this case. I feel the Lane Bryant (More accurately the parent company) allowed this man to get away with this crime by offering the low reward it did. I am sure a number of people know who this man is but as sick as it sounds in the urban gangsta culture someone like this belongs to it would be considered a worse crime to go to the police as a snitch than it was to shoot these women. Howver even with that someone would have broken that hard set cultural rule if the reward had been massive enough. Now to me and you and most normal people $50,000-$100,000 seems a lot but to these type of individuals it's not enough to betray your people to the police.

And why aren't you calling them when you are there and see this person?

Why didn't you alert some one right then and there?

This guy acted alone so he may never tell anyone what he did.

The best chance to catch this guy will be through DNA or fingerprint matches.

The surviving person knowing who did this is a stretch.

Really, Sharon? Wow! Let the task force know this amazing insight of yours.

Do you realize they got this sketch from the woman that survived getting shot in the neck that day? I'm sure she was able to determine it was a male that executed five women in front of her and then shot her in the neck. Apparently according to you, she got it wrong.

And the police released a small portion of the 911 call secretly made by the manager asking the public to listen to the MALE VOICE shouting in the background to see if anyone recognized the voice.

Still think it's a woman?

baba, I'm going to side with Sharon on this. If you look at the picture it could go either way. The crime is still unsolved, they still need to look at EVERY possibility. there are women out there that could easily pass as a man.

Bob,

How do you explain the surviving sixth victim's detailed description? She saw AND HEARD the whole thing. She was there. How do you think they got the sketch? The fact that he had green beads in his hair? From her. The guy was in the store for a period of time before the killings. The store manager called 911 from her phone and you hear his voice in the background. The authorities released a small segment of that recording hoping people would recognize the voice.

"I wonder have they checked into where each victim was from, the area, and work back from there."

Gee, no, they probably didn't. Amazing insight you have, too! Call the task force right away and suggest they do that.

OBVIOUSLY you haven't read the news accounts when this happened that detailed the victims' lives and where they were from and other personal aspects about themselves.

And you think it's a woman? You do realize there was as sixth victim that survived. Although she was shot in the neck, she was still able to give a detailed description about the offender. (Hint: See sketch above). Where'd you think that came from? And when the store manager called 911, there was some audio of the offender's voice that authorities were asking for the public's help in possibly recognizing the obviously male voice on the recording.

A sad anniversary today and you add to it with your idiocy.

Only a near sighted idiot would focus on only one possibility. IT JUST MUST BE THAT WAY!! Not a good way to look at life or solve problems. Like I said, it's still unsolved, open the envelope baba and look around. Do you belong to the flat earth society? I'm sure the authorities have looked at all of this anyhow, so this discussion is moot.

Bob,

The earth is round and you're the myopic idiot here.

You and everyone else here is discounting the fact there was a surviving
E Y E W I T N E S S to this whole event! It's troubling because you are questioning her credibility, who despite her physical and emotional trauma, she was able to provide a description of the offender and details of what happened. She was working there part time, and if I recall, she was filling in that day. She said HE came in the store and was talking to them for a while. They thought he was there to make some type of delivery. The robbery was announced and as he was marching the women to the back of the store, the store manager called 911. His voice was on the 911 recording and was made available to the public in the hopes of possibly identifying the voice.

You think this surviving eyewitness, who was shot in the neck, would not get the gender right of the offender? Seeing him, hearing him talk? You don't think law enforcement interviewed her extensively when she was physically and mentally ready to be interviewed? Look at the sketch. Again, how do you think it was created? Who provided the details? The EYEWITNESS.

baba, if you haven't been there, watch the pride parade on T.V., there are ladies out there that neither you, me, or their hairdressers know for sure. The world has progressed on openmindedness (one word?). closedmindedness (again one word) never got anyone anywhere. Example: My car won't start. crap. I put four new carburators on it and it still won't start. crap. IT HAS TO BE THE CARBURATOR. crap. O.K. I'm going to put one more on. Psst. Your gas tank is empty. Damn. baba honey, you weren't there. Neither was I. The survivor went through a horrible ordeal. Did she remember every detail accuratly? Would you or I? Even if she did, could she have been mistaken? Dunno. Keep an open mind. P.S. I didn't call you an idiot before. Now? Dunno.

More than 2,000 studies on eyewitnesses in recent decades have determined that recollections are prone to decay, distortion, and suggestion. Honest, well-meaning people often simply misremember or misreport what they have seen. In one experiment, for example, more than two thousand people were shown a 13-second video clip of a mugging, followed by a six-man lineup. Just 14 percent of viewers correctly identified the perpetrator — a success rate lower than that of random guessing. In a 1999 study, 150 college students watched videos of a shooting and then of a five-man lineup. Every one of them identified a suspect, even though the culprit was not pictured. Factors such as fear, poor lighting, the presence of a weapon during a crime, and the passage of time have all been shown to cause mistakes in identifications — even when the witness is the victim of the crime. Witnesses are particularly inaccurate, studies show, when asked to remember the facial features of someone of a different race.

Yes, concerned. I'm familiar with Elizabeth Loftus and her take eyewitness testimony. Nice of you to cut and paste your uncited "expert opinion" from multiple websites.

All you crackpots are forgetting another thing. The store manager called 911 and the killer's voice was heard on the recording. They only released a small portion of it, so obviously there's more audio.

And, Hugo, BRILLIANT insight! Let the authorities know right away! The killer knew how to handle a gun. Wow. Concerned is correct; it's not hard to hit a target just inches away from the barrel, considering he killed them all execution style with shots to the back of the head, except for the surviving eyewitness, who he shot in the neck.

The guy was in the store for a short period of time conversing with the women, so it wasn't an immediate attack. The eyewitness wouldn't be under duress at that point to make an identification, certainly as to remember a person's gender.

And you do realize police intentionally withhold information from the public to weed out crackpots and false tips? That happened in the Brown's Chicken killing case from 1993. So there may be a lot more we don't know from the eyewitness.

BW...although the eyewitness may not have been under duress during a fleeting conversation, I'm sure she wasn't expecting to identify him as the perpetrator of an execution style murder of which she was the sole survivor. I also don't think Concerned claim to be a expert by posting statistics. That information is valuabe. I once witnesses a robbery at a McDonald's, thought my description of the guy was detailed, until I had to pick him out of a line up of mugshots...you have no idea how difficult it can be to id someone.

It's not hard to miss a target laying on the floor from 6 inches away.

Yes Hugo, but people would rather argue the killer may be a woman! The stupidity which often rears its ugly head in these blogs never ceases to amaze me.

Kinda funny. Some people are argueing that there's no way it can be a woman. Others are just saying let's keep an open mind. I'd rather be on that side. We would be living in caves and trying to find some way to warm up that wooly mammoth that we just killed with rocks if someone didn't think outside the box. I'd rather be called an idiot for being open to possibilities than live inside the box.

Hi, Hugo:

This story posted on Jan. 31, 2011. At that time, it had been three years since the killings (hence the headline).

Thanks for your readership.

Lauren Traut,
Associate Regional Editor

Your just an authority on everything aren't you buddy? AT least in your mind!
Ha, Ha!!!

I was speaking specifically to the reliability of eyewitness identification, not whether the perp is male or female. Who cares if people wonder out loud as to the guy possibly being female...at lest people are talking about it, all the better for the investigation.