Lynn Schuller

Lynn Schuller (Courtesy the Gazette)

Lynn Louise (Tickner) Schuller

Homicide (presumed murdered but body never found – legally declared dead)

1992-3-19-lynn-schuller-clip
A short excerpt from Gazette writer Jeff Burnham’s March 19, 1992 story. More page downloads available below.

Lynn Louise Schuller
25 YOA
DOB: Dec. 5, 1946
3100 30th St. Dr. SE
Cedar Rapids, IA
Linn County
Went Missing: August 6, 1972

 

 

 

A Foreword Note to Commenters

This case summary (like others on this site) was compiled based on statements from law enforcement officials, past and recent news media articles, and other sources. The Cedar Rapids Gazette (in particular, Jeff Burnham’s in-depth “three take” story published March 19, 1992) proved invaluable, along with other articles cited in the “Sources.”

Nowhere in this summary does it allege that Keith Schuller killed his wife, Lynn. Nor does it allege Mr. Schuller fed her body parts to a pet alligator or snakes. In fact, the summary’s second paragraph distinctly references the suspicions and local folklore intertwined in nearly every archived story about Lynn Schuller’s unsolved disappearance and suspected murder.

In response to recent commenters who’ve left volatile personal attacks against us for daring to repeat info clearly in the public domain, you are not the only ones who “know” or “knew” Mr. Schuller. Ironically, the very first person who ever left a comment on this page knew the Schullers, too. (They even bravely submitted a first and last name with the comment.) They’d been told Keith lined the basement of his home with a plastic drop cloth, murdered her and chopped up her body, and then fed it to the hogs he owned or had access to. The person wrote more about what Keith (yes, allegedly) had done with Lynn’s skull, and said Keith’s ex-wife (his 2nd wife, who divorced him) was “much too frightened to ever testify.”

Whether this woman was fed to an alligator, snakes or hogs is all hearsay, but it’s a known FACT that detectives did indeed get a search warrant and seized several evidentiary items from the Schuller home. State investigators — formerly called the BCI, now the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) — were also called in to help.

Newspaper reporters do not make up stories as they go along; as is referenced in the Cedar Rapids Gazette articles, information they published was provided to them by law enforcement officials, investigators, and the Schullers’ family members and close friends familiar with the Schullers’ crumbling relationship and marriage.

This website’s purpose — in addition to celebrating loved ones whose lives mattered to many — has also been to invite thoughtful, civilized discussion with hopes that someone who knows something will come forward and provide investigators with that one small detail that might just help solve a crime. While we are not a law enforcement agency, we are a registered and incorporated Iowa non-profit organization and have shared tips (and sometimes quite detailed information provided to us by our readers, including eyewitness reports) with officials from the local to state to federal level for nearly a decade.

The vitriolic nature of these personal attacks on Lynn’s page are a first for this site. We’ve always encouraged discussion and debate (“where little but important details and names” often surface), but conversations have generally remained mature, civilized, and respectful. 

Our readers come from various socioeconomic and educational backgrounds, so in efforts to help those who skimmed, I’ve included some additional “text photos” — snippets from published articles where one may click to read the original published newspaper report. These snippets link to the very same references we’d already cited in the “Sources” list. 

I suspect Mr. Schuller — or any teacher, for that matter — would hang his head in shame at the egregious and crass comments left here by former students.

We at ICC take pride in researching and writing case summaries. These are not news articles; they are “summaries” (i.e. overviews) of unsolved cases based on collected articles, interviews, research, and info voluntarily provided to us by our readers. Our cross-referenced database (cases listed by city, county, year, etc.) was designed to in turn provide a valuable research tool to other writers and the general public. We’ve also partnered with a number of law enforcement agencies to ensure readers have access to case information. Two examples include Cedar Valley Crime Stoppers (see the Cold Cases tab), and the Cedar Rapids Police Department Investigative Division Cold Case Unit, whose web page links directly to our site “To view all Unsolved Homicides in Iowa.” For one to publicly leave a libelous comment here by calling ICC a “bogus” site serves no other purpose than to insult other readers’ intelligence — readers who sensibly take time to research the facts.  

In 2013 alone, the ICC website had 488,159 visitors and 2,189,694 page views. We put in long unpaid hours trying to make a difference by ensuring these victims’ stories are told and their unsolved cases not forgotten. We reach out to provide comfort and hope — rather than wishing that someone with whom we disagree “gets herpes.”    

Finally, I would like to extend a heartfelt, personal thank you to “Kim,” an astute reader who used facts, tact and diplomacy in numerous efforts to restore public decorum in an online comment forum normally populated with mature adults. Kim went above and beyond the call of duty to further explain the facts in this case and how information is cultivated, even as those who’d never read the source reports turned on her as well. So, my sincere thanks to you, Kim, for investing the time and energy you did in efforts to restore basic respect and decency here. 

To the others: Civilized disagreements and debates are perfectly acceptable, but immature 6th grade name-calling and juvenile, baseless attacks will not be further tolerated.

Jody Ewing, Iowa Cold Cases Founder


Case Summary compiled by Jody Ewing

When Keith Schuller reported his wife Lynn Schuller missing in August 1972, police suspected murder from the very beginning.

Linn CountyLinn County in Iowa
Cedar Rapids in Linn County
Cedar Rapids in Linn County

More than four decades later, they still believe Schuller is responsible for her death, but don’t ever expect to find her body. Why? The suspicions surrounding her disappearance sounded so much like that of local folklore that even police were reluctant to acknowledge Keith Schuller could have committed such an abhorrent act.

The tale began in a Minneapolis suburb, where Lynn Tickner had been born and raised. Barely a teen, she met Keith Schuller — six years her senior — while the two families were vacationing in northern Minnesota. A long-distance relationship culminated in Lynn and Keith’s marriage on Sept. 18, 1965.

The two made their home in Cedar Rapids, and Lynn gave birth the couple’s first and only child in 1969. By all outward appearances, they seemed like a happy couple until 1971, when Keith abruptly announced he wanted a divorce. Lynn, however, wasn’t ready to break up their new family and refused to grant the divorce.

“She always indicated to me that she was hopeful they would resolve it because of the child,” Lynn’s mother, Eloise Tickner, told the Cedar Rapids Gazette in a March 19, 1992 interview with Gazette reporter Jeff Burnham.

Keith continued to press for a divorce, and in 1972, Lynn wrote a letter to her mother stating that Keith had threatened to kill her.

crg-3-19-92-fraley-schuller-wakefieldCourtesy the Cedar Rapids Gazette
On March 19, 1992, Gazette writer Jeff Burnham chronicled the cases of three Iowa women who disappeared under mysterious circumstances. All three women are presumed dead. Download the two-part article in PDF

Keith owned a 6-foot-long alligator, Pogo, and two pet snakes. He’d also served as a medic in the Army for three years.

“You never believe anything like that is going to happen in your own family,” Eloise Tickner told the Gazette, “So I threw the letter away.”

A few months later, while vacationing at the same lake where their daughter and Keith had met, the Tickners received a call from their son-in-law. Lynn had disappeared, he told them, and he didn’t know where she was.

The Perfect Crime?

Harry and Eloise Tickner immediately headed south for Cedar Rapids, where Keith Schuller told them he’d last seen Lynn while she was sleeping. He said that around 7:30 a.m. on Saturday, Aug. 6, 1972 [sic- that date was a Sunday] that he and their 3-year-old son had left the home and returned about five hours later to discover both Lynn and her bicycle were gone.

Courtesy Cedar Rapids Gazette, March 19, 1992
These maps, published by the Gazette, show where Lynn Schuller went missing in Aug. 1972, where Jane Wakefield disappeared in Sept. 1975 and where Denise Fraley vanished in Sept. 1982. All three women were in volatile marriages with divorce proceedings pending. Detectives are certain all three were murdered, and though they’ve long had a prime suspect in each case, have never been able to find enough evidence to convince a prosecutor to charge any of the suspects with murder.

Schuller said he’d decided then to take his son swimming at Bever Park. Before they’d gone, he said, he’d left a note for Lynn.

The “swim” was short-lived, and Schuller and his young son returned home about an hour later. This time, however, he said Lynn’s bicycle was there but that she was missing.

The home showed no signs of forced entry and nothing was disturbed. Lynn’s purse and all her belongings were still there.

Later that same day, Keith Schuller had contacted his wife’s parents — along with several others — to report his wife was missing. Those he’d called arrived at the couple’s home and helped conduct searches in and around the surrounding area.

Keith Schuller Arrested for Refusing to Help Officers in Search

The following afternoon — approx. 24 hours after Keith Schuller said he first realized something was wrong — he called the Linn County Sheriff’s Office to report Lynn missing. Dozens of volunteers helped conduct a more extensive search, while detectives got a search warrant and seized several items from the Schuller home. State investigators were also called in to help.

Keith Schuller was asked to assist in the investigation — particularly to help search the nearby woods for his wife’s body — but he refused to do so and was arrested for refusing to assist an officer. Schuller said he’d refused because he’d already checked out the woods himself. The charge was later dismissed for lack of evidence.

Infrared aerial photos were taken of the home’s surrounding areas to determine if the ground had recently been dug up, but they produced no positive results.

Lynn’s parents offered a $1,000 reward for information leading to Lynn’s body or her whereabouts, but no one came forward. Everyone seemed to hold the same opinion — that Keith Schuller had killed his wife, chopped up her body, and then fed the pieces to Pogo and the snakes.

Multiple Divorce Papers Filed

Keith Schuller continued with efforts to obtain a divorce — this time on the grounds that his wife had deserted him. When Lynn’s parents hired an attorney to represent their daughter, Schuller dropped the case. He would file again and again — a total of seven times in Linn County District Court — but each time when it became apparent he’d have to testify about circumstances surrounding his wife’s disappearance, he would drop the case.

Without his in-laws’ knowledge, Keith Schuller finally went to Dubuque County District Court to file the papers; the divorce was granted in July 1976.

Less than two years later on March 20, 1978, a Dubuque District Court judge granted Schuller’s request to have Lynn Schuller declared legally dead. The decree listed their son as the sole heir of Lynn’s life insurance benefits, with Keith the conservator.

Keith would later marry a woman he’d met in Cedar Rapids before his wife’s unexplained disappearance, but that relationship also ended in a divorce.

Schuller and Pogo head to Idaho where Schuller teaches middle school students, obsesses about death

Schuller eventually left Iowa — taking the 6-foot-long alligator with him — and moved to Fruitland, Idaho, where he taught middle school students for 25 years. A 1992 article in the Gazette said “Pogo” had become a favorite of Schuller’s students, and that Schuller had just recently been featured on a local television news program.

One of Schuller’s former students vividly remembers his science teacher from the mid-90s.

On Friday, August 2, 2013, the student responded to an “Ask Reddit” post titled “What is the scariest unsolved mystery you have ever heard?” The student responded, “My 6th grade science teacher!”

keith-schuller-argus-observerCourtesy photo Independent-Enterprise 
In January 2008, Keith Schuller received the Fruitland (ID) Chamber of Commerce Lifetime Achievement award.

According to the former student, Schuller was seemingly obsessed with death.

After leaving his teaching position, Schuller went on to become the Payette County coroner. Payette County is part of the Idaho and Ontario, Oregon, Micropolitan Statistical Area. The population was 22,623 as of the 2010 census; the county seat and largest city is Payette, ID.

“Although he was our science teacher, all I remember him talking about was deadly diseases (the hantavirus was a favorite of his), deadly animals (he had a pet gila monster), and deadly gasses (he talked about carbon monoxide poisoning a lot),” the student said.

Schuller had lived right next door to the school, and would sometimes let the students come over and feed Pogo the pet alligator, they said.

The Aug. 2 Reddit post linked to Lynn Schuller’s page here on Iowa Cold Cases, and by 10:15 that night, nearly 12,000 people had clicked the link to read about her still unsolved disappearance/murder.

One Reddit commenter said the case sounded like a story from a “Goosebumps” book.

About Lynn Schuller

Lynn Louise (Tickner) Schuller was born Dec. 5, 1946 in Hennepin, Minnesota, to Harry D. Tickner and Florence Eloise (Cook) Tickner. She was raised in a Minneapolis suburb.

Barely a teen, the 13-year-old Lynn met 19-year-old Keith Raymond Schuller while the two families were vacationing in northern Minnesota, and began a relationship that culminated in their marriage on September 18, 1965 when Lynn was 18 and Keith, 24.

In 1969, Lynn gave birth to the couple’s son.

Keith Schuller reported his wife missing on August 6, 1972. (Media reports listed her age as 26, though Lynn Schuller was actually 25 at the time she went missing.)

Keith Schuller then filed for divorce a total of seven times in Linn County District Court without success. Without his in-laws’ knowledge, Schuller finally went to Dubuque County District Court to file the papers, and the divorce was granted in July 1976.

Less than two years later on March 20, 1978, a Dubuque District Court judge granted Schuller’s request to have Lynn Schuller declared legally dead. The decree listed the couple’s young son as the sole heir of Lynn’s life insurance benefits, with Keith the conservator.

Information Needed

The Cedar Rapids Police Department currently has two volunteer investigators who work exclusively on unsolved homicides. These investigators work closely with other investigators from both the Cedar Rapids Police Department, the Linn County Sheriff’s Office, and other law enforcement agencies.

The current investigators assigned to the Cedar Rapids Cold Case Unit are J.D. Smith, a retired Agent for the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation, and Jeff Mellgren, a retired Captain from the Cedar Rapids Police Department.

Anyone with information concerning Lynn Schuller’s unsolved disappearance and/or suspected homicide is asked to contact one of the following individuals or agencies:

You may now also report this information online or by sending a text message to “CRIMES” (274637) with the keyword “5227.” (See http://www.tipsoft.com/index.aspx for more information about TipSoft.)

Sources and References:

 

Copyright © 2014 Iowa Cold Cases, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

 

Add a Comment

48 Responses to Lynn Schuller

  1. Marti Kyles says:

    I find it very interesting that the main suspect for this murder in 1972 Keith Schuller is the Payette County Coroner. How is this possible? I was told that he murdered her, lined the basement of his home at the time with a plastic drop cloth, chopped her body up and fed it to the hogs that he owned or had access to. I was told he also boiled her skull for hours then threw her teeth in several creeks in the area. It is just tragic that her Family will never have closure. I have met Keith years ago and it would be just like him to work himself into a position of this kind to make sure he would always be privy to any incoming information of his crime. His ex-wife is much to frightened to ever testify.

    • Jody Ewing says:

      Marti, I’ve often wondered about his second wife and what she may have discovered over the course of her marriage to Keith. Please feel free to contact me directly at: jody at iowacoldcases.org

      Thanks so much for sharing your insights!

  2. Erin says:

    I never understand that in cases such as this, when it is so patently obvious who
    the murderer is, why not make the arrest and go to trial with the overwhelming circumstantial evidence? Juries usually have enough common sense, i.e., MMO & “Cui bono?”, etc., that a strong prosecutor should be able to get justice for the victim without a body. I know there is a special place in hell for such children of satan, but
    earthly retribution would be awesome!

    • Jody Ewing says:

      Erin, I’m sure many share your feelings, but I think the biggest concern is that if a jury acquits, prosecutors can never try the person again for murder even if solid evidence resurfaces at a later date.

      We have cases here on the website where juries have acquitted individuals even when prosecutors / local LE officials / DCI agents had rock solid physical evidence. (See the Shane Lass case.) The good news, at least for cases not yet tried, is that DNA technology and testing methods are light years ahead of where they were even 10 years ago.

      In the past, brilliant defense attorneys placed finely tuned “reasonable doubt” fiddles in jurors’ hands, but even the finest Stradivarius can’t match a perfect DNA profile. As Warden Norton (from Shawshank Redemption) had framed in needle-point on his office wall, “His judgment cometh and that right soon.” DNA is leading its way.

  3. Diana Kaus says:

    Keith taught at New Plymouth School, not Fruitland. This makes my skin crawl. Can this article be published in the news paper. This man is up for re election.

  4. Danielle says:

    Do you believe everything you read. What happened to innocent until proven guilty. Not guilty until proven innocent. …????

  5. It seems many people apparently have forgotten that we, in fact, live in a country where citizens are innocent until proven guilty. Regardless of the emotionally charged way in which this story is written, or anyones personal feelings, this man has never been charged with this “presumed” crime. We can postulate all we want but this is still no more than a 40+ year old missing persons case until proven otherwise.

  6. Adam says:

    I’ve known Keith since I was 12 years old. He helped me earn my Reptile Study merit badge, and later spoke at my Eagle Scout court of honor. I’ve never known him to be anything but a caring, kind, decent man. Everyone in this country has been brought up on crime TV shows, so much so that I don’t know how anyone can get a fair trial. People are convicted in the court of public opinion. Look at all the hearsay in this article. There is a reason that the burden of proof is on the State in this country. “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”

  7. Eric Edvalson says:

    My cousin was in his 6th grade class in New Plymouth. He was considered the “cool” teacher! I also went to school with his 2 daughters in Fruitland. Nothing in my experiences would lead me to believe this about him. I’ve never known him to be anything but a good kind man. He’s also always been an upstanding member of the community for years. Is also well known for his wildlife rescue work. If he’s guilty of this than it’s the states burden to prove it to be so. INNOCENT until proven guilty! REMEMBER!

    • John Shipley says:

      Absolutely innocent until proven guilty. Circumstantial evidence is not admissible for one obvious reason….There is NO proof!!!!!

      • Jim says:

        Yes Circumstantial evidence is admissible in court. If you believe this is not true then why doesn’t he take a polygraph.That would would prove one way or another, but I bet if offered he would refuse to take one.

  8. Jerry says:

    This article is terrible, and I hope the author gets herpes.

    • Kim says:

      Maybe if you all would read the actual article instead of hysterically jumping to conclusions, you’d realize that the information contained in this profile is derived ONLY from accredited news sources like the local newspapers, and the facts stated come directly from the investigating jurisdiction, in this case, the Linn Co. Sheriff’s Dept. So are all of you going to say that the facts the PD has given out in this case are incorrect? Sure, maybe the info on the Reddit article is sort of out there, but the rest of the profile is nothing but facts taken from the originating investigation. Trying to denounce FACTS of a case make no sense and indicates a mob mentality of over-reaction. Wishing that the author of the article gets herpes is extremely juvenile and lowbrow, but I guess it is a sad reflection what kind of defenders Mr. Schuller has in his corner. For the record, the Iowa Cold Cases website and its owners/contributors provide an extremely beneficial service, it offers up to the public the FACTS of unsolved homicides and missing persons cases in hopes that maybe someone out there might have information that would help solve one of those cases.

      I urge the decriers to take another look at the FACTS outlined here. Keith Schuller tried 7…count ‘em 7…times to file in Linn County for divorce from his missing wife and each time his wife’s family challenged him and he found he’d be forced to testify what he knew about his wife’s disappearance, he dropped the suit, at least until he went behind Lynn’s family’s back and filed in Dubuque Co.. If he wasn’t hiding something, why didn’t he proceed with the first divorce suit, why keep filing and then dropping it when he found he’d have to testify what he knew about her disappearance? Did he not want to committ perjury by lying and saying he knew nothing about her disappearance and likely murder when he really did? He wanted a divorce and Lynn didn’t, and maybe things came to a head that weekend and he got angry and killed her, either by accident or intentionally. He also refused to cooperate with LE in the search for her in the wooded area behind his house and I can tell you from having lived in this area all my life that that wooded area was HUGE back in that era, it spanned from behind his house on 30th St. Dr. to about where Hwy100 is now in Marion, plus it spanned westward towards Cedar Rapids for quite a distance as well. So if they thought maybe Lynn was in the wooded area, even though he claimed he’d already searched it before calling for LE, why wouldn’t you immediately agree to search the area again, wouldn’t having as many people as possible out looking for her increase the possibility of finding her, especially if they thought maybe she was lying injured in the woods somewhere?

      The house in this case is still standing and it’s too bad that investigators can’t get permission from the current owners to go in with the modern equipment and processing techniques that didn’t exist back then and see if there’s any sign of blood or bone fragments, or other body fluids on places like the floorboards under the carpet and the basement joists. There’s a possibility that even if the killer thought he’d disposed of every bit of blood evidence by cleaning it as best he could, traces of it still might remain in the wood joists, floorboards, or even the cement, as those would absorb the fluids, no matter how much he scrubbed.

      And FYI, circumstantial evidence IS admissible and can be used in trials. It’s up to the prosecutors and investigators to make the case that the circumstantial evidence indicates that the perpetrator committed the crime. Sometimes it’s strong enough evidence to get a conviction, other times it is not. The recent acquittal of Johnathon Mitchell in the 2011 murder of Cedar Rapids cabdriver Cathy Stickley is proof that circumstantial evidence doesn’t always hold up in a court and a good defense attorney can create enough doubt in a jury’s mind over the evidence in order to win an acquittal.

      • T Shurte says:

        If the investigators thought there was evidence in that house, the woukdnt need permission from the owners. A probable cause warrent would be good enough. Problem is, hearsay is not evidence. Making up stories is not evidence. A manwho says he searched the wwoods already and refusing to do it again is not evidence. Trying to file for divorce provesto me he didn’t think she was dead. Her family BLOCKED the divorce…why would he keep trying to file for divorce if he knew she was dead? Never heard of that before! Also, he also collected NO life insurance by declaring her dead. It was collected by her son. This article is speculative nonsense! Just because you have .org behind your name, does not make you credible!

  9. E Strong says:

    This is a perfect example of the saying, “Not everything you read on the internet is true”.
    This is a very poor personal interpratation based on an opinion and false information. Not only is this NOT an official site but it is also skewed and twisted to create an urban legend.
    misinformation. Do your research.
    Again, this is not official and is slanderous misinformation and a TERRIBLY skewed opinion BASED on a case in which was closed.

    • Kim says:

      E Strong, do YOUR research, please, before demanding anyone else do it, otherwise you risk looking like a hypocrite and I’m sure that’s the last thing a defender of a murder suspect wants to look like, right? This case has NEVER been closed, it is still VERY OPEN with the Linn Co. Sheriff’s Dept. Why? Because even if Lynn Schuller wasn’t murdered, she is still MISSING and an officially reported missing persons case CANNOT be closed until the person is found either dead or alive. Lynn’s case was officially reported to LE by Mr. Schuller and is still open because she, nor her remains, have ever been found.

      Regarding the rumor that Keith Schuller chopped Lynn’s body up and fed it to his alligator and snakes, here’s what the Cedar Rapids Gazette (a highly credible and reliable newspaper) says about it in a snippet from an article in a series of unsolved murders and missing persons cases in the area, dated March 19,1992, written by Gazette staff writer Jeff Burnham:

      “Before long, Keith Schuller couldn’t help being aware of rumors that he had killed his wife, cut up her body and fed the pieces to Pogo and the snakes. “I was looked upon as this god-awful monster,” he says. “It didn’t seem real at the time, like an out-of-body experience.” Over the years, the rumors died down, perhaps due to the fact that detectives discounted them. “Those reptiles were too small to have been able to devour a human body,” says Capt. Dennis Fiser of the Linn County Sheriff’s Department.”

      So yes, that part is mostly rumors, but I suspect the reason Jody included them in the case profile was because the rumors were part of a credible, reliable news source; plus anyone who has ever heard about this case has probably heard those rumors around town…I know I have. I was a kid when this case happened, but I remember my parents talking about it, saying that they’d heard he’d chopped her body up and fed the parts to his alligator. And that was before I’d ever read any information about the case in the newspaper. So the rumors WERE around town about him feeding his wife to the ‘gator.

      The really funny thing is, out of all the staunch defenders Mr. Schuller is garnering on this site, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM HAS OFFERED ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION concerning this case…if he is truly innocent as the defenders are claiming, why isn’t someone submitting solid proof of that innocence so that he can be fully cleared of any suspicion? Wouldn’t that be the RIGHT thing to do instead of claiming this site is being mean and unfair and slanderous to him, all because this site has posted information about his missing wife’s case? Where has posting facts ever been considered slanderous? Yes, I do agree the Reddit thread doesn’t have much merit because the comments can’t be verified as fact, but again, I suspect it was included because the thread netted attention to the case, NOT because Jody thought it was actually “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”. She often includes links to other sites that have information or comments about Iowa cold cases, just so readers can have the chance to check the other sites out. I’m also curious as to why there’s suddenly a rush to defend Mr. Schuller…the comment about the Reddit thread has been up on the site for at least a year now, so why is it all of a sudden the focus of such a hostile reaction?

      And no one has ever said this is an “official site”. It is not presented as such in any way, nor has Jody Ewing, the founder of the site, or any of the contributors ever claimed that it is an “official site” of any kind. Iowa Cold Cases is a non-profit website that is dedicated strictly to sharing information with the public about Iowa’s many missing persons and unsolved homicide cases in hopes that someone out there might know something about a case and be willing to come forward in hopes of solving it. The information on the profiles comes from credible sources such as the investigating law enforcement agency or from archived and current newspaper articles about the cases. It also comes from family or friends of someone who is on here, or it is submitted by outside contributors who have details about an unsolved case. All of the information is verified before being posted and I see no issue with a site offering information like this…this is not the only site that shares details about cold cases, there’s sites dedicated to cold cases in other states as well, all you have to do is google the state name and the term “cold cases” and they’ll come up.

      Look at if from another angle…imagine if your loved one were missing or was the victim of an unsolved homicide, wouldn’t you hope that someone with info about the case would see the case on a site like this and come forward so that then the case might be closed? Closure is an important thing to families or friends who have had loved ones go missing or get murdered, so please stop attacking this site in the manner it is currently being attacked because in essence, such rude and childish behavior is sending a message to the families who have cases on this site that their feelings of loss and sorrow and anger mean absolutely nothing at all to such critics. I mean really, what if YOU had a loved one listed on this site and you read a post from someone saying how they wished the site owner would get herpes because the poster didn’t like the case profile…wouldn’t you be appalled at such shameful and immature behavior? And what’s the point of indulging in name-calling and wild accusations against the site and site owner, are the ones engaging in that truly oblivious to how badly they’re making themselves look, not to mention making Mr. Schuller look bad as well? Because the name-calling and accusations flying about are NOT based on fact, they’re based on seemingly overwrought emotional reaction by apparent fans of Mr. Schuller’s. Let’s face it, it’s one thing to engage in debating theories of a case in the spirit of trying to figure it out, or sharing memories of someone who is listed on here, but such outright baseless and mindless attacks like this is extremely uncalled for.

  10. E Strong says:

    A biased opinion does not help to solve a case. There are reasons as to why there are certain replies to this article. It is a ridiculous interperatation of a case lacking peices to sway judgement. Which makes this slander.

  11. E Strong says:

    Also, Thank you, Kim, for reiterating on the fact that this article is based on rumors and not facts. YOU HEARD IT EVERYONE, straight from the horses mouth.

    • Kim says:

      E Strong, you seem to have a penchant for presumption and assumption, and remember what they say about “assumption”? I know what you’re making a..well, you know what…of yourself, that’s patently and painfully obvious. PLEASE read my comments again, I did NOT say the article was based on rumor, I said it CONTAINED mentions of a rumor that was INCLUDED IN A RELIABLE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE. I also stated WHY I thought Jody had included that information. Would you also like to cry that the Cedar Rapids Gazette slandered Mr. Schuller by including the rumors in their article? This is a small town, rumors get spread like crazy and even if there’s little to no truth in them, the Gazette AND ICC felt it necessary to acknowledge them as a matter of public record that was VERIFIED by the investigating LE agency handling this case. Note I said PUBLIC RECORD. Not PUBLIC OPINION, which you seem unable to distinguish between the two. Even Mr. Schuller himself referenced the rumors in that article (downloadable in PDF format from the link under the source credits for this profile so you can read the full article yourself, which I STRONGLY advise), so in acknowledging them as being part of local lore, did he then slander himself?

      Even Jody’s details from the Reddit thread are NOT claimed as any sort of fact by her, she states clearly that the information was being quoted directly from the Reddit thread, NOT FROM HER. Yes, I do agree the Reddit info really doesn’t belong here, but I am not the site owner, nor did I submit the info for this case. It’s up to Jody to decide what is posted in case profiles and as I said in my previous comments, I imagine she had a good reason for including the Reddit thread and that was to let readers know there was a link to a site that had details about Lynn’s case. NOWHERE in her link or comments about the Reddit thread does she say “Ermagerd! This must be the truth!” She has links to many other sites, including several blogs devoted to cold cases, and if a third-party posting opinion-only comments like that on a public blog such as Reddit is considered slanderous, then all blog sites would be shut down, including Tumblr, WordPress, and LiveJournal. And whenever a mistake HAS been pointed out on this site, Jody and Kerry have been VERY quick to fix it because despite what you may think, they ARE interested in keeping the records straight on these cases, for to do otherwise is a great disservice to the victims and their loved ones and they’d never dream of causing such harm like that.

      Furthermore, aren’t you aware that your comments and the comments of other defenders are considered slanderous? You want to throw that word around like it’s a Superball, why not take a good hard look at what YOU’RE doing because NONE of you have proof to any of YOUR claims against the site, either. Why are you so hot to vilify an innocent site and owner, is this a personal vendetta or something? Because the axe your grinding sure feels like it and it makes me wonder what your rather hostile interest is in this case, considering your own ridiculous interpretations of information on a profile.

      I reiterate: In all of your arguments and the arguments of others, I see NO evidence or information to set the record straight on Mr. Schuller’s involvement in this case, nor do I see any apparent desire on your part TO want to set the record straight, all you want to do is argue without any merit or substance on your part. If you KNOW he’s innocent, why don’t you and the other defenders PROVE it by putting your money where your mouths are at by actually, you know, OFFERING SOLID EVIDENCE to support your claims? Or are the claims all just bluff and bluster? FYI, knowing this man because he taught you in school or was your neighbor or you spoke to him once in a grocery store while the two of you were shopping for kumquats is NOT proof that he is innocent, many killers can be very charming in their subterfuge, and how many times have you read in the paper or heard on the tv news about someone getting arrested for a murder and the neighbors or friends thought “he/she was a really nice person and had no clue they were capable of such evil”? Remember Ted Bundy? People who knew him, including author Ann Rule, had a hard time fathoming that he was capable of being a such a sadistic serial killer because he seemed so charming and normal…but that’s how he got his victims to go with him, he was charming and personable and won their trust, which is a trait a lot of sociopaths have. Or how about John Wayne Gacy? No one knew he was capable of viciously raping and then killing young boys and stuffing their bodies in the crawlspace under his house or dumping them in the river, he worked as a clown for children’s parties and had met First Lady Roslyn Carter, so it was a shock to people who thought they knew him that someone who seemed so “normal” was committing such atrocious acts.

      Now, unless you can actually offer up some sort of solid proof to verify your claims that Mr. Schuller is being slandered and is completely innocent of any involvement in his wife’s disappearance LIKE I’VE REQUESTED THREE TIMES NOW, I’m done debating with you because your arguments are pointless and unfounded, in case you didn’t realize it before you put on your little thinking cap and decided to go to war against this site.

  12. Kim says:

    BTW, I should add that if the defenders go to the bottom of Lynn’s profile and click on the blue links, those take you to the sources used to write the profile, and there the defenders can read the factual information right “from the horse’s mouth”.

    And yes, my responses are long because I want to make the facts clear and state my position, rather than using “aww, evry1 iz bein’ meanz” as a form of credible argument. If the defenders don’t want to read my posts, that’s their right, but that shows how smallminded and unwilling to listen to reason they truly are, IMO.

  13. E Strong says:

    Right, Verified rumors. Thank you.

    • Kim says:

      Your point is? Yes, they’ve been verified by both law enforcement and news reports, not to mention Mr. Schuller himself, or did you completely miss that part of my comment in your singleminded attempt to try to mine my remarks for support to back you up? You’ve hit a brick wall with this argument, dearie. I’d suggest you drop it and try to come up with something more credible than a constant whine about verified rumors. Or better yet, why not actually READ the cited sources Jody offers on this site at the bottom of the profile page? You might learn some interesting details about the man you’re defending. (Yes, I said I wasn’t going to debate with you but I couldn’t resist a bit more argument with a rabid little defender who is obviously talking out the lower hole of their anatomy)

      • T Shurte says:

        Rumors are just that rumors. If you want to call yourself a credible site, please leave the rumors out of the article and present FACTS only. I mean seriously? There was a lady who commented above that she heard he lined his basement wit plastic, chopped up her body, fed it to the hogs, and threw her teeth in the river. This is ridiculous and no more so that the chopping up her body and feeding it to the alligator. Perpetuating these claims is perpetuating rumors, plain and simple. If the police believe he did it, why DON’T the go in with modern technology and look closer at the house today? They do not need permission, just a judge to sign a warrant to search. Reason the aren’t searching is no evidence a crime was committed there? Lots of things to ponder. Plus, again, just because you have a .org at the end of your site name, this doesn’t make you credible, no a responsible journalist.

  14. E Strong says:

    Tunnel vision

    Sometimes a viable suspect has been overlooked or simply ignored due to then-flimsy evidence, the presence of a likelier suspect, or a tendency of investigators to zero in on someone else to the exclusion of other possibilities (which goes back to the likelier suspect angle)—known as “tunnel vision”:

    • Kim says:

      Tunnel vision..wow, have you looked at your own comments for such a fine display of tunnel vision? Hypocrisy at it’s best right there, dearie.

  15. E Strong says:

    Keith is one the most respected men in Payette County. He is an honest, caring, and hardworking individual who takes pride in jumping through hoops to help the community and the people around him. He has rehabilitated countless amounts of wildlife and has been an intrical part of schools in his lifetime. He is warm hearted, pure spirited And one of the most professional individuals I’ve had the absolute pleasure to know. I would trust him with my life. I’ve known him for many years and he has a genuine heart of gold.

  16. Kim says:

    So this IS a personal vendetta..are you Mr. Schuller himself, or are you a close friend or relative of his? I take it you are, dearie. All glowing praise aside about Mr. Schuller’s apparent tributes, I still don’t see any of that, you know, PROOF that he is innocent, all I’m seeing is continued whines and rants that have no merit or substance to them, it’s just some upset little defenders crying that they got their feelingz hurtz. Knowing someone isn’t proof of innocence, or did you also skip over that part of my comments? People knew John Wayne Gacy, they knew Ted Bundy, they knew Charles Manson, but being acquainted with such killers doesn’t mean those people could definitely say one way or another that they didn’t kill anyone. Friendship/acquantainceship/familial relationship holds no water in court, save for a wife not being forced to testify against her husband if she doesn’t want to. Say you know someone who has committed a quadruple homicide, and you know none of the details or evidence of the case, you just know this person and think they couldn’t be capable of such a crime. Sure, if you’re on fairly intimate terms with the killer, you might be called to offer testimony to his character in court, but that testimony is opinion ONLY and not solid proof that the person didn’t committ the crime. The jury or judge will not accept that as incontrovertible fact, it’s testimony offered for background purposes ONLY. So even if you KNOW Mr. Schuller and think he’s the greatest thing since sliced bread, that is not PROOF that he’s innocent of this crime…you’ve only apparently known him since he moved to Payette County, which was several YEARS after this crime happened. He has had ample time to strengthen up his alibi and his attitude, criminals often do that, you know.

    Now, I REALLY will not be debating with Estrong any longer because honestly, I think I could get my guinea pig to understand my comments better than Estrong can.

    • Sean says:

      Kim, you seem to have your mind made up, don’t you?
      Many of these people have indicated their personal experiences with the man and you have very aggressively discredited their opinion and then insult them. Why are you not open minded or even considerate to those people’s feelings? But rather you accuse them of “talking out of thier lower hole if their anatomy” or using the “assumption makes a….” (btw you misquoted that phrase, makes me wonder if you too might ve fallible like the rest of us).

      Then you try to shove some “burden of proof” obligation on them. Are you a judge? Are you a jury? Are you an attorney? What knowlege do you have of court proceedings?

      These people have stepped forward voluntarily as character witnesses. Since you seem to be much more knowledgeable of the legal process, please tell me, are character witnesses charged with a burden of proof?

      The newspapers that you vehemently defend more than once, although reputable, and qualified, would they be qualified as an expert witness because they are great at reporting weather, stocks, and sports? Would the court allow a journalist article as “expert testimony” and issue a death penalty?

      • Kim says:

        Again, hypocrisy on your part. If I have made my mind up, then so have you people, haven’t you? You’ve all determined without considering any of the facts or evidence in this case that Mr. Schuller is automatically not guilty, simply because you people are all good buddies of his. Personal experience of being drinking buddies or fishing buddies of a suspected killer wouldn’t hold weight in court, as I’ve said. Character witness, yes, but unless you actually KNOW something about the evidence pertaining to the case itself, your testimony in court will only be for character reference. The judge or jury isn’t going to take all the evidence presented to them and say “oh, but so-and-so said he was such a good guy when they knew him, so we’ll overlook the bloody knife with his fingerprints on it, we’ll overlook the life insurance policy he took out on his brother, we’ll overlook his detailed plans on his computer on how to commit the perfect crime, not to mention overlook the 15 eyewitnesses who saw him stab his brother to death and acquit him because everyone says he’s such a great guy.”

        It’s hypocritical of defenders like his to come onto this site and claim it is engaging in slander when you folks turn right around and engage in slander yourself (actually the term you all are looking for is “libel”, look it up) by trying to defame this website and it’s owner by launching vicious and bullying attacks against them.

        You want to play the “I know so-and-so” game, well, I’ll play too. I know Jody Ewing and she is extremely conscientious about this site and what posts on here, and for you all to launch all the nasty attacks you’ve launched against her, you’re defeating your own arguments because you have no ground to stand on by engaging in libel yourself. You’re also continuing to make your case weaker and weaker with every single post because nothing any of you have said has actually contained any evidence or other irrefutable proof that Schuller is innocent.

        Furthermore, look at it from the perspective of someone who has a family member on here, say Lynn’s parents or other relatives. Can you imagine the horror they must feel to know that people are posting on their daughter’s profile page really nasty things like “I hope you get herpes”? What a class act Mr. Schuller’s defenders are all the way around, wow, what’s next, telling me you hope I get cancer and die? If something on this profile upsets you so much, why not have the guts to email Jody and ask if she’d revise or remove it? Her email contact is at the top of the site page under the “About” link.

        And I think you’re overlooking the major tragedy here. This isn’t about Mr. Schuller’s innocence or guilt, this is about a mother, a daughter, and a wife that went missing over 40 years ago and has never been found. Isn’t that the worst thing that could happen to someone or their family? Why isn’t such avid attention being focused on finding Lynn instead of browbeating this site to death because it has dared to post the information about her case on here? If you’ve all got that massive amount of time and energy and resources on your hands, then why not fly here to CR and contact the sheriff’s dept. and see what you can do about getting into her case file and playing amateur detective yourselves? Maybe you’ll have more luck at turning over new suspects than the LE officers, huh?

        I’m not debating this any longer with any of you because none of you have any basis for your arguments here. I have made my claims clear and I have backed them up with solid evidence. Not a single one of you has come up with any proof or evidence to back your claims up, despite the fact I’ve repeatedly challenged you all to put your money where your mouths are. So unless someone can cough up more evidence than “waah, my fweeings are hurtz because my beloved Mr. Schuller was the suspect in his wife’s disappearance and ermagerd, I know him and he can’t be guilty because I KNOW HIM and that proves he’s innocentt”, I will not be responding any further to comments posted on here.

        • E Strong says:

          There is no reason to “prove him innocent” when according to Law you are Innocent until proven guilty…. Or did you miss that part while watching your CSI shows.

          I believe that my long term personal character witness statement holds far more ground than someone who “heard their parents talking about this case as a child”.

          Check your definitions; Hypocrite/hypocracy. These words are used in error.

          Rumors are not “solid evidence”. Backing yourself up using Rumors is not credible.

          All persons have the right to express their opinions. The problem with Closed minded people is that their mouth is always open.

        • T Shurte says:

          Yes…I, personally, HAVE made up my mind due to lack of evidence against Mr Shuller and my personal knowledge of Mr Shuller’s character, just as you have made up your mind based on flimsy, so-called “evidence” that in no way proves Mr Shuller is guilty of this crime.

  17. Sean says:

    Kim,

    You seem to have made up your mind about me. Read my original reply. I never claimed the suspect was guilty or innocent. Interesting.

    My issue was not with the website, or Jody. However, I don’t know if Jody supports 100 percent of your techniques of commenting. If so, maybe have her tell me so. Maybe she might be a bit concerned about someone mistaking your name calling and insults about intellect lower than a guinea pig as expressed opinions of her website. Your verbiage implies that her organization encourages the insults because you’re fighting for the same conviction. Yet her verbiage seems quite professional.

    Your own quotation:
    “And what’s the point of indulging in name-calling and wild accusations against….”, …”are the ones engaging in that truly oblivious to how badly they’re making themselves look”

    Also your own quotations:
    I guess it is a sad reflection what kind of defenders Mr. Schuller has in his corner

    shows how smallminded and unwilling to listen to reason they truly are, IMO.

    but I couldn’t resist a bit more argument with a rabid little defender who is obviously talking out the lower hole of their anatomy)

    Hypocrisy at it’s best right there, dearie.

    all I’m seeing is continued whines and rants

    it’s just some upset little defenders crying that they got their feelingz hurtz

    rather than using “aww, evry1 iz bein’ meanz” (do say these in funny voices?)

    I think I could get my guinea pig to understand my comments better than Estrong can.

    But yet you threw the “hypocrisy” card at me.

  18. Kim says:

    Sean, if you are concerned about my comments I’ve posted and wish to contact Jody about them, her email is available at the top of the site page under the “About” link, so please feel free to write and share your thoughts/concerns with her. As I’ve said, I am no longer responding on this issue because this is not my website and since I have no desire to potentially offend Jody by continuing to argue, I am now respectfully turning the matter over to her to handle however she sees fit.

    • T Shurte says:

      “Like you’ve said” you’re not responding anymore, but you just can’t stop. Just can’t help yourself. You must maintain that “last word!” Also, you type so much and spend so much time on your comments, Kim, saying the exact same thing, that everyone, or most everyone, has started to not even reading the whole comment. How’s this? Will THIS make you feel better?

      “Awesome article! Wow! With so much evidence against Mr. Shuller, I’m surprised this is a cold case! You certainly maintained responsible journalism by reciting local rumor and folklore! Again, I thank you for bringing this to my attention so that I can help! ”

      Is that better, Kim?

      Now, everyone who knows Keith Sculler! We need to make sure we shut up now and not interject our opinions anymore! Kim needs to rest her little fingers!

      • Jim says:

        Yes I know Kieth and have known him for years. I look at all of this in a neutral manner. Just because you know someone, doesn’t mean he isn’t capable of doing this.
        I worked for Law Enforcement for years and if he is innocent why did he refuse to help and even Lawyer up. In all the years I have worked for law enforcement, If you refused to help or speak to law enforcement, want a lawyer, and refuse to take a polygraph. You either did it or know something about it. A Polygraph is inadmissible in court, so they can’t use it against you in court. If you are innocent why wouldn’t you take one. I would, because it shows you are truthful then you are usually taken off the suspect list or at the least go to the bottom of the list and it would prove to the public you didn’t do it.

        T Shurte
        Go and talk to one of the law enforcement officers that have some years under there belt and without giving names ask them if they had a crime and the suspect wanted a lawyer, refused to talk to them and refuse the take a polygraph what they would think. I would bet they would say the same thing I did above.

  19. Phil says:

    I have no idea if the man is innocent or guilty, but statistically in these type of cases the spouse ends up the guilty party.

    Also, I wonder how many times in history people have said, “he was a gentle and caring man”…or “I’ve known him for (insert number here) years and I know he’s not capable of this”…or “there’s no way he did it!”…but they ended up finding out they were wrong, they didn’t really know this person (anymore than the pedophile that sits a few seats away in church)…in secret, people are very capable of some horrendous things.

    • Phil says:

      Also, I wonder how many times in history people have said, “I heard a rumor this guy did it” …or “I heard he didn’t cooperate so he must be guilty!” …but they ended up finding out they were wrong, they didn’t really know this person (anymore than other armchair lawyers on this site)…on the internet, ignorance runs rampant.

      • Phil says:

        I agree, if they soley base their accusations of guilt on a rumor and not the mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing the finger directly at him, you’d be right. But I’m sure if people claim they know him enough to assure his innocence, they must be right!

        p.s. Is your name actually Phil, also?

  20. Tanya says:

    Phil- you are absolutely correct, people really are capable of terrible things that they hide from others. We ALL have our secrets, and you’d be amazed at what a person can hide.

  21. regan ramirez (@reganramirez23) says:

    people completely forgot that this article is called Lynn Schuller everyones talkin about this man like hes a god or some shit like you ever thought that when u yell at ur little brother or took a candy more than him you felt bad and tried to right it i.e being nicer etc. YOU CAN do bad shit and feel bad about it afterwards doesnt change the fact that you still did it period.

Leave a Reply