This indicated that if the teenagers had appeared in the secondary dock area, the chances of being seen by others were very low.

Alongside documenting footprints and visibility, the investigation team collected mud and soil samples from several spots with clearer shoe prints.

They lightly scrape the surface to obtain samples of still moist mud for analysis of soil composition and particle structure to cross reference with samples from other areas around the lake.

This sampling helped determine whether the traces were created during the night or had existed for days prior.

Soil samples were also taken from the water’s edge and locations with faint drag streaks on the planks to look for signs of disturbed sediment.

The field team used equipment to measure surface compression on the wood, recording any unusual indentations.

However, at the marina, there were no notable deep dents beyond natural wear from daily boat owner activity.

After completing the trace and soil sampling, police worked with the marina manager to review the log of boats leaving the dock on the night of March 19th into the early morning of March 20th.

The marina’s log book showed only two boats had gone out in the evening, one at 6:30 p.m.

and one at 8:15 p.m.

and both had returned before 1000 p.m.

There was no official record of any boat leaving after 11 p.m.

This was particularly important because if the teenagers had accessed a boat at the marina, they would have done so outside operating hours without leaving any log entry.

The marina manager confirmed that the main dock was locked, but the secondary docks were not locked at night, allowing anyone familiar with the layout to enter.

The investigation team noted that the likelihood of the group accessing the secondary docks was higher than the monitored main dock while also visually inspecting the entire water perimeter from the wooden pier.

No unusual objects were floating on the surface at the time of the survey, and using high-powered spotlights to scan dark areas between the floating docks yielded no abnormal findings.

All recordings were immediately forwarded to the analysis team for cross- refferencing with the timeline and established direction of movement.

Although Summersville Lake Marina did not provide direct evidence that the six teenagers had been there, the presence of unidentified footprints in lowlight areas, combined with the unlocked access, kept the marina as a key point of interest for follow-up in the next phase of the investigation.

From that assessment, the field team left Summersville Lake Marina and moved on to survey Battlerun boat launch in the late afternoon of March 20th, treating it as the second critical point due to its open terrain, limited nighttime visibility, and alignment with witness statements reporting engine noise between 2:30 a.m.

and 3:00 a.m.

Upon arriving at Battle Run, the investigation team divided the area into three sections.

the boat ramp slope, the wooden pier leading to the water, and the open ground where small boats, kayaks, or pedal boats were typically pulled up.

This location was quieter than the marina, and the surfaces, especially the wood, allowed clearer observation of disturbances.

At the pier section closest to the water, the investigation team discovered several long streaks running along the planks, appearing as straight scratches wider than normal foot traffic.

These streaks were over 1 m long, parallel to each other, and directed toward the water.

When measured with on-site tools, the team recorded shallow but consistent depth with similar friction levels, suggesting a heavy object, most likely a small boat or pedal boat, had been dragged down.

Additionally, at the junction between the pier and the dirt area, they found semic-ircular wear points indicating where an object touched the ground before being dragged.

These findings were marked with reflective stakes and thoroughly photographed for later comparison.

Simultaneously, the team collected wood samples from the scratched areas for friction analysis, drag direction, and estimated weight of the object.

Expanding the survey to the dirt area behind, the investigation team discovered multiple tire tracks imprinted in the dried mud, still retaining marks from the previous evening.

The tracks were small, consistent with lightboat trailers or handpulled carts.

One track ran along the edge of the dirt area straight toward the pier, but was incomplete due to overlapping footprints.

However, one section was clear enough to measure the width between the ruts, allowing the team to determine it matched common small boat trailer sizes in the area.

Near the tire tracks, the team also noted shoe prints deeper than normal, indicating the ground had borne significant weight as an object was moved.

Soil and footprint samples were carefully collected for records, though at that time it was impossible to confirm any belonged to the teenagers.

The investigation team extended the search radius, checking the lakeside trail connecting Battle Run to flooded areas.

There they found scattered footprints, some leading away from the launch, others toward the water’s edge.

These were not clear enough for specific size or stride identification, but were documented as they lay within a potential movement corridor related to the teenager’s disappearance.

During the survey, police contacted the witness living near Battle Run, who had reported hearing engine noise between 2:30 a.m.

and 3:00 a.m.

The witness described the sound as an unstable small engine running for several tens of seconds before stopping, apparently coming from the water rather than the main road.

The investigation team recorded the witness’s house location, sound direction, and weather conditions that night for sound propagation analysis.

The witness also reported no clear voices, only the engine and a loud impact sound resembling something hitting wood or metal.

Given the area’s low lighting, sparse population, and lack of overnight staff, police assessed Battle Run as having many factors consistent with unsupervised activity during the teenager’s disappearance window.

Limited visibility around the ramp and no cameras made it a critical focus for analysis.

The drag marks, tire tracks, shoe prints, and sound information were entered into the battle run field report, supplementing the timeline and movement corridor, strengthening the assessment that this boat launch likely had direct involvement in the events between 1:48 a.m.

and 3:00 a.m.

on the night of the disappearance.

After completing the initial surveys at Summersville Lake Marina and Battlerun boat launch, the investigation moved to inventorying all mored vessels around the lake to determine if any had left the dock overnight from March 19th into March 20th without official record.

This was a pivotal step because the traces at both launches, especially the drag marks and tire tracks at Battle Run indicated a high likelihood that at least one vessel had been moved during the night.

The investigation team coordinated with marina management, DNR representatives, and boat owners to create a reconciliation list between registered boats and those physically present.

The marina manager provided the activity log for March 19th, including boats that left during the day and returned in the evening.

While checking each moing spot, police quickly identified an empty slot in Roi on the left side of the marina, recorded as the spot for a Boston Wher replica owned by a local resident.

According to the manager, this boat had no recorded departure on March 19th, and the owner had not notified anyone of plans to take it out at night.

Police examined the moing cleat and noted the moing line had been untied manually with no signs of cutting or damage, indicating the person untying it knew boat handling and the marina’s mooring system.

Additionally, the remaining line was neatly coiled to one side, not stretched or tangled, consistent with quick manual untying rather than forceful pulling.

This detail aligned with the trace patterns found at Battle Run, where light drag marks on the wood, suggested a small vessel had been moved from dock to water overnight.

To confirm this was not a mistake or the owner taking the boat unlogged, the investigation team contacted the owner.

The owner stated he had not used the boat on the night of March 19th and had not authorized anyone else to do so.

He emphasized that the Boston Wher replica was usually kept secured and that he always checked it on weekends.

The boat’s disappearance without any marina log entry led police to classify it as a clear anomaly, especially given the six teenagers disappearance just hours earlier.

After confirming one missing boat at the marina, the investigation team moved to Battlerun boat launch for vessel inventory there.

Unlike the marina’s fixed mooring system, Battleler Run was a launch ramp and pedal boat area where small equipment was typically user managed without logging.

However, the onduty DNR staff provided a list of regularly stored vessels and noted that a white and green pedal boat, usually kept at the edge of the dirt area, was no longer in place.

On the morning of March 20th, when police examined the pedal boat’s usual spot, they found the wooden stake used to secure it slightly displaced with disturbed soil around it.

The two side tie lines remained, but the front mooring line had been untied in the same manner as the Boston Wher replica at the marina.

Comparing the two sites, police noted the similarity in untying, both clean, uncut and neatly coiled aside.

This indicated preparation and a certain level of skill by the person involved.

To reinforce the finding, the investigation team checked remaining pedal boats at Battle Run and confirmed only one was missing.

DNR staff also confirmed no events or nighttime activities required pedalboat use and no procedure allowed removal in the early morning without notification.

Cross-referencing with on-site traces, especially long drag marks on wood and small tire tracks from dirt to water, police determined the pedal boat had been moved onto the lake overnight, with timing fitting the gap in the teenager’s timeline.

Placing the two missing vessels side by side, a powered Boston Wher replica from the marina and a pedal boat from Battle Run, along with the physical traces at the sites.

The investigation’s preliminary conclusion was that unauthorized vessel movement occurred between 1:30 a.m.

and 3:00 a.m.

on March 20th.

The fact that vessels from two different locations disappeared the same night within the same time window, both showing untied moorings without owner confirmation, led police to treat it as a serious anomaly, likely directly related to the final movements of the six teenagers before their disappearance.

Immediately after confirming the two vessels from Summersville Lake Marina and Battlerun Boat Launch were missing overnight from March 19th into March 20th.

The investigation coordinated with the Division of Natural Resources Specialized Team to analyze hydraological conditions at Summersville Lake during the critical period.

The goal was to model potential drift paths for the two vessels, the powered Boston Wher replica and the unpowered pedal boat to identify water areas where they might have drifted or become lodged.

DNR began by extracting water level, surface temperature, wind, and current data for the night of March 19th.

According to weather records, wind speeds ranged from 4 to 7 mph, predominantly west to east.

The lake level was stable with no sudden dam releases or changes, improving drift simulation accuracy.

This data indicated the eastern and southeastern lake surface was prone to light object accumulation, especially under the mild winds that night.

For heavier vessels like the motorboat, drift was heavily influenced by engine use.

But if the engine was off or the boat abandoned, initial momentum from the launch point and wind became dominant.

DNR noted that if the Boston Wher left the marina with brief engine use, initial momentum could push it east or southeast before losing control and drifting freely.

Conversely, if the pedal boat left Battle Run without forced propulsion, it would be more affected by wind and surface currents, likely pushed into coes or rock pockets along the eastern shore.

After obtaining hydraological data, the DNR analysis team built three potential drift models based on estimated launch points.

Model one from the Marina secondary dock, model two from the Battlerun Pier, and Model 3 combining both assuming simultaneous departure.

For model one, the Boston Wher’s potential drift was analyzed under two scenarios, engine running and engine off.

If running, the boat could travel farther into open water before slowing.

If off immediately, it would drift slowly eastward, possibly lodging in natural rock pockets along the shore.

For model 2, the pedal boat’s low initial speed and wind susceptibility led to likely southeast drift or accumulation in depressions near the Longpoint rim.

For model 3, DNR examined simultaneous drift and intersection points on the lake, though unable to confirm simultaneous movement.

This model identified high accumulation zones to guide search prioritization.

After running flow simulations and cross-checking with lake bottom topography maps, DNR established three primary search zones.

Zone A, the area east of the marina with average depth and numerous rock pockets capable of trapping large objects.

Zone B, offshore from Battle Run, where pedalboat drift paths most converged.

Zone C, the southern rim of Long Point, where both drift models indicated objects could be pushed due to the west to east wind on March 1920ths.

The investigation team marked these zones on tactical maps as the basis for underwater search deployment.

Each zone was subdivided by radius and depth, prioritizing areas by trapping probability.

Zone A was designated priority one due to higher likelihood of the motorboat lodging in rock pockets.

Zone B was priority two, suitable for pedal boat search.

Zone C was included for expansion, not ruling out unusual currents, pushing both vessels there.

To prepare for the first sonar sweep, police and DNR planned lake access using two survey boats equipped with side scan and downward scan sonar.

They established grid pattern routes starting in zone A, then moving to zone B, and if time allowed, the same day, conducting initial scans in zone C.

Sonar equipment was calibrated to detect returns from boat or pedalboat- sized objects, distinguishing natural rock from man-made shapes based on return patterns.

The underwater survey team was placed on standby for immediate coordination upon any suspicious sonar hits, ensuring timely evaluation of any lake bottom objects.

Completing the lake movement modeling and establishing three primary search zones became a pivotal step, allowing the investigation to focus efforts on highest probability areas rather than spreading across the vast lake surface.

This targeted search structure provided the foundation for the first sonar sweep, aimed at determining whether the two missing vessels were underwater and whether lake bottom traces could reveal the final movements of the six teenagers before their disappearance.

Based on that plan, the underwater search team launched the first sonar campaign on the morning of March 21st, starting from the three priority areas identified through hydraological analysis.

Two DNR survey boats, each equipped with 2010 era sonar, capable of standard side scan and down scan, worked in coordination with the local rescue team to scan the lake surface in a grid pattern.

Although the sonar technology at that time had limited resolution and struggled to distinguish anomalous objects at greater depths, early deployment was still prioritized to take advantage of the stable lake conditions and rain-free weather that day.

The investigative team maintained its strategy of prioritizing area A where drift modeling indicated a higher likelihood that a large object like the Boston Wher replica could have become lodged among rock crevices.

The sonar boats moved in a zigzag grid with parallel scan lines spaced dozens of meters apart to ensure maximum coverage.

On each pass, the screen displayed patches of dark and light corresponding to changes in the lake bottom structure.

DNR specialists continuously marked GPS coordinates of any anomalous signals for more detailed evaluation.

Throughout the morning, the sonar recorded multiple unusual returns, including areas showing large shadows or dense masses.

However, upon closer examination of the return patterns, the specialist determined that most signals were caused by natural rock formations or the rugged lake bottom, which is very common in the eastern section of Summersville Lake.

Some larger signals were flagged as possible targets, but their return shapes lacked characteristics typical of a boat, such as an elongated hull or smooth curves resembling a motorboat shell.

One notable signal that morning caused the sonar team to pause for further assessment.

The return appeared to have a length of approximately 12 15 ft, matching the length of the Boston Wher replica.

When the boat repositioned closer and scanned from multiple angles, the sonar imagery showed the object was buried too deeply in silt and its forward section lacked the structure typical of a boat bow.

Instead, it presented as a solid mass with jagged edges, more consistent with natural rock than a man-made object.

The sonar team marked the coordinates, but removed it from the priority list due to the lack of matching characteristics.

In the afternoon of the same day, the sonar boats shifted to scanning area B, the zone where a pedal boat could have drifted if pushed far from battle run by wind and surface currents.

Since the pedal boat was lighter, its drift path was more complex and it was more likely to snag in shallower depressions.

So, the sonar team reduced scanning speed to increase accuracy.

Even so, the recorded signals did not reveal any object with size or shape consistent with a pedal boat.

Some smaller signals appeared indistinct and when specialists re-evaluated the return patterns, they concluded these were submerged logs or tree roots on the lake bottom.

Additionally, the 2010 sonar resolution made it difficult to distinguish small objects.

Returns were often distorted by lake bottom slopes, especially around the long point area where the terrain is uneven.

Meanwhile, the rescue team stood ready on the second boat, prepared to dive if sonar detected a credible target.

However, no location was clear enough to trigger a dive.

The sonar specialist continuously cross-referenced the simulation maps with realtime signals to determine whether any areas might have been missed.

But throughout the entire day scanning, no location displayed a return pattern resembling a boat hull or hollow object consistent with a pedal boat.

Toward late afternoon, the sonar boats continued scanning a portion of the edge of area C, even though it was not a high priority in the first search round.

This zone featured many steep rock walls that could interfere with sonar waves, creating large shadows and distorted images.

While scanning through a deep rock crevice, the sonar recorded a series of strong consecutive signals, but preliminary analysis showed the return shape was irregular and lacked the defined edges typical of man-made objects.

This result was noted as a rock shelf cluster, a natural underwater rock formation inconsistent with a boat or pedal boat.

Some weaker signals along the lake edge were dismissed due to interference from submerged vegetation.

Upon completing the full 1.2 mi scan loop around the marina and battle run, the investigative team compiled the sonar data and concluded that there was no evidence indicating the presence of a sunken boat or pedal boat in the three priority areas.

The failure to locate any matching objects forced the search team to assess that if the two vessels had left the dock that night, they had not become lodged within the high priority range of the first search round or might lie outside the detectable range of 2010 era equipment.

The scan results showed no signal clear or precise enough to indicate a sunken boat location.

And this was recorded as the official conclusion of the first sonar round, marking an important milestone in determining the investigative team’s next steps.

Concurrent with the first sonar scanning operation on the lake surface, SAR forces were deployed along the Summersville Lake shoreline to thoroughly search the entire interface between the water and the forest edge for signs that the group of teenagers might have moved near the shore before disappearing.

The SR forces divided the shoreline into three segments.

the waterfront strip between the marina and battle run, the long point perimeter and the secondary trails leading down to open shoreline clearings.

Throughout March 21st, the SR teams conducted searches in line formation with team members spaced a few meters apart to carefully scan the ground, rocky banks, and water’s edge.

members use probing sticks, daytime flashlights, handheld cameras, and evidence collection kits to document any potentially relevant traces.

During the search, the team discovered numerous scattered shoe prints in the mud and sand along the shore, but most were distorted by wind, moisture, and footprints from anglers or visitors in prior days.

Some prints were of a length comparable to teenage shoe sizes, but lacked clarity for accurate measurement of width, depth, or sole tread pattern, severely limiting comparison to the six teenager shoe sizes.

These prints were photographed and marked, but could not be used as identifying evidence due to insufficient sharpness and distinctiveness.

Beyond shoe prints, the SR team closely examined any differentially compacted ground areas in hopes of finding signs of heavy objects or simultaneous group movement.

However, the ground surface in many places was affected by rising water and natural mudslides, making wear patterns too faint to determine direction of travel.

At some locations close to the water’s edge along Longpoint, the team found small slide marks, but could not determine whether they were caused by humans, animals, or water saturated soil erosion.

Though all were documented, the team found no directly related signs leading to the six teenagers.

In the expanded search near the forest, CR checked locations commonly used by local youth as gathering spots, old fire pits, or resting areas.

These sites showed no abandoned items or evidence of the group having stopped there overnight.

The team also carefully scanned the shoreline for personal items such as phones, wallets, jackets, or shoes, but made no discoveries.

Inspections of shallow water areas yielded no new leads as no debris or drifting objects were found washed ashore.

Additionally, some shoreline sections with jagged rocks or dense vegetation cover made thorough scanning difficult, but the CR team still followed standard procedures and ensured all accessible locations were surveyed.

At the end of the search day, the SCR team compiled all scene photographs, shoe print samples, and terrain notes for transfer to the analysis team.

Although some scattered shoe prints were collected, none were clear enough to serve as direct linking evidence to the six teenagers.

More importantly, throughout the entire shoreline search, the ACR team found no personal belongings or activity signs belonging to the victims, leading investigators to record the initial conclusion.

The shoreline area provided no clear clues indicating the group of six teenagers had moved close to the W’s edge from 1:48 a.m.

onward.

The search forces expanded the scope into Manonga National Forest immediately after completing the shoreline sweep as it borders the Longpoint Trail where the group of six teenagers was last seen at the party.

Topographic maps showed numerous secondary forest branches connecting from Longpoint deeper into the woods, some with informal trails created over years by locals or hikers.

Since the possibility, though low, that the teenagers left the lake area and moved into the forest still needed verification, CR and K9 teams coordinated a large-scale search starting from the main Longpoint Trail entrance extending along the northern and eastern forest slopes.

At Longpoint Trail, the search team divided into small groups to sweep each section using the forest grid method, moving in line formation to easily detect ground disturbances or vegetation disruption.

The K9 team was first led along the main route, as this was the direction some witnesses reported seeing two teenagers separate from the group that evening, though exact timing could not be confirmed.

However, once the scent dogs moved more than 200300 m from the trail head, the scent trail weakened and could not maintain a stable tracking line.

This led the team to assess that if the group had entered the forest, they did not follow a clear path or left insufficient scent on the ground for the dogs to track.

The K9 team tried multiple clothing items and scent samples taken from the six teenagers bedrooms to aid tracking, but results were similar.

scent started near the trail head and faded quickly after a few dozen meters.

The team recorded this as indirect evidence that the likelihood of the group leaving the party and moving deep into the forest was low.

When shifting to secondary forest branches, the SAR team checked areas likely to show signs of multiple people moving, deeply compacted soil, flattened dry leaves, broken roots, or displaced vegetation sections.

Such signs typically appear when a large group walks or when heavy objects are dragged, but along the entire length of the branches, the team only recorded natural disturbances caused by wildlife or occasional individual hikers from earlier.

No signs indicated six people moving together on the night of March 19th into the early morning of March 20th.

Many branches led to higher ground toward the main US19 highway, but at those locations, there were no abandoned items, fresh footprints, or any evidence related to the group.

In addition to trail checks, the search forces expanded to scattered abandoned cabins along the forest edge, formerly used by anglers or campers years earlier.

At least five old cabins were identified on local ranger maps, and all lay within a reasonable walking radius if the group had headed north or northeast from the party.

At the first cabin, the search team noted a door off its hinges and scattered rotted wood on the porch.

Inside, the floor was thick with dust and showed no fresh footprints.

The second cabin, deeper in the forest, had a closed but easily opened, rusted locked door.

Inside were only a few old empty cans and an undisturbed dust layer on the floor.

The third cabin showed signs of animal habitation, but no human traces in recent weeks.

The fourth and fifth cabins were similarly inspected with the same results.

No recent use and no items or clothing related to the victims.

The SAR team recorded that these cabins, though within the broad search area, provided no evidence the teenagers had stopped there.

After completing the cabins, the team continued expanding the search to cliff edges and overlooks facing the lake as some forest sections connect to high vantage points over the water.

These spots are often used by locals for viewing, but when checked, the ground and rock surfaces showed no recent movement signs or abandoned items.

The steepness and natural terrain made this area difficult to access at night.

So, the likelihood of the teenagers reaching these points if they entered the forest was very low.

In the overall search summary, the SAR team assessed at the Monahala National Forest near Longpoint provided no reliable traces, indicating the six teenagers had moved deep into the woods on the night of March 19th.

The scent dogs could not maintain a trail.

The trails showed no fresh disturbances.

The abandoned cabins recorded no recent human activity and the cliff areas were completely empty.

Accordingly, the initial conclusion was entered into the report.

There was no evidence supporting the hypothesis that the teenage group left the lake area to enter the forest at the time of disappearance and monahala forest was not a primary direction of movement in the group sequence of events before vanishing.

After completing searches on the lake surface, shoreline, and forest, the investigative team shifted to compiling all witness statements received in the first 48 hours to evaluate the likelihood of the group of six teenagers appearing in areas around the lake between 1:48 a.m.

and 3:00 a.m.

The first key statement came from a resident living about half a mile from Battlerun Boat Launch, who reported hearing a small engine sound around 2:30 a.m.

The witness described the sound as similar to a low power boat motor running unevenly, as if the engine was unstable or someone was attempting to start it multiple times.

The engine noise lasted less than a minute before stopping completely, followed by absolute silence.

Police rated this statement highly because the witness’s home had a natural sound corridor directed straight down to the lake, especially with the stable weather and light winds on the night of March 19th.

The second statement came from a couple parked about 1 and a half miles from the marina who reported hearing a loud male shout sometime after 2:00 a.m.

They could not make out the words, but described it as not playful, more like an argument or short command that occurred once and did not repeat.

Though they saw no movement, hearing the shout at a time relatively close to the first statement led police to consider combining the two for possible connection to the same sequence of events.

The third witness provided information about unusual light on the water.

This person was staying at a rental cabin on the eastern hillside of the lake and saw a small white light moving for 3 to 5 seconds on the water around nearly 2:00 a.m.

The light appeared low to the water surface, not a headlight from the main road and vanished abruptly without prolonged movement.

The witness initially thought it might be a nightboater, but reported it to police upon hearing about the six missing teenagers because the timing matched the period when the group was not visible on any cameras.

The investigative team mapped each witness’s location, the engine sound witness northwest of Battle Run, the shout witness northeast of the marina, and the light witness east of the lake.

When cross-referencing these positions with the drift model and wind direction on the night of March 19th, police noted that all three statements aligned with a lake corridor extending from the water east of Battle Run to the area near the marina.

The distances between witnesses and suspected locations were sufficient not to rule out the possibility they were describing different parts of the same event.

In particular, the engine sound statement fit the hypothesis that a motorboat may have been started that night, while the light statement fit a signal from a boat or temporary lighting device.

Next, police sequenced the timeline markers from the statements and compared them to the 1:48 a.m.

mark.

when three teenagers appeared on camera and 3:00 a.m.

The end of the unexplained gap in the timeline, the engine sound heard around 2:30 a.m.

fell in the core of the time gap.

The shout heard after 2:00 a.m.

also lay within the 1:48 to 3:00 window.

The light seen near 2:00 a.m.

fell precisely in the middle.

When placing the three statements side by side, the investigative team noted that all occurred during the period the group was unseen by cameras or direct witnesses and all described phenomena likely on the lake rather than on shore or in the forest.

This reinforced the assumption that if the six teenagers or part of the group approached boats that night, the events described in the statements could relate to the vessels being moved, started, or encountering trouble.

Although it could not be concluded that the statements described the exact same incident, the investigative team determined they held high value for narrowing the time frame in space likely related to the group’s disappearance, and all were incorporated into the timeline for analysis alongside sonar data and traces collected around the lake.

After completing all search activities in the initial 72 hours, the investigative team compiled all collected data to evaluate the next direction and determine the feasibility of the investigative hypothesis.

The key data included camera footage capturing three teenagers at Birch River 1, stop at 148 a.m.

traces at Summersville Lake Marina and Battlerun boat launch.

Information about the two stolen vessels, a Boston wher replica, and a pedal boat.

The results of the first sonar round finding no matching objects.

Shoe prints that were not sharp enough for identification.

No signs of the group passing through the Mononga Hella Forest and three witness statements about engine noise, shouting, and lights appearing on the lake surface between 1:48 a.m.

and 3:00 a.m.

From this chain of data, the investigative team proposed three main hypotheses to explain the disappearance of the group of six teenagers.

The first hypothesis, an accident on the lake, was considered the most likely at that time.

It was based on a series of factors.

The two vessels stolen on the same night and within the group’s unaccounted for time frame.

Drag marks at battle run consistent with signs of a boat or pedal boat being launched into the water.

Witness statements hearing engine noise and loud shouting which could relate to starting the boat in low light conditions or encountering an issue on the water and unusual lights around 2:00 a.m.

consistent with a group using boats at night.

Additionally, Summersville Lake has many cliffs and deep water areas, making accidents likely in dark conditions if the operator lacked experience or the boat was damaged.

However, the factor causing the investigative team to proceed cautiously was that the first sonar round did not locate a sunken boat in the priority area, although the 2010 equipment had resolution limitations.

Nevertheless, the accident remained the strongest hypothesis because it aligned with the available data and witness statements.

The second hypothesis, an attack was proposed due to some factors that could not be fully explained by the accident hypothesis.

First, the two vessels being untied on the same night indicated intentional action rather than randomness.

The mooring lines at both the marina and battle run were cleanly untied, not cut, suggesting the person responsible knew how to quickly release boats.

Second, statements about loud shouting heard after 2:00 a.m.

suggested the possibility of an argument involving multiple people, not just a simple accident.

Third, the absence of any personal items along the shore or in the forest reduced the likelihood that the group voluntarily reached the shore or swam ashore after an incident.

Additionally, the possibility of someone approaching the group at the boat launch, coercing or forcing them onto the boats, could not be ruled out given the lack of items left at the scene.

However, the investigative team had no direct evidence of a third party contacting the group, nor any clear signs of a struggle at the boat launch.

Therefore, the attack hypothesis was rated as moderate.

It had potential basis but lacked confirming evidence.

The third hypothesis that the group left voluntarily was considered the least likely but was still included in the evaluation to ensure procedural completeness.

This hypothesis was based on some cases of local youth gathering, using boats without permission, and leaving the area late at night without notification.

However, the actual factors in this case made the voluntary departure hypothesis less convincing.

The six teenagers did not bring necessary supplies, had no vehicles at the gas station, their phones all stopped working from the previous night, and they left no messages.

The two vessels stolen from different launches also did not fit a planned voluntary departure as executing that would require precise and premeditated coordination for which there was no statement or evidence.

Additionally, no cameras recorded them appearing at exit points from the lake or other settlements after 148 a.m., further reducing the likelihood of an intent to leave the area.

When assessing the feasibility of the three hypotheses, the investigative team ranked the lake accident highest because it fit the recorded chain of events.

The attack possibility was retained as a direction to monitor and the voluntary departure hypothesis was rated as very low probability.

This evaluation summary was added to the official file, becoming the foundation for guiding subsequent steps in narrowing the search scope and identifying areas for deeper analysis.

However, reviewing all data from the initial 72 hours, revealed no direct traces confirming the final location of the six teenagers, forcing the investigative team to consider expanding the search on the lake surface.

From that assessment, police decided to deploy a second sonar round with a larger scan area and an adjusted search grid to cover areas outside the first round scope.

The second sonar round was conducted on March 22nd and 23 using the same two DNR survey boats, but expanding the scan radius beyond the initial 1.2 mi to include areas outside the primary drift model, particularly deep water regions and rock crevices under Long Point, where the first sonar only partially scanned due to the lake bottom slope and interference from natural rock terrain.

The investigative team aimed to additionally scan the entire southern edge of Longpoint, an area farther from the predicted drift path, but still possible for objects to become lodged if redirected by initial water currents and wind inertia.

Additionally, the second sonar round covered areas close to the eastern lakes cliff bases where deep rock crevices and natural water channels created many points that the first sonar had not reached.

DNR adjusted the scan grid to a cross pattern for increased density while varying scan angles between passes to minimize object signal loss due to cliff shadows.

On the first day of the second round, sonar recorded additional anomalous returns, but when cross-referenced with prior years stored lake terrain data, these signals were all identified as rock clusters or natural deep trenches.

A few signals appeared as elongated patches resembling man-made objects more than those in the first round, prompting the sonar team to temporarily mark them for reanalysis.

However, after the boat returned for a different angle scan, the signals clearly revealed as part of a large rock ledge obscured by thin sediment.

Similarly, a signal in the water near area C was closely evaluated due to its slightly curved return shape, but the depth and object density fully matched sedimentary rock lacking hollow characteristics or the long frame typical of a boat hole.

By the end of the second day, the expanded grid scan was completed, including farther southwestern lake sections where some specialists suggested stronger winds could have pushed objects before sinking.

But this area also showed no appropriate returns.

Sonar returns remained only natural rock masses, submerged tree stumps, or interference points from complex terrain.

During the search, divers at Battle Run in the marina remained on standby if sonar identified a viable suspect location, but no cases met the criteria for deployment.

The results of the second scan round led the investigative team to note a clear reality.

No evidence indicated the motorboat or pedal boat sunken in the priority area despite significantly expanded search scope.

This reduced the ability to locate the missing vessels on the lake in the early phase while making accident related scenarios harder to verify through underwater search methods.

After completing all expanded search activities, the investigative team held a summary meeting to re-evaluate all data.

With no new physical evidence recorded, no additional traces or information emerging that could lead to clear signs of the six teenagers in subsequent days, the case file lacked basis to maintain high priority status.

Furthermore, there were no calls, messages, or any interactions from the victims since the night of the incident, and no new witnesses emerged with reliable additional information.

From these factors, the Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office had to decide to shift the case to inactive status, a status for missing person’s files with no new leads, or unable to expand investigation with existing data.

The file was marked inactive, pending new information, meaning the case was not fully closed, but would only be re-examined upon emergence of new physical evidence, witnesses, or data.

This decision was communicated internally and updated in the state missing person system.

All documents, collected traces, and sonar images were archived for future cross referencing if needed.

At that time, no new investigative direction was identified, and the case officially entered a long period without progress.

2 years after the file on the six missing teenagers was shifted to inactive status, the case rarely appeared in the Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office weekly reports except for required periodic updates.

However, in mid 2012, Deputy Mark Hollis, then newly assigned to the archiving and case review department, was tasked with re-examining several unsolved missing persons cases for new recruit training purposes.

Among the assigned files, the six teenagers missing at Summersville Lake drew Hollis’s attention due to its unusual nature, six people disappearing simultaneously, two vessels missing from boat launches, and no physical evidence recovered after two sonar rounds.

While restudying the file, Hollis focused particularly on the only video recording the victims, the Birch River Onetop camera, at 1:48 a.m.

on March 20th, 2010.

This was the sole image source confirming the location of the three teenagers on the night they disappeared.

At that time, image analysis technology was still limited, but Hollis decided to review the entire original video at slow speed and with basic software magnification, hoping to find details possibly overlooked before.

When playing the video at 0.25x 25x speed.

Hollis focused on movement in the frame edges where the three teenagers appeared and disappeared from camera view.

What caught his attention was not the three main figures, but the dark area behind them where store lights only partially illuminated the road edge.

Only after rewinding multiple times did he notice a faint dark shadow appearing in the distance at the left edge of the frame exactly when the three teenagers left the camera area and walked toward the parking lot.

The shadow lacked complete shape, but its movement matched human walking pace.

Initially, Hollis thought it could be noise or a low light effect, but upon magnification and contrast enhancement, the movement became clearer.

The dark shadow moved in the same direction as the three teenagers, but lagged by about 1 2 seconds.

When looping continuously, Hollis closely observed to determine if the movement matched human stride rhythm.

Through frame by frame analysis, he noted regular changes in the shadow area, mimicking walking.

The higher shadow part moved up and down rhythmically, while the lower part slightly extended forward.

Although the image was blurry and unable to identify face or body details, Hollis concluded it was most likely a walking person, not noise.

More importantly, the timing of the dark shadows appearance perfectly coincided with the three teenagers leaving the frame and appeared to move along the same path.

This contradicted the 2010 report conclusion, which stated no one else appeared near them at the gas station.

Hollis then analyzed the other camera angle, side camera covering part of the parking area and access to US19 to see if the shadow person appeared further.

However, due to narrow angle and poor lighting, no matching images were found.

Nevertheless, this did not rule out the person standing in an area not [clears throat] covered by the second camera.

By zooming individual frames before and after the faint shadow moment, Hollis attempted to determine the shadows approach direction before entering the frame.

However, the camera only recorded a narrow range, so it was impossible to know if the shadow came from the trail to the right of the station, the US 19 roadside, or the dark land dozens of meters away.

This limitation prevented Hollis from further determining the shadow person’s initial position.

Next, he considered the possibility that the shadow was merely movement from vehicles or light reflecting objects.

But when cross referencing with headlight beams from vehicles in the video, Hollis noted the shadow person’s movement was independent, not coinciding with any light streams from vehicles and not appearing simultaneously with reflections from metal or glass.

This helped rule out the shadow being created by passing vehicles.

Hollis documented all observations, captured key frames, and attached them to an internal report.

In the notes section, he stated, “The blurry image appearing behind the group of three teenagers may be a walking person moving in the same direction but maintaining a certain distance.” He also clarified limitations.

The image is too blurry to determine identity, gender, age, or whether the subject directly interacted with the teenage group.

When submitting the report to superiors, Hollis proposed recording this detail in the file as an additional suspect, but insufficient to reopen the case.

Lacking new physical evidence, no confirming witnesses, and unclear imagery prevented the investigative unit from concluding the faint shadow person was directly related to the disappearance.

The file was updated, but remained inactive.

Nevertheless, the faint shadow person detail was flagged in the system for future cross-referencing if new data emerged.

During the 2013 2014 period, when the sheriff’s office conducted periodic reviews of unsolved missing person’s files, the six teenagers at Summersville Lake case remained on the list for re-examining stored evidence.

Although no new information from witnesses or field reports emerged, the evidence department was required to fully review all archived evidence to determine if any details were overlooked in initial evaluation or could be reanalyzed using expanding forensic methods, though still limited compared to later standards.

The case evidence file consisted of three main groups.

fabric pieces collected at the marina and battlerun areas.

Several unidentified plastic fragments found along the lake shore in the first search days and recorded shoe prints taken along the shore and at the dirt area near Battle Run.

The review team started with the fabric and fiber evidence group stored in sealed paper envelopes, each labeled with collection location and time.

Most fabric samples were very small, consisting of detached fibers, many degraded or hardened due to storage and field moisture.

When cross-referencing initial collection records, the review team noted that no samples were identified as related to the six teenagers clothing at the time of disappearance, but could not be fully ruled out since 2010 lacked high-speed microfiber comparison methods.

The 2013 forensic team attempted digital microscope comparison of fiber structures, but results remained unclear for confirming matches between collected fibers and victim clothing descriptions.

Many fibers had neutral colors like dark blue or gray, easily matching common clothing, making classification more difficult.

Due to lacking detailed microfiber databases, the review team concluded these samples had low value in identifying individuals or reconstructing events.

Next, the team focused on plastic fragments collected along the shore.

These were initially recorded as unidentified origin evidence, possibly from outdoor equipment, personal items, or boat debris.

Some fragments were slightly curved, others flat surfaced or with sharp broken edges.

The review team re-evaluated them by examining structure, thickness, and color.

A few fragments were white and light blue, potentially related to the missing pedal boat, but 2013 lacked advanced polymer analysis to compare plastic to 2000’s pedalboat materials.

No identification codes, distinctive paint marks, or large enough pieces showing industrial features existed.

Therefore, the team could not reach clear conclusions on these plastic fragments origins.

They were classified as unidentified utility evidence retained but without direct analytical value.

The third evidence group involved recorded shoe prints, including photos of prints along the shore and at battle run.

prints were captured with limited resolution 2010 cameras in uneven mud and sand conditions causing blurry images lacking sharpness for sole tread identification.

During re-review of photos, the team attempted contrast enhancement to clarify tread lines, but with low effectiveness.

Most prints were distorted or overlapping, making it hard to isolate toe, heel, or crosscut marks.

prints at Battlerun showed deeper compression consistent with heavy object pressure on soil, but insufficient to identify shoe type or size among victims.

When comparing to the six teenagers footwear records, the review team noted general size similarities, but lacking distinctive features for confirmation of specific ownership.

No prints had unique tread patterns or wear marks.

This resulted in no significant progress from evidence re-evaluation.

Beyond the three main evidence groups, the review team also checked items excluded since 2010, such as paper scraps, bottle caps, and inorganic trash collected along the shore.

These had no direct case connection and were not considered evidence.

However, as part of comprehensive review, they were still re-examined to ensure no misinterpretation or oversight.

After 2 years of storage, some evidence had mildly degraded, especially fibers and soil samples, further limiting analysis.

Upon compiling all review results, the investigative team concluded existing evidence did not meet standards to reopen the case or propose new hypothesis.

Lacking modern analytical technologies like advanced polymer comparison, digital microfiber scanning or improved shoe print databases, confirming or ruling out evidence at this stage was nearly impossible.

The conclusion report to superiors stated, “No new evidence capable of expanding investigation.

All archived evidence remains unable to clearly cross reference with victims or missing vessels.” The file continued in inactive status, awaiting suitable technology or new data that could alter current assessment.

From 2015 to 2018, the case of the six teenagers who went missing at Summersville Lake entered a complete frozen phase as no additional data, witnesses, or physical evidence was recorded that could reinforce or challenge the initial assessments of the investigating authorities.

Throughout these four years, the case file was only reopened during periodic reviews or for standard evidence inventory procedures, but no new details of sufficient value emerged to change its inactive status.

All efforts by local police, including checking the statewide missing person’s reporting system, monitoring unusual reports in the lake area, or receiving tips from residents, yielded no progress.

In 2016, when West Virginia’s traffic camera system was expanded, investigators attempted to cross-reference the new archive data with the 2010 timeline, but no camera captured any movement consistent with the six teenagers on the night they disappeared.

Extracting data from highway cameras was also impossible because no footage from that time had been retained.

In 2017, police received a few calls from citizens reporting sightings of a group of strange young people in forests or near lakes around the state.

But when patrol teams checked, all turned out to be false alarms unrelated to the case.

Calls of this type typically increased during holidays or summer when higher numbers of tourists and hikers led to more mistaken reports based on speculation rather than accurate observation.

Although these reports had no investigative value, they still required police to document and verify them, but ultimately none led to new evidence.

On the physical evidence front, no additional objects found around the lake during 2015 2018 could be linked to the victim group.

Some fishermen reported seeing glowing objects underwater, but when patrol teams used bottom scanning cameras to check, those objects were invariably metal cans, or rotted wood that had sunk years earlier.

There were no fragments of a boat, no personal items like shoes, jackets, or electronic devices washing ashore.

Each year, when the lakes’s water level was lowered for maintenance of the Summersville Dam, lake patrol units conducted visual inspections along the exposed shorelines for unusual objects.

However, for four consecutive years, no suspicious points were discovered.

The lakes’s terrain, with its deep rock walls and natural crevices, posed significant limitations to visual searches.

But even combined with the first and second sonar rounds from 2010, authorities were still unable to identify any location likely to contain man-made objects such as a boat or pedal boat.

Internally at the sheriff’s office, the case was updated to the long-term missing person’s list, becoming one of the cases with the highest number of victims, yet completely lacking additional data over time.

There were no calls from outofstate agencies, no matching identification reports in neighboring states, and no financial evidence or phone signals indicating that the six teenagers were still alive or had left the West Virginia area.

The file continued to be archived under standard preservation protocols, including storing original evidence in the evidence room, preserving camera videos in digital storage, and categorizing crime scene photos under case 10136, Summersville Lake juvenile disappearance.

During these years, community interest also gradually waned.

The spontaneous searches by local residents, which had been frequent in 2010 and 2011, completely ceased after 2014.

Local news outlets only mentioned the case in roundups of unsolved events in Nicholas County.

When lake patrol personnel changed, supplemental notes about dangerous water areas were reviewed, but no adjustments related to the six teenagers case were made.

Each year when the file was flagged for annual review, the conclusion of each round was identical.

No new information, no leads for expanded investigation, no additional evidence.

Even when some families contacted police again in 2018, hoping to apply new analytical technology, investigators had to note that current technology was insufficient to re-examine old videos or shoe prints.

The entire 2015 2018 context thus became the quiet phase of the case.

A period with no events, no developments, and no clues, leaving the file unchanged in storage, deprioritized, and without any path forward.

By late 2018, after the case of the six teenagers missing at Summersville Lake had gone nearly 8 years without progress, Deputy Mark Hollis, who had reviewed the Birch River One-Stop video in 2012, was transferred from the Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office to the Charleston Police Department and joined the city’s cold case unit.

This unit transfer was administrative for Nicholas County’s files, but for Hollis, it was an opportunity to access better analytical tools, particularly the image processing equipment and scene reconstruction software used by the cold case unit for long-standing cases across West Virginia.

During internal training at the new unit, each investigator was required to select two or three old cases to practice reanalysis using more modern technical standards.

Hollis chose the Summersville Lake 6 teenager disappearance because he remained haunted by the blurry figure seen in the 2012 Birch River camera.

A detail not strong enough to reopen the case but impossible to ignore.

Upon reaccessing the digitized file in the federal system, Hollis downloaded all crime scene photos taken in March 2010, including those from Summersville Lake Marina, Battlerun Boat Launch, Longpoint Trail Head, and Lakeside areas.

These digital photos, though captured with limited resolution equipment at the time, still retained enough data for analysis with new image enhancement software.

Hollis started with Battle Run, the site with the most unusual signs in the initial report, long drag marks on the wooden dock, tire tracks, deeply compacted soil, and witnessed statements about hearing an engine.

He opened each photo at high magnification, using tools to adjust contrast and sharpen surface details to highlight traces that may have been faint in the originals.

When analyzing photos of the wooden dock at Battle Run, Hollis immediately noticed the long streaks that the crime scene team had described as shallow scratches running parallel, possibly from an object being dragged.

In the original photos, these streaks were blurry and hard to distinguish from natural woodear.

But after applying light balancing algorithms and shadow layer separation, their shape became clearer.

two nearly parallel streaks extending over about a meter with consistent abrasion depth, all pointing directly toward the water’s edge.

With improved resolution, Hollis could observe that the streaks were not unevenly colored like scratches from shoes or light objects, but rather deep horizontal grooves across the wood grain, indicating the causing object was heavy or had a flat, hard bottom.

The spacing of the two streaks, only a few inches apart, reminded Hollis of the bottom of a pedal boat or metal runners under a boat hole when dragged.

He cross-checked photos of tire tracks in the dirt lot behind, adjusting contrast to sharpen the wheel ruts.

The results showed some tire tracks more clearly, enough to identify two parallel ruts running from the lot down to the dock and disappearing where the wood began to show wear.

When comparing the abrasion streak positions on the wood to the tire track positions, Hollis noted alignment in direction, both pointed toward the water and matched the path a missing pedal boat might have been dragged into the lake.

This discovery did not contradict the initial analysis, but highlighted something the 2010 report only mentioned in passing.

The drag marks on the dock could indicate intentional activity rather than natural signs.

Continuing the photo analysis, Hollis used pixel measurement tools to estimate groove depth relative to the wood surface.

Though photos could not provide absolute precision, the shadow depth and shading intensity suggested pressure stronger than what would occur from dragging a light object like a kayak.

This reinforced the hypothesis that the dragged object had moderate mass consistent with a pedal boat or composite boat hole.

Hollis compiled these findings and revisited the original report scene description.

He noted that in 2010 the crime scene team could not determine the drag marks origin due to limited analytical technology and because the marks were not clearly visible under natural light when photographed.

But with 2018 image enhancement capabilities, the abrasion characteristics were clarified enough to reconsider prior assessments about an object possibly being dragged from Battle Run on the night of the disappearance.

Beyond Battlerun photos, Hollis reviewed Marina photos, but found no similar drag marks as the marina’s wooden dock terrain was less impacted and better lit, making any disturbance easier to detect from the start.

This made the drag marks at Battlerun stand out more as the only prominent mechanical sign related to boat movement on the night of the incident.

Concluding the crime scene photo analysis, Hollis noted in an internal report that the drag marks at Battlerun exhibit characteristics consistent with dragging a heavy object into the water, highly likely the missing pedal boat.

However, he also determined that while these findings clarified the marks nature compared to 2010, they were insufficient to reopen the file due to lacking direct evidence linking the marks to the victims or any specific individual.

His report was saved in the cold case unit system under analysis only, creating no new investigative file, but flagging points potentially useful in the future.

Though it produced no actual progress, Hollis’s analysis showed that the case still had unexplored angles limited by technology at the time of the incident.

Moving into 2020, the Charleston PD cold case unit began testing next generation image analysis tools to address a backlog of long pending cases, including the six teenagers disappearance at Summersville Lake.

A federal assistance program provided access to AI enhanced video software capable of reconstructing motion and denoising blurry frames that previous decades technology could not handle.

When the list of suitable cases was entered into the testing system, Hollis proposed adding the 2010 Birch River one-stop video, the only footage showing three teenagers and the blurry figure appearing behind them.

As this was the case’s sole visual data point, any clarity improvement could alter core file assessments.

The original video was uploaded to the AI software, which processed each frame by enhancing dark areas, smoothing motion, and predicting hidden structures in noisy regions.

Processing took nearly 4 hours, longer than expected due to high noise and low light in the original.

When the AI model finished, Hollis reviewed segments in slow motion, focusing especially on the left corner where the blurry figure had appeared.

What he saw differed marketkedly from the 2012 video.

The previously amorphous dark area now [clears throat] revealed a clearer shape, enough to discern the basic structure of an adult walking.

The AI software could not generate facial details, but the silhouette, including shoulder tilt, stride length, and weight shift favoring the left leg, was far clearer.

In the enhanced video, the person emerged from the frame edge about 0.7 seconds after the three teenagers passed the gas station’s glass door.

The gate was slow, not merging with the group, but following the same direction.

This was no longer light noise as assessed in 2010, but structured movement of a person with body size consistent with an adult male.

What particularly caught Hollis’s attention was the footfall pattern, a slight outward deviation in the right foot with heel striking distinctly before the toe.

This was a hallmark of outward toegate, a mild outward foot rotation during steps.

Hollis recalled that this gate had been noted in a prior local patrol related to a resident near Summersville Lake.

Rymer Cobb, a middle-aged man known for appearing around forest and boat access areas at night.

To verify, Hollis accessed the database of crime scene photos from minor disturbance cases involving Cobb from 2008 to 2015, including dash cam footage from a vehicle stop.

When comparing the two videos side by side, the dash cam man and the AI enhanced figure.

Hollis noted significant similarities.

Both had offset rhythm right foot outward angle and slightly low hip sway when stepping.

Though the AI could not reconstruct sharp details, the motion model was sufficient for a preliminary assessment that the 2010 video figure had a gate very similar to Cobbs.

Hollis further analyzed using motion modeling software which generated path graphs for each frame.

Results showed the Birch River figure had longer than average stride and low shoulder movement consistent with someone over 510 and muscular.

Cross-referencing residency records, Cobb was 5’11 and weighed about 200 lb in 2010, matching the descriptors.

Notably, no one on the witness or party attendee list had a similar gate.

further supporting that the blurry figure was not part of the teenager group.

When zooming the final frame where the figure exited camera range, the AI clarified the lower shadow showing low cut shoes with wide soles similar to the work boots Cobb typically wore in old file photos.

This was not enough for identification, but sufficient to raise suspicion.

Hollis compiled motion data, gate analysis charts, and Cobb file comparisons into an evaluation report.

In it, he wrote, “The figure in the enhanced video exhibits height, weight, and gate consistent with Rymer Cobb, a resident near the lake often present around the Birch River one-stop area late at night.

However, he clearly noted that the video showed no interaction between Cobb and the teenagers and gatebased identification had only investigative value, not legal evidentiary weight.

Nonetheless, Hollis recommended flagging Cobb as a person of interest in the file due to coincidences in location, timing, and gate characteristics.

This detail was added to the expanded case file with update priority, marking the first time since 2010 that investigators had a specific suspect fitting enhanced camera data from Birch River Onetop.

Starting in 2021 when the West Virginia Department of Transportation partnered with the US Army Corps of Engineers on a project to upgrade underwater topographic mapping at major state lakes for dam management and hydraulic safety assessment.

Summersville Lake was included in the survey list using 3D sonar and underwater lidar.

This application of new technology inadvertently created a rare opportunity for the cold case unit to re-evaluate the 20106 teenager disappearance file, especially since older sonar had missed many complex terrain and deep crevice areas.

When the project was announced to Charleston PD and Nicholas County law enforcement, Hollis, who now held primary investigator role for file reviews, requested prioritizing the areas around Battle Run and the eastern lake basin in the survey scope.

The reason was that 2010 sonar could not fully scan steep deep crevices particularly those near underwater cliffs below longpoint and shelf-like rock protrusions where sidescan sonar waves could not penetrate.

Dot and army corps reviewed the request and agreed to include these areas in the official survey route as they also needed accurate topographic data for rock wall stability and auxiliary channel checks.

In early 2021, Army Corps engineers compiled old hydrographic maps to identify lake bottom regions never surveyed or overlooked by older sonar.

After comparing with 2010 original maps, they identified over 40 points inadequately scanned in the first and second sonar rounds, including deep crevices near eastern battle run, natural steep trenches extending south of Long Point, and slot canyon-like underwater fissures where traditional sonar easily encountered noise or failed to produce clear returns.

An Army Corps preliminary report stated that over 20% of steeped edge bottom structures had never been properly surveyed, causing serious data gaps for hydraulic safety.

This aligned with Hollis’s 2018 speculation that large objects like a motorboat or pedal boat could be lodged in crevices undetectable by old sonar.

For the new scan, Army Corps used a combination of multi-frequency 3D sonar and underwater lidar to create highresolution lake bottom models, enabling reconstruction of deep crevice structures previously invisible to old technology.

3D sonar provided volutric data, while shallow water penetrating LAR allowed precise surface checks near cliff edges.

The program’s goal was a complete lake basin map, including small crevice clusters only a few feet wide, but deep and capable of trapping heavy objects.

When do sent formal notice to investigators, Charleston PD cold case unit immediately saw this as a pivotal chance to rescan areas likely containing 2010 submerged objects.

To ensure forensic value and collected data, Hollis coordinated with Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office to propose a three-member forensic team, a 3D sonar image analyst, a LAR data processor, and a field investigator experienced with Summersville Lake terrain.

The team’s task was to monitor the survey live, flag any anomalous bottom signals, and convert suspicious points to forensic coordinates for file storage.

In late 2021 preparation, the forensic team reviewed all 2010 unccannable marked positions, especially those with vague old sonar returns, but unconfirmed.

These were mostly along the lakes’s eastern rim, where terrain featured natural rock ledges and abrupt depth changes.

Additionally, the team identified a chain of crevices parallel to the predicted drift path of a pedal boat from Battle Run, an area never scanned before.

Entering 2022, DOT and Army Corps began field surveys with vessels equipped with 3D sonar, high precision GPS, and underwater LAR for nearshore zones.

Hollis’s forensic team was present for the first two weeks to flag anomalous returns, documenting even minor signals for further analysis.

Simultaneously, they prepared forensic protocols for man-made object discovery from area lockdown, coordinate marking, signal reporting to diver coordination for direct verification if needed.

All this preparation ensured that if any 20110 related object, boat, pedal boat or submerged item existed in deep crevices, it would not be missed again.

The planning and implementation of the 2021 2022 lake bottom survey marked a significant turning point.

The first real possibility of obtaining new clues after over a decade of the case being frozen.

As the new year of 2023 began, when the US Army Corps of Engineers underwater topographic survey project shifted to the periodic maintenance phase, Summersville Dam was required to release water to a level lower than normal to facilitate inspection of the dam body.

The auxiliary spillway and related engineering structures.

The water level draw down occurred in stages, but by the end of February, the lakes’s water level had dropped more than 40 ft below the average winter operating level.

The first time in many years that areas of the lake bottom, unseen by the naked eye, since the 1990s were exposed.

For the Army Corps engineering team, the draw down was a necessary step to inspect the rock faces near the dam foot, survey sedimentation conditions, and assess erosion risk points within the reservoir.

But for the Charleston PD cold case unit and especially Hollis, this event held special significance because it could expose areas that 3D sonar and lidar had previously flagged as potentially containing objects, but which could not be verified due to excessive depth before.

As the water level continued to drop, the rock ledges on the eastern side of the lake began to emerge, forming long sloping chains leading down to rock crevices that had been completely submerged for over a decade.

These structures were deep fissures only a few feet wide, but potentially dozens of feet deep, exactly the type of terrain that traditional sonar in 2010 could not fully scan.

In the early days of March, as the Army Corps engineering team moved along the W’s edge to inspect the rock surfaces, they noted the appearance of many rock formations previously invisible.

Some areas had sediment that dried out as the water receded, revealing natural cut marks and narrow rock grooves running parallel to the lake edge.

While surveying a rock slope near the eastern edge of Battle Run, a location the forensic team had marked on the sonar map due to anomalous signal returns, a group of workers observed a strange object wedged between two rock ledges lying approximately 8 10 ft below the previous water level.

The object did not have a natural shape like the surrounding rocks.

Instead, it had a gentle curve and a flatter surface than natural stone.

At first, the workers thought it might be a piece of rotted wood or debris from an old dock that had drifted in.

But upon closer approach, they noticed a protruding part that resembled the bow of a small vessel.

This detail was immediately recorded in the field report and sent to the area supervising engineer.

When the engineering team used a long hook to probe the object, they felt a hard surface and heard a sound unlike rotted wood.

One worker described the surface as having an old painted layer that had been worn away, a sign suggesting the object was man-made.

Recognizing the possibility that this was a vessel sunk years earlier, the Army Corps temporarily cordoned off the area with marking tape and prohibited workers from approaching to avoid disturbing the scene.

An engineer noted in the report that the object was located exactly in a rock crevice previously marked unscannable in the 2010 sonar data and very close to the area where drift modeling estimated lightweight objects like a pedal boat or elongated objects like a motorboat could be retained.

That same day, the report of the strange object was forwarded to Hollis and the forensic team because the Army Corps had recorded the case identifier in their internal files following the 2021 coordination request.

Initial photos taken with cell phones showed the protruding part as curved, narrow in width, and with unnatural angular lines, characteristics that virtually ruled out the possibility of it being rock.

Although the shooting angle was not sufficient to identify the object definitively, the overall shape suggested it could be part of a larger structure trapped in the rock fissure, something never recorded in any search operation over the previous 13 years.

As the water level continued to drop according to the maintenance schedule, the rock crevice where the object was located gradually became fully exposed, revealing sediment layers tightly adhered around the surface, indicating it may have been there for a very long time.

Workers noted that the deeper part of the object was still obscured by water and settled mud, but the upper portion was sufficient to recognize rounded edges consistent with composite material from a boat or small watercraft.

This discovery compelled the engineering team to formally notify law enforcement, according to protocol, when encountering an unidentified man-made object in the reservoir.

This was the first time since 2010 that a clear physical sign appeared due to natural water draw down, completely different from the vague signals from old sonar and sufficient to be treated as a point of interest requiring forensic processing.

This created a major turning point, opening the possibility of a sunken vessel that all previous search efforts had been unable to access.

As the Summersville Lake water level continued to drop deeply in the early days of March 2023, the rock crevice where the object appeared became fully exposed, allowing the Army Corps engineering team to access and observe in greater detail the parts previously hidden.

Immediately following the maintenance team supplemental report, the Charleston PD cold case unit along with representatives from the Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office coordinated with the Army Corps to conduct an emergency forensic survey to determine the nature of the object.

Upon close approach, the protruding part from the rock fissure clearly displayed the characteristic curve of a boat bow with old worn paint and a composite surface showing small cracks from time and water pressure.

The engineering team used measuring tools and compared simulations with boat types registered at the marina in 2010.

And within minutes, they recognized that the curve, width, and transition angle of the bow perfectly matched the Boston Wher replica reported missing on the night the six teenagers disappeared.

Identifying the object as the bow of this boat was a breakthrough, as it was the first time since 2010 that one of the two missing vessels had been located.

And more importantly, the boat’s position was exactly in the area unscannable by old generation sonar, consistent with the conclusions from the hydraological analysis and 3D sonar data that Hollis and the forensic team had prepared.

Immediately after identifying the object as the boat, the area was sealed off under forensic protocol, prohibiting all unrelated workers from approaching and requiring engineering units to remove equipment from the risk zone to avoid disturbing the scene.

The forensic team proceeded to document the scene in detail.

The boat bow was tightly wedged between two steep rock walls.

The lower hull portion was buried deep in mud and sediment, and there were signs indicating the boat had been forced into the crevice with considerable force, possibly from drift inertia combined with the sloping terrain.

Forensic specialists recorded the entire surrounding structure with highresolution photos and LAR scans to create a 3D model for analyzing how the boat became lodged in the crevice.

The uneven thickness of sediment layers on the boat surface helped estimate the duration it had been submerged and specialists confirmed the buildup was consistent with an object sunk for over a decade.

After completing initial scene documentation, the next step was to recover the boat, a process requiring high precision to preserve the integrity of the evidence.

The Army Corps deployed a specialized underwater vehicle recovery team, coordinating directly with the forensic team to ensure all operations complied with forensic standards.

Since the boat was deeply wedged in the crevice and could not be pulled straight up, the team used two cables anchored to different points on the hull combined with small hydraulic levers to lift the bow enough to release the clamping force of the rocks.

The process was slow and meticulous with every position change recorded on camera for later analysis.

As the boat was gradually lifted out of the crevice, specialists noted slight deformation in the lower hole, indicating it had endured significant pressure when wedged or forced into the crevice while still underwater.

However, the bow and deck remained sufficiently intact for subsequent forensic analysis.

Once the boat was fully removed from the rock surface, the Army Corps used a specialized transport stretcher to place it in a temporary isolation area where the forensic team began assessing the surface structure and remaining traces.

Specialists noted several important details.

The deck had long parallel scratches consistent with the direction of water flow, suggesting collision with rocks during drifting.

The floor near the bow had hardened mud patches, and in some areas, peeling paint exposed the underlying composite.

On the gun whales, there were dried aquatic plant marks from when the water receded, indicating the boat had lain tilted in the crevice for many years with very little position change.

The most notable feature was the remaining paint color, off-white with pale blue, characteristic of the Boston Wher replica lost in 2010.

When compared with photos of the boat taken before its disappearance provided by the owner, the forensic team confirmed absolute similarity in the forward deck structure, cleats, and hull curves.

Recovering the boat, while a major advancement, still required caution to avoid disturbing any potential traces inside.

Since the hull had been submerged for many years, the likelihood of evidence remaining in the compartments was considered low, but could not be completely ruled out before inspection.

Therefore, the boat was sealed and transported to the Charleston PD Forensic Analysis Facility for detailed examination.

Before moving it, the forensic team conducted a full 360° photo documentation, LAR scan, and GPS coordinates of the boat’s position in the crevice to create an event model for later drift path analysis.

The overall scene indicated the boat had not sunk in the open lake, but drifted into a crevice unreachable by 2010 sonar, explaining why all previous search efforts failed to locate it.

Finding the Boston Wher replica after 13 years was one of the most significant discoveries in the case to date.

Not only because it provided direct physical evidence related to the night of the disappearance, but also because the boat’s position and wedged condition revealed a sequence of movements that 2010 models could not fully reconstruct.

When the Boston Wher replica was transferred to the Charleston PD forensic analysis facility after recovery from the rock crevice, the forensic team began implementing the compartment inspection protocol according to standards for processing evidence related to long-term missing person’s cases.

Since the boat could potentially contain decomposed organic evidence over a long period, all compartment opening operations were conducted slowly and under supervision by both forensic anthropologists and biologists.

The thick mud layer on the boat floor was vacuumed using specialized equipment to avoid disturbing underlying material.

As the initial mud layer was removed, the forensic team began to see scattered bone fragments exposed near the forward compartment.

Initially, it was unclear whether these were human or animal bones.

But as the anthropologist used a soft brush to clear remaining adhered mud, the bone structure became clearer.

A femur, rib fragments, and part of an arm bone.

Anatomical features, size, curvature, and remaining marrow structure.

quickly confirmed these were human bones.

The bones were mostly piled in one corner of the compartment, suggesting the body had decomposed in water and been pushed to the same spot by minor currents within the compartment.

Continuing to clear the sediment, the forensic team found an additional skull missing part of the jaw and numerous loose vertebrae.

The distribution of vertebrae was consistent with natural decomposition in stagnant water over a long period with no signs of postsubmers mechanical impact.

The initial records noted six missing teenagers, so finding a human skeleton in the boat compartment was immediately considered highly likely evidence related to one of the victims.

However, identity could not be confirmed on site until DNA testing was completed.

In addition to the skeleton, the forensic team continued searching for non-biological evidence in the compartment.

In the mud near the forward deck edge, they discovered a sneaker still fairly intact at the sole, though the upper was completely torn and faded.

When compared with records describing the footwear of the six teenagers at the time of disappearance, this type matched the pair Caleb Rowan was reported to have worn at the party.

However, since the shoe was common, full testing was still required before concluding.

Near the shoe, the forensic team recovered a thin metal chain with a very small cross pendant.

The metal dulled from years underwater.

When cleaned, the pendant revealed simple details, but a design similar to the description in Jesse Hart’s personal belongings record, though confirmation required technical comparison.

Beside the chain, the team also collected two small fabric pieces, one dark blue and one gray with synthetic fiber structure.

The dark blue piece was tightly adhered to the side edge of the compartment, possibly torn or ripped from victim clothing during the boat’s collision or decomposition phase.

The gray piece had a texture similar to hoodie lining, corresponding to the description of Evan Dodson’s clothing on the night of disappearance.

All evidence was collected with specialized forceps and placed in layered sealed evidence bags.

To prevent DNA crosscontamination, the forensic team used separate tool kits for each compartment area while recording the exact position of each item in a compartment diagram.

The final phase of the boat compartment inspection focused on collecting all remaining human bones.

The anthropologist determined the fragments likely belonged to a single individual based on size and compatibility among bone groups.

Some smaller pieces were heavily araided from rock contact in the crevice, but the quantity was sufficient to reconstruct nearly the entire skeleton after transfer to a specialized analysis lab.

All bones were categorized, placed in padded soft containers, and labeled according to long-term evidence protocol.

Once all evidence was collected, the boat was resealed for future structural analysis.

The forensic team compiled an evidence list, including one human skeleton from a single individual, one athletic shoe, one cross pendant chain, two fabric pieces potentially related to victim clothing, and several mud samples collected for sediment composition analysis.

All evidence was transported by specialized vehicle to the Charleston PD Forensic Lab.

with each sample documented and entered into the chain of custody to ensure integrity and legality during examination.

Discovering a human skeleton along with personal items in the boat compartment marked the first time in 13 years that tangible evidence directly related to the disappearance of the six teenagers appeared, opening the possibility of victim identification and reconstructing the final moments before the boat became trapped in the rock crevice.

Given the unprecedented importance of this discovery, the Charleston PD Forensic Laboratory conducted forensic analysis over eight consecutive weeks after receiving the skeleton and evidence from the Boston Wher replica.

And the results of this examination became the biggest turning point since the six teenagers disappeared in 2010.

The analysis process began with enzyatic cleaning of the bones to remove all remaining sediment and algae from the surface followed by transfer to the anthropology lab for preliminary reconstruction and identification of osteological features.

In the first few days, anthropologists determined the skeleton belonged to a male individual aged 16 18 consistent with the age group of the six missing teenagers.

However, exact identity required DNA results.

Spongy bone samples from the femur and muller teeth were taken for testing as these locations offered the best chance of DNA preservation after 13 years underwater.

Next generation sequencing DNA results compared with family reference samples provided in 2010 showed a perfect match with the profile of Caleb Rowan, one of the six teenagers who left the party at Long Point and disappeared that same night.

This confirmation was announced internally in midMay 2023, making Caleb the first victim officially identified in the disappearance case spanning over a decade.

After establishing identity, the next step was analyzing cause of death based on bone trauma.

Forensic pathologists focused on observing unusual marks on the skull and ribs.

On the left forehead area of the skull, they recorded a crescent-shaped fracture, clean but irregular, characteristic of blunt force trauma sustained while the victim was still alive.

Microructural analysis at the fracture edges showed living tissue response, proving the injury occurred before death and was not from post-mortem decomposition in water.

Additionally, a second crack extending from the frontal bone to the right temporal area indicated major oblique force impact, suggesting the victim was struck or collided forcefully with a medium-sized hard object.

There were no post-mortem bone marks, such as sharp-edged fractures from rock pressure or recovery equipment.

The antimmortem skull trauma was a key factor, raising the possibility that the victim was assaulted or suffered severe impact in a loss of control situation immediately before the boat sank.

Pathologists continued examining ribs and spine, noting minor cracks in two ribs, but insufficient to determine timing.

These cracks could have occurred during decomposition or when the boat was forced into the crevice, so they were not considered direct evidence of violence.

However, focusing on the skull revealed far more severe trauma than what might occur from a simple fall or minor collision during drifting.

Concurrent with bone analysis, forensic biologists examined remaining traces on the shoe, chain, and fabric pieces.

Although most items were heavily degraded by time, a small amount of epithelial cells remaining on the shoelaces and pendant were isolated and DNA tested.

Results showed matches with Caleb Rowan, strengthening the connection between all evidence and the skeleton.

Meanwhile, the dark blue fabric piece had fiber structure matching the type of shirt Caleb was described wearing on the night of disappearance.

Another critical evaluation came from analyzing remaining soft tissue in the compartment.

Although only a minuscule amount of organic material adhered to the compartment floor, datom testing revealed that algae samples in the boat did not match those typically found in drowning cases at Summersville Lake.

Instead of infiltrating lungs and soft tissue as in drowning, these algae appeared only in sediment layers, not in any biological tissue.

The complete absence of drowning indicators compelled the forensic team to rule out death by asphixxiation from water.

This meant Caleb died before his body entered the water and the skull trauma was the most likely cause of death.

Combining all data, body position in the compartment, antimmortem skull trauma, injury pattern inconsistent with minor accident, absence of drowning signs, and the boat’s deep crevice entrapment.

The forensic team issued the official conclusion.

Caleb Rowan’s cause of death was blunt force trauma to the head and this was the fatal injury occurring before the boat sank.

The forensic report concluded manner of death homicide.

Officially shifting the case from missing persons to homicide immediately had a major impact within the investigative units as it meant one or more of the six teenagers suffered violence before the boat disappeared.

The forensic report was forwarded to the Charleston PD cold case unit and Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office, accompanied by recommendations to expand the investigation in a criminal direction, reviewing all interactions and witnesses present around the lake area on the night of March 20th, 2010.

In particular, this conclusion heightened suspicion toward Rymer Cobb, the man seen behind three of the teenagers in the Birch River one-stop video and flagged as a person of interest in 2020 based on AI enhanced gate analysis.

An important factor in the forensic report was the bone distribution pattern in the compartment, indicating Caleb’s body was likely placed or fell into the compartment while unconscious or already deceased before the boat drifted into the crevice.

There were no signs of body movement in the compartment afterward, suggesting the boat sank quickly or stopped in the crevice before water currents could significantly affect the body.

These details were added to the file as a basis for reconstructing the event sequence in the time frame from 1:48 to 3:00 a.m.

The period investigators in 2010 recorded as an unexplainable gap.

The 2023 forensic results not only identified the first victim, but also shifted the case from a missing person’s file to a firstderee murder investigation, paving the way for the phase of pursuing the perpetrator and re-examining all data collected over more than a decade.

When the forensic results determined that Caleb Rowan’s death was a homicide, the Charleston PD cold case unit shifted its focus to analyzing the terrain of the rock Cove where the Boston Wher replica was found using LAR and 3D sonar data obtained from the 2021 2022 survey program to determine the boat’s drift trajectory and assess whether the boat drifted freely or was subjected to human intervention before becoming lodged.

The forensic team reconstructed the entire cove terrain using a highresolution LAR model, allowing clear visualization of rock channels, deep crevices, and underwater slopes that were not observable to the naked eye when the lake was full.

The model showed that the cove where the boat was lodged was not on the natural drift path of the main current, but offset to the right relative to the wind direction on the night of March 19th, 2020.

Vector flow analysis simulated in hydrodnamic software indicated that for a lightweight abandoned boat to enter this exact rock crevice, it would have to approach from an angle offset by about 30 45° from the predicted drift path.

Meaning it did not align with a natural trajectory unless the boat was steered or subjected to strong force beforehand.

The lake bottom elevation data from LiDAR also revealed a narrow trench directly above the cove, a natural guiding channel that could push drifting objects into the crevice, but only if the object already had strong inertia or was directed artificially.

When integrating the weather data from the night of March 20th, 2010 with the Army Corps water model, the analysis team found that the nighttime winds blew weekly from west to east, insufficient to generate the inertia needed to push the boat into such a sudden deep crevice.

This reinforced the hypothesis that the boat did not simply drift with the wind, but was subjected to force from the southwest, the direction from Battle Run.

During the terrain model processing, the forensic team noticed a series of long scratch marks on the rock face near the cove edge, curving toward the exact position where the boat was lodged.

These marks were scanned with lidar and appeared as shallow grooves 2 to 4 in wide, consistent with the composite hull edge of the boat being pressed against the rock at low speed.

The groove depths were uneven, but the arrangement of the marks indicated the boat contacted the rock at least twice before lodging in the crevice, suggesting the boat did not plunge straight into the cove, but was deflected beforehand, possibly while in a semicontrolled state.

Notably, on a rock slab at a depth once 25 ft below the water surface, LiDAR recorded an unnatural horizontal abrasion mark inconsistent with the movement of a larger boat, but resembling the impact trace of a flatter, lighter object, specifically a pedal boat.

To test this hypothesis, the forensic team compared the abrasion mark dimensions with those of the pedal boat lost on the night of March 20th, 2010.

When overlaying the pedal boat model on the LAR simulation, the sizes nearly matched.

The groove width corresponded to the estimated flat hole section at the pedal boat stern, while the impact angle aligned with an approach from Battle Run.

The presence of this impact trace was significant because it indicated the pedal boat had reached an area farther from Battle Run than predicted, meaning it traveled beyond what the water model forecasted.

This could only occur if the pedal boat was towed, occupied by someone, or propelled mechanically rather than drifting naturally.

When reconstructing the full three dead scene based on LAR data, the forensic team could visualize the sequence of impacts.

The pedal boat contacted the rock slab at mid-epth, creating the horizontal abrasion.

Subsequently, the motorboat struck the lower rock face, then slid into the deep cove and became lodged.

The distance between the pedal boat mark and the lodged boat position was about 14 ft with markedly different depths, proving the two vessels did not drift parallel but impacted the terrain at separate times.

This ruled out a purely natural accident scenario as the probability of two vessels drifting off course on different paths yet striking the same rock wall was extremely low.

As the forensic team further analyzed the model, they noted small horizontal cracks on nearby rocks consistent with impacts from a heavy object forced against the rock.

These cracks were absent in survey data from 1998 and 2004, indicating they formed after 2010.

The most critical discovery came when LAR detected narrow parallel grooves on the sloped rock surface above the cove, faint drag marks inconsistent with freef fall trajectory.

When reconstructing motion vectors based on the groove angles, the forensic team found these marks directed downward into the cove at a fixed angle, evidencing downward force applied by human action, similar to pulling or pushing an object down a slope rather than natural drifting.

The analysis team noted in the report that the terrain scene bore clear characteristics of intervention.

The pedal boat and motorboat did not simply drift randomly, but were highly likely steered or manipulated by human action on the night of the disappearance.

The rock abrasions, parallel drag grooves, and contact trajectories all evidence purposeful movement before the vessels lost control and became lodged.

The forensic team’s conclusion stated clearly, “The pedal boat’s presence at an abnormal depth and position, combined with directed impact traces, completely ruled out the possibility of a mere natural accident.” The composite LAR model and terrain analysis confirmed human intervention played a role in the final movement of both vessels.

These findings combined with Caleb Rowan’s skull trauma provided strong forensic grounds to view the cove not as a random endpoint, but as the direct consequence of a sequence of aggressive or coercive actions occurring before the vessels entered deep water.

The search warrant for Rymer Cobb’s cabin was executed jointly by the Charleston PD cold case unit and the Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office immediately after the LAR results and cove analysis indicated signs of human intervention in the movement trajectories of both the Boston Wher replica and the pedal boat on the night.

The six teenagers disappeared.

Cobb’s cabin was located more than 1.5 miles from Battlerunboat launch as the crow flies, but less than half a mile from the lake via a forest trail, a position allowing quicker water access than by road.

When the investigation team arrived at the scene, the cabin had been abandoned for years with windows boarded up and no functioning electricity.

Nevertheless, the interior structure was largely intact, sufficient for conducting an evidence search.

In the main living area, investigators discovered an old, lightly moldy jacket caught on the edge of a wooden table.

When collecting fabric fibers stuck to the table edge for analysis, the forensic specialist recognized the polyester cotton blend structure matching exactly the fiber composition of Logan Price’s hoodie, one of the six missing teenagers, based on material records provided by the family in 2010.

Though the fibers were small and insufficient for on-site DNA identification, this marked the first time material matching the victim’s group clothing appeared in Cobb’s cabin.

The forensic team seized all fiber samples and sealed them per protocol while thoroughly searching other cabin areas for additional related evidence.

Moving to the old kitchen area, a specialist discovered a dark brown stain on the inner surface of a cabinet door only a few millime wide.

The stain tested weekly positive with field blood reagent.

Despite the faint signal due to a lapse time, the forensic team immediately cut out the wood section containing the suspected stain and sealed it for lab DNA analysis.

Discovering even a small blood trace was highly significant because the cabin was deep in the woods, not an area prone to accidental injuries, and Cobb had lived alone for years.

If the blood did not belong to Cobb, the likelihood of victim connection would increase substantially.

During the continued search, the team moved to the old bedroom where they found a rough wooden table cluttered with assorted items.

Old paint cans, rusty pliers, fishing hooks, and a large folded map of Summersville Lake stuffed under a toolbox.

Upon unfolding the map, investigators noted numerous pencil markings, lines drawn from Battlerun eastward, a circle around the area near Long Point, and especially precise markings on the exact cove where the Boston Wher replica was discovered in 2023.

There was no reasonable explanation for a resident like Cobb to mark that location, as it was neither a fishing spot nor a public trail.

The map also featured three aligned dots forming a line extending from the marina edge into the forest resembling the predicted pedal boat path in the Aliar model.

Details Cobb could not have known without being present or witnessing the 2010 events.

Upon further scanning, the forensic team found under the old mattress a small plastic bag containing two pale white plastic fragments.

Their surface texture and curvature resembled the composite polymer used on the lost pedal boat per 2010 case records.

Though further analysis was needed for confirmation, the presence of these plastic fragments further supported the hypothesis that the pedal boat had been near the cabin or directly handled by Cobb.

Beside the bed, an old moldy pair of work boots was found and seized for soul tread analysis.

This was crucial because the 2020 AI enhanced video had captured a figure with a limping gate wearing wide sold shoes similar to those Cobb commonly used.

If the tread matched faint shoe prints collected in 2010 at Battlerun, it would be one of the strongest links connecting Cobb to the scene.

The investigation team proceeded to check the shed behind the cabin, which contained numerous wooden crates and old equipment.

In one crate secured with rusty wire, they discovered an old anchor rope with a worn core along with a shortcut section featuring uneven knots.

These characteristics matched the description of the untied anchor rope at Battle Run on the night of the disappearance.

A detail noted in the 2010 report, but never traced to evidence.

Despite degradation over time making origin hard to determine, the forensic team seized everything for synthetic fiber analysis.

In the preliminary evidence compilation from the cabin, the cold case unit noted a series of serious items.

Fibers matching Logan’s hoodie type, weekly positive blood stain on the cabinet door, plastic fragments consistent with the pedal boat, lake map marked with the sinking location and pedal boat path, suspicious anchor rope, and personal items matching Cobb’s nighttime movement habits.

all formed a data set strong enough to elevate Cobb from person of interest to primary suspect in Caleb Rowan’s homicide file.

The investigation team reconstructed Cobb’s 2010 timeline, cross-referencing the cabin location and forest paths to the lake while building a detailed suspect profile, residency history, disorderly conduct record, nighttime appearances near Birch River.

one-stop lake area connections and access to boats at Battlerun.

The cabin provided multiple pieces of evidence inexplicable by normal daily activity.

From its geographic advantage for Battle Run, access to evidence matching the scene and camera footage, all factors converge to reinforce the conclusion that Cobb was directly involved in the disappearance and death of Caleb Rowan.

When news of the sunken boat discovery and Caleb Rowan’s remains spread through the Summersville community in the summer of 2023, the Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office received a series of calls from local residents, mostly those who lived near the lake in 2010, but had never been interviewed or thought their statements held value.

Among them, a call from a 63-year-old man named William Ridgley, living about 3/4 of a mile northeast of Battlerun boat launch as the Crow flies, was deemed to have breakthrough potential.

Ridgely had moved away from West Virginia in 2011 and only returned in summer 2023 upon hearing the lake was drained and police found the sunken boat.

In his initial call, Ridgely stated that on the night of March 19th into the early morning of March 20th, 2010, he heard a loud argument, adult male voices mixed with younger ones, followed by a heavy thud against wood or metal.

When pressed for details, he confirmed it was after 2:00 a.m.

because I was getting ready for bed when the dog in the yard started barking non-stop.

In 2010, Ridgely did not report it to police, assuming it was just drunk teenagers making noise common around the lake in spring.

However, upon seeing news of the sunken boat found near his former home, he decided to contact authorities because that night’s events no longer sounded like ordinary noise.

When the investigation team invited him to Nicholas County for an in-person interview, Ridgely provided details far more noteworthy than any 2010 witness reports.

He described the sounds not as playful, but as tense arguing, with an older male voice dominating, while the younger voices only emerged a few times, seemingly overpowered.

The man’s voice was not loud, but harsh, like giving orders.

Notably, Ridgely mentioned a sound he never forgot, a strong clanging like metal striking wood or a boat surface.

This perfectly matched the 2023 conclusion about Caleb Rowan skull trauma, a detail not publicly released when Ridgely contacted authorities, confirming his statement was uninfluenced by media.

To corroborate, the team used a 2010 Battlerun sound propagation map based on terrain cross-referenced with noise survey data and sound transmission paths in the Summersville Lake Valley.

The model showed that a loud argument at the Battlerun wooden dock after 2:00 a.m.

could reach Ridgley’s home area via reflections off the water and eastern rock walls.

The distance, timing, and clarity of sounds he heard fully aligned with the model.

When asked about the man’s voice, Ridgely said he did not recognize it specifically, but added a key detail.

Several times in 2009, 2010, he had heard similar shouting from the forest near Rmer Cobb’s cabin when Cobb yelled at dogs or slammed objects.

This prompted focused questions about Ridgley’s familiarity with Cobb.

Ridgely confirmed he had seen Cobb walking around the lake at night, sometimes with a flashlight, sometimes just standing near Battle Run as if watching the water.

He described Cobb as the type who avoided people, but when he spoke, his voice was very distinctive, dry, grading, and drawn out at the end of sentences.

When investigators played Ridgely a recording of Cobb’s voice from a 2011 Disorderly Conduct file, he reacted immediately.

That’s the voice I heard that night.

I’m not 100% sure, but it’s close enough to give me chills.

The team noted this reaction as significant because Ridgely had left West Virginia long ago, had no motive for false identification, and was unaware Cobb had become the primary suspect.

When pressed on timing, Ridgely confirmed the argument occurred around 2:205 a.m.

This exactly matched a 2010 witness report of hearing shouting in the same window.

previously added to the timeline, but lacking supporting details for further investigation.

Additionally, Ridgely described hearing running footsteps on the wooden surface for a few seconds, very fast, followed by prolonged silence.

These running sounds aligned with lidar detected abrasions and drag marks at battle run, indicating heavy disturbance on the wooden dock before the boats departed.

One final detail from Ridgely added substantial weight.

He recalled hearing a small engine starting right after the argument and heavy thud matching a 2010 witness description of an uneven boat motor sound.

This was the first time all three sound groups argument heavy thud and engine were reported by a single witness.

After cross-referencing his full statement with case evidence, the team identified at least seven complete matches between Ridgley’s account and 223 confirmed forensic and terrain traces.

Most critically, the older male voice timber matched Cobbs.

The investigator’s preliminary conclusion stated clearly.

Ridgley’s testimony was independent, uninfluenced by media, with verified timing and location, directly linking suspect Cobb to the conflict at Battle Run in the exact window the teenagers vanished.

With this testimony, Cobb’s suspect file entered its strongest reinforcement phase since the case reopened.

The arrest warrant for Rymer Cobb was issued by the Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office in early September 2023 after the investigation team completed a comprehensive report, including cabin evidence, witness Ridgley’s testimony, and forensic confirmation of Caleb Rowan’s death as homicide.

Cobb was arrested at 6:40 a.m.

in a parking lot near Birch River, where he routinely stopped for morning coffee.

The arrest occurred without resistance, and Cobb appeared calmer than investigators anticipated.

After reading the Miranda warning, Cobb was transported directly to the Charleston PD cold case unit for interrogation.

The interrogation room was prepared with three investigators present.

Hollis, a Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office representative and a behavioral analyst.

In the initial phase, investigators asked Cobb to recount his personal timeline for the night of March 19th into early March 20th, 2010.

Cobb stated he was alone at the cabin, asleep from around 11 p.m., and did not go out.

However, when asked for details about hearing anything unusual or leaving the cabin to let the dog out, Cobb became hesitant, saying, “Not sure.” Then shifting to, “If I did go out, it was only for a few minutes.

No contact with anyone.” This statement shift within minutes was noted as the first inconsistency.

Next, Hollis noted the cabin’s halfmile trail distance to Battle Run and asked if Cobb had visited the boat launch area that night.

Cobb strongly denied it, stating, “I didn’t go there and I didn’t know any of those kids.” However, when questioned about shoe prints matching those collected in 2010 at Battle Run, Cobb avoided direct answers, saying, “My shoes are common.

Everyone wears them.” The interrogation shifted to evidence confrontation, where Cobb began losing composure.

An investigator placed an evidence envelope containing cabin fibers on the table, explaining they matched Logan Price’s hoodie type.

Cobb denied it, claiming, “That’s just my old torn fabric.” But when asked which of his clothing had 6040ths polyester cotton structure, Cobb fell silent.

This silence was recorded as evasion.

When presented with the cabinet door blood stain, Cobb reacted more strongly.

I cut my hand fixing tools, but when pressed for specific timing and cause, he could not recall precisely, only saying it was years ago.

Who remembers? Authorities knew preliminary DNA from the blood had excluded Cobb, but withheld this during interrogation.

The next key item was the Summersville Lake map from the cabin marked with the sinking location and pedal boat path.

When the investigator placed the map on the table, Cobb shifted posture, leaned back, and avoided eye contact.

He claimed, “I just marked fishing spots, but when asked to identify which marks were fishing locations, Cobb could not answer and grew visibly agitated.” The investigator exploited this by showing 2023 LAR images of the lodged boat site and asking how Cobb knew that location without being present during the incident.

Cobb said he was told by someone but could not recall who.

This became the largest inconsistency as no one else in the area knew of that cove before 2023.

The interrogation continued with the 2020 AI enhanced Birch River one-stop video.

When the figure trailing the three teenagers appeared, investigators asked Cobb to confirm if it was him.

Cobb refused, citing can’t see clearly.

But when noted the right leg limp matched his 2011 dash cam footage, he turned away, avoiding eye contact.

This was recorded as a key non-verbal reaction.

When pressed on his whereabouts between 1:30 and 2:45 a.m., Cobb insisted asleep, but lacked any witness or alibi evidence.

Conversely, his timeline conflicted with Ridgley’s testimony, identifying Cobb’s voice in the battlerun argument during that exact period.

The interrogation climax confronted all evidence, hoodie matching fibers, pedal boat consistent plastic, marked sinking location map, cut anchor rope, AI video gate match, and ridgely testimony.

As each item was placed on the table, Cobb stopped clear denials only saying, “You can’t prove I did it.

This is common when suspects face layered circumstantial evidence without confession.

At the session’s end, the cold case unit reported Cobb provided multiple inconsistent statements, lacked alibi evidence, and displayed evasion consistent with the behavioral analysts assessment.

The compiled evidence strengthened charges showing Cobb was near battle run on the disappearance night, contacted the pedal boat, and likely participated directly in the conflict leading to Caleb Rowan’s death.

Though Cobb did not confess, the full interrogation data further solidified his position as the primary suspect and the last person confirmed present in the area before the six teenagers vanished.

The trial of Raymer Cobb began in November 2023 at the Nicholas County Court, attracting significant attention as it was the first time in over 13 years that the disappearance of six teenagers was brought to trial with specific criminal charges.

The prosecutor announced the main indictment, murder in the second degree for the death of Caleb Rowan, based on a combination of forensic evidence, LAR data, physical evidence collected at the cabin, and witness testimony from Ridgely.

At the trial, the biggest focus was on the presentation of the 3D reconstruction created by the Charleston PD cold case unit in collaboration with the Army Corps based on 3D sonar lidar and the lake terrain from 2010.

This model allowed the jury to see the entire drift trajectory of the Boston Wher replica and the pedal boat, including impact points, slide marks on rocks, and the location where the boat got stuck in a deep crevice.

When the 3D model displayed the reconstructed trajectory of the boat, sliding in a direction not matching the wind, but deviating toward the direction from Battle Run, the prosecution argued that the boat could not have drifted into the rock crevice on its own without human intervention.

The contact points simulated in 3D perfectly matched the abrasion marks recorded by LiDAR, reinforcing the argument that the boat had been pushed or pulled before losing control.

This presentation was considered the most convincing technical evidence to rule out a random accident scenario.

Next, the prosecution presented forensic evidence collected from the boat and cabin.

The forensic anthropologist presented the results of the analysis of Caleb Rowan’s bones, clearly describing the crescent-shaped fracture on the left frontal bone and the diagonal crack extending to the right temple, confirming that this was blunt force trauma occurring before death.

Descriptions of remaining soft tissue and diadem tests were presented to completely rule out the possibility of drowning.

The jury was shown microphotographs of the fracture edges where there were signs of living tissue reaction to the injury.

Crucial evidence to determine the manner of death as homicide.

The prosecution also presented DNA test results.

The skeleton matched 100% with Caleb Rowan.

The necklace and shoes in the boat carried Caleb’s DNA, while fabric fibers collected at the cabin matched the fiber structure of Logan’s hoodie, a detail clarifying that Cobb had direct or indirect contact with one of the other victims.

Regarding physical evidence, the prosecution described pale white plastic fragments collected at the cabin that matched the composite of the missing pedal boat, along with an anchor rope and a cut rope section with unusual knots matching the 2010 scene description.

When the Summersville Lake map with pencil markings was presented, the analyst showed the jury that one of the circled markings was exactly at the rock crevice where the Boston Wher was discovered in 2023, a point that could not possibly be known unless the marker was present in the area at that time.

The jury paid special attention to this unusual coincidence.

The prosecution continued by showing AI enhanced video footage from Birch River One stop in which the figure walking behind the three teenagers was described and compared to dash cam video recording Cobb in 2011.

The gate analysis expert pointed out four matching gate characteristics.

Outward rotation of the right foot, low knee lift, long stride, and distinctive hip tilt.

Although not absolute identification, the high-level gate model match led the jury to conclude that the person in the camera was most likely Cobb.

Another important part of the trial was the testimony of William Ridgley.

Before the jury, he described the male voice in the argument between approximately 2:20 pony 2:35 a.m.

on March 20th, 2010.

And when asked to confirm Cobb’s voice in a recording, he affirmed the similarity was very high, impossible to confuse with anyone else’s voice in the area.

The prosecution’s argument was Ridgely had no reason to lie, did not know the forensic results or the location of the sunken boat when he came forward, and his testimony emerged right when the boat was found, reinforcing the witness’s credibility.

An important part of the courtroom debate revolved around the motive for the crime.

The prosecution proposed the hypothesis that Cobb, known for wandering around the lake at night and liking to interfere with groups of kids, encountered the group of teenagers at Battle Run.

An argument ensued and then he attacked Caleb with a blunt object.

Investigators presented that Cobb had a history of disruptive behavior in the area previously recorded for fighting and vandalizing property, creating a pattern of aggressive behavior consistent with a sudden violent situation.

The interference with the boat, removing the anchor rope, and directing the vessel, according to the LAR model, were viewed by the prosecution as attempts to conceal the body or erase traces at the scene.

The defense attorney strongly objected, arguing that all evidence was circumstantial with no eyewitness seeing Cobb attack Caleb and no fingerprints of Cobb on the boat.

However, the prosecution countered that the boat being submerged for 13 years made fingerprints impossible to preserve.

While the circumstantial evidence, gate, physical evidence at the cabin, map marking the location, pedalboat composite fragments, and Ridgley’s testimony formed a unified chain of data.

The prosecution’s conclusion was Cobb was present at Battle Run during the disappearance time frame.

A conflict occurred.

Caleb was struck on the head and died before contact with water.

The boat was deliberately directed and Cobb attempted to cover up the crime by pushing the boat away from the dock.

After 8 hours of deliberation, the jury returned to the courtroom and declared Rymer Cobb guilty of murder in the second degree in the death of Caleb Rowan.

The verdict was read in heavy silence, enveloping the entire courtroom, marking the first time in over a decade that the Summersville 6 case had a clear legal resolution.

6 weeks later at the sentencing hearing, Judge Elaine Mercer affirmed that Cobb’s actions, attacking a teenager, intentionally directing the boat to conceal the scene, and remaining silent for 13 years, demonstrated a significant level of callousness and disregard for human life.

With the finding that the case involved prolonged concealment and profound harm to the community, she sentenced Raymer Cobb to 34 years in prison with no possibility of parole in the first 20 years.

The sentence was announced amid sobs from the victim’s families and the silence of the entire courtroom, closing the darkest chapter in the history of Summersville Lake.

The investigative report summarizing the Summersville 6 case was completed in late December 2023, right after the trial concluded and Rymer Cobb was found guilty of murder in the second degree.

The document over 200 pages long consisted of three main parts.

Evaluation of errors and limitations in the 2010 investigation phase, analysis of the key role of new technology and scene surveys in 2023, and a summary of the entire 13-year case solving process leading to the official closure of the file.

The first part of the report focused on the unavoidable errors in the initial investigation, emphasizing the context of limited technology in 2010.

The report pointed out that reliance on lowresolution sidescan sonar caused the search team to completely miss the series of deep rock crevices east of Battle Run, the area where the Boston Wher replica was stuck for over a decade.

The sonar’s inability to access the rock gaps led to the incorrect conclusion that the boat did not sink within the surveyed range, thereby downgrading the accident hypothesis to unverifiable, but also without basis for rejection.

The report also assessed that evidence collection in 2010 was limited, blurry shoe print photos, fiber samples not deeply analyzed, and drag marks at battle run only preliminarily recorded without the capability for image processing to distinguish mechanical characteristics of the causing object.

Additionally, the 2010 witness interview phase did not cover the entire residential area near the lake, causing Ridgley’s important testimony to be overlooked for many years.

The report did not assign individual responsibility, but emphasized that those limitations reflected the technology and investigation standards at the time of the incident, not intentional professional shortcomings.

The second part of the report evaluated the decisive role of forensic technologies and tools deployed from 202023.

AI enhanced video was the factor that helped reconstruct the movement of the shadowy figure at Birch River.

One stop, paving the way for identifying Cobb’s gate.

3D sonar and lake bottom LAR helped accurately reconstruct the rock crevice structure, proving the abnormal drift trajectory of the boat and detecting pedal boat impact marks data completely beyond the capabilities of the 2010 search team.

The lake drawdown for dam maintenance in 2023 was a rare natural condition, creating an opportunity for direct access to the rock crevice and visual discovery of the Boston Wher replica’s bow.

The recovery process under forensic supervision along with enzyme cleaning of bones clarified Caleb Rowan’s cause of death and completely ruled out the drowning scenario.

Next generation DNA technology allowed victim identification from just small bone amounts, something nearly impossible in 2010 with high accuracy.

The report affirmed that without these technologies, the case would hardly have moved beyond inactive status.

The final part of the report summarized the 13-year case-solving process from the night the six teenagers left the spring break party to the sentencing of Raymer Cobb.

The report recounted each step, receiving the report, establishing the timeline, expanded search, sonar rounds one and two, the nearly 8-year frozen phase, Hollis’s persistence in reviewing when transferring to Charleston PD, the AI technology phase, opening new investigative directions, the 2021 2022 lake bottom survey program, discovery of the sunken boat in 2023, identification of Caleb’s bones, search of Cobb’s cabin, Ridgely coming forward as a witness, and finally a strong enough file to bring the case to trial.

The document also emphasized that although only one victim was found, the entire chain of events proved Caleb’s death was not an accident and identified the responsible party within current legal capabilities.

At the end of the report, the lead investigator clearly stated, “The Summersville 6 file is closed with the official conclusion, Caleb Rowan’s death was homicide due to blunt force impact, and Rymer Cobb is the person legally responsible.” The remaining victims remain in missing status until new information emerges.

With confirmation from Charleston PD and Nicholas County Sheriff’s Office, the file was transferred to long-term storage, closing one of the most complex and prolonged cases in the investigation history of the Summersville Lake area.

The 13-year investigation story surrounding the Summersville 6 is not just a late solved criminal file, but also reflects very real issues in American life today.

the vulnerability of rural communities to sudden violence.

The limitations of traditional investigations without suitable technology and the importance of ordinary citizens like Ridgely in solving cases thought to never have answers.

The fact that the case fell into deadlock in 2010 shows that shortages in technology and manpower not only limited law enforcement agencies but also caused communities to lose faith in the ability to find the truth.

Today in America, in the context where rural areas still lack resources for investigative forces, this story reminds us that investment in forensic science and local investigative capacity is not a luxury but a necessity to protect communities.

Another important lesson lies in Raymer Cobb.

living isolated with little interaction but frequently appearing around the lake late at night.

Behavior that the community had grown accustomed to and did not see as abnormal.

The story shows that community safety depends greatly on each person daring to note something unusual and reporting it to authorities rather than viewing it as just local habit.

If Ridgely had spoken his testimony in 2010, the investigation process might not have lasted 13 years.

Finally, the deepest lesson lies in persistence.

Hollis, a young investigator, did not overlook small details like the figure behind the three teenagers in the Birch River video.

In modern American life, where everything happens quickly and is easily forgotten, the story reminds us that a small detail, a small action, can sometimes be what saves the truth.

Community safety relies not just on police, but on the attention, initiative, and responsibility of each individual.

Thank you for following the entire 13-year case-volving journey of the Summersville 6.

If you find this story meaningful, please subscribe to the channel so you don’t miss the next case files.

See you in the next video where we continue to explore the truths buried behind cases thought to never have resolution.