Three Trips To The Harnish Cottage and The Hidden Clothing

Ed Gibbs made three distinct trips to the Harnish cottage in West Lampeter Township on January 10, 1950, if he is to be believed. It's already clear that Ed Gibbs lied about much surrounding the events leading up to and including the murder of Marian Louise Baker.
It's difficult to determine if he injected any truth to his statement about his activities after the murder.
His first trip to the cottage was with Marian in his car. He killed her there.
After bludgeoning her to death, he dragged her body down by a garbage dump on the property after having tossed her pocketbook a short distance from where he had killed her. He then got back in his car and drove back to the F & M campus.
He claims he then got undressed, took a shower and returned to his room to get dressed.
He took his coat, sweater and socks and placed them on the backseat of his car and drove back to the Harnish cottage. Gibbs admitted that the coat, sweater and socks were bloody and that is why he wished to dispose of them.
When he got to the Harnish cottage on trip number two, he picked up her purse and left the scene, driving out toward Maple Grove. Behind Maple Grove, the threw the lug wrench, his socks, his sweater and coat as well as Marian's umbrella into the stream. He then got back in his car and returned to the college again.
He picked his wife up at Armstrong Cork Company at the end of her shift .
At 7:30 pm that same night, he took a shovel from the basement of East Hall and drove back out to where Marian's body remained. This would be the third trip to the Harnish cottage.
He claims he took the shovel with him to dig a grave but the many roots prevented him from doing so.
He dragged Marian to the excavation under the cottage, covered her with corrugated tin and a saw horse, scattering leaves around the area and lastly placing the incinerator at the spot where he hid Marian's body.
He then drove to Stump's Service Station and disposed of Marian's rings. He didn't return to the scene of the crime after that he says.
The next day, though, he went back to Maple Grove and grabbed the jacket out of the stream where it was still floating.
On Gibbs' last trip to the cottage the night he killed her, in the dark of night, with a flashlight he purchased on South Prince Street enroute, he removed rings from Marian's fingers but claimed he didn't know why he did so.
After his confession, Gibbs accompanied the police to the attic of East Hall on the F & M campus and showed them where he had hidden his bloody clothes. They found his brown corduroy jacket and his sweater. The socks weren't located at that time. So far, I don't know if they were found later or not.
The complete transcript may tell me that.
The next morning, the authorities were able to locate Marian's purse, the lug wrench and the umbrella, or what was left of it after Gibbs had broken and bent it to make it easier to dispose of.

It strikes me as extremely remarkable that Gibbs not only returned to the murder scene once, but three times.
Three times within less than twenty four hours of killing Marian.

Marian and Nancy Stonesifer had a good laugh when Marian had returned from lunch at the college cafeteria. Marian was rushed, sitting at her desk without removing her coat and realized she had forgotten her umbrella. Much like myself, apparently Marian had quite a habit of losing or forgetting umbrellas! :)
She must have gone back for it. It was with her when Ed Gibbs killed her.
I am now curious as to where Ed Gibbs was when Marian went back for her umbrella.
She took the CTC bus from the corner of College and James Streets. The Sigma Pi house was on James Street. I don't know exactly where. But I wonder if Ed had encountered Marian or spoke briefly with her, knowing that she was headed downtown.
Why did Ed Gibbs tell another student that he had driven Marian downtown that day?
That statement still makes no sense.

My biggest question tonight is this.
Ed Gibbs claimed that he remembered nothing except reaching over to choke Marian, chasing her and continuing to choke her. What he related after that point he claims he had to surmise because he had no memory of it, but came to conclusions based on what he saw when he "came to".
He said that he must have hit her with the lug wrench because of all the blood and the lug wrench in his hand.
He had blood on his jacket, his sweater and his socks. So much blood that he needed to get out of them, get a shower and then dispose of them.
If there is blood flowing to the extent that it greatly covers a jacket, the sweater under the jacket and your socks, how do you NOT get blood all over your trousers or pants?
Not once was Gibbs trousers or pants mentioned.
Again, the official transcript may clear that up. But nowhere, to date, are his trousers even mentioned.
Given that he probably had his shoes on, how much of his socks were exposed? How much was covered by his pant legs?
If Ed Gibbs had trousers on, the blood would have been prevented from soaking his socks by his trouser legs.
Did he scrub his shoes? No mention of them appears anywhere either.
He mentioned that on the second trip to the Harnish cottage, he had taken a towel with him to clean the handle of the inoperative pump on the property. After killing Marian he tried to pump water to wash his bloody hands but was unsuccessful. Worried that his fingerprints could be taken from the handle, he made sure to clean it with the towel.
He never wavered in his story of having choked her, then getting the keys out of the ignition of his car, going to the trunk, grabbing the lug wrench and then "apparently" beating Marian to death.
The autopsy didn't reveal much severe damage to the structures of her throat or trachea.
And if she was at least unconscious from the choking, giving him time to walk to his car, get the keys, go to the trunk, grab the lug wrench, then how did she receive the wounds to the different locations of her head?
The largest wounds weren't in the same anatomical location or region of the skull. One was right frontal, the other left parietal. The left parietal wound extended into and through the ear canal. The force used was monstrous.
She wasn't unconscious enough to be rendered immobile. And he certainly didn't have the opportunity to just saunter to the car for the keys and the lug wrench. Marian wasn't immobilized when he struck her with the lug wrench. Her wounds tell that clearly and unequivocally. In a murderous rage, the killer doesn't lay the weapon down, turn the victim's head to the side and then resume the beating.
Marian sustained other injuries. I will confirm that when I view the photos from the crime scene and the autopsy.
I in no way wish to upset her loved ones with my frank discussion of the physicality of the attack. It is just extremely important to finally understand what Ed Gibbs really did to Marian that day. He lied throughout the trial, even to his own attorney.
The quotes attributed to Hense Brown are confusing. He was sure Ed wasn't telling the whole story.
Clearly. Brown saw the photos and read the report. He KNEW Ed wasn't telling the whole story.
Several people knew that to be a fact. Brown had caught him in several lies.
How and why that was never entered into the court proceedings is an issue unto itself. We'll cover that later.
It is vital to understanding how very innocent Marian Baker was in the progression of events that day.
The lies started when Ed Gibbs offered her a ride. And he stuck to his lies to the bitter end.
He took her life, he helped take a bit of her reputation and he took the truth with him.
Marian deserves that the truth be told, finally.
I can't help but feel that the timing here is significant.
There is a time for everything. And perhaps there were factors in place, people still loving and missing Marian so over the past sixty years that it just wasn't the time for the truth to be told just yet, in the way that it needs to be told. I'm sure no one who ever knew her or loved her wanted the lies and innuendoes to go on; it just hurt so much to delve into it again.
Marian deserves the truth. And she deserves to have the respect that she was shown when she was alive.
Those who really knew her, loved her, worked with her and spent any time with her knew the real Marian.
She was meticulous, witty, funny, caring and a lady.
Those who knew her knew the truth.
It's sad that because of what was done to her, in the societal time in which it occurred, she was presented in a questionable light. And the pain and frustration of having to live with those undeserved rumors and a sullied reputation has to come to an end. And the truth will do that. It will finally show everyone, especially those who never had the privilege or honor of knowing her, just what Marian Baker was made of.
Marian was "good stuff". She still is :)