Last night, Valerie Markowski (Larry Markowski’s current wife) commented on a public post defending Larry and downplaying concerns surrounding his involvement in Bethany Markowski’s 2001 disappearance.
The responses to her comment are still visible on the thread. Here’s the screenshots of the comment:
Whether it’s actually Valerie or—as some have long suspected—Larry using Valerie’s account, one thing is clear: This response only raised more questions.
We’re breaking down Valerie’s comment line-by-line, keeping her original grammar, punctuation, and phrasing, followed by direct refutations using verified facts, logic, and context.
Valerie’s Full Comment (Transcript)
People deal with things differently. Every year we light a candle for Bethany’s birthday and the day she disappeared. We have spoke with detectives . No , I don’t ask Larry questions because they seem ridiculous to me . I have no reason to ask those questions. You all are talking about a man that I don’t know . No , I’m not painting a perfect marriage as everyone has their differences. But the Larry you are talking about and the Larry I know are not the same person . Larry didn’t hide when the cameras came to our home , he stepped outside and talked with them ( that wasn’t good enough ) He’s not hiding from anyone he just doesn’t have to answer to everyone . About the shovel , c’mon think about it . He reports his daughter missing at the mall and also throws a shovel at the same mall ?? . Does that really make sense to you ? Just like Jonnie abandoned her car at the same mall that Bethany came up missing at. That doesn’t make sense to me . Also , I noticed in another post on here about the bag of pictures Larry has . Someone commented and said he only brought those pictures out to hurt the mother . That’s far from the truth. People have a twisted way of thinking. Idk if it was you or Kelli who mentioned about sharing the pictures . We did share the pictures with TBI . They went through the pictures and asked if they could take some and they would give them back. They took over 20 sum pictures and never returned them . The birthday card that was from ” Bethany” that was hand delivered to a mailbox , we took to a detective for finger printing and never heard anything else about it . TBI also came to our home and took Larry’s DNA . Larry wasn’t home when they got there but I called him and he said tell them I’ll be right there . Guess that never happened ? Y’all don’t know everything and we don’t have to mention everything. And about his children. Him and Jenny had a good relationship from what I gathered. They would call each other and she came to visit him . Then all of a sudden she had a problem. We still can’t figure that out but whatever . Can’t change the way she feels . So he should be the one trying to have a relationship with his daughter when he doesn’t even know why SHE turned on him ?. And it’s kind of strange that it happened about the same time Harold Robert’s called and tried to start drama . And his son , apparently they had problems over a truck or something, I don’t get involved but I do know Larry loves his kids . No matter what they say about him he still says he loves them . People mention about Bethany being deceased including Jonnie . Larry doesn’t think that way . He’ll always believe she is alive and will return home . He holds on to hope and that’s what I believe keeps him going . Just because Larry remarried doesn’t mean he forgot about his own children because he hasn’t and never will . I’ve been married to him for 24 years and his story has never changed. He may word it differently but its the same story . Now he is older and his memory is slipping a bit which is starting to be concerning . But we won’t get into that because noone cares . Anyways , there are a few other things that Larry said he’s done to help find Bethany but I can’t speak for Larry I wasn’t there . I do know TBI has told some lies and when confronted, it was ” we never said that ” . Also 1 of them tried to get me to divorce Larry and they would pay for it . Crooked ? Sure are ! Oh I’m waiting patiently for the podcast to drop because someone has already been caught in a lie and her story is garbage and I can’t wait to confront it . So don’t believe everything you hear . So did you actually know Larry and witness all this stuff being said about him or are you just going along with what you hear ? Hope I answered your questions but I’m sure it still isn’t good enough . Now I’m done here . I commented on this to let everyone know that Carol & Robert are deceased . Also yeah the sketch and Carol do favor a little but keep in mind Carol was a very large woman always has been and she doesn’t fit the description at all . 100 sum odd pounds is a big difference from 300 -400 lbs . Someone would clearly notice that . Didn’t even know that there was a Catholic School in Sweetwater, definitely will look into that .
Valerie’s Comment + Our Response:
“People deal with things differently.”
True, but not answering legitimate questions or dismissing red flags is not “just dealing differently.” It can also be avoidance or guilt.
“Every year we light a candle for Bethany’s birthday and the day she disappeared.”
Symbolic gestures mean little if they aren’t backed by transparent cooperation and truth-seeking.
“We have spoke with detectives.”
Speaking with detectives is not the same as full cooperation and we know that police have said you have NOT been fully cooperative. What was said? Were they truthful? Were they proactive or reactive?
“No , I don’t ask Larry questions because they seem ridiculous to me . I have no reason to ask those questions.”
If you truly believed in his innocence, why would honest questions seem “ridiculous”? Avoiding questions is a red flag, not a virtue.
“You all are talking about a man that I don’t know . No , I’m not painting a perfect marriage as everyone has their differences. But the Larry you are talking about and the Larry I know are not the same person .”
That’s exactly the point. Abusers often have two personas, public vs. private. This is not proof of innocence.
“Larry didn’t hide when the cameras came to our home , he stepped outside and talked with them ( that wasn’t good enough )”
Talking with the media once doesn’t erase evasive behavior or inconsistent statements before or after. One moment doesn’t cancel years of doubt.
“He’s not hiding from anyone he just doesn’t have to answer to everyone .“
He does have to answer when a child is missing under suspicious circumstances and he was the last adult with her.
“About the shovel , c’mon think about it . He reports his daughter missing at the mall and also throws a shovel at the same mall ?? . Does that really make sense to you ?”
Yes, it does if someone was staging or disposing of evidence. People panic. Dismissing it with sarcasm doesn’t address why it’s suspicious.
“Just like Jonnie abandoned her car at the same mall that Bethany came up missing at. That doesn’t make sense to me .”
Are you referring to when Jonnie had to flee Larry due to abuse and left her car at that very same mall? Because you just added more suspicion to Larry’s story, not less.
“Also , I noticed in another post on here about the bag of pictures Larry has . Someone commented and said he only brought those pictures out to hurt the mother . That’s far from the truth. People have a twisted way of thinking. Idk if it was you or Kelli who mentioned about sharing the pictures .”
Regardless of intention, context and timing matter. Why bring out photos after years of silence and only under pressure?
“We did share the pictures with TBI .“
Were they shared voluntarily or under pressure? Did you give all the photos, or just a curated batch?
“They went through the pictures and asked if they could take some and they would give them back. They took over 20 sum pictures and never returned them .“
If that’s true, that’s on TBI—but it’s not proof of innocence. Evidence often remains in law enforcement’s custody.
“The birthday card that was from ” Bethany” that was hand delivered to a mailbox , we took to a detective for finger printing and never heard anything else about it .”
Law enforcement did investigate that card. We know who sent it and it wasn’t Bethany. That’s likely why there was no further response.
“TBI also came to our home and took Larry’s DNA . Larry wasn’t home when they got there but I called him and he said tell them I’ll be right there . Guess that never happened ?”
Compliance when law enforcement is at your door isn’t heroic—it’s expected. Also, DNA taken doesn’t prove innocence, it’s standard in cases like this.
“Y’all don’t know everything and we don’t have to mention everything.”
That’s exactly the problem—critical facts are being withheld. Not sharing key info in a missing child case is obstruction, not privacy.
“And about his children. Him and Jenny had a good relationship from what I gathered. They would call each other and she came to visit him . Then all of a sudden she had a problem. We still can’t figure that out but whatever . Can’t change the way she feels . So he should be the one trying to have a relationship with his daughter when he doesn’t even know why SHE turned on him ?. And it’s kind of strange that it happened about the same time Harold Robert’s called and tried to start drama .”
Adult children rarely “turn” on a parent without cause. That’s not the whole story. Short-term or surface-level contact doesn’t equal a healthy relationship, especially in a family dynamic that has endured trauma and secrecy. Occasional visits or calls don’t mean everything was fine—many survivors stay in contact with harmful family members before they’re ready to break away. There is nothing sudden or random about it. Minimizing her experience with phrases like “whatever” or “we can’t figure it out” is dismissive and revealing. If she had a problem, she deserves to be heard, not brushed aside as irrational. Yes. The parent is responsible for making amends and seeking understanding, especially if they’re truly confused. But let’s be clear: Jenny doesn’t “owe” Larry a relationship—especially if trust was broken, boundaries were ignored, or emotional damage was done. That’s on him. Trying to pin Jenny’s decision on outside “drama” is another way of dodging responsibility. People don’t cut ties with a parent because of a phone call from someone else. That timing might say more about what was being uncovered than about Jenny’s motivations.
“And his son , apparently they had problems over a truck or something, I don’t get involved but I do know Larry loves his kids . No matter what they say about him he still says he loves them .”
This tries to downplay potential serious conflict between Larry and his kids. Why are both children estranged? We know the real answers and they will share them with the public if they want to, so I’d be careful telling lies.
“People mention about Bethany being deceased including Jonnie . Larry doesn’t think that way . He’ll always believe she is alive and will return home . He holds on to hope and that’s what I believe keeps him going .”
Hope is one thing—but facts and circumstances paint a much darker picture. The situation looks bleak because it is bleak. A child went missing while in Larry’s care, his story has changed, he’s avoided full transparency, and multiple red flags have surrounded his behavior since day one. It’s not just Jonnie who thinks something terrible happened to Bethany. Anyone looking at the known facts can see that it strongly suggests Larry either harmed her or knows exactly what happened to her. Hope doesn’t erase suspicion, and it doesn’t cancel out inaction, avoidance, or inconsistencies. If anything, clinging to hope while refusing accountability only adds to the public’s concern.
“Just because Larry remarried doesn’t mean he forgot about his own children because he hasn’t and never will .”
No one is accusing Larry of “forgetting” his children—we’re pointing out how his actions don’t reflect love, protection, or accountability. Being remarried isn’t the issue. The issue is that his children are estranged, and instead of facing why that is, statements like this try to rewrite the narrative with sentiment instead of substance. You can claim someone “hasn’t forgotten” their children—but when those children cut ties, refuse contact, or openly express pain, it’s not forgetfulness we’re talking about—it’s damage.
“I’ve been married to him for 24 years and his story has never changed. He may word it differently but its the same story .”
That’s simply not true. Larry Markowski’s story has changed multiple times, and that’s a matter of public record. Law enforcement has acknowledged inconsistencies in his statements, and even early reports show contradictions about what happened the day Bethany disappeared.
“Now he is older and his memory is slipping a bit which is starting to be concerning . But we won’t get into that because noone cares .”
This is pre-emptive damage control. If he’s slipping now, what about past inconsistencies? Also: doesn’t excuse past gaps.
“Anyways , there are a few other things that Larry said he’s done to help find Bethany but I can’t speak for Larry I wasn’t there .”
Exactly—and that’s the problem. If there are “things” Larry has done to help find his missing daughter, why are they still being kept private 24 years later? Why hasn’t he spoken openly, on record, and consistently about them? Saying “I wasn’t there” doesn’t excuse vague references or shield someone from scrutiny. If Larry truly did more to help, let him say so publicly, clearly, and with receipts. Otherwise, this just reads as another way to hint at effort without ever proving it.
“I do know TBI has told some lies and when confronted, it was ” we never said that ” . Also 1 of them tried to get me to divorce Larry and they would pay for it . Crooked ? Sure are !”
We have no doubt that the TBI has dropped the ball on parts of this case, and there are legitimate criticisms to be made about their handling of certain leads. But as for outright lying—we don’t know what you’re referring to. If you mean the kind of strategic deception law enforcement sometimes uses to draw out information from a suspect or person of interest, that would make more sense. That’s a standard investigative tactic—and not the same as being “crooked.” If a TBI agent truly offered to pay for your divorce, where is the documentation, complaint, or report? That’s not a casual claim; that’s either a massive breach of ethics—or a dramatic exaggeration meant to distract. Lobbing vague accusations without proof doesn’t help Larry’s credibility. If anything, it highlights how much this narrative relies on emotion and conspiracy, not evidence.
“Oh I’m waiting patiently for the podcast to drop because someone has already been caught in a lie and her story is garbage and I can’t wait to confront it . So don’t believe everything you hear .”
Which lie? By whom? Vague threats and accusations aren’t the same as evidence.
“So did you actually know Larry and witness all this stuff being said about him or are you just going along with what you hear ?”
You don’t have to know someone personally to see patterns or analyze public facts. Truth isn’t limited to inner circles.
“Hope I answered your questions but I’m sure it still isn’t good enough . Now I’m done here . I commented on this to let everyone know that Carol & Robert are deceased . Also yeah the sketch and Carol do favor a little but keep in mind Carol was a very large woman always has been and she doesn’t fit the description at all . 100 sum odd pounds is a big difference from 300 -400 lbs . Someone would clearly notice that .”
That doesn’t mean they didn’t have a role or knowledge while alive. Their deaths don’t end suspicion. Weight can be misjudged in sketches. Also, if she was wearing oversized clothing or had lost weight, she might resemble the sketch more than assumed.
“Didn’t even know that there was a Catholic School in Sweetwater, definitely will look into that .”
Ignorance of local schools isn’t a defense or relevant. Why mention it unless something triggered guilt or suspicion?
Final Thoughts
Valerie’s comment is filled with:
- Defensive tone
- Emotional appeals
- Dismissive sarcasm
- Red herrings and vague accusations
- No actual facts to exonerate Larry
This wasn’t a helpful explanation—it was a wall of excuses and deflection.
✅ Want to Respond to Valerie?
Her original comment is gone, but the replies are still public on the thread.
👉 Go here to read and respond directly: https://www.facebook.com/BethanyLeanneMarkowski/posts/pfbid02MbpKAmCW8kQACw7G3mhWb2eR7EW2EJqZGeX4QSnTunfgBWXENunfFKytHXxVqhJSl
Or—if you believe, like many of us do, that Larry may be using Valerie’s account, then ask the questions he refuses to answer.
Let’s keep pushing for transparency. We don’t owe politeness to those who protect a man at the center of a 24-year-old missing child case.
First of all I’m like everybody else I believe that’s Larry, even though Valerie has stayed with him after he did to her one night in his semi truck when we where driving for 3 L trucking in Niota tn after he caught up with her seeing a man from Pennsylvania during the time they were separated. After that went down there is no way she could make the statements that are being made on his behalf that’s been made in this commits we reading. I’m not going to go into details about that night here cause iv already told the full details all over facebook on the websites that are about the disappearance of Bethany.
If she’s so happy with him as these statements are implying why aren’t there any pictures of her so called happy family on either of her facebook accounts
And if changes that Larry has made is showing that he’s a different man. Tell us those changes. Really I don’t think Valerie is that stupid she’s probably smart enough to say nothing and I don’t believe she is saying anything again he is