East Bay Rape Connections

[pendleton]

Sept 4, 2014 14:09:48 GMT smitty2011 said:

It is very strange that EAR/GSK did not have a weapon with him at the HH Goleta attack, his first known attack in So.Cal. I could theorize why this was, but maybe other posters can throw out some ideas why they think EAR came unarmed to this home. Someone who seemed to have meticulously planned 50 + previous attacks didn't seem prepared for this one. Luck would be on his side once again, if the neighbor comes outside 30 seconds earlier we may not be here talking about this. But again why would EAR show up with no weapons ? If I remember correctly, the knife was from the home he was in, but correct me if I am wrong. And to take the discussion a step further, he shows up with no weapons, what can that tell us about him, what was happening in his life at this time and does it create any possible investigative channels ? 

I was just thinking along these same lines the other day. I was reading a report on violent sexual offenders that focused on characteristics and statistics of organized and disorganized offenders. Because I've been posting on the board here quite a bit lately I was mentally ticking boxes with EAR/ONS in mind as I read it. I've always considered EAR/ONS to be an organized offender and I think if you stood one offender type up against the other, when it comes to the EAR/ONS crimes, organized would win out over disorganized but there were definitely a few EAR/ONS crimes that seemed much more disorganized then most of his crimes. The HH Goleta attack stands out. So do a few others where he seemed ill prepared. There were instances where he appeared not to have a firearm. One rape he was reported to have been wearing mittens. Another (possibly a B&E) he reportedly wore socks on his hands. At another attack he show up at one brandishing a nail file. What does it say about him? I think a lot. Here's a few things that come to mind.

His inconstancy with bringing firearms to his attacks suggests that he did not have have a safe environment to hold on to these weapons or he attacked on impulse when he was not prepared. This could be suggestive of a transient lifestyle or a life marred by sporadic incarceration where he would be unable to hold on to such weapons.  It could also suggest an extreme paranoia where he felt he had to get rid of weapons (possibly stolen) for fear he would be caught with them.

The nail file attack is very interesting.  It tells us that that he was very self-concious. He did not trust his own ability to subdue a woman without a weapon. What's also strange about this particular attack is that he didn't seem to have the presence of mind to seek out a better weapon. That's very odd, considering his propensity for taking things from victim's homes and using them to his advantage. You could argue that the victim's resistance called for immediate control of the situation but EAR/ONS was all about control and this particular attack shows that he struggled with control because of his own lack of preparation. A true devolution/diversion from an organized to a disorganized offender.  

Violent serial sexual offenders live in two worlds. The world of fantasy and the world of reality. When they kill, they combine these two worlds and they feel complete. But when one disrupts the other, it lends to this type of disorganization. It's been pointed out that during the Goleta attacks EAR/ONS appeared to be unravelling; becoming more unstable and sloppy. That could suggest that the fantasy was taking precedence and driving him beyond his own level of control. This could be because of a trigger in his reality that effected his mental state to the point that he could finally complete his fantasy of killing. It could also be caused by stimulants (drug abuse/or lack of a prescribed medication). Equally though it could be caused by a disruption in his world of reality. A transient lifestyle, incarceration, institutionalization or, as mentioned before, a trigger in his reality (loss of job, loss of family, loss of partner). 

As far as investigative channels, I think it would be best to take a closer look at the EAr/ONS crimes where he seemed ill prepared. Where did they all take place? What was the length of time between these attacks and previous, more organized attacks and what was the length of time before he offended again? If he was incarcerated or spent time in a hospital, it may give us ideas as to where.

[casesolverforfun]

I believe there is multiple factors that you have probably touched on. One thing that jumps out is that he might not have had as much leeway down south to prowl. Whether he was on the move, had a family, a more serious job...another thing I was thinking was that by Goleta, GSK has a clear understanding of the law, how LE works and how to move in and out of crime scenes. I have always asked myself when he is breaking and entering does he possibly leave weapons behind in case he is caught in the act? I don't know the law, but is there a huge difference between B&E carrying a gun or if you just have nothing? I would guess so. Or lets say its not a gun, its a knife, or something lesser. Are the charges the same?

I have also wondered about age or possible injury. He seemed to control scenes much better during his time up north. Was there an injury that could have attributed to the sloppiness? Was he ever seen running in Goleta anywhere? He was seen running all over Sac. And in Janelle's case it seemed like he quickly attacked her as opposed to tied up and went through whatever ritual.

[casesolverforfun]

Sept 4, 2014 16:51:25 GMT casesolverforfun said:

I believe there is multiple factors that you have probably touched on. One thing that jumps out is that he might not have had as much leeway down south to prowl. Whether he was on the move, had a family, a more serious job...another thing I was thinking was that by Goleta, GSK has a clear understanding of the law, how LE works and how to move in and out of crime scenes. I have always asked myself when he is breaking and entering does he possibly leave weapons behind in case he is caught in the act? I don't know the law, but is there a huge difference between B&E carrying a gun or if you just have nothing? I would guess so. Or lets say its not a gun, its a knife, or something lesser. Are the charges the same?

I have also wondered about age or possible injury. He seemed to control scenes much better during his time up north. Was there an injury that could have attributed to the sloppiness? Was he ever seen running in Goleta anywhere? He was seen running all over Sac. And in Janelle's case it seemed like he quickly attacked her as opposed to tied up and went through whatever ritual.

Another quick idea about carrying a gun. I have also thought that possibly EARONS has had a reason or story if he was caught out at night. This could be whether he was a security guard, patrol officer, probation officer...whatever. Could it be when he was carrying a gun, it was part of his employment and he was licensed to carry if asked. And when he didn't, then he wasn't working in a field that allowed a gun. I feel like there are a lot of late night jobs where you can carry a gun. Bonds Bailsman, Tow Truck Driver and the others above etc...

[pendleton]

My knowledge of American vs. Canadian criminal law is a bit cloudy but there's definitely a difference between B&E with a weapon vs. B&E without. It's similar to a robbery with an unloaded/fake firearm over an unloaded weapon. The grey area would be the use of a knife or other weapon. The key word is 'intent'. I do know that the level of distress to the victim is factored into sentencing. An offender convicted of a simple B&E when no one was home will obviously do a lot less time then a hot prowl B&E where a weapon is present.

[woofytreats]

Apparently, a gun wasn't used in the 6/2/79 and 6/25/79 attacks on the teenage girls in Walnut Creek...and no one saw a gun on 7/5/79. However, a gun was used in the 6/11/79 Danville attack. EAR was "easy" on both of the W.C. teenage girls in relation to attacks that were more brutal. He told the 6/2/79 victim that he was leaving and left. He didn't go the psychological torture route of having them wonder if he was still there. The Walnut Creek attacks were of a short duration and to my knowledge didn't involve drinking an Oly and having some pickles. You can derive whatever you want from those bits but my contention might be that EAR was conflicted and transitional in this period due to a life or employment event ( possibly bringing him to Goleta ).

Hot Prowl posits that the W.C. crimes were impulsive but from what I've read this is not the case as there was a burglary, hang up calls, and prowling associated with one or more of the W.C. victims. Contrary to what's often said, I don't necessarily think he was getting more violent during this period prior the Goleta # 1 as he was getting more transitional and all that might entail...whether he was conflicted and planning his next phase in his new town during this period is anyone's guess but it definitely appears by his actions that something was different that he might have been reacting to...

[pendleton]

Thanks for the quick information Woofy. The lack of a firearm in both the Walnut Creek attacks suggests a coalition. So does the fact that both attacks involved teenage victims. If we're looking at EAR transitioning from an organized to disorganized offender then you've brought up a couple of interesting points. The lack of brutality in the WC attacks suggests an organized offender. He didn't need to use violence for intimidation and his attacks were not explosive in the way most disorganized offenders attack. He was in control. The briefness of the attacks suggests he was not as familiar/not prepared for the WC attacks. (Which raises the question of why was he there?) The lack of the presence of alcohol may be insignificant but I will say that organized offenders are more inclined to use alcohol in combination with their crimes. I'm not surprised that there are inconsistencies regarding the information for the WC crimes. Wasn't it the WC LE that were very standoffish and uncooperative?

[slumbergirl]

It's interesting. CC County is generally regarded as "not significant" to the EAR attacks - just EAR passing through. The real "ground zero" is generally regarded as Sacramento. So, Sacramento POI's have been focused on by LE. What if EAR commuted to his attacks? What if EAR has real connections in CC County - not Sacramento? Then, the whole investigation has been geared toward the wrong geographic area.

[Deleted]

Oct 9, 2014 1:21:43 GMT slumbergirl said:

It's interesting. CC County is generally regarded as "not significant" to the EAR attacks - just EAR passing through. The real "ground zero" is generally regarded as Sacramento. So, Sacramento POI's have been focused on by LE. What if EAR commuted to his attacks? What if EAR has real connections in CC County - not Sacramento? Then, the whole investigation has been geared toward the wrong geographic area.

As I have often said "With the possible exception of Rancho Cordova early on EAR never lived where he offended." You have no idea how easy it was and still is to be highly mobile in California. I'm just hoping we get to find out for sure. And I still want to know why Sac LE sent warnings to various jurisdictions in NorCal and two detectives to Contra Costa County.

[slumbergirl]

F1- It appears to me that just you and I and a few others think it was likely he commuted to his crimes, though. You mention non-Sacramento-based POIs to LE, and the response is "we cannot place him in Sacramento during the Sacramento rapes...". You do not need to. I knew people in CC County who commuted to Sacramento on a daily basis. EAR could easily have done so several times a month - with the added plus of not commuting during Rush Hour....

[Relentless]

I believe he did work at one point in CC and I have something to back that up. I'm not at liberty to share it just yet.

[artemisia1]

Oct 9, 2014 1:21:43 GMT slumbergirl said:

It's interesting. CC County is generally regarded as "not significant" to the EAR attacks - just EAR passing through. The real "ground zero" is generally regarded as Sacramento. So, Sacramento POI's have been focused on by LE. What if EAR commuted to his attacks? What if EAR has real connections in CC County - not Sacramento? Then, the whole investigation has been geared toward the wrong geographic area.

You make a good point. It would help explain why Sacramento LE canvasses of the area (Rancho Cordova, etc.) didn't bear any fruit -- he was living somewhere else. His odds of escaping detection while living at a different place than he offended really go up.

Slumbergirl, you ask some really great questions that I truly hope LE of the time considered.

[Deleted]

What LE is trying to tell you is they have no way of justifying getting a DNA sample when they can't say where the POI was during the attacks.