6/18/1976

[Mitchell]

Apr 1, 2016 2:10:57 GMT jamenreid said:

Apr 1, 2016 0:39:27 GMT cerulean said:

Is that why the people in your avatar are carrying strategically posed terriers? 

Welcome to the board --I love that pic !


Another reason to think he  might be on the young side: if he had been exposing himself just prior to these attacks, he might've had a record they'd find. But as a minor, the record could have been expunged.
I always thought that if he was teh Visalia Ransacker, that he was pretty experienced going pantless in stranger's homes (and in their yards).  But I am curious to know if rapists actually do fantasize about appearing nude. I never read anything I remembered about someone climbing in windows with their, whatyou say?, "wonder" bouncing about.
And if it is a fantasy, how much of it is the delusion they are under that the woman will think it's the biggest one she's ever seen?
Can anyone think of a movie, a slasher, even a porn, that has a hot prowl where the character  comes in nude from the waist down?

I do remember an episode of Forsenic Files where a serial hot prowler eventually escalated to rape/murder and I believe he entered the home pantless. At the very least he was in his underwear only. There were a lot of EAR parallels I remember thinking, prowling, ski mask etc. If I find a link, I'll edit and post.

UPDATE: I found the FF episode mentioned above and you can easily access it on YouTube. Just search "Forensic Files: Window Watcher. I would post the link but I think Drifter mentioned we needed to chill w/ the attachments.

I've seen that particular episode and even though it up here before. I believe the lack of pants is due to the masturbation while peeping. Pants around ankles while peeping then when he ultimately decides to enter the residence he just kicks the pants off.

But here's a thought, maybe someone did his laundry for him. If his girlfriend, wife, or mother washed his skivvies there may be some questions to answer. [Rest of paragraph deleted by Drifter]

I read a couple of hostile posts a few pages back that seemed to take issue with the idea that EAR's victims may or may not have been physically attractive, "beautiful", "hot", etc... and that this could be relevant to victimology.

It may sound crass, but why rape a woman that is not attractive? I'm sure EAR could probably have found unattractive partners willing to consent. Anyone can. This applies to both genders.

If EAR did in fact specifically target women that were disproportionately attractive, it says something about his MO. One doesn't just stumble across incredibly beautiful women. Some searching would be necessary. Once found, stocking and research would be required. This takes time and energy. It could also speak to his occupation. Was he in a position where he frequently came in contact with beautiful women who became potential victims?

This is far different from the accepted MO which sees EAR picking a neighborhood and then selecting victims largely based on circumstance.

I'm not claiming that this is an accurate assessment of his MO, just that it is relevant to the discussion.

[trabuco]

I also believe the EAR and his #1 victim knew each other. Out of 50 rapes the EAR committed only one Victim #1 actually knew him.

As for the EAR taking off his pants, I think he did that to keep from getting something on them because he knew after the rape he was going to work at the diner where he is a cook and not back home
Of course there is speculation. EAR has never been caught.

[Drifter]

Posters ... some comments in this thread come across as a bit crass or coarse. Comments about the EAR's vulgar behavior, and our attendant speculation, are gratuitous and serve no useful purpose. Let's try to keep the discussion on a higher plane. And let's get back to the original thread topic, which is the first EAR attack.

Thanks,

Drifter

[trabuco]

Mar 31, 2016 14:47:00 GMT sammyt said:

Actually, let's reconsider that point about the heavy boots as EAR often continued to wear shoes/boots (rather than tennis shoes) throughout the EAR crimes.

I still find it puzzling that EAR would wear heavy boots (which are cumbersome and can't be slipped on and off like running shoes) if he knew he might have to put his trousers on in a hurry after the crime.

EAR may have had a getaway car or bike nearby, but the fact that EAR continued to wear heavy boots rather than lightweight trainers at rape #4 suggests to me that he didn't have to run a considerable distance.

Or that he was a military man and may have been used to marching, trekking or even running in boots.

Remember the victim who said the EAR was wearing blue running shoes and had on brown and burgandy dress socks?

I think whether EAR was wearing hiking boots or addidas, puma, asics or nike running shoes I believe he changed shoes but at least in the one instance I mentioned above the EAR forgot to change his socks.

[sammyt]

I've heard of bank robbers ordering people in banks to strip naked.

This way everyone is embarrassed, and people look down at the ground, rather than at the bank robbers.

Being confronted by a naked from the waist down rapist would be an incredible shock, and perhaps one of the intentions of the rapist is to cause the victim to look away in general from the perpetrator, reducing the chances of a positive identification.

[trabuco]

Apr 1, 2016 8:07:43 GMT Mitchell said:

Apr 1, 2016 2:10:57 GMT jamenreid said:

I do remember an episode of Forsenic Files where a serial hot prowler eventually escalated to rape/murder and I believe he entered the home pantless. At the very least he was in his underwear only. There were a lot of EAR parallels I remember thinking, prowling, ski mask etc. If I find a link, I'll edit and post.

UPDATE: I found the FF episode mentioned above and you can easily access it on YouTube. Just search "Forensic Files: Window Watcher. I would post the link but I think Drifter mentioned we needed to chill w/ the attachments.

I've seen that particular episode and even though it up here before. I believe the lack of pants is due to the masturbation while peeping. Pants around ankles while peeping then when he ultimately decides to enter the residence he just kicks the pants off.

But here's a thought, maybe someone did his laundry for him. If his girlfriend, wife, or mother washed his skivvies there may be some questions to answer. [Rest of paragraph deleted by Drifter]

I read a couple of hostile posts a few pages back that seemed to take issue with the idea that EAR's victims may or may not have been physically attractive, "beautiful", "hot", etc... and that this could be relevant to victimology.

It may sound crass, but why rape a woman that is not attractive? I'm sure EAR could probably have found unattractive partners willing to consent. Anyone can. This applies to both genders.

If EAR did in fact specifically target women that were disproportionately attractive, it says something about his MO. One doesn't just stumble across incredibly beautiful women. Some searching would be necessary. Once found, stocking and research would be required. This takes time and energy. It could also speak to his occupation. Was he in a position where he frequently came in contact with beautiful women who became potential victims?

This is far different from the accepted MO which sees EAR picking a neighborhood and then selecting victims largely based on circumstance.

I'm not claiming that this is an accurate assessment of his MO, just that it is relevant to the discussion.

Mitchell, you said "Was he in a position where he frequently came in contact with beautiful women who became potential victims?"

I believe victim #1 occupation was insurance adjuster. The EAR may have been a con man scamming insurance companies or was he just trying to get close enough to the victim to take her to lunch and put something in her food or drink to make her sick?

I wonder who adjusted that 1973 Chevy Vega that was only 3 years old with a salvaged title and would leave puddles of oil every time it was parked.

Then I recall reading a post once some time back about victim #1, I think the post was from Port but I could be mistaken. Anyway the poster mentioned victim #1 had fell ill the day before or day of the attack which caused her to just want to lay in bed and rest. Where is the victim when EAR has most success?

How many more victims suddenly became ill before they were attacked?

[trabuco]

Apr 2, 2016 7:44:21 GMT sammyt said:

I've heard of bank robbers ordering people in banks to strip naked.

This way everyone is embarrassed, and people look down at the ground, rather than at the bank robbers.

Being confronted by a naked from the waist down rapist would be an incredible shock, and perhaps one of the intentions of the rapist is to cause the victim to look away in general from the perpetrator, reducing the chances of a positive identification.

Those little things keep adding up which is why I can't believe he was just a teenager.

Sometimes I do think that the EAR could have been a psychology student. He seems to know much about how people behave.

[lufttec]

Apr 2, 2016 11:22:34 GMT trabuco said:

Apr 2, 2016 7:44:21 GMT sammyt said:

I've heard of bank robbers ordering people in banks to strip naked.

This way everyone is embarrassed, and people look down at the ground, rather than at the bank robbers.

Being confronted by a naked from the waist down rapist would be an incredible shock, and perhaps one of the intentions of the rapist is to cause the victim to look away in general from the perpetrator, reducing the chances of a positive identification.

Those little things keep adding up which is why I can't believe he was just a teenager.

Sometimes I do think that the EAR could have been a psychology student. He seems to know much about how people behave.

Or an immature kid who wants his intentions known to the victim without question.  There would be little doubt as to why he was there and speeds things up in his twisted mind, it would allow him to have his hands free.  He also has played this out in his mind over and over and pants off must be how he has made his sick fantasy play out. It could be something as small as shock value to victim, just like the masks, knives, guns and clubs, another tool in his mind. 

[trabuco]

Apr 3, 2016 7:23:27 GMT lufttec said:

Apr 2, 2016 11:22:34 GMT trabuco said:

Those little things keep adding up which is why I can't believe he was just a teenager.

Sometimes I do think that the EAR could have been a psychology student. He seems to know much about how people behave.

Or an immature kid who wants his intentions known to the victim without question.  There would be little doubt as to why he was there and speeds things up in his twisted mind, it would allow him to have his hands free.  He also has played this out in his mind over and over and pants off must be how he has made his sick fantasy play out. It could be something as small as shock value to victim, just like the masks, knives, guns and clubs, another tool in his mind. 

Lufttec, as far as EAR playing out his fantasy, I have wondered how he seems to want the house to be cold. Is that for him or is that planned exposure for his victim?  

Something else I have thought about is with victim #1 he notices something about her that suggests he has seen before when he says, "take it out"

[lufttec]

Apr 4, 2016 7:42:03 GMT trabuco said:

Apr 3, 2016 7:23:27 GMT lufttec said:

Or an immature kid who wants his intentions known to the victim without question.  There would be little doubt as to why he was there and speeds things up in his twisted mind, it would allow him to have his hands free.  He also has played this out in his mind over and over and pants off must be how he has made his sick fantasy play out. It could be something as small as shock value to victim, just like the masks, knives, guns and clubs, another tool in his mind. 

Lufttec, as far as EAR playing out his fantasy, I have wondered how he seems to want the house to be cold. Is that for him or is that planned exposure for his victim?  

Something else I have thought about is with victim #1 he notices something about her that suggests he has seen before when he says, "take it out"

MY opinion is based on my experience of way back when, I worked custody in transportation and jail.  One of the tools when transporting was to make the transport vehicle cold with A/C , when it was cold people resist less fight us less and talk less ( yelling in a bus full of 60 inmates is loud), they want to stay warm and concentrate on staying warm.**** No hate mail it was not that cold, not freezing people just a regular vehicle air condition system, no suffering just colder. But the cold kept it peace. ****  The jail had similar effect, people fight and complain less when colder.  They use energy to staying warm and generally sleep in those situations.
AS far was EAR I believed he learned when people are cold they fight less they go along with whats happening, the victims are disrobed and are cold and are more likely;y to listen to commands.  He of course could have a medical condition too, I believe that has been brought up , I"m more along the lines is he's totally amped up and in his work mode and he gets hot and sweaty when he's working, Adrenaline  heats the body, raises the temp.  In my career I have been in situations outside hiding in dark waiting for bad guy toexit a home and had been sweating wearing light clothing and windbreaker in 28 degree cold.  So I see the temperature thing as a two fold to control victims and to keep him cool when he's preparing or participating in an attack.    

[Drifter]

Apr 3, 2016 7:23:27 GMT lufttec said:

Apr 2, 2016 11:22:34 GMT trabuco said:

Those little things keep adding up which is why I can't believe he was just a teenager.

Sometimes I do think that the EAR could have been a psychology student. He seems to know much about how people behave.

Or an immature kid who ...

... an "immature kid" who got away with 40 rapes in Sacramento?

Oh my!  What does that say about Sacramento's failure to catch him?

Drifter

[lufttec]

I have quite a bit of inside info he was 16, 17, 18 on June 18 1976, so yes young an immature , he matured and got much better in a rapid fashion . There was another young guy by the name the early morning rapist and the norcal rapist they all started at or around that age and all three got away. What it tells us all three behaved normal in everyday life, that is why they got away. They were average, they fit in and did not stand out. IN the EAR case his youthful appearance saved him from even being stopped by patrol cars in the early attacks.

[Drifter]

lufttec ... you quickly gloss over my question by saying "he matured and got much better in a rapid fashion".

So I will ask again ... Why didn't Sacramento catch him when he first started out as the EAR?

More importantly, if you or your LE "insiders" know who the guy is ... why don't they arrest him?

Drifter

[trabuco]

Apr 5, 2016 23:29:29 GMT lufttec said:

I have quite a bit of inside info he was 16, 17, 18 on June 18 1976, so yes young an immature , he matured and got much better in a rapid fashion . There was another young guy by the name the early morning rapist and the norcal rapist they all started at or around that age and all three got away. What it tells us all three behaved normal in everyday life, that is why they got away. They were average, they fit in and did not stand out. IN the EAR case his youthful appearance saved him from even being stopped by patrol cars in the early attacks.

That is classical example of when individuals let their own thinking and understanding to get in the way of their training.'

It also suggest LE knew he was in the area but that he was just a paper boy or something and then they caught on but he knew they had caught on and it was "let's see whatcha got"

1. Opportunity

2. Means

3. Motive

Oh how easy that was for me to say. I wasn't there trying to apprehend the little pest.

[lufttec]

Apr 5, 2016 23:54:11 GMT Drifter said:

lufttec ... you quickly gloss over my question by saying "he matured and got much better in a rapid fashion".

So I will ask again ... Why didn't Sacramento catch him when he first started out as the EAR?

More importantly, if you or your LE "insiders" know who the guy is ... why don't they arrest him?

Drifter

Never said I knew for sure , there is a difference being suspect and POI. I can share my opinion on why he was not caught and its only mine.  The first few cases were the most important and evidence collection was not done as careful and complete as it should have been.  They treated it like a run of the mill and not as a serial offender.  They used old techniques of catching the run of the mill rapist, if you will, and this guy like the Early Morning Rapist was nothing but run of the mill.  The administration of the Sheriff's Department also fought the concept the EAR was a serial and dragged their feet.  When I refer to EAR as immature that in no way suggest he's not smart, clever, lucky,tactical,calculating and can plan well.  It was referring to his removing of his pants, he stopped doing that in later attacks, the immature part is in his performing the pant-less entry.  It doesn't mean for a second that would make him easier to catch.


Bottom line I believe the physical evidence was not collected as well as it should have been, even given the forensic of that day, sloppy until they final made serial connection.  The answers were there in the early attacks, they got missed.