Revisiting the Offerman/Manning murders .....

[portofleith]

Mar 9, 2015 19:10:44 GMT Agent99 aka Sandia said:

Mar 9, 2015 17:23:04 GMT woofytreats said:

Port,

Thanks for putting some context to the car exiting at 3:17AM. I would agree with Sandia that access to police reports in this case would likely clarify many of these types of questions. Obviously, it's hard to put time attribution to the period between the gunshots at 3:05AM and the sighting of the vehicle at 3:17AM. Eating in the kitchen and feeding the dog outside after the murders seems to be a popular and likely one. The lights were apparently off inside the condo so I can imagine him eating near the ambient light source which would likely be the patio. I can also imagine that neither set of witnesses kept a specific vigil on Dr. Offerman's condo between 3:05 and 3:17AM and there were likely time windows to not be seen leaving.

However, I would still question the 3:17AM time for the paper being delivered and the car driving through "all dark" with no lights. In between jobs several years ago, I worked for the Contra Costa Times and that paper ( along with most others- large and small- I've ever had experience with ) typically don't deliver much earlier than 4:30AM just based on the logistics and handling that occurs. I'm sure it would depend on the printing / distribution point(s) and the usual delivery time of the L.A. Times in this area, but it still doesn't click with me.

I guess that the witness(es) "thinking" it was the LA Times delivery person and saying it "looked like" this person strikes me as vague in the sense that if you know what the delivery person looks like it would be even more probable that you'd recognize the car as I can imagine it would be less likely ( although possible ) for a delivery person to use different cars. This IDing of the car and driver seems too vague based on what's been stated for me to think that this component is answered. Reading a fuller statement between these witnesses may well answer the question...I don't know. I believe Shelby refers to the area where the car departed as "the common" parking lot in a general sense so apparently that would be the "south" parking lot.

The report I have says "The X's observed a white compact car (Pinto or Honda Civic) driving slowly through the condo's south parking lot with the lights off.  Mrs. X believed that the vehicle may have been driven by the person who delivers the Los Angeles Times newspaper"  So I notice how that was put "believes the car may have been driven"  Now, is this an exact quote of what she said or paraphrasing.  I don't know.

On google it's kind of hard to see the parking lots.  The North parking lot is the one that the Offerman's would have used.  From Cathedral Oaks it would be the first entrance.  It is basically a U shaped parking lot, with spaces and car ports and  you must enter and exit from the same place.  The North and the South parking lots are quite a bit away from each other.  The second entrance goes into the South parking lot back towards the tennis courts.  It is a bit more like a road with smaller parking lots on the right, kind of like a tiny cul de sac for the condos back there and the X's lived behind Offerman and would have parked in the South parking lot.  The South parking lot would offer a number of places to park a car and not be noticed.  Not so for the North parking lot which was much more confined and I think any car in there would be quite noticeable.

Keep in mind that Investigator Shelby says he is not an expert on Goleta and other jurisdictions and has had to rely on others rather than first hand knowledge when it comes to Goleta.  I've spoken to him about that.  He is a very nice man.

The white car sighting leaving the south parking lot by a couple who said "it appeared the vehicle was being driven by the person who delivers the L.A. Times" is separate from another couple who lived closer to Offerman's condo and the male observed nothing when he ran out to check to see if vandals were putting firecrackers under the cars in the north lot.  That would have been about 3:10 or 3:15 a.m. and he saw nothing.

When do you think EAR snacked in the kitchen and fed turkey to a dog on the patio?  Before the murders?  Did he leave in the white car seen at 3:17 a.m. and come back to snack in the kitchen?  I personally believe that he hung around to see if sirens were en route, with a very easy escape into the creek bed if LE did appear.

The Los Angeles Times, as a major newspaper ,did indeed have very early deliveries of morning editions- the goal was to have all papers delivered before dawn.  I could only find a source about how it worked at the Chicago Times and they said the writers wrapped the paper at midnight, the papers were sent to  press while the writers went to bars.  When the bars closed, the delivery trucks picked up the writers at the bars and delivered them home while on their nocturnal routes.

 I know the local paperboys were interviewed and I hope the L.A. Times deliveryman was as well.  The adult paper delivery men would be another occupation, like milkmen, out in neighborhoods in the early morning hours.  They all should have been interviewed.

Another point on timing to consider is that the neighbor of Offerman's who heard the voices, said when she returned home at 10:30 p.m., Offerman's Porsche was in it's parking space.  So he actually left later than 10:30 to drop off the ski gear, as it was his Porsche engine she heard at midnight when he returned.

[woofytreats]

Personally, I don't have a dog in this race ( pun intended ) and I think it might be more logical in a lot of ways for him to disappear into the creek bed as you mention than get into a car. I'd just be more interested in elimination concerning this car than what was actually done that we apparently don't know. Unless I'm mistaken, there was time between 3:05 and 3:17 when he could've left as the witnesses weren't fixated on the Offerman condo during this entire period. To me, as sick as it sounds, the 12 minute time window would be in reason to snack, feed the dog, and leave by car. That's not to say that this is what happened. Thirty-five years on, the whole proposition might seem to be a bit ridiculous.

I can speak from experience when I say that there can be a significant time lag between when the paper is printed and when it's collated with ads inserted and trucked to the bundle spotters. This was true of the SF Chronicle and the Contra Costa Times and I'm assuming it would be the same today. If the L.A. Times is not printed locally, then that would likely add additional time where we'd need to know when it was normally delivered or if there was an edition that was already "old" when it was delivered at 3AM. When I lived in Isla Vista, the L.A. Times was delivered at 5AM or later. I don't offer that this would be relevant to the neighborhoods north of 101, but if it was normally delivered at 4:45-5:00AM versus 3:15AM to Avenida Pequena and the neighbor offers that it "might" have been the LA Times driver since that's the only person they think who is out and about...and the other says it "looked like" the driver...then, to me at least, it's lacking additional info that would eliminate the notion of the car. As mentioned, the information may be there, it just isn't available to mere mortals and I get to beat a dead horse.

[portofleith]

Mar 9, 2015 20:52:28 GMT woofytreats said:

Personally, I don't have a dog in this race ( pun intended ) and I think it might be more logical in a lot of ways for him to disappear into the creek bed as you mention than get into a car. I'd just be more interested in elimination concerning this car than what was actually done that we apparently don't know. Unless I'm mistaken, there was time between 3:05 and 3:17 when he could've left as the witnesses weren't fixated on the Offerman condo during this entire period. To me, as sick as it sounds, the 12 minute time window would be in reason to snack, feed the dog, and leave by car. That's not to say that this is what happened. Thirty-five years on, the whole proposition might seem to be a bit ridiculous.

I can speak from experience when I say that there can be a significant time lag between when the paper is printed and when it's collated with ads inserted and trucked to the bundle spotters. This was true of the SF Chronicle and the Contra Costa Times and I'm assuming it would be the same today. If the L.A. Times is not printed locally, then that would likely add additional time where we'd need to know when it was normally delivered or if there was an edition that was already "old" when it was delivered at 3AM. When I lived in Isla Vista, the L.A. Times was delivered at 5AM or later. I don't offer that this would be relevant to the neighborhoods north of 101, but if it was normally delivered at 4:45-5:00AM versus 3:15AM to Avenida Pequena and the neighbor offers that it "might" have been the LA Times driver since that's the only person they think who is out and about...and the other says it "looked like" the driver...then, to me at least, it's lacking additional info that would eliminate the notion of the car. As mentioned, the information may be there, it just isn't available to mere mortals and I get to beat a dead horse.

Good points Woofy.  I would like to know more about newspaper distributions during this time period, because the Smith's were murdered on the exact day the Sacramento Bee article appeared "Police Debate Tie Between East Area Rapist and Killings" 3/13/80. Most papers were still morning editions then.  

I have always wondered if reading that article was an impetus to move the killings away from Goleta for a bit.  That would assume though, that the Sac Bee was available in the area , though I guess he could have driven south to kill the Smiths.  I would imagine that the UCSB campus library or bookstore stocked a variety of newspapers from around the state.

I hope we can assume that this particular LA Times driver was interviewed and the car eliminated or ruled in as "of interest".

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

My opinion on when he ate or possibly fed a dog, would be most definitely before the shooting. I do not believe that he would fire off 4 shots, then go out on a patio and eat. The neighbor said he looked out the window and could see into the Offerman patio, and nobody was there. He should reasonably expect that the cops would be swarming the place after 4 gunshots were fired inside a condo.

Offerman had gotten loose, one wrist still had the ligatures around it. Personally, what I surmise is that Offerman got loose while he was eating, ransacking, (feeding a dog turkey?).

Why wouldn't a dog bark when hearing gun shots is another question....this whole thing is just weird....attacking someone in a CONDO first of all, are you kidding? so close to everyone, so many people around to hear a scream, hear gun shots, run outside, apprehend him or at least witness him running away, and dogs that don't bark? Was there really a dog there? I guess that is not for sure. Dog paw prints were on the patio, and turkey on the ground 1/2 inside and 1/2 outside the kitchen slider I believe. Was he about to eat the turkey when he heard Offerman get loose and drop the turkey and run into the bedroom or was the turkey put on the floor for a dog to eat? Was there evidence of dog teeth marks or dog hair on the turkey? I've never heard about it if there was. That would be good to know.

I think he had his car parked in a dark corner of the south parking lot. I drove back there a couple of weeks ago and there are a lot of good places to put a car back there and not be seen, next to out buildings and a big field. I think he stole the bike to ride around between Queen Ann and Hanna Drive, but I think high tailed it out of there and ran to some remote area he had the car stashed, and drove out very slowly without the lights on within 12 minutes of the shots being fired. The timing fits.

Then at 5 a.m. screeching breaks were heard out on the corner, I'll bet that was him whooping it up in some sort of maniac disturbed sick victory celebration. Eva Taylor's daughter had a situation that kind of reminds me of that when she was standing in the front bedroom of the house and saw a VW do a really fast turn around right in front of her mother's house with all the police inside and speed off in such a way that it has always stuck in her mind as strange. Another thought that comes to mind is that "the killer always returns to the scene of the crime" Is that what happened at 5:00 a.m.? out on the corner.

[V]

Mar 9, 2015 17:23:58 GMT @murdoc said:

Just for the heck of it, is there anyone who does not think the EAR was involved with this crime? That's something I've been wondering about personally, not because I doubt it myself but because I would like to hear the argument.

I would like to hear that theory as well. Wasn't this case DNA linked?

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

I believe DNA linked Sanchez/Domingo. I don't know if O/M was DNA linked or if it is linked because of the close proximity and time frame of the other very rare cases of sleeping couples being attacked and the break-in methods, the eating, and the rest of the weird M.O./signature of the EAR/ONS. I don't know if everyone believes it. Actually, I know one person that still thinks Glasby killed O/M only. I think that makes one person.

[V]

Mar 9, 2015 21:58:02 GMT Agent99 aka Sandia said:

I believe DNA linked Sanchez/Domingo. I don't know if O/M was DNA linked or if it is linked because of the close proximity and time frame of the other very rare cases of sleeping couples being attacked and the break-in methods, the eating, and the rest of the weird M.O./signature of the EAR/ONS. I don't know if everyone believes it. Actually, I know one person that still thinks Glasby killed O/M only. I think that makes one person.

Yea, I believe you are right. 

[zforce]

That the driver of the car at 3:17 would remain unaccounted for would lead me to believe it is related to the crime. If ONS drove a car to the scene then it makes sense that the bike is stolen earlier in the evening for a burglary run, and the proximity of that theft to O/M leads me to believe some sort of O/M recon would have taken place at that time. He ditches the bike near where he has a car parked, but he also brings his dog which leads me to believe he has a residence nearby......obviously where the dog is kept.

Logically speaking, I would think the bike theft would have occurred after O/M and used in the getaway but the 3:17 car, and more pointedly that this person was never accounted for, throws a wrench in things.

The midnight convo if relayed accurately by the neighbor could have been ONS. He could be expected around there that early, and again this person is also unaccounted for.

[V]

Did the bike come from the unoccupied condo next door to the O/M condo? Or was it stolen from elsewhere?

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

Mar 9, 2015 23:06:43 GMT V said:

Did the bike come from the unoccupied condo next door to the O/M condo? Or was it stolen from elsewhere?

It was stolen from the car port of one of his condo neighbors and later found abandoned North, above Queen Ann.

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

Mar 9, 2015 22:58:57 GMT zforce said:

That the driver of the car at 3:17 would remain unaccounted for would lead me to believe it is related to the crime. If ONS drove a car to the scene then it makes sense that the bike is stolen earlier in the evening for a burglary run, and the proximity of that theft to O/M leads me to believe some sort of O/M recon would have taken place at that time. He ditches the bike near where he has a car parked, but he also brings his dog which leads me to believe he has a residence nearby......obviously where the dog is kept.

Logically speaking, I would think the bike theft would have occurred after O/M and used in the getaway but the 3:17 car, and more pointedly that this person was never accounted for, throws a wrench in things.

The midnight convo if relayed accurately by the neighbor could have been ONS. He could be expected around there that early, and again this person is also unaccounted for.

  Well that is an interesting point that the car remains unaccounted for.  But the bike was not abandoned in the South parking lot but it was abandoned up north above Queen Ann, but again yes, maybe at that point the car was up there and he moved it.  Here is another indication he had a car in the neighborhood.  One of the five burglary victims that night lived south of Offerman's condo near the corner of Harvard Lane and Hanna Drive.  The home owners discovered "random coins" had been stolen.  The just threw their loose change into a Sparklett's container they kept in their bedroom closet and also missing were a pair of mucklucks (a sock/slipper/boot type of thing) and presumably used to transport the coins out of the home.  Some coins were dropped in their back yard.  Again he was so weird!  random pennies, dimes, nickles and heavy.  They never turned up, he must have put them in his car.

I think if there was a construction connection and I suspect he was more like a supervisor, or assistant to someone higher up and not painter he might have been staying at the Holiday Inn on Calle Real which is steps from the San Juan creek on the opposite side of the creek.  It is very close.  I think he was either staying with a relative in that neighborhood or I'm going to say I think he may have stayed in that Holiday Inn.  Further down Calle Real is a Motel 6 but since I think he was higher up in construction, I think Holiday Inn.

The midnight conversation...I'll bet you are right that it was Offerman/Manning and EAR/ONS.  If someone that lived in the area such as the boys playing Dungeons and Dragons that coincidentally left the condo to go to Carrows to eat, we would know if it was one of them that encountered them and spoke to them.  It was one other voice that never came forward leading me to think it was the EAR/ONS.  Did they catch him coming out from trying to enter the condo next door and did he pretend to ask for directions?

[Drifter]

Mar 9, 2015 21:52:56 GMT V said:

Mar 9, 2015 17:23:58 GMT @murdoc said:

Just for the heck of it, is there anyone who does not think the EAR was involved with this crime? That's something I've been wondering about personally, not because I doubt it myself but because I would like to hear the argument.

I would like to hear that theory as well. Wasn't this case DNA linked?

Sandia is correct that the D/S crime has been officially DNA connected to the ONS.

Technically, O/M is not officially an ONS crime.  I seem to recall that the DNA available at O/M was insufficient or too degraded or some such, for testing.

But I am not aware of anyone on this message board or any LE official who thinks O/M was not committed by the original night stalker.  The overwhelming consensus is that O/M crime + the first Goleta crime (where Stan Los chased the perp on a bike) were both committed by the same person who committed the D/S crime, owing to M.O., timing, and other factors, like Sandia indicated.

As always, someone correct me if I am wrong.

And I would agree with playinem that if there ever is a murder charge against this guy it will come from Orange County, not Santa Barbara County.

D.

Edit ... some really good, thought provoking questions and comments last few pages.

[Deleted]

Gotcha! Thank you everyone!

I had known about the Glasby angle and I believe I know who you are referring to. I could see it but without knowing his "movements" at that time, its only an assumption.

As for ONS dna, I believe it was S/M, Janelle, Manuela, the Smiths and the Harringtons who had DNA present. If not the DNA for Smith and Harrington, it was the knots used. Plz plz plz correct me if I am wrong here.

Personally, I do believe the ONS committed the murders of O/M. Theres a theory that Offerman was sexually assaulted due to his positioning upon discovery, though I do not feel this is true. More evidence would be there to prove this and any male who has ever been assaulted in this way would agree. I believe that Offerman fought off being tied up and that's when the * hit the proverbial fan. Feeling cornered, the murderer in question shot him up and then in order to silence Manning, he blasted her next. It raises some questions though, as I feel that he might've shot Manning first and Offerman responded by attacking....also, it could be speculated that this attack was a seperate rapist who lost control of his situation. Then, you have the Glasby angle, which I have always found to be intriguing. As a victim of mistaken identity though, I am obligated to look things over at every angle. I do not believe Glasby did this, despite his history with the good doctor. No offense to his family, but he was a hood and a rat...he didn't have the cajones necessary to murder, at least in my humble opinion. He was too busy trying to impress fellow criminals and he would've been ratted out if he was in fact the murderer.

I agree the angles warrant thought and some very deep research is needed to back much of this up. Honestly, I feel that the Offerman/Manning murders are even more mysterious than the Maggiore murders. So much is there but no where near enough...

SORRY to rant.... Just on my mind. I'm losing steam on this case and the trial of Antwan Pittman is under my radar currently. I just wanted to point out theories that have caught my eye and I am still interested in the alternate O/M theories.

[zforce]

Mar 9, 2015 23:54:55 GMT Agent99 aka Sandia said:

Mar 9, 2015 22:58:57 GMT zforce said:

That the driver of the car at 3:17 would remain unaccounted for would lead me to believe it is related to the crime. If ONS drove a car to the scene then it makes sense that the bike is stolen earlier in the evening for a burglary run, and the proximity of that theft to O/M leads me to believe some sort of O/M recon would have taken place at that time. He ditches the bike near where he has a car parked, but he also brings his dog which leads me to believe he has a residence nearby......obviously where the dog is kept.

Logically speaking, I would think the bike theft would have occurred after O/M and used in the getaway but the 3:17 car, and more pointedly that this person was never accounted for, throws a wrench in things.

The midnight convo if relayed accurately by the neighbor could have been ONS. He could be expected around there that early, and again this person is also unaccounted for.

  Well that is an interesting point that the car remains unaccounted for.  But the bike was not abandoned in the South parking lot but it was abandoned up north above Queen Ann, but again yes, maybe at that point the car was up there and he moved it.  Here is another indication he had a car in the neighborhood.  One of the five burglary victims that night lived south of Offerman's condo near the corner of Harvard Lane and Hanna Drive.  The home owners discovered "random coins" had been stolen.  The just threw their loose change into a Sparklett's container they kept in their bedroom closet and also missing were a pair of mucklucks (a sock/slipper/boot type of thing) and presumably used to transport the coins out of the home.  Some coins were dropped in their back yard.  Again he was so weird!  random pennies, dimes, nickles and heavy.  They never turned up, he must have put them in his car.

I think if there was a construction connection and I suspect he was more like a supervisor, or assistant to someone higher up and not painter he might have been staying at the Holiday Inn on Calle Real which is steps from the San Juan creek on the opposite side of the creek.  It is very close.  I think he was either staying with a relative in that neighborhood or I'm going to say I think he may have stayed in that Holiday Inn.  Further down Calle Real is a Motel 6 but since I think he was higher up in construction, I think Holiday Inn.

The midnight conversation...I'll bet you are right that it was Offerman/Manning and EAR/ONS.  If someone that lived in the area such as the boys playing Dungeons and Dragons that coincidentally left the condo to go to Carrows to eat, we would know if it was one of them that encountered them and spoke to them.  It was one other voice that never came forward leading me to think it was the EAR/ONS.  Did they catch him coming out from trying to enter the condo next door and did he pretend to ask for directions?

Any idea if Manning's whereabouts while Offerman ran his errand has been confirmed by LE?

I'm under the impression that they both returned to the condo to encounter ONS. Particularly if he'd preselected them earlier in the evening and was getting ready to make his move thinking they had already gone to bed.

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

zforce, Offerman was gone for 1 to 1 1/2 hours and three voices were heard in the parking lot at midnight, Offerman, one unknown female and one unknown male. I tend to think the female voice was Manning because if not, it meant Offerman encountered a couple in the parking lot and because no couple came forward.