Attack #9 Info

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

May 5, 2015 12:18:13 GMT richporce said:

May 5, 2015 11:55:39 GMT dbw said:

Once again, the girl attacked is a family friend who lived next door to my girlfriend. She did not live where Q is indicating. She lived at the address I have given. These are indisputable facts. Period.

How she got to wherever in the canal you can debate and speculate all you want, but she was attacked in the home, taken through the neughbir's back yard to the canal. If Q wants to talk to me about this, i will, but his location of the house us not correct - period.

I believe you dbw, although this indicates that Shelby was likely wrong. Either that or ear took the ridiculous risk of taking her on a 400m walk down a canal across an area under a main road that is completely visible from it, at roughly 8pm, a time when traffic/people would still be out on the streets. 

Personally I think Shelby got the street name muddled up and that your house is correct, and ear took the victim away from Dewey, not towards it.

So they walked along a paved canal under a bridge, what is the big deal?

This attack took place November 1976. It would have been completely dark, it is stated also in the book he used his flashlight to light up their way. 

They walked a maximum of 22 houses, about 2 blocks, if you walked on the road instead of in the canal, it's a 5 minute walk, walking in the canal it was also paved with a tiny amount of water in it. 

I am so frustrated that people take the word of this guy Quester who WAS NOT THERE, does not have the police reports, over the word of LE, and we have dbw to offer unique insight. 

It is absolutely weird to me that when dbw explains where the house was, gives the actual address, (by the way in case you are not believing dbw, he is who he says he is because I've been told that by multiple people including Shelby that  dbw

is who he says he is, he has also given some very interesting new  insights  as to how the girl was treated and roughed up.

 Also Shelby told me that he is the one who walked down that ditch with the girl and her father the next day, as if Shelby got it wrong but Quasar got it right.

WHY WHY WHY are people so quick to dismiss what the detectives say, what dbw says and take the word of an anonymous person, Quasar. 

I think he is a very talented writer, very colorful, takes really great pictures, intrigues me much like Sherlock Holmes does, same sort of self assured attitude. I would really enjoy his writings if only he would not say the detectives got things wrong but he is the one who is right, and he is not!  I love thinking, speculation, theories, new ideas, maybe something new and good could come from this but I do have a problem with changing facts, that is doing harm in my opinion. 

[dbw]

I heard back from two sources, one of which was present and walked the canal with the victim and her father.  EAR took her under the bridge and down the canal west of Dewey Drive.  Once again, they did NOT stay on the same side of Dewey Drive but crossed under the bridge over Dewey Drive.

Actually, although looking at maps may not show it, this makes sense.  They would be visible for a shorter period of time crossing under the bridge than walking a distance parallel to Dewey Drive in the canal on the east side.  Also, at that time, there was much more tree and brush cover in and along the canal on the west side of Dewey Drive  than the east side.

I had always assumed EAR moved the victim along the east side of the canal.  I was mistaken.

[vangogh]

Thanks for clarification and the legwork.

Accuracy is essential.

[vangogh]

DBW posted the message below in a separate thread.  Accuracy is essential.  Case closed.  Lock thread.  

May 6, 2015 11:01:28 GMT -4 dbw said:

I heard back from two sources, one of which was present and walked the canal with the victim and her father. EAR took her under the bridge and down the canal west of Dewey Drive. Once again, they did NOT stay on the same side of Dewey Drive but crossed under the bridge over Dewey Drive.

Actually, although looking at maps may not show it, this makes sense. They would be visible for a shorter period of time crossing under the bridge than walking a distance parallel to Dewey Drive in the canal on the east side. Also, at that time, there was much more tree and brush cover in and along the canal on the west side of Dewey Drive than the east side.

[dbw]

I have heard back from two sources in regard to the attack on Victim #9, one of which was present when investigators walked the canal with the victim and her father.  It turns out EAR took the victim UNDER the bridge on Dewey Drive to the east side of the street.  The distance he took her down the canal was to an area fairly close to home of his earlier victim (I know her real name, but cannot remember the fictitious name given in the books) in the area.

Although it is difficult to see in on maps, it actually makes sense.  By going under the bridge EAR was visible to traffic on Dewey Drive for a shorter period of time than going some distance in the canal parallel to and along Dewey Drive of the east side.  There was, at the time of the attack, much more tree and brush cover along the canal on the west side of Dewey than the east side.  It also makes sense that EAR may have made for an area he was familiar with, where he had attacked before. 

However, it was also a huge risk to have gone outside and down into the canal at all. One can only assume, as was his pattern in "home alone" attacks when he didn't know when parents might return, he wanted the victim outside so he wouldn't get "trapped" in the house.  Since the backyard of victim#9 was essentially visible from two, possibly three sides, including Dewey Drive, the next door neighbors, and anyone passing by on Shell Court (it was, as I know the house and yard, as it was then, well) EAR decided to risk going into the canal.

It's not a risk I would have taken, but he was a risk taker.  Eventually, of course, he abandoned the attack without raping.  Perhaps he was unnerved at the risk, among other factors.

One other fact, not well known.  The father of my girlfriend (next door neighbour to the victim) observed a person matching EAR description coming out of the canal into his back yard and walking onto Green Leaf in the early morning hours two nights after the attack.  The father called LE but the person was long gone before deputies arrived.  Apparently there was a search and the person was not found in the area.  IF it was EAR - and there is no way to prove it one way or the other - he was once again taking a huge risk. 

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

It was night. In November it gets dark at 5 p.m. and it is stated in the book that he carried a flashlight to light their way.

To paraphrase Shelby, they walked under the bridge and less than 3 blocks down the canal.

[almagata]

I think I maybe able to clarify something that will bring Gian and DBW into line with one another. I walked the canal behind Greenleaf today. Along the canal are two wooden bridges that span the canal allowing access from one side to the other. In looking at the property lines on Google maps, some property lines appear to span the canal.  These wooden bridges were built to allow the property owners to reach the other side of the canal apparently during the winter if there was water in the canal.   Both wooden bridges were to the east of 6607 Greenleaf.  The only willow tree I saw was on the same side of Dewey as 6607.  It was a couple of hundred feet to the east of 6607.

I did go to the bridge that runs under Dewey and it is quite low. Peter Dinklage might find it comfortable to traverse but the rest of us not so much. I also did not find any willow trees on the west side of Dewey.

 

Attachments:

[almagata]

More pictures

Attachments:

[dbw]

According to two sources that were present when the victim and her father walked the canal with investigator, the victim said she was taken UNDER Dewey Drive. It think we can pretty much agree the victim's word is pretty much the authoritative source. Yes, it is low, but it is passible.

Bear in mind, in over thirty years trees come and go. I have no idea if the bridges you speak of east of Fewey were there at the time if the attack. I don't remember them, but that doesn't mean they weren't there.

[dbw]

This is my most recent post on this issue.

[richporce]

That clears things up. EAR really was brazen, wasn't he.. This attack occurred at around 8pm, admittedly it was in the winter so that would reduce the amount of people out on the street, but still.. What a huge risk. I calculated on google earth that he must have walked her about 400 metres down the canal. That's incredibly brazen even by EAR's standards

[dbw]

Indeed, a huge risk, and then he abandons the attack without raping. This particular attack is interesting because he goes way off script, may have attacked the wrong target (this is not certain), grows agitated when cutting off the victims jeans with a knife doesn't work well, finds she is menstruating (although this didn't bother him in other attacks), seems to have come unraveled, and walks away.

It an example of how essential it was to EAR to stick to the plan and how rattled he became when things didn't go his way.


Perhaps he was moving the victim closer to his escape route/vehicle?

[Mitchell]

"One other fact, not well known.  The father of my girlfriend (next door neighbour to the victim) observed a person matching EAR description coming out of the cnal into his back yard and walking onto Green Leaf in the early morning hours two nights after the attack.  The father called LE but the person was long gone before deputies arrived.  Apparently there was a search and the person was not found in the area.  IF it was EAR - and there is no way to prove it one way or the other - he was once again taking a huge risk. "

Returning home, maybe?

He waited till his parents went to bed before he could leave and engage in his work. Forced to return home before they awoke and found him missing. Spoiling his alibi. Those must have been long painful days for him. Wantoness. The anticipation building.

He had to satisfy his urges during the day with drawing, writing, and making his phone calls. And masturbation. Always. When night finally came and darkness spread across his haunts like a disease, he was sometimes already spent. Unable to perform. He struggled to maintain his erection.

He hated weaing the masks, balaclavas, helmets. They made it so hot. Too hot to perform. But some of them knew him. Would recognize him.

It was all about making memories anyway. Fantasies he could explore later when alone. In comfort and safety.

[dbw]

Can not prove it was EAR that was observed that night or, if it was, what he was doing. Removing something he left (rape kit, etc.?) who knows?

Not so sure he was living with his parents - most suspected sightings place EAR's age in his mid to late twenties. Possible. No way to know if he hated wearing the masks, or what he did during the day - perhaps work, because he wasn't working nights or swing shift. Not must indication he may have known his victims - the masks may have been simply a precaution, as EAR was very cautious about evidence and concealing his face, wearing disguises, etc. There is some indication of reconnaissance during the day. It is suspected he had some means of supporting himself as he was usually pretty well dressed (at least enough to not stand out in middle and upper-middle class neighborhoods) and had money to keep himself in running vehicles.

[Deleted]

I don't know if anyone has commented on this point, but I'll give it a try and hope I can articulate my point decently....

I've read the account of this attack multiple times, and there always something about it that stood out to me as being pretty strange. As I learned more about this aborted attack and the fact that the neighbour was probably the intended target, the sense that something was off only grew. However, it was the renewed possibility that the offender may have been a teenager at the time that finally made me realize what it was that I had always found so strange.

When the EAR has the victim from #9 seated in the place where he presumably intended to rape her, he seems to realize he has made an error. He brings his face up close to hers and asks her,

"I know you, don't I?"

I think this could potentially be a revealing question and a slip on the EAR's part. While he seemed genuinely flummoxed by the whole situation, this question stands out. Unlike so much of what the EAR says to his victims, this seems to be a serious question asked by someone who had just realized they had abducted the wrong girl. After studying her face closely he suddenly asks her, as though stunned himself, "I know you, don't I?" He then goes on about American River College, etc., but it is this question that stands out for me. I wonder if the EAR did actually know the girl, and only realized it when he had her in his chosen spot with time to scrutinize her more closely. Why else would he ask such a strange question, seemingly without guile, and obviously in a situation where he is confused and much more likely to let something slip?

I've started to wonder if this wasn't a question that slipped out of the EAR's mouth as he came to a sudden awareness that he did know this girl — perhaps from school or through school friends, or from some other venue — and only realized it after he took a moment to scrutinize her face closely. He asks her about American River College, and when she replies that she does not attend the school, he seems to understand that this definitely is not his intended victim. But his confused state pits him off his game. He says something else that is possibly revealing when he mentions having to wait for his parents to leave before he can go home. As Q has pointed out, EAR never would have even thought to say this if he didn't think the victim would see him as someone younger. Or perhaps there was some truth to it and it slipped out because of the confused state he was in. Either way, I think that when Q labels this aborted attack a "Revealing Mistake," he is correct, and the more we can learn about what exactly the EAR said and did after he realized he had the wrong girl, the more likely it is that we can glean even more details from this mistake.

Anyways, I've said my piece. What do others think about this strange question? Do you think he might have actually known the girl after all? He seemed more than willing to rape alternate victims in other instances when his first choice was unavailable for some reason. He always had "substitutes" set up in case his victim of choice was unavailable when he went to atack her. Why the sudden reluctance to rape this victim? I realize that he had a tendency to sort of shut down when things didn't go exactly according to plan, but could there be another reason why he chose not to rape her? Did the fact that he knew her somehow make her less appealing as a victim? Of course, I don't know the answers to any of these questions; I'm just probing. Do others think it is a possibility?