Offerman and the Janitor

[guessting]

Oct 8, 2013 17:37:54 GMT redding said:

Oct 8, 2013 17:24:37 GMT Agent99 aka Sandia said:

Good morning g,  I just had a thought pop into my noggin.  Since they never filed charges against BG or his accomplice, it seems that probably the janitor was not able to positively identify either one of them by way of photos or a lineup, would that be correct to say? 

Now the idea that the Sheriff, who had always been convinced that BG was the killer as well as the person who with an accomplice beat the janitor, did believe that BG was capable of that sort of violence.   However,  other LE did NOT believe that BG was capable of that level of violence.  (I have to say BG did beat his friend severely with his steal toed boots causing said friend to lose an eye over $100 of marijuana.  That is pretty violent but since the janitor almost died it sounds like it was much more violent.  That poor janitor by the way,  I hope he is O.K.)

Here is my brain storm could it be the accomplice was not NOT with BG's but with somebody else, possibly GSK?  The S.B. sheriff did say that the break-in technique was unique and the only two people he ever saw use that unique technique was BG and GSK.  Could it be the the break-in technique was unique to THE ACCOMPLICE and GSK?

Having said that I discussed the break-in technique with Inv. Pool and he told me that he did NOT consider the break-in technique unique and rather indicated a novice.  I believe Inv. Pool.  It seems SBSO was fixated on BG and trying to make things fit.  At least that is my opinion and it seems to be the opinion of Inv. Pool.

But I'm taking a long time to say, what if the break in was done by the accomplice and someone else and what if that someone was GSK?

Anything is possible. It just seems to me that the harder we look at the Glasby stuff the more unlikely any direct connection to the GSK seems to be. For example it has been said countless times that if Glasby used Woofy for a guard dog on his pot grows then he may of known who the GSK was. As it turns out, he never had a pot grow and he so he didn't borrow the dog. Then it is stated that the janitor beating break in had a unique technique similar to the GSK. Then Pool states that it wasn't a unique technique at all. At the end of the day there is just nothing that supports a Glasby/GSK connection. At the same time given everything that we know about how the GSK selected his victims it is very likely that he had never heard of Glasby. 

A lot of what ifs? Nothing I can say or do about those. I am aware of the you man that was beaten up by BG and I have read a lot of the court documents. I am just getting tired of talking about BG. It has led no where at this point. One detective said they break in was unique to SB. I just quoted him. I am familiar with the technique and it is not so unique. Pool is right. Non of this is really relelvant IMO. But I sure hope someday you do find a connection. Maybe you will be able to find what I have not been able to get to. I just really feel I need to personally let BG rest in peace. I feel bad talking aobut him over and over. Please do prove me wrong and keep searching.

[redding]

Oct 8, 2013 22:03:33 GMT guessting said:

Oct 8, 2013 17:37:54 GMT redding said:

Anything is possible. It just seems to me that the harder we look at the Glasby stuff the more unlikely any direct connection to the GSK seems to be. For example it has been said countless times that if Glasby used Woofy for a guard dog on his pot grows then he may of known who the GSK was. As it turns out, he never had a pot grow and he so he didn't borrow the dog. Then it is stated that the janitor beating break in had a unique technique similar to the GSK. Then Pool states that it wasn't a unique technique at all. At the end of the day there is just nothing that supports a Glasby/GSK connection. At the same time given everything that we know about how the GSK selected his victims it is very likely that he had never heard of Glasby. 

A lot of what ifs? Nothing I can say or do about those. I am aware of the you man that was beaten up by BG and I have read a lot of the court documents. I am just getting tired of talking about BG. It has led no where at this point. One detective said they break in was unique to SB. I just quoted him. I am familiar with the technique and it is not so unique. Pool is right. Non of this is really relelvant IMO. But I sure hope someday you do find a connection. Maybe you will be able to find what I have not been able to get to. I just really feel I need to personally let BG rest in peace. I feel bad talking aobut him over and over. Please do prove me wrong and keep searching.

Why keep searching if all the connections have proven to be false?  What we are left with is that there is no reason to believe that Glasby knew the GSK, was framed by the GSK, or had any connection to the GSK.  I applaud Sandia's work.  She has helped to clarify many of the issues regarding Glasby and the three toed dog.  At this point I hope that we can move on to other areas that still need to be looked into.

[guessting]

Oct 8, 2013 22:16:51 GMT redding said:

Oct 8, 2013 22:03:33 GMT guessting said:

A lot of what ifs? Nothing I can say or do about those. I am aware of the you man that was beaten up by BG and I have read a lot of the court documents. I am just getting tired of talking about BG. It has led no where at this point. One detective said they break in was unique to SB. I just quoted him. I am familiar with the technique and it is not so unique. Pool is right. Non of this is really relelvant IMO. But I sure hope someday you do find a connection. Maybe you will be able to find what I have not been able to get to. I just really feel I need to personally let BG rest in peace. I feel bad talking aobut him over and over. Please do prove me wrong and keep searching.

Why keep searching if all the connections have proven to be false?  What we are left with is that there is no reason to believe that Glasby knew the GSK, was framed by the GSK, or had any connection to the GSK.  I applaud Sandia's work.  She has helped to clarify many of the issues regarding Glasby and the three toed dog.  At this point I hope that we can move on to other areas that still need to be looked into.

[guessting]

I too applaud her work. My thoughts and feelings on this have nothing to do with Sandia or her work. Sandia and I have shared many things she knows how I feel and I'm certain she knows this is not personal. This is just my opinion.

[Drifter]

quote from redding:
"Why keep searching if all the connections [between Brett Glasby and the Original Night Stalker] have proven to be false?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------

As I stated in another thread, the only certainties about this case relate to names, dates, locations, and a few specific pieces of evidence. Almost nothing else is certain.

You are free to believe there is no connection between Glasby and the Original Night Stalker.  Other posters may not share your belief.

And to say that the stated connection has "proven to be false" is not correct. 

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

I don't want to be stubborn but just want to explore the framing angle and various different possibilities. I feel very bad for the Glasby family. Brett was a scoundrel but he was no killer. His family loved him and Brian and they were killed. The family has been hounded for over 30 years. My intention is not to harm Brett but to hopefully show he was framed and that he actually was a victim too. Who knew his connection to Offerman and knew about the dog. What does it hurt to explore this angle. Everyone is free to explore their own angle. I'm not going to tell anyone "don't look at the 6th grade classes" "don't look at the map" whatever. Everyone should pursue all angles. I used to believe in another poi who was cleared, it doesn't mean he shouldn't have been looked into. How are we going to solve the case unless we keep a reasonably open mind. I have no problem with what guessting says. I have so much respect for her and her work on this case. The main thing I would like is to clear up false information. Like Brett did not have a pot farm. He did not bring the dog to guard the pot farm etc. I just fervently wish that LE would clear up some things.

Here is a really big question. I was told that Russ Whitmeyer said that "the accomplice" in the Offerman break-in and beating of the janitor confessed and took a plea deal. I need to verify the plead deal part. Tonight is the first time I heard that.

Can anyone clarify if that is true or false. From what I have been reading on the board it is false but according to someone in the know it is what Russ Whitmeyer told him.

So can anyone weigh in on that one, guessting? Port? anyone?

[Drifter]

I think there's a lot of muddy water here. The pot farm issue is irrelevant, in my opinion. Whether the large dog had 3 toes or 13 toes is irrelevant, in my opinion. Whether the dog was a German Shepherd is irrelevant, in my opinion.

But the basic issues remain. The Goleta murders were in the general area of where the Glasby family lived. Brett Glasby did live in Sacramento for a period of time. Glasby Sr. did know a SB cop who had ties to Sacramento. LE established that there were dog paw prints at the O/M crime scene. Ditto the D/S crime scene.  And neither resident O nor D owned a dog. Brett had access to a large dog. Brett was a patient of Dr. Offerman. Many "believe" the East Area Rapist had a drug problem, and Brett was a drug dealer.  Brett died under mysterious circumstances. And so on and so on.  There's too much here to blithely throw the baby out with the muddy bathwater .

Drifter

But I don't wish to detract from Sandia's discussion, so ...

... back to Sandia's main point, as stated above ...

[Drifter]

Inquiry from Sandia:

Here is a really big question. I was told that Russ Whitmeyer said that "the accomplice" in the Offerman break-in and beating of the janitor confessed and took a plea deal. I need to verify the plead deal part. Tonight is the first time I heard that.

Can anyone clarify if that is true or false. From what I have been reading on the board it is false but according to someone in the know it is what Russ Whitmeyer told him.

So can anyone weigh in on that one, guessting? Port? anyone?

[Agent99 aka Sandia]

Oct 9, 2013 6:56:03 GMT Drifter said:

Inquiry from Sandia:

Here is a really big question. I was told that Russ Whitmeyer said that "the accomplice" in the Offerman break-in and beating of the janitor confessed and took a plea deal. I need to verify the plead deal part. Tonight is the first time I heard that.

Can anyone clarify if that is true or false. From what I have been reading on the board it is false but according to someone in the know it is what Russ Whitmeyer told him.

So can anyone weigh in on that one, guessting? Port? anyone?

Hi Drifter, Thanks for your points and I agree with you completely.  I can clarify what I was told.  I looked at my notes and I was definitely told by someone in the know that Russ Whitmeyer said (not sure but I wonder if Russ Whitmeyer was being deliberately misleading for investigative purposes, so repeat Russ "SAID" THAT "the accomplice" confessed to the Offerman robbery/beating and plead to a deal in court.  We should know this if it was factual, and BG would have been charged then, ergo I am questioning what Russ W. apparently said."

So again a plea to guessting, port, or whoever might know the facts to clarify.

[redding]

Sandia,

          I am not saying that you should not look into the idea that Brett was framed by the GSK. In fact I am one of the only posters taking the time to consider and comment on the possibility. By looking into this angle you have shown that many long held beliefs about the Goleta crimes appear to be far from certain. It would appear that you are taking my comments personally. Scrutinizing your theory should not be seen as personally attacking you. I do think that it is important to think about why you even think that Glasby may of been framed and to take the time to see how such a theory fits into the big picture of what we know about the GSK and how he operated. I am sorry if this process distresses you in any way. Please carefully consider the following questions without reading it as an attack of you personally.

1. Don't you think that if the GSK wanted to frame Glasby he would of done a better job of it?

2. Now that you have looked into this thoroughly can you please outline what evidence in your opinion still remains that the GSK had any idea who Brett was?

[portofleith]

Oct 9, 2013 7:37:02 GMT Agent99 aka Sandia said:

Oct 9, 2013 6:56:03 GMT Drifter said:

Inquiry from Sandia:

Here is a really big question. I was told that Russ Whitmeyer said that "the accomplice" in the Offerman break-in and beating of the janitor confessed and took a plea deal. I need to verify the plead deal part. Tonight is the first time I heard that.

Can anyone clarify if that is true or false. From what I have been reading on the board it is false but according to someone in the know it is what Russ Whitmeyer told him.

So can anyone weigh in on that one, guessting? Port? anyone?

Hi Drifter, Thanks for your points and I agree with you completely.  I can clarify what I was told.  I looked at my notes and I was definitely told by someone in the know that Russ Whitmeyer said (not sure but I wonder if Russ Whitmeyer was being deliberately misleading for investigative purposes, so repeat Russ "SAID" THAT "the accomplice" confessed to the Offerman robbery/beating and plead to a deal in court.  We should know this if it was factual, and BG would have been charged then, ergo I am questioning what Russ W. apparently said."

So again a plea to guessting, port, or whoever might know the facts to clarify.

According to a detective who worked the janitor beating, the suspected accomplice fled town.  I would not characterize that as a plea deal.  The janitor beating should be re-visited.  It is possible that the two POI's were not the actual perps, as was commonly believed.

[guessting]

Oct 9, 2013 5:04:27 GMT Drifter said:

quote from redding:
"Why keep searching if all the connections [between Brett Glasby and the Original Night Stalker] have proven to be false?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------

As I stated in another thread, the only certainties about this case relate to names, dates, locations, and a few specific pieces of evidence. Almost nothing else is certain.

You are free to believe there is no connection between Glasby and the Original Night Stalker.  Other posters may not share your belief.

And to say that the stated connection has "proven to be false" is not correct. 

Thanks Drifter for the reminder. This board is a place we can all agree to disagree. We don't have to jump into camps of me against you. We are only sharing information. When I share anything that I know to be fact, either out of a report, from LE, a victim, or any other source I will state that it is a fact. To tell all of you the truth I have many times been left wondering if Facts are really facts sometimes. But all I have to go on is things from many years ago that could or could not be skewed with time. I am not in any type of dissent with 99 for her beliefs. As a matter of fact I welcome all thoughts and ideas. It will be necessary in solving this case. Someone is going to put this puzzle together. My ego is not too large to KNOW it has not been I! I am just stating for myself that this has been a dead end and I have spent enough of my energy on it. That is all. No harsh feelings towards anyone. I prefer to talk in civil tones and respect eachother. g

[guessting]

Oct 9, 2013 6:32:18 GMT Agent99 aka Sandia said:

I don't want to be stubborn but just want to explore the framing angle and various different possibilities. I feel very bad for the Glasby family. Brett was a scoundrel but he was no killer. His family loved him and Brian and they were killed. The family has been hounded for over 30 years. My intention is not to harm Brett but to hopefully show he was framed and that he actually was a victim too. Who knew his connection to Offerman and knew about the dog. What does it hurt to explore this angle. Everyone is free to explore their own angle. I'm not going to tell anyone "don't look at the 6th grade classes" "don't look at the map" whatever. Everyone should pursue all angles. I used to believe in another poi who was cleared, it doesn't mean he shouldn't have been looked into. How are we going to solve the case unless we keep a reasonably open mind. I have no problem with what guessting says. I have so much respect for her and her work on this case. The main thing I would like is to clear up false information. Like Brett did not have a pot farm. He did not bring the dog to guard the pot farm etc. I just fervently wish that LE would clear up some things.

Here is a really big question. I was told that Russ Whitmeyer said that "the accomplice" in the Offerman break-in and beating of the janitor confessed and took a plea deal. I need to verify the plead deal part. Tonight is the first time I heard that.

Can anyone clarify if that is true or false. From what I have been reading on the board it is false but according to someone in the know it is what Russ Whitmeyer told him.

So can anyone weigh in on that one, guessting? Port? anyone?

That is not true in my records. I have never heard that. If there had been a plea deal there would be a public record of that. Not wanting to gossip or say anything bad about RW but I will say after doing my own research MANY things W told me were not what I found to be FACT. Happy digging! g

[guessting]

In my opinion EAR had a lot of his own work to do.I just don't see how he would of had the ability to frame anyone with amount of prowling, peeping, raping and then murdering he did and then to also stop and think about framing individuals. If he had a job too. I just do not see it. But I am the first to admit I have seen stranger things in this case.

[redding]

Oct 9, 2013 14:49:48 GMT guessting said:

In my opinion EAR had a lot of his own work to do.I just don't see how he would of had the ability to frame anyone with amount of prowling, peeping, raping and then murdering he did and then to also stop and think about framing individuals. If he had a job too. I just do not see it. But I am the first to admit I have seen stranger things in this case.

I agree.  For the record I am not in a camp for or against anything.  I listen very carefully to all the ideas expressed here and I am open to new theories.  Also any comments that I make about an idea are about the merit of the theory itself and are not directed at the person who came up with the idea.  The problem is that I haven't seen anything that would indicate that the GSK had any connection to Glasby.  Since after close examination of all the known information there appears to be no reason to think that Glasby was framed by the GSK and every reason to believe that he wasn't I currently don't believe that he was framed by the GSK.  Since no new information is likely to surface supporting this theory at some point a reasonable person has to ask why is it still be presented as a viable avenue of investigation.   Everyone is free to work on whatever theory they want. These are just my thoughts.