Post by batman on May 9, 2017 14:37:11 GMT
Batman - Agreed...if we have a consistent playing field, so to speak. We don't.
1. We have different officers in different jurisdictions writing the reports and not sharing information with other jurisdictions. Have LE who remain interested in this case reviewed each and every file from each jurisdiction? Or, are they, also, relying on "deus ex machina" - postulated unrevealed - or unverified, in the case of LE - police knowledge? We also have some victims saying that there are errors and omissions in their police reports.
2. Did the unique behavior occur in the three Costa County County rapes with DNA evidence? Nobody is arguing that EAR did not display a unique MO. Did he display it in the attacks with "hard evidence"?
3. Did the assailant display some behavior that was not typically identified with EAR in the three Contra Costa County attacks? For example, did he rob the home of all the cash he could lay his hands on? If so, is that enough to raise serious questions?
Again, it is just an alternate theory that has gained traction with some credible investigators - some amateur such as JJ - but also Detective Shelby has said he thinks it is possible there was more than one rapist committing some of these crimes.
I think in a general way, out of the 48 attacks, to associate a number of traits as unique features of EAR is somewhat subjective. You can pick 1 - 100 of 'unique' behaviours if they existed. The more you pick, the less chances you have of matching crimes, which means omitting possible related attacks. If your number is too low, then the greater the chance of matching unrelated crimes. Let's say it the latter. The number of traits was low enough to allow for non-EAR crimes to be classed as EAR crimes. Okay, that can be the case. Maybe out of those 48 a few fall into that category. Then you have the possibility of two EARs, but only 1 is really EAR. The other would be deemed a sort of 'copycat'.
Shelby wrote that the Early Morning Rapist had a copycat. So they pretty much have encountered the possibility. So even if there is a copycat in the 48, there is still an EAR. The copycat may or may not be connected to EAR. However again this all boils down to the number of unique traits selected. I think the description of EAR events has clearly many distinct elements. So many that Shelby calls it a routine. I believe in modern criminology its called a ritual?
How does an independent (unconnected) offender acquire the same rituals EAR?
Randomness can account for it. Chance. But the odds are so small as to be put aside as unreasonable to accept them.
They learned it from a source. Someone talked about it. Someone wrote about it. If unique traits become public knowledge then they can be copied.
Then we have the connected version. EAR 1 and 2 are connected.
But do we need to invoke 2 to explain all the crimes or can 1 be sufficient? I think parsimony tells us its one person.
The Maggiore Murders could be copycats trying to make it look like an EAR crime, but got seen, murdered the Maggiores and dropped the shoelace as it was the best they could do under the circumstances with one maybe putting on a ski-mask for a short time after. A small number of elements that match EAR crimes. So if your criteria is small, then this one sneaks in.