Proof LE not always telling the truth to public in EAR case
Jul 24, 2017 6:01:57 GMT
sammyt, Hydrogen, and 1 more like this
Post by nick on Jul 24, 2017 6:01:57 GMT
On March 23, 1977, the Sheriff's Department's take on what would become attack #15 was a very clear message they stated to the media and the public. "We have absolutely no proof the attack was made by the East Area Rapist" Sacramento Sheriff's Department spokesperson stated on Monday after a series of Metro articles came out attributing the attack of a 16-year-old girl behind the Raley's Supermarket on Friday night. "Newspaper accounts referred to the 17th victim without absolute proof the crime was committed by the same man. It can be assumed the attack the attack was made by another culprit and one that could well live in the Rancho Cordova area. The burglar may not have knowledge of the young girl returning home. He could have been surprised in the process of burglarizing the home the parents of the girl were gone for the evening." All of those comments were directly from a memo and were reported in a local Rancho Cordova newspaper.
This is an example of LE not telling the truth to the public and using the media to perform this outrageous act. They did not say it could be EAR or maybe they stated it's not him although they did, in fact, know at that time it was EAR. This attack provided the cartoon like drawing of EAR suspect in the hooded black and white drawing and the victim had been receiving hang ups calls for 6 months prior to the actual attack. This was known at the scene and a drawing of the suspect was completed and yet LE says it was not EAR??? They had his description and MO and also just a, by the way, the X-Ray units were dispatched to this crime scene that Friday night. For those who do not know the X-Ray units were assigned to EAR case exclusively.
This is the 15th attack that the victim had just returned home from her shift at KFC and EAR used an ax as a weapon just for reference to anyone who did not know.
The interesting part of this time frame of the Sheriff's Department denial this was an EAR crime is the same time the first PBX Sacramento County Sheriff's personnel started receiving calls from a suspect claiming to be the East Area Rapist. These particular calls were received on the PBX line non-recorded so there is no recording of them when they first started.
This is an example of LE not telling the truth to the public and using the media to perform this outrageous act. They did not say it could be EAR or maybe they stated it's not him although they did, in fact, know at that time it was EAR. This attack provided the cartoon like drawing of EAR suspect in the hooded black and white drawing and the victim had been receiving hang ups calls for 6 months prior to the actual attack. This was known at the scene and a drawing of the suspect was completed and yet LE says it was not EAR??? They had his description and MO and also just a, by the way, the X-Ray units were dispatched to this crime scene that Friday night. For those who do not know the X-Ray units were assigned to EAR case exclusively.
This is the 15th attack that the victim had just returned home from her shift at KFC and EAR used an ax as a weapon just for reference to anyone who did not know.
The interesting part of this time frame of the Sheriff's Department denial this was an EAR crime is the same time the first PBX Sacramento County Sheriff's personnel started receiving calls from a suspect claiming to be the East Area Rapist. These particular calls were received on the PBX line non-recorded so there is no recording of them when they first started.