Post by dogs on Jan 26, 2018 18:35:16 GMT
"In the early 2000s, Orange County seemingly tracked down anyone who had anything to do with the suspicious dog seen before Goleta 1 and possibly associated with Goleta 2. A fortune was spent on DNA tests and investigative work. Unfortunately, anyone who had anything to do with this dog was cleared. The Glasbys intersected into this story and it was quite a saga and incredible police work was done but the bottom line is: none of these characters were the EAR/GSK. The known dog and everything related to it was cleared exhaustively as it could be."
Not trying to discount Winters' story or anyone else's, but I have been thinking about how the pieces of this dog investigation line up.
Did they identify a "dog perp" and then clear everyone associated with it?
Did they look at all suspect dogs in the area and then investigate associated suspects?
Did they follow the trail of blood back to a dog and go from there?
Did they get plaster dog prints and match them up to a dog?
I'm thinking it would be extremely difficult for any LE to investigate a crime based on a dog description, without knowing who the owner was or where it came from. If everyone associated with the Glasby/neighbor dog was cleared, then that's one step. But what about the other neighborhood dogs? This just seems too confusing for me.
I guess I should buy Winters' book and get the details. <cha ching>