Post by leonidis on Dec 15, 2017 3:04:15 GMT
That mother who went toe-to-toe with him gave a pretty good assessment of him.
The truth is we don't know the details of what actually transpired in any given attack. We have a victim's statement to police after the event. We have LE's write-up after the event. We have interpretations of the write-up well after the event. All of this after-the-fact information is interpretation of what actually occurred and therefore subject to error and bias.
It is disingenuous to base something as basic and fundamental as age on trivial tidbits that have been preserved in the public record.
Yet, trivia is what drives the idea that the guy was young; trivia also drives other, potentially wrong, characteristics of the criminal.
All this trivia distracts from the more overarching facts of the case, namely the guy's successful evasion in some 40 rapes in Sacramento and his successful evasion of ten murders.
Basing grand conclusions on trivial tidbits occurs because such tidbits reinforce a confirmation bias on the part of people who have already made up their minds about the offender, and who therefore are not really open minded about the case.
Drifter
I agree with you here!!!
Wouldn't you feel a bit more comfortable if the victims were able to be reinterviewed, and have a first hand account that might clear up some of the issues? It won't guarantee an exact age, but it would allow for current LE, and us, to get a better grasp at what the victims used to estimate the age of the perpetrator.