ONS is not EAR

[huckfinn]

EAR = Visalia Ransacker
Rapes: #1-36 (July 6, 1978)

ONS Rapes & Murders: #37- 39; #42-48
- #40 & 41 in SJ are copy cats

1. ONS was violent with women and men beyond rape. EAR merely threatened people.
- Big difference in psychological makeup
- The only time EAR killed was when he was threatened or his identity known (Prof. Snelling & Maggiores)

2. ONS murdered for the sexual thrill

3. ONS rapes escalated quickly into murder. EAR’s never did.

4. Everything about EAR’s MO was printed in the newspaper or broadcast on the news.
- Ligatures, method of entry, knife & gun, dishes, crying, hissing, clenching teeth while speaking, shoelaces, verbiage, lotion, etc.

5. ONS stole money and items of value. EAR rarely did.

6. Penis size was different according to victims.

If you compare the details of the rapes from 6/76 thru 7/78 vs. the East Bay ones from 10/78 - 7/81 + 5/86 you will see
they are clearly two different perpetrators with extremely different motives, MOs and signature.

ONS killed for sexual gratification.

It’s time we separate these two, start anew and begin a new suspect pool that is based on evidence that is completely separate for both monsters.

ONS DNA has been identified. EAR’s has not.

Since Sacramento’s Finest tossed out all the rape kits there will never be DNA for convicting the EAR. Additionally, if there are no fingerprints from the Maggiore murders or Prof. Snelling, then LE will be hard pressed to get a conviction even if they do find the culprit.

ONS is the scarier monster and he was clearly incarcerated from 81-86 for an unknown felony that did not require a DNA sample. Once released, he unleashed hell on Janelle Cruz.

Rapists & Killers don’t take breaks unless they are caught or are living out their fantasies with their partner in some way or another.

Start thinking of this case as two separate UNSUBS and the pieces will start to fall into place quickly.

Hint: They both have a long history of violent crimes.

[tede]

Uhhh they were connected by dna.

[jackydee]

Mar 16, 2018 7:51:12 GMT tede said:

Uhhh they were connected by dna.

Not quite. Only the latter crimes we believe are EAR's were linked to by DNA to ONS crimes. I think the OP is wrong, but I won't say he is certainly wrong. Im about 98% sure EAR is ONS but I can't quite guarantee the Sac rapist was ONS. It's probably best to have that tiny lingering doubt. There may easily be something about these crimes we think is correct but may indeed be very, very wrong. That "thing" might just be 2 different perps for 2 different(but similar) sets of crimes. It's certainly not my default position though.

[Roy]

The lack of evidence makes this theory def. possible. Either way, whoever did the crimes of the VR, EAR, and ONS was skilled at not making ANY mistakes. That is very rare for one person, let alone 2 or 3, don’t you think?

[locard]

Mar 16, 2018 7:40:04 GMT huckfinn said:

EAR = Visalia Ransacker
Rapes: #1-36 (July 6, 1978)

ONS Rapes & Murders: #37- 39; #42-48
- #40 & 41 in SJ are copy cats

1. ONS was violent with women and men beyond rape. EAR merely threatened people.
- Big difference in psychological makeup
- The only time EAR killed was when he was threatened or his identity known (Prof. Snelling & Maggiores)

2. ONS murdered for the sexual thrill

3. ONS rapes escalated quickly into murder. EAR’s never did.

4. Everything about EAR’s MO was printed in the newspaper or broadcast on the news.
- Ligatures, method of entry, knife & gun, dishes, crying, hissing, clenching teeth while speaking, shoelaces, verbiage, lotion, etc.

5. ONS stole money and items of value. EAR rarely did.

6. Penis size was different according to victims.

If you compare the details of the rapes from 6/76 thru 7/78 vs. the East Bay ones from 10/78 - 7/81 + 5/86 you will see
they are clearly two different perpetrators with extremely different motives, MOs and signature.

ONS killed for sexual gratification.

It’s time we separate these two, start anew and begin a new suspect pool that is based on evidence that is completely separate for both monsters.

ONS DNA has been identified. EAR’s has not.

Since Sacramento’s Finest tossed out all the rape kits there will never be DNA for convicting the EAR. Additionally, if there are no fingerprints from the Maggiore murders or Prof. Snelling, then LE will be hard pressed to get a conviction even if they do find the culprit.

ONS is the scarier monster and he was clearly incarcerated from 81-86 for an unknown felony that did not require a DNA sample. Once released, he unleashed hell on Janelle Cruz.

Rapists & Killers don’t take breaks unless they are caught or are living out their fantasies with their partner in some way or another.

Start thinking of this case as two separate UNSUBS and the pieces will start to fall into place quickly.

Hint: They both have a long history of violent crimes.

Incorrect. The East Area Rapist raped in Contra Costa County, the East Bay of Northern California/San Francisco Bay Area, which kept some of their rape kit evidence with the rapist's DNA. EAR's DNA was a match to Southern California's Original Night Stalker [not Richard Ramirez, "The Night Stalker" serial killer who died in prison] aka The Golden State Killer and the ten murders he committed there. His DNA was first matched by Orange County's four murders to the Contra Costa rapes.

EAR/GSK has not been positively identified, so it is premature to say what happened during his five year gap, between his 1981 murders and his last known murder in 1986 of Janelle Cruz. EAR/ONS/GSK could have: moved away and later moved back, been out of the country, been busy with work, been busy with family, and a variety of other life factors that got involved in his crime spree. Most crimes are committed by people in their 20's. As people age, it changes them and they are less likely to offend (not always, though). 

Visalia Police do not have the DNA of the Visalia Ransacker, as those crimes occurred pre-DNA science/forensic gathering techniques. The law enforcement experts featured in the upcoming 5-part HLN/CNN series about the case, the first episode airs this weekend, think that VR=EAR=ONS=GSK. I have heard that Visalia Police may have some VR fingerprint evidence. If they do, once EAR/GSK is identified, they could see if his fingerprints are a match for any of their old evidence. www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/07/unmasking-a-killer-6.cnn

[locard]

Mar 16, 2018 8:18:09 GMT Roy said:

The lack of evidence makes this theory def. possible. Either way, whoever did the crimes of the VR, EAR, and ONS was skilled at not making ANY mistakes. That is very rare for one person, let alone 2 or 3, don’t you think?

Incorrect. DNA evidence ties some of EAR's Northern California rapes (Contra Costa County kept some of their rape kits) to the ONS/GSK murders in Southern California, specifically with the first DNA match to the four Orange County murders. It's the same offender. 

[leonidis]

Mar 16, 2018 7:40:04 GMT huckfinn said:

EAR = Visalia Ransacker
Rapes: #1-36 (July 6, 1978)

ONS Rapes & Murders: #37- 39; #42-48
- #40 & 41 in SJ are copy cats

1. ONS was violent with women and men beyond rape. EAR merely threatened people.
- Big difference in psychological makeup
- The only time EAR killed was when he was threatened or his identity known (Prof. Snelling & Maggiores)

2. ONS murdered for the sexual thrill

3. ONS rapes escalated quickly into murder. EAR’s never did.

4. Everything about EAR’s MO was printed in the newspaper or broadcast on the news.
- Ligatures, method of entry, knife & gun, dishes, crying, hissing, clenching teeth while speaking, shoelaces, verbiage, lotion, etc.

5. ONS stole money and items of value. EAR rarely did.

6. Penis size was different according to victims.

If you compare the details of the rapes from 6/76 thru 7/78 vs. the East Bay ones from 10/78 - 7/81 + 5/86 you will see
they are clearly two different perpetrators with extremely different motives, MOs and signature.

ONS killed for sexual gratification.

It’s time we separate these two, start anew and begin a new suspect pool that is based on evidence that is completely separate for both monsters.

ONS DNA has been identified. EAR’s has not.

Since Sacramento’s Finest tossed out all the rape kits there will never be DNA for convicting the EAR. Additionally, if there are no fingerprints from the Maggiore murders or Prof. Snelling, then LE will be hard pressed to get a conviction even if they do find the culprit.

ONS is the scarier monster and he was clearly incarcerated from 81-86 for an unknown felony that did not require a DNA sample. Once released, he unleashed hell on Janelle Cruz.

Rapists & Killers don’t take breaks unless they are caught or are living out their fantasies with their partner in some way or another.

Start thinking of this case as two separate UNSUBS and the pieces will start to fall into place quickly.

Hint: They both have a long history of violent crimes.

We do not know everything about EAR's MO, but LE does. It is unique, and they say they have a few bits that are extraordinary to those cases. The cases are very well connected by a very well defined MO. Not everything is printed in a newspaper! They only tell you what they want to tell you. All the really telling details are kept (or should be kept) close and not released to the general public just for the reasons you are stating!

[Deleted]

Mar 16, 2018 8:10:23 GMT jackydee said:

Mar 16, 2018 7:51:12 GMT tede said:

Uhhh they were connected by dna.

Not quite. Only the latter crimes we believe are EAR's were linked to by DNA to ONS crimes. I think the OP is wrong, but I won't say he is certainly wrong. Im about 98% sure EAR is ONS but I can't quite guarantee the Sac rapist was ONS. It's probably best to have that tiny lingering doubt. There may easily be something about these crimes we think is correct but may indeed be very, very wrong. That "thing" might just be 2 different perps for 2 different(but similar) sets of crimes. It's certainly not my default position though.

I agree that it is less than 100% certain the EAR is the ONS. Yes the CCC rapist was for sure the ONS; there is a DNA match. No DNA in Sac. The physical descriptions seem to change in CCC. Also, the EAR tied the victims very tight and they didn't get loose. He started having trouble with his victims getting loose after leaving Sac. Were the CCC and "down south" victims tied as tight as the Sac victims?---Do we know that?

[drdoogie]

I cannot say for certain that the Sac crimes were committed by the same perp as who committed the Bay Area and the SoCal crimes, but I believe they are close enough in MO to be the same guy. But if the OP is correct (and I cannot say with 100% certainty that he is incorrect), then EAR (the perp in the Sac crimes) willl never be caught - there is nothing to catch him with.

Okay, I am depressed now...

[leonidis]

Mar 16, 2018 8:50:14 GMT drdoogie said:

I cannot say for certain that the Sac crimes were committed by the same perp as who committed the Bay Area and the SoCal crimes, but I believe they are close enough in MO to be the same guy. But if the OP is correct (and I cannot say with 100% certainty that he is incorrect), then EAR (the perp in the Sac crimes) willl never be caught - there is nothing to catch him with.

Okay, I am depressed now...

Well, the first victim got a phone call that was recorded. She says it is EAR. The other victims obviously heard the same voice or they would be telling LE that it was not the same voice they heard on the recording. I am sure that every victim has heard that voice over and over and can't wait for the idiot to be locked up!

[jackydee]

Mar 16, 2018 9:07:37 GMT leonidis said:

Mar 16, 2018 8:50:14 GMT drdoogie said:

I cannot say for certain that the Sac crimes were committed by the same perp as who committed the Bay Area and the SoCal crimes, but I believe they are close enough in MO to be the same guy. But if the OP is correct (and I cannot say with 100% certainty that he is incorrect), then EAR (the perp in the Sac crimes) willl never be caught - there is nothing to catch him with.

Okay, I am depressed now...

Well, the first victim got a phone call that was recorded. She says it is EAR. The other victims obviously heard the same voice or they would be telling LE that it was not the same voice they heard on the recording. I am sure that every victim has heard that voice over and over and can't wait for the idiot to be locked up!

Im going to say the victims cannot be sure the caller was ear. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable; earwitness testimony will be even less reliable than eyewitness testimony; earwitness testimony 5, 10 or 15 years after the fact will be so unreliable as to be bordering upon useless. This is before we even mention that a voice over the phone can  sound very different to a voice heard in person. This recorded caller might indeed be ear, and im not doubting the victims belief that it was ear. However, this does not mean it was ear. The calls are almost certainly useless in any legal sense.

[leonidis]

Mar 16, 2018 9:22:59 GMT jackydee said:

Mar 16, 2018 9:07:37 GMT leonidis said:

Well, the first victim got a phone call that was recorded. She says it is EAR. The other victims obviously heard the same voice or they would be telling LE that it was not the same voice they heard on the recording. I am sure that every victim has heard that voice over and over and can't wait for the idiot to be locked up!

Im going to say the victims cannot be sure the caller was ear. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable; earwitness testimony will be even less reliable than eyewitness testimony; earwitness testimony 5, 10 or 15 years after the fact will be so unreliable as to be bordering upon useless. This is before we even mention that a voice over the phone can  sound very different to a voice heard in person. This recorded caller might indeed be ear, and im not doubting the victims belief that it was ear. However, this does not mean it was ear. The calls are almost certainly useless in any legal sense.

Considering that the vocal tones and general speech patterns would only be known by the victims, it would be hard for someone to prank call a victim and make them believe it was EAR without him knowing what EAR actually sounds like. I know you are going to say that it is not exact, but you can bet that each victim has lived those words in full clarity in their minds over and over since the day it happened. I would not discount their ability to say that the guy on that tape sounded exactly like the person who raped them. If that is not the case, then 2 or more rapists, not only have the same MO, same voice characteristics, and they continued in a linear fashion to commit crimes one after another....stopped....then the other started....all without any overlap. That is not very convincing at all! I'll have to go with same guy....same MO....1 perp!

Then, if we believe multiple perps, and the voice is not either, then we have 3 guys who sound like and say things that EAR said to all his victims. That is even more hard to believe than the fact that EAR has actually gotten away with this for so long

[trabuco]

The only reply I can think of are the words of Peter Griffin, "Uh! Now you're just splitting hairs."

[claudius_2014]

Mar 16, 2018 7:40:04 GMT huckfinn said:

EAR = Visalia Ransacker
Rapes: #1-36 (July 6, 1978)

ONS Rapes & Murders: #37- 39; #42-48
- #40 & 41 in SJ are copy cats

1. ONS was violent with women and men beyond rape. EAR merely threatened people.
- Big difference in psychological makeup
- The only time EAR killed was when he was threatened or his identity known (Prof. Snelling & Maggiores)

2. ONS murdered for the sexual thrill

3. ONS rapes escalated quickly into murder. EAR’s never did.

4. Everything about EAR’s MO was printed in the newspaper or broadcast on the news.
- Ligatures, method of entry, knife & gun, dishes, crying, hissing, clenching teeth while speaking, shoelaces, verbiage, lotion, etc.

5. ONS stole money and items of value. EAR rarely did.

6. Penis size was different according to victims.

If you compare the details of the rapes from 6/76 thru 7/78 vs. the East Bay ones from 10/78 - 7/81 + 5/86 you will see
they are clearly two different perpetrators with extremely different motives, MOs and signature.

ONS killed for sexual gratification.

It’s time we separate these two, start anew and begin a new suspect pool that is based on evidence that is completely separate for both monsters.

ONS DNA has been identified. EAR’s has not.

Since Sacramento’s Finest tossed out all the rape kits there will never be DNA for convicting the EAR. Additionally, if there are no fingerprints from the Maggiore murders or Prof. Snelling, then LE will be hard pressed to get a conviction even if they do find the culprit.

ONS is the scarier monster and he was clearly incarcerated from 81-86 for an unknown felony that did not require a DNA sample. Once released, he unleashed hell on Janelle Cruz.

Rapists & Killers don’t take breaks unless they are caught or are living out their fantasies with their partner in some way or another.

Start thinking of this case as two separate UNSUBS and the pieces will start to fall into place quickly.

Hint: They both have a long history of violent crimes.

why ons didn t continue crime after janelle ?

[jackydee]

Mar 16, 2018 9:39:54 GMT leonidis said:

Mar 16, 2018 9:22:59 GMT jackydee said:

Im going to say the victims cannot be sure the caller was ear. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable; earwitness testimony will be even less reliable than eyewitness testimony; earwitness testimony 5, 10 or 15 years after the fact will be so unreliable as to be bordering upon useless. This is before we even mention that a voice over the phone can  sound very different to a voice heard in person. This recorded caller might indeed be ear, and im not doubting the victims belief that it was ear. However, this does not mean it was ear. The calls are almost certainly useless in any legal sense.

Considering that the vocal tones and general speech patterns would only be known by the victims, it would be hard for someone to prank call a victim and make them believe it was EAR without him knowing what EAR actually sounds like. I know you are going to say that it is not exact, but you can bet that each victim has telived those words in full clarity in their minds over and over since the day it happened. I would not discount their ability to say that the guy on that tape sounded exactly like the person who raped them. If that is not the case, then 2 or more rapists, not only have the same MO, same voice characteristics, and they continued in a linear fashion to commit crimes one after another....stopped....then the other started....all without any overlap. That is not very convincing at all! I'll have to go with same guy....same MO....1 perp!

Then, if we believe multiple perps, and the voice is not either, then we have 3 guys who sound like and say things that EAR said to all his victims. That is even more hard to believe than the fact that EAR has actually gotten away with this for so long

Sure, the victims will have replayed ear's words in their minds over the years. This imo does NOT make them more accurate recognizing as ear's true voice. There are numerous studies of witnesses getting things wrong. Eyewitness testimony can be strong but it can also be very, very flawed. The mind can easily convince itself of things. The most likely call to stand out to earwitnesses is the gonna kill you call. The stutter(real or put on) stands out. However, the "Ray" call can be from almost any twentysomething Californian. The Ray caller may be a rapist, he may be some crank, or it may indeed be a guy asking innocently for Ray. We can tell virtually nothing about the Ray caller. I think the most we can say is that these suspected ear calls sounded something like ear. It is perhaps telling that the caller never repeated something only the perp would know. Thats partly why I still have lingering doubts over them. I believe every other student of the case should too. Far too often suspicions, some very strong suspicions can become fact; a future victim talking boastfully at a townhall meeting suddenly means ear MUST have been in attendance at that townhall meeting.

Having said all this I have no real opinion on the calls other than some may possibly(maybe even probably) be from ear.