ONS is not EAR

[leonidis]

Mar 16, 2018 10:25:38 GMT jackydee said:

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

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.

I am not referencing the Ray call. I am referencing this:

youtu.be/jdElYnd-xMo

Not your average prank call! If the victims heard EAR, they would be able to have a fairly accurate opinion, after all there are 50 victims and many more men and children involved. If being an earwitness is truly as inaccurate as you say, then there should be no agreement among the victims that this is EAR. They should be saying, "Well, gee.....I don't know....his voice was a bit higher.....or lower......or.....! Doesn't seem like that is happening because LE is fairly certain it is him because the victims have probably been confronted by them for their opinions. Nothing is perfecr, but I would tend to go with what the victims are saying, and what LE seems to believe is most compelling! Othrwise, we are just offering our opinions, and I know I was not there, and I have no idea what EAR sounded like. I can only imagine based on the victim's descriptions which are fairly uniform from victim to victim.

And, then again......I am probably completely wrong, and there probably were multiple rapists/murderers who had the same MO, and worked the same stomping grounds. The police probably are wrong, and all of this is probably a complete waste of time.

[jackydee]

Mar 16, 2018 10:38:10 GMT leonidis said:

Mar 16, 2018 10:25:38 GMT jackydee said:

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.

I am not referencing the Ray call. I am referencing this:

youtu.be/jdElYnd-xMo

Not your average prank call! If the victims heard EAR, they would be able to have a fairly accurate opinion, after all there are 50 victims and many more men and children involved. If be in an earwitness is truly as inaccurate as you say, then there should be no agreement among the victims that this is EAR. They should be saying, "Well, gee.....I don't know....his voice was a bit higher.....or lower......or.....! Doesn't seem like that is happening because LE is fairly certain it is him because the victims have probably been confronted by them for their opinions. Nothing is perfecr, but I would tend to go with what the victims are saying, and what LE seems to believe is most compelling! Othrwise, we are just offering our opinions, and I know I was not there, and I have no idea what EAR sounded like. I can only imagine based on the victim's descriptions which are fairly uniform from victim to victim.

I referenced this call too. Firstly, 1970's telephone audio is not great. This means identifying the voice for anyone is difficult. Secondly, before the advent of youtube how many victims heard this call? Quite possibly only a few. This could mean the vast majority of victims only heard this call 20 to 30 years after their attack. As far as we know LE think it very likely this was ear, and thats probably the best attitude to take. But highly likely is still not a certainty. It's still in, say, the 90+% level of certainty; similar to the 98% certainty ear was ons. Again, the phone calls tell nothing about whether ear was ons.

[leonidis]

Mar 16, 2018 10:53:45 GMT jackydee said:

Mar 16, 2018 10:38:10 GMT leonidis said:

I am not referencing the Ray call. I am referencing this:

youtu.be/jdElYnd-xMo

Not your average prank call! If the victims heard EAR, they would be able to have a fairly accurate opinion, after all there are 50 victims and many more men and children involved. If be in an earwitness is truly as inaccurate as you say, then there should be no agreement among the victims that this is EAR. They should be saying, "Well, gee.....I don't know....his voice was a bit higher.....or lower......or.....! Doesn't seem like that is happening because LE is fairly certain it is him because the victims have probably been confronted by them for their opinions. Nothing is perfecr, but I would tend to go with what the victims are saying, and what LE seems to believe is most compelling! Othrwise, we are just offering our opinions, and I know I was not there, and I have no idea what EAR sounded like. I can only imagine based on the victim's descriptions which are fairly uniform from victim to victim.

I referenced this call too. Firstly, 1970's telephone audio is not great. This means identifying the voice for anyone is difficult. Secondly, before the advent of youtube how many victims heard this call? Quite possibly only a few. This could mean the vast majority of victims only heard this call 20 to 30 years after their attack. As far as we know LE think it very likely this was ear, and thats probably the best attitude to take. But highly likely is still not a certainty. It's still in, say, the 90+% level of certainty; similar to the 98% certainty ear was ons. Again, the phone calls tell nothing about whether ear was ons.

So...you are also questioning the DNA link to the EAR crimes that were tested?

[tilomagnet]

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.

You are doing it wrong....you question the EAR - ONS connection and at the same time come in with the speculative claim that EAR was the same person as VR and that EAR killed the Maggiores.

Although there is no hard proof for anything except that the CCC rapist became the ONS, Sac EAR and ONS are definately "easier" to connect than VR or Maggiore.

Also you're logic is quite flawed, these psychopaths do change around in their MO and of course they escalate. The DNA connection to the CCC rapes proves that ONS was originally "only" a rapist before he became a serial killer.

[jthou]

OP, Can you cite #4 where his script or verbiage as you put it was broadcast and printed in papers. While the gist of what he said and his threats may have been I don’t think the details were. He had very specific things he would tell each victim that he said again and again. That’s one of the reasons it was fairly easy to connect the dots. While a copycat could get close the script he used was similar every time. Someone would have to know those details to fool LE.

[otiswasthegreatest]

The cases in CCC are linked to Sac through a MO not yet released to the public, or something like that. I've tried to find the quote by Paul Belli on this, but can't find at the moment.

The OP may be right, but this isn't the forum to bring this up.

[leonidis]

Mar 16, 2018 12:21:02 GMT otiswasthegreatest said:

The cases in CCC are linked to Sac through a MO not yet released to the public, or something like that. I've tried to find the quote by Paul Belli on this, but can't find at the moment.

The OP may be right, but this isn't the forum to bring this up.

youtu.be/Tdk9V0QSSj4

At 18:18, he says exactly what you are looking for.

[otiswasthegreatest]

Mar 16, 2018 12:29:21 GMT leonidis said:

Mar 16, 2018 12:21:02 GMT otiswasthegreatest said:

The cases in CCC are linked to Sac through a MO not yet released to the public, or something like that. I've tried to find the quote by Paul Belli on this, but can't find at the moment.

The OP may be right, but this isn't the forum to bring this up.

youtu.be/Tdk9V0QSSj4

At 18:18, he says exactly what you are looking for.

Thank you new friend.

[nyc123]

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?

I don't think it's rare at all--we wouldn't have so many unsolved crime cases if it wasn't common...

[zeropipeline]

Mar 16, 2018 12:54:37 GMT nyc123 said:

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?

I don't think it's rare at all--we wouldn't have so many unsolved crime cases if it wasn't common...

Exactly correct. Also, police investigation of these sorts of crimes was less sophisticated back then. 

[venomsnake]

Interestingly in the two of the three DNA-linked rapes that are linked to ONS he is described by the victims as less than lean/svelte as we've come to expect of the the Sac EAR:

(attack 39)

-Light olive skin

-Dark hair
-
Medium build

-Larger upper body

-A little extra weight on his stomach

-legs: white complexion, not muscular, especially dark hair, moderately hairy

-Double chin and a short neck, but not a neck like a football player


(attack 46)

-stocky or chunky as opposed to thin (He may have appeared heavier because of a sweater he wore)

-He had a slight slouch.

-His hair was soft-bodied and a light-brown color

[Aristotle]

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.

Sorry but the M.O. in all of these cases is too strong to dismiss as coincidence.

[Dan]

Oh God... this thread ...

[redding2]

Mar 16, 2018 14:47:33 GMT Dan said:

Oh God... this thread ...

27% still think that OJ is innocent....

[huckfinn]

Mar 16, 2018 12:12:10 GMT jthou said:

OP, Can you cite #4 where his script or verbiage as you put it was broadcast and printed in papers. While the gist of what he said and his threats may have been I don’t think the details were. He had very specific things he would tell each victim that he said again and again. That’s one of the reasons it was fairly easy to connect the dots. While a copycat could get close the script he used was similar every time. Someone would have to know those details to fool LE.

www.coldcase-earons.com/1980-03-13.pdf