Movie Theater Prior to Disappearance

[(AQ)]

Oct 7, 2018 18:47:17 GMT englishman said:

Oct 6, 2018 4:38:35 GMT (AQ) said:

Yes, this is based on the book ASKOE.  

"He was a pretty straight forward college kid," Teri (sister) said. "they were going to go to the movies first and then to the party. She [Cassandra] and Susan (friend, I believe) had been to a party in that complex, I think the night before. The night before with her and her girlfriend she had called Mom and said that she was going to be out all night."

Book goes on to say, no one bothered to ask which movie.... After the movie the pair arrived at the university Square Apartments, across from Christopher Newport's campus.

Any details on Susan? Would be interesting to know if she made any observations.

For clarity- everything below is from the book ASKOE.

Susan Scott, Cassandra's friend, claims the party was nothing out of the ordinary.  It was your typical college party.   "They had been out to a movie, and they were not at the party that long.  It just turned out bad all the way around from something that seemed so simple. It was a simple date.  They had gone to the movies, then come by the party. When Cassandra was going home Susan plead for her to stay but, Cassandra said "No, that would be rude". 

Two of Keith's friends both claim he wasn't having a good time.  Gertrude (alias used in book), a high school mate of Keith's who didn't know Keith well, spent a good part of the evening talking with him.  Gertrude claimed Keith headed out to the convenience store and returned and that the two black males who had been talking to Cassandra went out the door at the same time.  She stressed how Keith & Cassandra didn't spend time together.  She also states she lost sight of Cassandra at some point.  Later she claimed that Keith wasn't having a good time, was ready to go home but Cassandra wasn't. 

Lisa, a friend of Keith's ex, claims he was elated to see her because he knew no one at the party; Cassandra was off on her own.

----
I wonder how many of the people at the party were interviewed by LE; what observations re Keith coming & going were made.  It sounds like the movie part of the date, as it were, didn't go well and hence they didn't spend time with each other at the party.

It's also odd that Cassandra spent most, if not all, her time at the party w/ Terry Kirby, but Susan Scott seems to not mention it (or made very light of it to the authors of the book).  Likewise she emphasizes that Cassandra didn't wan't to be rude by staying behind at the party.   Wasn't not talking to Keith, rather rude? 

How much time had passed from when Keith went to the store , returned, then he and Cassandra left? 

[(AQ)]

There are discrepancies, per the book, as to who Keith talked to and when; as to when Keith & Cassandra left the party and as to when they went to the convenience store. While Gertrude mentions Keith going (implying alone) there are references to he and Cassandra going to the store. None of this seems to be clarified in the book.

[MJP]

Oct 11, 2018 3:04:45 GMT (AQ) said:

Oct 7, 2018 18:47:17 GMT englishman said:

Any details on Susan? Would be interesting to know if she made any observations.

For clarity- everything below is from the book ASKOE.

Susan Scott, Cassandra's friend, claims the party was nothing out of the ordinary.  It was your typical college party.   "They had been out to a movie, and they were not at the party that long.  It just turned out bad all the way around from something that seemed so simple. It was a simple date.  They had gone to the movies, then come by the party. When Cassandra was going home Susan plead for her to stay but, Cassandra said "No, that would be rude". 

Two of Keith's friends both claim he wasn't having a good time.  Gertrude (alias used in book), a high school mate of Keith's who didn't know Keith well, spent a good part of the evening talking with him.  Gertrude claimed Keith headed out to the convenience store and returned and that the two black males who had been talking to Cassandra went out the door at the same time.  She stressed how Keith & Cassandra didn't spend time together.  She also states she lost sight of Cassandra at some point.  Later she claimed that Keith wasn't having a good time, was ready to go home but Cassandra wasn't. 

Lisa, a friend of Keith's ex, claims he was elated to see her because he knew no one at the party; Cassandra was off on her own.

----
I wonder how many of the people at the party were interviewed by LE; what observations re Keith coming & going were made.  It sounds like the movie part of the date, as it were, didn't go well and hence they didn't spend time with each other at the party.

It's also odd that Cassandra spent most, if not all, her time at the party w/ Terry Kirby, but Susan Scott seems to not mention it (or made very light of it to the authors of the book).  Likewise she emphasizes that Cassandra didn't wan't to be rude by staying behind at the party.   Wasn't not talking to Keith, rather rude? 

How much time had passed from when Keith went to the store , returned, then he and Cassandra left? 

Thanks AQ.  It's good to see these details, which give tantalizing glimpses into K&C's final evening.  It's difficult to see how you might get answers to your questions.  Perhaps over the years some of Keith and Sandra's friends have contributed to articles that provide additional details about the party? 

[cleopatra]

Oct 11, 2018 3:45:22 GMT (AQ) said:

There are discrepancies, per the book, as to who Keith talked to and when; as to when Keith & Cassandra left the party and as to when they went to the convenience store. While Gertrude mentions Keith going (implying alone) there are references to he and Cassandra going to the store. None of this seems to be clarified in the book.

I thought it said that Keith left for a brief time to go the convenience store, but not Cassandra. It didn't say if he went alone or with someone else. It did say that two African American guys left at the same time.

There seems to be so many conflicting info with this case. It really is sad. I can see that the police work early on in the investigations was  rotten. There's so many IMPORTANT unanswered questions because the questions weren't asked when they really should have been.  I think the LE on the cases were blind-sided.  They didn't know how to handle them, or they were poorly trained.  Or, they were just plain dumb. 

[englishman]

Oct 11, 2018 3:04:45 GMT (AQ) said:

Oct 7, 2018 18:47:17 GMT englishman said:

Any details on Susan? Would be interesting to know if she made any observations.

For clarity- everything below is from the book ASKOE.

Susan Scott, Cassandra's friend, claims the party was nothing out of the ordinary.  It was your typical college party.   "They had been out to a movie, and they were not at the party that long.  It just turned out bad all the way around from something that seemed so simple. It was a simple date.  They had gone to the movies, then come by the party. When Cassandra was going home Susan plead for her to stay but, Cassandra said "No, that would be rude". 

Two of Keith's friends both claim he wasn't having a good time.  Gertrude (alias used in book), a high school mate of Keith's who didn't know Keith well, spent a good part of the evening talking with him.  Gertrude claimed Keith headed out to the convenience store and returned and that the two black males who had been talking to Cassandra went out the door at the same time.  She stressed how Keith & Cassandra didn't spend time together.  She also states she lost sight of Cassandra at some point.  Later she claimed that Keith wasn't having a good time, was ready to go home but Cassandra wasn't. 

Lisa, a friend of Keith's ex, claims he was elated to see her because he knew no one at the party; Cassandra was off on her own.

----
I wonder how many of the people at the party were interviewed by LE; what observations re Keith coming & going were made.  It sounds like the movie part of the date, as it were, didn't go well and hence they didn't spend time with each other at the party.

It's also odd that Cassandra spent most, if not all, her time at the party w/ Terry Kirby, but Susan Scott seems to not mention it (or made very light of it to the authors of the book).  Likewise she emphasizes that Cassandra didn't wan't to be rude by staying behind at the party.   Wasn't not talking to Keith, rather rude? 

How much time had passed from when Keith went to the store , returned, then he and Cassandra left? 

Thanks for posting this AQ. Poor Keith that sounds like a horrible party, glad he met some friends though, unfortunately not all people are good at starting conversations with people when they're young and by themselves, it can be quite daunting unless your being introduced to people, also in some instances parties can be a bit cliquey.

Was Kirby one the two guys who went to the shop (store) afterwards? Did anyone find out what Keith brought? It is rude, in fairness I've had occasions when I've turned up at social events with a group and disappeared for hours talking to people I've known for years, different story when it's a single person who does not know anyone. 

Was Washington known to hang around with college kids? Strikes me as the kind of character people would want attending parties but you never know.

[(AQ)]

Oct 11, 2018 16:13:49 GMT cleopatra said:

Oct 11, 2018 3:45:22 GMT (AQ) said:

There are discrepancies, per the book, as to who Keith talked to and when; as to when Keith & Cassandra left the party and as to when they went to the convenience store. While Gertrude mentions Keith going (implying alone) there are references to he and Cassandra going to the store. None of this seems to be clarified in the book.

I thought it said that Keith left for a brief time to go the convenience store, but not Cassandra. It didn't say if he went alone or with someone else. It did say that two African American guys left at the same time.

There seems to be so many conflicting info with this case. It really is sad. I can see that the police work early on in the investigations was  rotten. There's so many IMPORTANT unanswered questions because the questions weren't asked when they really should have been.  I think the LE on the cases were blind-sided.  They didn't know how to handle them, or they were poorly trained.  Or, they were just plain dumb.  

Agree !  They were blind-sided.  They didn't know how to handle the cases; they weren't familiar with investigating these types of scenarios.  They went with the 1st thing mentioned or so it seems !!

They bought into a serial killer scenario as soon as they 2nd murders took place (David & Robin), so here, with a third, it's as if this confirmed it, despite there being differences as well as similarities.   I'm still not sold on all 4 being one perp (or set of).  

LE also immediately went to it's a makeout spot despite various things such as Keith & Cassandra not having gotten along so well that night and both still focused on their respective ex'es, and Annamaria & Daniel being roommates, with Annamaria a partner of Daniel's brother, Kent.   That still seems not to have diverted their focus from lovers lane incidents.   

The area (CPW) was known as a drinking, drug & makeout place. It is also by every account not a warm, friendly, fuzzy safe environment to just hang out in, if you are not there for any of those reasons.  It invites trouble and deception just by the long stretches of road, the darkness, the lack of any means to contact someone if stranded or injured (pre-cell days!,  even so- what is cell reception like today?!)

Not much has been said at all about the drug usage going on there. If it was considered only a place for hard-core users/buyers/dealers, or if lighter usage- weed etc would have been readily scored there and known for that more than hard-core.   

Was it considered a violent place prior to these incidents?  Seemingly not if the Rangers/Park Service spent time trying to down play these murders while playing up the lovely CPW, yet, given that, they wouldn't admit such, would they?

They also seem to be downplaying any sexual aspect that these crimes fed into for the perp other than in relation to Kathy & Becky.  This might be bigger than it initially appears.  Why make the guys & gals strip if no sexual overtone?  The only reason would be to keep control of them, but how does that feed into the whole scenario of walking them great distances and moving cars great distances?   The greater distances travelled whether by foot or other means (vehicle/boat) the greater chance one of the two victims escapes or all of them are seen.   

Cleo, I am with you.  Anger rises higher as each new question pops in my head, especially knowing that within the first 5 years of any of these murders there is a good chance they could have found leads, if not answers, to those exact questions.   I just want to ask LE what the heck were they doing/thinking?   They went from most likely/easiest answers (ex's or current lovers but not the one they were with) to the most difficult- serial killer of unknown origin/mo.   Seems they could have narrowed that down some in 32 years!

[cleopatra]

AQ,

All true. But in light of the totality of all the circumstances, despite all the other things that were going on in all the victim's lives, I am leaning more so toward the theory that all the murders are the work of one Killer.

I believe the killer sought couples and that he chose the Colonial Parkway specifically to carry out his attacks.

The more I read about each murder, the more details I learn, it seems there are constants that just continously stand out. All the details trickle away into the background and the CONSTANTS stand together, strong:

COUPLE/PAIR
VEHICLE - TOGETHER DRIVING SOMEWHERE
COLONIAL PARKWAY
SAVAGE MURDER
PAST MIDNIGHT
NO WITNESSES






People will always have drama or certain things going on in their lives at any given time. There are thousands of drug deals going on, jilted lovers, angry friends, scrupulous relationships, etc.... I don't think these post-teens were savagely atracked and murdered because of something going on in their personal lives. I believe they were all victins of the same sick, sadistic madman. The more familiar I become with this case, the stronger I feel about that.

I also believe this killer had killed before Cathy and Becky. He must have been progressing and perhaps started with individuals not couples. I believe in 1986 he was age 30-40. I also believe he is Caucasion. I believe he is very religious. Lastly, I believe he was LE.

[(AQ)]

Oct 11, 2018 16:13:49 GMT cleopatra said:

Oct 11, 2018 3:45:22 GMT (AQ) said:

There are discrepancies, per the book, as to who Keith talked to and when; as to when Keith & Cassandra left the party and as to when they went to the convenience store. While Gertrude mentions Keith going (implying alone) there are references to he and Cassandra going to the store. None of this seems to be clarified in the book.

I thought it said that Keith left for a brief time to go the convenience store, but not Cassandra. It didn't say if he went alone or with someone else. It did say that two African American guys left at the same time.

There seems to be so many conflicting info with this case. It really is sad. I can see that the police work early on in the investigations was  rotten. There's so many IMPORTANT unanswered questions because the questions weren't asked when they really should have been.  I think the LE on the cases were blind-sided.  They didn't know how to handle them, or they were poorly trained.  Or, they were just plain dumb. 

I missed this earlier, Cleo.  To answer... pg 176, bottom of 1st paragraph:

They would have driven by the local hangout at Heritage Square, and there were unconfirmed sightings of them at a convenience store there.  

[(AQ)]

Oct 11, 2018 23:42:32 GMT cleopatra said:

AQ,

All true. But in light of the totality of all the circumstances, despite all the other things that were going on in all the victim's lives, I am leaning more so toward the theory that all the murders are the work of one Killer.

I believe the killer sought couples and that he chose the Colonial Parkway specifically to carry out his attacks.

The more I read about each murder, the more details I learn, it seems there are constants that just continously stand out. All the details trickle away into the background and the CONSTANTS stand together, strong:

COUPLE/PAIR
VEHICLE - TOGETHER DRIVING SOMEWHERE
COLONIAL PARKWAY
SAVAGE MURDER
PAST MIDNIGHT
NO WITNESSES






People will always have drama or certain things going on in their lives at any given time. There are thousands of drug deals going on, jilted lovers, angry friends, scrupulous relationships, etc.... I don't think these post-teens were savagely atracked and murdered because of something going on in their personal lives. I believe they were all victins of the same sick, sadistic madman. The more familiar I become with this case, the stronger I feel about that.

I also believe this killer had killed before Cathy and Becky. He must have been progressing and perhaps started with individuals not couples. I believe in 1986 he was age 30-40. I also believe he is Caucasion. I believe he is very religious. Lastly, I believe he was LE.

I guess I'm just a difficult one here !  Mostly, I discount how quickly LE jumped into a serial killer scenario., and some of their other assumptions.  I think it is easy given the lack of evidence leading to where this killer came from and how he apprehended victims to jump to LE.   It makes it tidy and there is nothing tidy about these murders. 

I am, maybe, waiting for that something that gives us a thread of 'who' or 'why'; something that we can grab onto!   


Cleo- do you still think there may be a tie-in to the Alamo Church?

[cleopatra]

Oct 12, 2018 0:50:53 GMT (AQ) said:

Oct 11, 2018 23:42:32 GMT cleopatra said:

AQ,

All true. But in light of the totality of all the circumstances, despite all the other things that were going on in all the victim's lives, I am leaning more so toward the theory that all the murders are the work of one Killer.

I believe the killer sought couples and that he chose the Colonial Parkway specifically to carry out his attacks.

The more I read about each murder, the more details I learn, it seems there are constants that just continously stand out. All the details trickle away into the background and the CONSTANTS stand together, strong:

COUPLE/PAIR
VEHICLE - TOGETHER DRIVING SOMEWHERE
COLONIAL PARKWAY
SAVAGE MURDER
PAST MIDNIGHT
NO WITNESSES






People will always have drama or certain things going on in their lives at any given time. There are thousands of drug deals going on, jilted lovers, angry friends, scrupulous relationships, etc.... I don't think these post-teens were savagely atracked and murdered because of something going on in their personal lives. I believe they were all victins of the same sick, sadistic madman. The more familiar I become with this case, the stronger I feel about that.

I also believe this killer had killed before Cathy and Becky. He must have been progressing and perhaps started with individuals not couples. I believe in 1986 he was age 30-40. I also believe he is Caucasion. I believe he is very religious. Lastly, I believe he was LE.

I guess I'm just a difficult one here !  Mostly, I discount how quickly LE jumped into a serial killer scenario., and some of their other assumptions.  I think it is easy given the lack of evidence leading to where this killer came from and how he apprehended victims to jump to LE.   It makes it tidy and there is nothing tidy about these murders. 

I am, maybe, waiting for that something that gives us a thread of 'who' or 'why'; something that we can grab onto!   


Cleo- do you still think there may be a tie-in to the Alamo Church?

Re: Alamo - I am not ruling it out. I think it is very likely.

SInce I believe the killer was LE, the flyer could have been left on his windshield in Huntington on his civilian car. He could have been a religious zealot who was interested in the Alamo beliefs and been carrying it around in his pocket, and he could have been reading through it the night he killed Cathy and Becky.

[(AQ)]

Thanks, Cleo. Alamo has interesting aspects to it and really grabbed my attention - the crimes/viciousness, the odd incidents within (ie alamo churches shakey history) and the tie-in re the diesel.

[cleopatra]

RE: KNOBLING & EDWARDS 


This was written by a local newspaper when the crime was fresh (it says they WATCHED a movie):


Our report said back then that on the evening of September 19, 1987, "Robin, David's brother, Michael, their cousin and David watched a movie Saturday night." They had returned to the Knobling home. Robin had a curfew and returned to her home, but not for long. Around midnight David left the house, and picked up Robin at her home, and the two then went out into the night.

[fossilnerd]

Oct 4, 2018 23:11:32 GMT cleopatra said:

Oct 4, 2018 22:49:57 GMT cleopatra said:

I just read in the book, A Special Kind Of Evil, that the group was going to see Dragnet but it was sold out so instead they went to the Arcade.

That book is fairly recent. The book mentioning they went to watch Dragnet is older. I wish I could see the movie info in a police report.

Damn! A buck and spare change to see a movie.  Now it costs anywhere from $12-$15. So a date night back then, excluding the concession stand, was $2.50, whereas now it would cost roughly $25.00. 

So a mom taking 3 teens to the movies in the 1980s would pay FIVE bucks just for tickets. Today she'd pay approx. $52 bucks. 5 vs 52. W-O-W!  Mom's, you better skip the concession stand or you'll be hit up for another $50-80 easily. 

Looking through these older posts....

The Village Theatre is now a playhouse (Peninsula Community Theatre), but back then it showed 2nd-runs of really popular movies for $1.25. It's how the theatre kept in business when the huge theatres almost put it out of business. The theatre still had its 1920s/1930s-era art-deco interior. It seated a fraction of what the larger movie venues did, and was a lot more fun, because your money went farther. Situated in a nice area of NN: Hilton. At Warwick and Main, across Main from an upscale men's clothier. The crowd was of all ages...a lot of seniors, some middle-aged folks and families, and some teens/20s.

BTW, if David and his brother and Robin had been going to see Dragnet specifically, then if the Village Theatre was playing it, the Village would have been the only place playing it at that point because it played 2nd-runs. The bigger theatres would have moved on to newer movies. If it's true that they went to 4 theatres looking specifically for Dragnet and found it was sold out, they wouldn't have looked at the Village. Riverdale was another theatre nearby; it was in Hampton, in the general area, not far off of Mercury Blvd and near Newmarket North and Newmarket South shopping mall/center, where incidentally, there's a Taco Bell. I don't know if that Taco Bell was there then. That could be looked up in the City of Newport News Real Estate database. 5000 block W. Mercury.

Another connection: I think I read that Robin had run away at some point, and her parents recovered her living at a trailer park....was that trailer park at Mercury and Jefferson? If so that's on the other side of Jefferson from the Taco Bell.

I don't know if any of this is relevant; just putting out some info.

[cleopatra]

Oct 12, 2018 0:50:53 GMT (AQ) said:

Oct 11, 2018 23:42:32 GMT cleopatra said:

AQ,

All true. But in light of the totality of all the circumstances, despite all the other things that were going on in all the victim's lives, I am leaning more so toward the theory that all the murders are the work of one Killer.

I believe the killer sought couples and that he chose the Colonial Parkway specifically to carry out his attacks.

The more I read about each murder, the more details I learn, it seems there are constants that just continously stand out. All the details trickle away into the background and the CONSTANTS stand together, strong:

COUPLE/PAIR
VEHICLE - TOGETHER DRIVING SOMEWHERE
COLONIAL PARKWAY
SAVAGE MURDER
PAST MIDNIGHT
NO WITNESSES






People will always have drama or certain things going on in their lives at any given time. There are thousands of drug deals going on, jilted lovers, angry friends, scrupulous relationships, etc.... I don't think these post-teens were savagely atracked and murdered because of something going on in their personal lives. I believe they were all victins of the same sick, sadistic madman. The more familiar I become with this case, the stronger I feel about that.

I also believe this killer had killed before Cathy and Becky. He must have been progressing and perhaps started with individuals not couples. I believe in 1986 he was age 30-40. I also believe he is Caucasion. I believe he is very religious. Lastly, I believe he was LE.

I guess I'm just a difficult one here !  Mostly, I discount how quickly LE jumped into a serial killer scenario., and some of their other assumptions.  I think it is easy given the lack of evidence leading to where this killer came from and how he apprehended victims to jump to LE.   It makes it tidy and there is nothing tidy about these murders. 

I am, maybe, waiting for that something that gives us a thread of 'who' or 'why'; something that we can grab onto!   


Cleo- do you still think there may be a tie-in to the Alamo Church?

The Alamo Church is a viable theory still.  The killer mau havr dropowd that flyer inside Cathy's car.  

[tosh]

Regards the Alamo Church Flyer - could it be the killer gave it to the victims as a ruse to get chatting to them - pretending to be some kind of missionary? Maybe the killer picked up the flyer somewhere and he actually had no ties to the church.