rebuttal room

[perplocator101]

Feel free to argue opinions and facts. No cursing and being ignorant to others. But if we all don't get talking more than we do and just adding something we are not going get anywhere to find this guy. Will someone explain why this guy is so smart because I can't seem to get it in my head. I won't be offended if your sarcastic or whatever(and I like to here sarcasm), but I want to learn idea's and thought's from other's instead of me thinking the same. I would rather just talk about anything about this case.

If you state why you think this guy works for the sewage company than explain in at least a paragraph why is your reason. maybe we can get people looking in the right places and put our heads together.( mine stops working sometimes). Maybe it's just me but this guy can't be this complicated. He has probably been looked at lots of times maybe earlier cases and petty things starting out.

Rather he is smart or not lets profile this guy, write a paragraph use sarcasm, get your point across with some facts. If you say he used a car state your fact why or the best you can. Write a page full

Don't post if your going to just say he is smart because LE thinks that. please explain in long terms. Fill half the page, refer to crime scenes with names or dates if possible.

Make sure you refer back to this if posts are short and tell others , this is for rebuttals about theories and facts or whatever on the subject

Don't say he rides a bike on the trails and leave it at that. type at least a paragraph. 

If you are going to rebuttal someone again state your theory in at least a paragraph, I'm wondering if this page could help everyone if we explain more. Someone can go first, just let it out

[Drifter]

perplocator101 ...

Actually, the entire message board can be used to "argue opinions and facts", though I would prefer the word "debate" to "argue".

Will someone explain why this guy is so smart because I can't seem to get it in my head.

That's a valid question. Being "smart" is a relative term. Smart relative to what or whom? I'd say LE. That the guy got away with forty-something rapes and ten murders implies to me that he was ... smarter than ... LE.

That simple fact alone tells me he was pretty "smart". If he wasn't smart, what does that tell us about LE?

Drifter

[perplocator101]

Here is an idea. His mother was around 45 to 50 yrs old at his birth. His father was older than that and died at some point when he was very young. He is mommy's little boy, his mother giving birth to him at a late age gives him some mental and speech problems. He had a slight stuttering issue and it could have got worse when he got excited. His mother yells at him growing up smacks him a lot. She doesn't teach him right from wrong. She may have told him something about his facial appearance and repeatedly. He is a lost individual, getting out of the house when he could to get some freedom from his mother growing up. This point he is confused and a sad individual. Kids make fun of him throughout his childhood in school and around the neighborhood, and his mother is a little abusive towards him. He has probably not many friends and feels alone and lost. So he rides his bike around a lot and his mom doesn't care that he is out of the house. She gives him money to ride his bike to a local store to get things they need. At this point he is going from sad to a kid growing with anger that is building. They barely get by with the money they receive each month. He starting stealing things at a young age off the kids that made fun of him and even peeping in there windows, and when they had friends over to see what it was like to have friends stay over there house. This infuriated him, he would start out by doing small destruction of the neighborhood kids toys or bikes they left outside at night, maybe a girls baby doll by tearing off the head. At this point he is around 12 years old. Continuing, with these things but finds him self peeping in a windows with grown ups and doing this peeping thing for awhile seeing grown up things at age 14. He could be going to the same usual places and watching the same usual stuff of grown up bedroom stuff and listening to them. The certain people he listens too might have certain sayings/phrases they used over and over. Like "just give me a drop". He may have started missing the school bus on purpose or skipping school. He starts burglaries at age 16 and 17yrs old but gets heavy into at 18 and 19 yrs old. Robbing the people he watched or a woman he watched at night and knows she wouldn't be there. His mother is having issues at her age so they move to where her family is close or by a better hospital in Sacramento. He is around 20 yrs old at this point, he still rides his bike and goes to the store for his mother and downtown on bike. Still at age 20 he is peeping in windows and watching the same people. He learns the times the husband is not there so he gets some ideas and prepares some for his first victim. He fails his first time or decides not too but he was in the house with this woman and she didn't know. He leaves because he isn't quite ready yet. The next time he enters the same woman's house and goes through with it. At this point he is in the making of being called the East Area Rapist. I think the few houses he hits first that he lives near by. After his first victim he feels like he is somebody of power/superior. I think he stuttered more than it was reported in these crimes. He stole his flash lights, cords, maybe even his first gun. Mother probably had guns of his deceased fathers he would use later. By this time his mother is hospitalized. He visits her on Bike and learns more areas to prowl. He lives alone now in his mother's house. Anyways, this could be a way this guy started out.

[t]

  I actually think that is an interesting profile Perplocator. And I get your point about intelligence.  Here's what I would say and it isn't a rebuttal
  really -- there are different kinds of intelligence -- there is intuitive intelligence that is aside from book learning.  There is cunning -- that may not
  necessarily have to do with a super high IQ.  There are people who can sit down at the piano and compose masterpieces who cannot do math, etc.
  There are people who could run traps in the wilderness and survive all manner of exposure which would kill so-called very smart city dwellers.

  I think GSK was cunning.  Had very sharp sensibilities and perception -- eyesight, hearing. . .physically extremely adept; but emotionally very
  underdeveloped almost infantile. I think he was born with some bad equiptment -- brain anomalies (they don't have to be super pronounced)
  that incline him towards psychopathy and stuttering. Small penis which caused him untold embarrassment and humiliation (this cruelty still goes
  on on this very board). 

  I think too that the abuse you allude to was somewhere along the line more extreme than you suggest. I agree about Mom.  She could be sick too. 
  Seems to me that the fury he exhibits pertains to a hatred of her.  Neglect can be a form of abuse.  Bad Dad or step Dad may be in there.

  Possibly molested or raped himself.  Bullied badly in school.

  His ability to allude police, allude the dogs, fool friends and family and outwit armies of smart detectives, and armies of LE  and now more armies
  of computer sleuths -- indicates something.  Maybe an absolute genius manipulator.  A chameleon who can shape-shift according to the demands
  of the situation. 

  Israel Keyes had a pronounced Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde personality.  There were many people who knew him who trusted him implicitly and could never 
  have guessed in a million years his proclivitives to murder.  Bundy was this way too.  

  Imagination is a form of intelligence.  Most people have no inclination nor imagination for murder and mayhem.  He could outwit the cops because
  he was "thinking" along a completely different tact.  And tactical enough, methodical enough in the planning to evade all comers for 40 years --
  unless of course he is dead.  Which I think he could well be.  Via suicide.

  He is a narcissist and a sadist with sexual paraphillias that i don't think fell out of the sky.
 

[janehurley]

What never ceases to amaze me is how someone that is sitting comfortably at his or her computer can spew such nonsense regarding law enforcement at any level. Of course LE makes mistakes, but they are also the who have done the grunt work to gather a majority the information that people on here analyze to formulate ideas about EAR/ONS. From what I have read, some posters on here have done some fabulous investigating on their own, maybe even getting out to survey certain areas and going through government files to gather information to form their own opinions. But still, it's only a minority of the data on EAR/ONS. So before someone decides to ridicule LE, that person should praise them for their tenacity and bravery.

[tmacchallenger]

Apr 4, 2014 17:47:43 GMT janehurley said:

What never ceases to amaze me is how someone that is sitting comfortably at his or her computer can spew such nonsense regarding law enforcement at any level. Of course LE makes mistakes, but they are also the who have done the grunt work to gather a majority the information that people on here analyze to formulate ideas about EAR/ONS. From what I have read, some posters on here have done some fabulous investigating on their own, maybe even getting out to survey certain areas and going through government files to gather information to form their own opinions. But still, it's only a minority of the data on EAR/ONS. So before someone decides to ridicule LE, that person should praise them for their tenacity and bravery.

Very good point. Many people don't realize how hard it must have been for the patrol officers to catch this guy. Even if the areas he attacked had low crime rates it's not like the police didn't have to answer other 911 calls and deal with car accidents, domestics, and all the other various disturbances that police do handle. It also doesn't help when you have apathetic, mentally slow citizens that didn't report the times when the EAR was observed prowling and even breaking in to a home to burglarize it.

What you posted does go both ways though. Hindsight being 20/20, I can't help but feel that some of the detectives didn't do a better job during the original investigation. That would be when most of the legwork is done in a case like this. Did they interview the prostitutes in certain areas to maybe get a lead on this loser? Did they interview History teachers in the surrounding colleges regarding the Custer paper? I don't know, but something tells me that this case could have been handled better.

One thing that has been made obviously clear, at least to me, was the * poor lack of communications between the departments. Part of that can be blamed on how things were done during that era and the other because of the political hacks that were put in charge of the departments (an example would be the idiot that ordered all the EAR evidence thrown in the garbage that was thankfully saved). But not the majority of the hardworking and dedicated police officers that dealt with this case and were probably haunted by it to some degree.

[t]

  well since this is the REBUTTAL ROOM: as an American of 60 years raised during the Vietnam War protest Era and the corruption that was Watergate
  etc. etc. ad nauseum -- i have seen plenty of evidence a long the way of police corruption and unintelligence, and including QUITE POSSIBLY 
  in this very case. . .frustration sets in when a perp of this level of danger manages to slip through -- but i wouldn't take it too personally. . .

  everybody wants the same thing (i think?!) -- to discover his identify and apprehend him. . .so us armchair sleuths are attempting to assist --
  free of any kind of pay. . .in doing what has escaped the capabilites of LE for 4 decades

 

[Drifter]

janehurley wrote:

So before someone decides to ridicule LE, that person should praise them for their tenacity and bravery.

If there was actually any "ridicule" of a specific LE officer on this message board, that post would be deleted. Since the inception of this website I have never had a need to delete a post because someone "ridiculed" a specific LE individual. That's how respectful of LE this group of posters has been.

The issue that posters have is with LE as an institution. Generally, this means those higher-ups who make important decisions, like the decision to discard or throw away evidence, which apparently occurred with this case, especially in Sacramento. In some instances, these higher-ups may be political appointees.  I know of no criticism, and certainly no "ridicule" of police officers working in the field.

Further, LE, as an institution is paid to solve crimes. And while there are many crimes that have not been solved, it's extremely rare for LE anywhere to fail to identify a criminal who has committed some 30 crimes in one county.

Criticism of LE, as an institution, is thus justified, out of due respect for the community where the crimes occurred as well as the victims and their families.

You are entitled to your opinion janehurley.  But kindly do not toss words like "ridicule" around freely.  Be a bit more selective.  Words matter.

Drifter

[playinem]

JaneHurley said:

 What never ceases to amaze me is how someone that is sitting comfortably at his or her computer can spew such nonsense regarding law enforcement at any level. Of course LE makes mistakes, but they are also the who have done the grunt work to gather a majority the information that people on here analyze to formulate ideas about EAR/ONS. From what I have read, some posters on here have done some fabulous investigating on their own, maybe even getting out to survey certain areas and going through government files to gather information to form their own opinions. But still, it's only a minority of the data on EAR/ONS. So before someone decides to ridicule LE, that person should praise them for their tenacity and bravery.

I think that most of us recognize the contributions of individual LE investigators and of their efforts to develop a resolution to these cases and for these victims. Nonetheless these cases and their investigations represent one of California law enforcement's most colossal and glaring failures. The bureaucratic deficiencies and pitfalls which very possibly were contributing factors in the failure to achieve any resolution in these cases will be examples most likely of WHAT NOT TO DO in years to come for legions of LE investigators, investigative coordinators and supervisors as they come on line, not only in California but in jurisdictions who look to California to set a standard in innovation, efficiency and effectiveness. You can be assured that much of the emphasis on properly organizing and sharing information between jurisdictions today is a direct result of cases and investigations like those related to the EAR and ONS where the failure to properly address those and other issues most likely were major contributing factors to LE's failure to successfully resolve the EAR and ONS investigations. 

[t]

            When I was a girl the Civil Rights movement was in full swing and twice I saw DC on fire across the Potomac River from the riots. Seeing
            the footage of the police in Alabama beating and fire hosing and sicking vicious police dogs on a quiet Civil Rights march helped me to
            understand why.

           As I grew up the Vietnam War raged on and maybe what helped end it was that a young college girl was shot dead at Kent State. Or,
           was it Neil Young's song about it that helped end it. 

           In California I rode home on a 45 Union bus driven by a black man and we both nearly wept over the beating of Rodney King, and the con-
           flagration in LA that was erupting after the verdict in the trial of the group of cops that beat him.

           Just this week a cop was reported to have stolen an old man's perscription drugs.  Cops have been busted for rape. And Oscar Grant was
           shot dead here in Oakland waiting for a Bart train.

           Tip of the iceberg.

           This is a statement of my own personal truth: "I fear the cops almost as much as I fear criminals".

[tmacchallenger]

Apr 5, 2014 15:18:06 GMT t said:

            When I was a girl the Civil Rights movement was in full swing and twice I saw DC on fire across the Potomac River from the riots. Seeing
            the footage of the police in Alabama beating and fire hosing and sicking vicious police dogs on a quiet Civil Rights march helped me to
            understand why.

           As I grew up the Vietnam War raged on and maybe what helped end it was that a young college girl was shot dead at Kent State. Or,
           was it Neil Young's song about it that helped end it. 

           In California I rode home on a 45 Union bus driven by a black man and we both nearly wept over the beating of Rodney King, and the con-
           flagration in LA that was erupting after the verdict in the trial of the group of cops that beat him.

           Just this week a cop was reported to have stolen an old man's perscription drugs.  Cops have been busted for rape. And Oscar Grant was
           shot dead here in Oakland waiting for a Bart train.

           Tip of the iceberg.

           This is a statement of my own personal truth: "I fear the cops almost as much as I fear criminals".

Sorry, I wouldn't use Rodney King as an example when he was wacked out on drugs and all the other crimes he was convicted of. They didn't beat that idiot long enough.

As for the ensueing riots that followed, a lot of those ghetto trash were just looking for an excuse to riot, loot, and kill. Look no further then that innocent trucker that got beaten nearly to death by a pack of cowards.

[t]

Apr 5, 2014 15:39:15 GMT tmacchallenger said:

Apr 5, 2014 15:18:06 GMT t said:

            When I was a girl the Civil Rights movement was in full swing and twice I saw DC on fire across the Potomac River from the riots. Seeing
            the footage of the police in Alabama beating and fire hosing and sicking vicious police dogs on a quiet Civil Rights march helped me to
            understand why.

           As I grew up the Vietnam War raged on and maybe what helped end it was that a young college girl was shot dead at Kent State. Or,
           was it Neil Young's song about it that helped end it. 

           In California I rode home on a 45 Union bus driven by a black man and we both nearly wept over the beating of Rodney King, and the con-
           flagration in LA that was erupting after the verdict in the trial of the group of cops that beat him.

           Just this week a cop was reported to have stolen an old man's perscription drugs.  Cops have been busted for rape. And Oscar Grant was
           shot dead here in Oakland waiting for a Bart train.

           Tip of the iceberg.

           This is a statement of my own personal truth: "I fear the cops almost as much as I fear criminals".

Sorry, I wouldn't use Rodney King as an example when he was wacked out on drugs and all the other crimes he was convicted of. They didn't beat that idiot long enough.

As for the ensueing riots that followed, a lot of those ghetto trash were just looking for an excuse to riot, loot, and kill. Look no further then that innocent trucker that got beaten nearly to death by a pack of cowards.

     I am sorry too but what you are saying here is grotesque to me. What happened to the truck driver was just as heinous.  You and I need not debate this all day;
     -- I am a woman from Mississippi -- both sides of the family go back many generations and we watched the lynching of the blacks, and my Dad helped fight the
    KKK.  But listen, no need to debate this all day because I will never concede yr side. 

[perplocator101]

After reviewing the facts and I don't know all of the facts surrounding the case, but I have reasons to believe he did use a car and/or he may not have used a car. So the debates between the two seem not to point at one or the other, or does it? I believe this alone would determine where to look for the suspect. If the glove that was found was his on the golf course, it looks as if he would be heading in the vicinity of a housing development that only has one way in and the same way out. Again we can debate whether he put this glove there on purpose to be cunning or he was just heading home and dropped it. That seems to be a mystery itself. We do know or think when connecting EAR and ONS he lived in the vicinity of each area when the crimes took place and by having some knowledge of both areas or it seems like he would of had knowledge of the area in the EAR cases and maybe not so much of the ONS. The age debate is another confusing for profiling and determining if he worked or not and if so for what type of profession, and stamina to have the energy to work at a job and prowl at night/early hours. Also a job or no job and the witnesses age variables doesn't help. Is he young or old? The majority says young so I believe that to be correct, and this will determine a type of job or no job. Maybe the college theory. At the crime scene we have so many facts for this suspect, he does have some good common sense at the least. The putting dishes on the male and telling him if he hears the dishes he will kill his wife. Which brings me to a question, I read somewhere that he used a coffee cup and the saucer that goes with it? If that's true than that tells us something about the suspect I would think. The bringing pre cut rope to the crimes and the stashing rope at some of the crime scenes before it took place, he prepared for the crime itself. You can see how he learns as he goes though. So I believe even know he has an imagination and common sense he mostly learns from over time. Most if not all of his things he used could of been stolen, we know he steals bicycles, but he must have a collection of flashlights, rope and masks, but I think he stole everything he uses, he used the knife from the kitchen in the one crime, I believe he prepared by stealing what he felt he needed. He brought rope on some crimes and used the tearing of towels in another. So he was brave enough to come unprepared as well, So he has built up his bravery so much he must of felt he would come up with another solution during the crime in progress. So this leads me back to whether he used a car or not. He may have used a car in some cases and in others he bicycled. If he used a car I wouldn't expect to find a whole lot of burglary items or would he have these items in his trunk? I just don't think this guys trunk would be like Ted Bundy's trunk.
So if he steals all his items, he probably doesn't put them in his car or does he? The stashing of items proves he wouldn't put them in his car that he stole them in that area and placed them in the house a head of time. However, he may have stole them somewhere else and put the items in his car and brought them to the area he was going to commit his crime and stashed them in that house and then going back to his car and returning later to commit the crime. It seems like that wouldn't fit and be a long time consuming way to prepare. So determining whether he stole the items he brought would help solve this case by profiling him some more. Anyways just some thoughts

[tmacchallenger]

Apr 5, 2014 16:26:50 GMT t said:

Apr 5, 2014 15:39:15 GMT tmacchallenger said:

Sorry, I wouldn't use Rodney King as an example when he was wacked out on drugs and all the other crimes he was convicted of. They didn't beat that idiot long enough.

As for the ensueing riots that followed, a lot of those ghetto trash were just looking for an excuse to riot, loot, and kill. Look no further then that innocent trucker that got beaten nearly to death by a pack of cowards.

     I am sorry too but what you are saying here is grotesque to me. What happened to the truck driver was just as heinous.  You and I need not debate this all day;
     -- I am a woman from Mississippi -- both sides of the family go back many generations and we watched the lynching of the blacks, and my Dad helped fight the
    KKK.  But listen, no need to debate this all day because I will never concede yr side. 

That's fine. I just don't see things as black and white as you do but given are polar opposite backgrounds that is understandable. I don't like corrupt bully cops, nor do I like gangsta thugs. Painting LE with broad characterizations is no different then doing the same to a race or class of people. You can find negative things to point out on both sides which is unfair to the ones that are good

[perplocator101]

I think the missing files of the suspect fitting the profile that was apprehended and let go because he was thought of not having the ability to commit the crimes could of well been GSK, he could of been reinvestigated, the pre cut rope and screw driver prying the sliding glass door proves he had the ability. That is just another mystery itself it seems, nobody can relate to the name of this person because of it happened so long ago. I cant believe there wasn't anything in the news articles about it. Does anyone know the house this was at or anything to start a research about this?