|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Apr 28, 2015 16:51:27 GMT -6
In 1982, in response to a national publicity push by Robert Graysmith, Riverside Police issued the following press release:  |
|
|
|
Post by Miss Marple on Aug 26, 2015 14:25:34 GMT -6
Hey maybe I should join the forum.
I think Ross Sullivan is a real serious POI in Cheri Jo's murder, but I don't think he was the Zodiac, because I don't think any one person was the Zodiac either.
|
|
Miss Marple
New Member
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, not me!
Posts: 2
|
Post by Miss Marple on Aug 26, 2015 15:14:19 GMT -6
Hey maybe I should join the forum. I think Ross Sullivan is a real serious POI in Cheri Jo's murder, but I don't think he was the Zodiac, because I don't think any one person was the Zodiac either. Sorry quoting myself, but I am a member now and couldn't edit this guest post. I think it's Ross Sullivan, mostly based on what the Librarians said about him and how they felt he was a real POI, not because he is suppose to look like the sketch from seeing the Zodiac after killing Stine. The Librarians urged RPD to check him out, I don't know if they ever did. Also didn't Ross's brother say he thought Ross was the Zodiac killer? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Aug 26, 2015 17:49:11 GMT -6
Marple:
Welcome! Thanks for joining, and thanks for your comment.
Ross was Cheri Jo's ex-fiancee, right? Yes, his friends and brother thought he most likely killed Cheri Jo. I mean, he jumped in his car and drove to the library to kill her, but the "Zodiac" beat him to the punch.
Just like Darlene Ferrin. Her exhusband tracked her down to BRS, but by the time he came back, she was already shot by the "Zodiac."
Ricky Burton MIGHT have shot David and Betty Lou. His only alibi is his family, and they cover him juuuuuuuuussssssst barely. But he doesn't really seem to be the cold blooded executioner type.
|
|
Miss Marple
New Member
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, not me!
Posts: 2
|
Post by Miss Marple on Aug 27, 2015 8:02:47 GMT -6
Marple: Welcome! Thanks for joining, and thanks for your comment. Ross was Cheri Jo's ex-fiancee, right? Yes, his friends and brother thought he most likely killed Cheri Jo. I mean, he jumped in his car and drove to the library to kill her, but the "Zodiac" beat him to the punch. Just like Darlene Ferrin. Her exhusband tracked her down to BRS, but by the time he came back, she was already shot by the "Zodiac." Ricky Burton MIGHT have shot David and Betty Lou. His only alibi is his family, and they cover him juuuuuuuuussssssst barely. But he doesn't really seem to be the cold blooded executioner type. Thank you, glad to be here. Ross Sullivan wasn't Cheri Jo's ex-fiancee. He was just a weird guy who lived in the same town and worked at the RCC library in 1966. A creepy poem was written on the underside of a desk that has been attributed to the Zodiac. There has been some question on whether or not he could drive, but then later I read where he did indeed drive a motorcycle and perhaps a VW. One major piece of "evidence" is that Ross was a dead ringer for the sketch of Zodiac, when Ross was in high school, that is, I've only seen the pictures of him from 1959. Would he have changed much in 7 years, sounds like he put on a lot of weight, maybe. But it really doesn't matter if he matches, because he is not the Zodiac, he can't be linked to any other murders, but he doesn't need to be, in my mind, he might have killed some others before he died in 1977, but he wasn't the Zodiac. He spent some years in and out of mental institutions, after Cheri Jo was killed. All the murders need to be looked at and solved by themselves individually. Nobody is ever going to connect them all to one person. Because it wasn't one person. I have run across some folks who do think it was multiple people, but that they all belong to a cabal of killers. I don't think that is a viable solution at all. There would be too many involved and somebody would have said something over the years. I do think your theory of a "Zodiac hoax" is valid, where the unrelated murders were all tied together in a neat Zodiac package. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Aug 29, 2015 7:19:31 GMT -6
Marples:
Oh, right. That guy. Sorry. Long story short: It's about 99 percent certain that Cheri Jo was murdered by her ex. He had been stalking her; he had physically attacked her a couple of days before her murder; when he was informed that she had been seen at the library he immediately left a playground game of basketball and jumped in his car; under polygraph exam one of his friends confessed to helping him cover up; other friends said he confessed to them. Two men were seen at the crime scene later that night with flashlights. There were some short blond hairs stuck to the blood on her wrist as though someone had tried to put them in her hand; there was some skin tissue under her nails. DNA testing failed to link the hairs to her ex, but no DNA was recovered from the skin under her nails. RPD have zero doubt he was guilty. He had ironclad alibis for being "Zodiac." The typed "Confession" letter was more full of holes than the Zodiac letters. The "Bates Must Die" letters look NOTHING like the Zodiac letters.
Ricky Burton was ruled out as David and Betty Lou's killer because he had not taken his parents car anywhere that night. But, as we can see from the crime scene sketches, the killer got out of the PASSENGER side of the second car. However, Ricky does not make a convincing suspect. David Perry and David Ott make very convincing suspects, and the Donohue brothers apparently told Cunningham they were in the second car that night and that "Big Red" was the shooter (Ott.) They described the victims clothing etc much more accurately than Zodiac did. Benicia PD have alway believed they did it, and believe they know what happened to the .22, so they apparently had a snitch or confession of some kind (probably Rockey Dixon.)
Perry and Dixon accused each other of shooting Darlene and Mike. Mike described Darlene's ex Crabtree to a T, and Crabtree owned a Corvair nearly identical to Darlene's (Mike said the shooters car resembled Darlene's.) I think he was doing business with Ott's gang (and that included Perry, Dixon, and Porter) and so I think that murder is pretty much solved, too. But Vallejo was (and is) riddled with corruption, so no one from that gang was arrested. VPD still claim that the Ferrin murder is "unsolved" but they also claim the Lindbergh baby kidnapping and the assassination of Lincoln are "unsolved," so there you go.
Dennis Land was not only the prime suspect in the Shepard murder, but he, his brother Ray, and another Napa deputy are suspected of helping each other murder kids (yikes!) and young women in Napa and Sonoma counties. Napa is at least as corrupt as Vallejo. They solve about 25 percent of their murders, and they have a LOT of murders. About five times the national average in some years.
There was a taxi cab bandit in SF who perfectly matched the description and MO of the Stine shooter. I think it was a simple case of an accidental shooting. The Beretta .380 semiautomatic has a notorious hair trigger, and if Stine struggled at all, it would have been difficult for the robber NOT to shoot him accidentally. In 1997, a short order cook named Fashem Zayed shot a waitress with a .380 at the Pinecrest Diner when she refused to loan him money (again) to cover some gambling debts. Zayed was working as a cook at the Pinecrest the night Stine picked up his killer in front of the Pinecrest. The taxicab bandit was believed to be a cook or dishwasher who worked in that neighborhood (Zayed worked at several restaurants along Mason) and Zayed looked EXACTLY like the composite sketch of the Stine shooter, including three long parallel scars on the right side of his neck that can be seen in the "revised" sketch. The day after he was arrested for the Menicou murder (the only murder in SF that weekend)—the same day the evidence in that murder was being processed in the lab—SF County Coroner personnel took Stine's bloody shirt out of the evidence locker and took a bunch of photos of it for an internal bulletin. They won't say why.
There is really no mystery at all in ANY of these murders. There is less of a mystery about the Zodiac letters.
Thanks for your comments :-) Keep posting!
|
|
|
|
Post by Brinkley on Aug 29, 2015 20:02:27 GMT -6
Marples: Oh, right. That guy. Sorry. Long story short: It's about 99 percent certain that Cheri Jo was murdered by her ex. He had been stalking her; he had physically attacked her a couple of days before her murder; when he was informed that she had been seen at the library he immediately left a playground game of basketball and jumped in his car; under polygraph exam one of his friends confessed to helping him cover up; other friends said he confessed to them. Two men were seen at the crime scene later that night with flashlights. There were some short blond hairs stuck to the blood on her wrist as though someone had tried to put them in her hand; there was some skin tissue under her nails. DNA testing failed to link the hairs to her ex, but no DNA was recovered from the skin under her nails. RPD have zero doubt he was guilty. He had ironclad alibis for being "Zodiac." The typed "Confession" letter was more full of holes than the Zodiac letters. The "Bates Must Die" letters look NOTHING like the Zodiac letters. Ricky Burton was ruled out as David and Betty Lou's killer because he had not taken his parents car anywhere that night. But, as we can see from the crime scene sketches, the killer got out of the PASSENGER side of the second car. However, Ricky does not make a convincing suspect. David Perry and David Ott make very convincing suspects, and the Donohue brothers apparently told Cunningham they were in the second car that night and that "Big Red" was the shooter (Ott.) They described the victims clothing etc much more accurately than Zodiac did. Benicia PD have alway believed they did it, and believe they know what happened to the .22, so they apparently had a snitch or confession of some kind (probably Rockey Dixon.) Perry and Dixon accused each other of shooting Darlene and Mike. Mike described Darlene's ex Crabtree to a T, and Crabtree owned a Corvair nearly identical to Darlene's (Mike said the shooters car resembled Darlene's.) I think he was doing business with Ott's gang (and that included Perry, Dixon, and Porter) and so I think that murder is pretty much solved, too. But Vallejo was (and is) riddled with corruption, so no one from that gang was arrested. VPD still claim that the Ferrin murder is "unsolved" but they also claim the Lindbergh baby kidnapping and the assassination of Lincoln are "unsolved," so there you go. Dennis Land was not only the prime suspect in the Shepard murder, but he, his brother Ray, and another Napa deputy are suspected of helping each other murder kids (yikes!) and young women in Napa and Sonoma counties. Napa is at least as corrupt as Vallejo. They solve about 25 percent of their murders, and they have a LOT of murders. About five times the national average in some years. There was a taxi cab bandit in SF who perfectly matched the description and MO of the Stine shooter. I think it was a simple case of an accidental shooting. The Beretta .380 semiautomatic has a notorious hair trigger, and if Stine struggled at all, it would have been difficult for the robber NOT to shoot him accidentally. In 1997, a short order cook named Fashem Zayed shot a waitress with a .380 at the Pinecrest Diner when she refused to loan him money (again) to cover some gambling debts. Zayed was working as a cook at the Pinecrest the night Stine picked up his killer in front of the Pinecrest. The taxicab bandit was believed to be a cook or dishwasher who worked in that neighborhood (Zayed worked at several restaurants along Mason) and Zayed looked EXACTLY like the composite sketch of the Stine shooter, including three long parallel scars on the right side of his neck that can be seen in the "revised" sketch. The day after he was arrested for the Menicou murder (the only murder in SF that weekend)—the same day the evidence in that murder was being processed in the lab—SF County Coroner personnel took Stine's bloody shirt out of the evidence locker and took a bunch of photos of it for an internal bulletin. They won't say why. There is really no mystery at all in ANY of these murders. There is less of a mystery about the Zodiac letters. Thanks for your comments :-) Keep posting! |
|
|
|
Post by amerigochattin on Mar 15, 2016 13:44:46 GMT -6
Marples: Oh, right. That guy. Sorry. Long story short: It's about 99 percent certain that Cheri Jo was murdered by her ex. He had been stalking her; he had physically attacked her a couple of days before her murder; when he was informed that she had been seen at the library he immediately left a playground game of basketball and jumped in his car; under polygraph exam one of his friends confessed to helping him cover up; other friends said he confessed to them. Two men were seen at the crime scene later that night with flashlights. There were some short blond hairs stuck to the blood on her wrist as though someone had tried to put them in her hand; there was some skin tissue under her nails. DNA testing failed to link the hairs to her ex, but no DNA was recovered from the skin under her nails. RPD have zero doubt he was guilty. He had ironclad alibis for being "Zodiac." The typed "Confession" letter was more full of holes than the Zodiac letters. The "Bates Must Die" letters look NOTHING like the Zodiac letters. I don't think it was Bates's ex. I know the RPD seem to be stuck on that guy, but it's not uncommon at all for police to be stuck on a husband/ex-lover even after DNA appears to clear the suspect or the suspect is found to have a rock solid alibi. I have just seen too many cases of where the police are "sure" they have the right guy (a spouse/lover/acquaintance) and it turns out they were dead wrong. mtDNA was obtained from blood on the base of Cheri Jo's thumb. It's not Cheri Jo's blood; it almost certainly belongs to the killer. But it was not a match for the ex. I do think that Ross Sullivan makes for a decent suspect in the Bates case; not because message board posters dug this guy up out of the blue, but because actual employees at the Riverside Community College Library identified Sullivan as a good suspect at the time. People who knew him in Riverside seemed generally terrified of him. That all being said, I don't think there's much of anything to connect this murder to the other "Zodiac" "incidents." I certainly don't think Sullivan is responsible for Lake Herman Road, Blue Rock Springs Park, Larry Berryessa or Presidio Heights. Is there a chance that the person who scratched the poem into that desk or wrote the ALL CAPS typed letter also wrote some of the "Zodiac" letters? Perhaps. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Mar 16, 2016 6:00:59 GMT -6
Amerigo:
Thanks for your comment. Really? You think Ross Sullivan, for whom there is ZERO evidence of being connected to the Bates case in any way whatsoever, is a BETTER suspect than her stalker ex-boyfriend, "Bob Barnett" (not his real name, but the one everyone knows him by, so I'll use it here)? You think Barmett, who had assaulted her before, and who was angrily ON HIS WAY TO THE LIBRARY TO CONFRONT HER, was a few seconds too late to kill her because Ross Sullivan GOT THERE FIRST? Talk about bad luck. I guess Bob stood around outside the library waiting for Cheri Jo to come out, but when some other strange guy dragged her down an alley and murdered her, Bob just shrugged and went home.
I'm not blaming you. I know you picked up this Ross Sullivan bullshit from somebody else. But use your own brain for a second: We know that two guys were in that alley with flashlights for over 15 minutes later that night. What were they doing there? They weren't "looking for the watch" because the the watch WAS STILL RIGHT THERE the next morning, So, what were they doing there? Tampering with the evidence, that's what. Barnett's friend ADMITTED to police that he went there that night with Barnett to help Barnett cover up his connection to the Murder. Why on earth would Barnett's friend confess to being an accomplice to a murder that "Ross Sullivan" committed??? I guess Ross Sullivan paid him off. The hairs you refer to (Barnett had brown hair) belong TO THAT FRIEND (or possibly some other fiend.) So does the watch, more than likely. It had no fingerprints on it. Unfortunately, the skin that was embedded under her fingernails had decayed too much to successfully extract DNA, so Barnett ended up dodging that bullet.
The day after Cheri Jo's murder, Barnett had deep scratches on his face and arms. His friends said he confessed to them. He is suspected of murdering another ex in Guam. He and his friends failed polygraphs. He never doubted that he was eventually going to be arrested and convicted of Cneri Jo's murder. OJ Simpson wasn't convicted of murder either, but that doesn't mean Ross Sullivan killed Nicole Brown Simpson.
The big problem with the "Desktop Poem" baloney is that the only "evidence" we have that it was actually written on the desk before October 1970 is Paul Avery. Avery also used to tell people that the Halloween card addressed to him contained a piece of Stine's shirt. Avery claimed a lot of things. Even though Avery knew all about Barnett, he flat out lied about it anyway. He AND Graysmith lied about the "lack of suspects" in ALL the murders. The photo of the desktop (it was actually written on the UNDERSIDE of the hinged top of one of those one-piece college desk/chairs) is clearly a photo-of-a-photo, and the "original" photo has been clearly (clumsily) retouched with a felt-tipped pen.
There is just NO MYSTERY about the Bates murder AT ALL. There's no real mystery about ANY of the "Zodiac" murders.
Ross Sullivan. He's a worse "suspect" than Ted Cruz. I realize that the bullshit is never going to stop. And I'm never going to stop exposing it for bullshit. I'm sorry the truth is so boring, but we're not talking about some harmless Sasquatch or UFO nuttery. We're talking the the real murders of real kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by amerigochattin on Mar 16, 2016 13:35:06 GMT -6
Amerigo: Thanks for your comment. Really? You think Ross Sullivan, for whom there is ZERO evidence of being connected to the Bates case in any way whatsoever, is a BETTER suspect than her stalker ex-boyfriend, "Bob Barnett" (not his real name, but the one everyone knows him by, so I'll use it here)? You think Barmett, who had assaulted her before, and who was angrily ON HIS WAY TO THE LIBRARY TO CONFRONT HER, was a few seconds too late to kill her because Ross Sullivan GOT THERE FIRST? Talk about bad luck. I guess Bob stood around outside the library waiting for Cheri Jo to come out, but when some other strange guy dragged her down an alley and murdered her, Bob just shrugged and went home. I'm not blaming you. I know you picked up this Ross Sullivan bullshit from somebody else. But use your own brain for a second: We know that two guys were in that alley with flashlights for over 15 minutes later that night. What were they doing there? They weren't "looking for the watch" because the the watch WAS STILL RIGHT THERE the next morning, So, what were they doing there? Tampering with the evidence, that's what. Barnett's friend ADMITTED to police that he went there that night with Barnett to help Barnett cover up his connection to the Murder. Why on earth would Barnett's friend confess to being an accomplice to a murder that "Ross Sullivan" committed??? I guess Ross Sullivan paid him off. The hairs you refer to (Barnett had brown hair) belong TO THAT FRIEND (or possibly some other fiend.) So does the watch, more than likely. It had no fingerprints on it. Unfortunately, the skin that was embedded under her fingernails had decayed too much to successfully extract DNA, so Barnett ended up dodging that bullet. The day after Cheri Jo's murder, Barnett had deep scratches on his face and arms. His friends said he confessed to them. He is suspected of murdering another ex in Guam. He and his friends failed polygraphs. He never doubted that he was eventually going to be arrested and convicted of Cneri Jo's murder. OJ Simpson wasn't convicted of murder either, but that doesn't mean Ross Sullivan killed Nicole Brown Simpson. The big problem with the "Desktop Poem" baloney is that the only "evidence" we have that it was actually written on the desk before October 1970 is Paul Avery. Avery also used to tell people that the Halloween card addressed to him contained a piece of Stine's shirt. Avery claimed a lot of things. Even though Avery knew all about Barnett, he flat out lied about it anyway. He AND Graysmith lied about the "lack of suspects" in ALL the murders. The photo of the desktop (it was actually written on the UNDERSIDE of the hinged top of one of those one-piece college desk/chairs) is clearly a photo-of-a-photo, and the "original" photo has been clearly (clumsily) retouched with a felt-tipped pen. There is just NO MYSTERY about the Bates murder AT ALL. There's no real mystery about ANY of the "Zodiac" murders. Ross Sullivan. He's a worse "suspect" than Ted Cruz. I realize that the bullshit is never going to stop. And I'm never going to stop exposing it for bullshit. I'm sorry the truth is so boring, but we're not talking about some harmless Sasquatch or UFO nuttery. We're talking the the real murders of real kids. Tom, as I said, I don't think the person(s) who killed Cheri Jo Bates has/have anything to do with the killings of the "Zodiac" canon. But, as far as "Bob Barnett" goes, am I not correct in thinking that we don't have access to the same original source LE documents (like we have in other cases) because Barnett is still alive? If the evidence against Barnett is as strong as suggested on sites like zodiackiller.com suggest (i.e., witnesses seeing two men searching the alley with flashlights, failed Polygraph by Barnett's friend, Barnett's refusal to continue with his Polygram, Barnett's same friend admitting to searching the area in the early morning with Barnett, etc.), the case should have been open and shut. Now perhaps there was a major LE blunder here. But I suspect the "facts" against Barnett are not quite as damning as we've heard. Are there actual LE files corroborating everything from the friend, including this confession, etc.? The FBI's DNA examination reports indicate that the key sample tested was from "hair from blood clot found at base of Cheri Jo's thumb." You are suggesting that those hairs belong to one of Barnett's friends. But it's unclear to me, under your scenario, why that friend would have left strands of hair in a blood clot on Cheri Jo's thumb. The fact Barnett wasn't charged in 1966, combined with the conclusive non-match on the DNA, leads me to believe this may have been a case of tunnel vision by LE. As to Ross Sullivan ... I have no idea if he was ever involved in any crimes. I certainly don't think he's "the Zodiac." But he was identified by co-workers at the same as someone they believed was capable of this. Perhaps it was Barnett. I'm absolutely willing to believe that. But, for whatever reason, LE has never been able to make the charge stick. So, maybe it is someone else. And, if it is, Sullivan makes for an interesting suspect. And, no, O.J. Simpson was acquitted, and there's no reason to believe Ross Sullivan was the real killer of Nicole. But the difference between O.J., "Bob Barnett," and Ross Sullivan is that O.J. DNA was all over the victim. Barnett's wasn't ... and Sullivan's has never been tested. Also, if Sullivan had worked across the street from the crime scene on Bundy, maybe he would have been a reasonable suspect. Again, this is all aside from the "Zodiac" canon of murders. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Mar 20, 2016 8:29:29 GMT -6
Amerigo:
Now THESE are intelligent, cogent, well-researched, and useful questions. You get a pumpkin sticker.
The information we do have about the Bates case comes straight from investigators working on the case. That's in stark contrast to the "investigation" Avery did. No one has ever raised any serious objection to the essential accuracy of the case against "Bob Barnett." RPD themselves have said that, like half of all murder cases, they just didn't have quite enough evidence to justify the expense of a trial. One problem they had, if I recall correctly, was the confessed accomplice died or something. Happens all the time. Casts zero doubt on Barnett's guilt.
Now, about those hairs. What were the two guys doing in the alley for 15 minutes? They weren't giving Cheri Jo CPR. What were they doing? Barnett's buddy confessed to being there as a legal accomplice helping Barnett commit the crime of evidence tampering. Is it far fetched to think that might have included planting a snatch of some third friend's hair in Cheri Jo's hand? (It wasn't even in her hand. As you may have guessed, a corpse's grip is petty weak.) I don't think it's far fetched at all. In fact, there is NO OTHER APPARENT REASON FOR THEM TO BE IN THE ALLEY THAT NIGHT. What I mean is, they didn't move the body. They didn't leave a phony confession letter. They didn't write "Fuck the pigs!" in the dirt. It wouldn't take 15 minutes to "plant the watch." They didn't call police. But they did SOMETHING. Something that took 15 minutes. The only thing that looks like evidence tampering is those hairs. In a bizarre twist, DNA was able to prove that the hairs (that may have been planted) weren't Barnett's, but was not able to prove anything about the skin under her nails (that UNDOUBTEDLY belonged to the killer.) The limited blood protein tests available in 1966 were able to match the skin to Barnett's blood, but nowhere near as precisely as DNA could have. Nooooooooot quite enough to guarantee a conviction. Especially without a confession. Which Barnett aaallllllllmost gave them. Close, but no cigar. And BTW, in my experience as an insurance investigator, THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
Now, am I saying that I could waltz into a court and get Barnett convicted of murdering Bates? No. My point is, contrary to popular belief (based almost entirely on Graysmith's book) the murder of Cheri Jo Bates is NOT—I repeat, NOT—"unsolved." There is no mystery to it. At all. And Graysmith KNEW that when he wrote his "book." Just like all the other murders. No mystery, no real mystery at all, just a hoax perpettuated by some jerk wads at a tabloid newspaper.
Now, back to OJ's DNA. He was frequent visitor to the house. DNA, obviously, can last for years, unlike fingerprints, which usually get wiped away after a few days or less. Now, what was more compelling was Nicole's blood stains on OJ's socks. BUT—once again, there's often a BIG difference between being guilty, and being FOUND guilty. LAPD's OWN POLAROIDS showed their sloppy handle of the crime scene and evidence. Since it was more than possible that the DNA evidence against OJ might have been accidentally contaminated, then one juror was able to justify in her mind voting not guilty. But that doesn't mean Ross Sullivan or the ghost of Ted Bundy murderd Nicole. See the difference?
It's like Sasquatch. Some people simply cannot go through life facing up to the fact there is ZERO actual evidence for his existence. There is ZERO actual mystery about the murder of Cheri Jo Bates. Just 30 years of the same myth being repeated over and over until people just can't imagine it not being true.
Let me put it another way. The way Isaac Newton might have put it. Is it somehow, some way, if you squint your eyes just right, some kind of hypothetically possible, that Ross Sullivan jumped Cheri Jo Bates a few seconds before Bob Barnett had a chance to, and then somehow convinced Barnett's friend to finger Barnett AND himself? Or, better yet, JUST GOT LUCKY about that? Welllll, yeah. Is there one, single, solitary piece of actual evidence to indicate, in the slightest degree, that that's what ACTUALLY HAPPENED? No. See the difference?
Unless you know something I don't know. BTW, what, exactly, so far as you know, IS the "case" against Sullivan in the Bates murder, anyway?
Thanks for your questions! They are excellent, and very helpful!
|
|
|
|
Post by amerigochattin on Mar 23, 2016 10:37:28 GMT -6
Thomas, Apologies on getting back to you so late. Having looked into many, many murder cases, I have seen far too often police get tunnel vision around a specific suspect -- usually a husband or (ex) boyfriend. I fear "Bob Barnett" is one of those, and the evidence that LE has leaked turns out to be not nearly as strong as they have suggested. In this case, I think the best we can ask ourselves is what is most likely: is it more likely that Barnett and his buddy were in that alley planting hair evidence on Cheri Jo's thumb? or is it more likely that the people with flashlights in that alley weren't Barnett and his friend or weren't connected to the murder at all? I personally do not buy the idea of hair strands being planted to throw off cops. For one, you are more likely to leave evidence at the scene further implicating yourself. For another, the type of testing for hair available in 1966 was essentially limited to texture and color analysis. But the hairs found on Cheri Jo's thumb did not clear Barnett on that basis. It wasn't until mtDNA technology advanced in the late '90s that those hairs could officially rule out Barnett. I seriously doubt that Barnett was anticipating decades of advancements in forensic testing as a motive to plant false hair at the scene. Occam's razor suggests that those hairs far more likely belonged to the actual culprit. As to the blood protein test conducted in 1966, I have never seen any evidence along those lines. I would appreciate any links to source documents if they are available. I do know that in 1966 Culliford first identified blood protein as a unique fingerprint for humans. But I'm not aware of the specific type of forensic testing that was performed in this case, and how reliable it was. I have also seen it written that the Bates case remains officially open with the RPD, and/but "Barnett" has been "cleared." I don't know if this is accurate or not. On O.J., jurors in the criminal case have admitted in interviews that they essentially dismissed all of the DNA evidence against Simpson out of hand, because they believed it may have been planted by the LAPD. Indeed. the DNA evidence against Simpson was never even discussed during jury deliberations. Obviously, the DNA evidence against Simpson was overwhelming. O.J.'s blood (in droplets) was all over the murder scene, including next to blood shoe prints leading away from the bodies of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman. Simpon's blood was also found on a glove left at the murder scene. Both O.J.'s blood and Nicole's blood in spatters was found inside the Bronco. Of course, O.J. had an open wound on his finger causing this blood. To draw an analogy to the Bates cases .... if we could actually find the source of the hairs on her thumb, like the O.J. blood evidence, I think we'd have the killer. JMO. So I disagree that there is zero mystery to the Bates case. Mystery No. 1 is whose hair was on her thumb. Filling in the gaps beyond that, I would like to see the actual case files and evidence. if the case against Barnett was as strong as some LE personnel seem to indicate, it's rather shocking he was never at least tried for the homicide. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Mar 25, 2016 8:51:13 GMT -6
Amerigo:
I notice you didn’t answer any of MY questions.
1. Why did Barnett’s friend confess to being one of the guys in the alley with a flashlight helping Barnett tamper with the crime scene, IF HE WASN’T THERE? Why did he do that?
2. Just what, exactly, supposedly makes Ross Sullivan such a hot suspect? Just because Barnett MAY be, in some bizarre and inexplicable way, “not” guilty? Or is there some EVIDENCE against Sullivan?
One more thing: EVEN IF the same person who wrote the (first four) “Zodiac” letters DID write the “Bates Had to Die” letters, you sure can’t see it. Avery claimed that Morrill “confirmed” a similarity in the handprinting, but Avery wrote a lot of horseshit that wasn’t true. An RPD spokesman specifically denied receiving any such report from Morrill. And Morrill never said anything about it in any interview—except for the one he SUPPOSEDLY gave at his home to Graysmith. The interview I debunk in my own humble missive, The Great Zodiac Killer Hoax of 1986. You have eyes. You tell me—is the handprinting on the first four letters a CLOSER match to the “BHTD” letters, or to Snook?
|
|
|
|
Post by amerigochattin on Apr 3, 2016 7:29:32 GMT -6
Amerigo: I notice you didn’t answer any of MY questions. 1. Why did Barnett’s friend confess to being one of the guys in the alley with a flashlight helping Barnett tamper with the crime scene, IF HE WASN’T THERE? Why did he do that? 2. Just what, exactly, supposedly makes Ross Sullivan such a hot suspect? Just because Barnett MAY be, in some bizarre and inexplicable way, “not” guilty? Or is there some EVIDENCE against Sullivan? One more thing: EVEN IF the same person who wrote the (first four) “Zodiac” letters DID write the “Bates Had to Die” letters, you sure can’t see it. Avery claimed that Morrill “confirmed” a similarity in the handprinting, but Avery wrote a lot of horseshit that wasn’t true. An RPD spokesman specifically denied receiving any such report from Morrill. And Morrill never said anything about it in any interview—except for the one he SUPPOSEDLY gave at his home to Graysmith. The interview I debunk in my own humble missive, The Great Zodiac Killer Hoax of 1986. You have eyes. You tell me—is the handprinting on the first four letters a CLOSER match to the “BHTD” letters, or to Snook? Thomas, Once again, apologies for my delayed response. Question: "Why did Barnett’s friend confess to being one of the guys in the alley with a flashlight helping Barnett tamper with the crime scene, IF HE WASN’T THERE? Why did he do that?" Answer: There is no good explanation other than that "Barnett" is guilty. Period. Full stop. Indeed, it's all but a silver bullet proving his guilt. Which is why it's so hard to understand why neither Barnett nor his friend was ever prosecuted .... and also why I asked the question from the get-go, "Are there actual LE files corroborating everything from the friend, including this confession, etc.?" A confession from a friend saying he was at the murder scene with Barnett with flashlights minutes after the murder not only implicates Barnett; it implicates the friend. You had mentioned the possibility of the confessed accomplice having died. That might be an explanation for why Barnett was not ultimately prosecuted. But it doesn't explain why this confessed accomplice wasn't himself prosecuted for accessory to murder after the fact, obstruction of justice, etc. Now, perhaps the statute of limitations had run for certain charges; though it would not have for murder. But where is the backup for all this? To put it bluntly, I will 100% believe Barnett is guilty if someone can show me the underlying LE files which substantiate the friend's confession against Barnett. Question: "Just what, exactly, supposedly makes Ross Sullivan such a hot suspect? Just because Barnett MAY be, in some bizarre and inexplicable way, 'not' guilty? Or is there some EVIDENCE against Sullivan?"
Answer: I don't think I called Ross a "hot" suspect; I said, I think he "for a decent suspect." Quite a bit of a difference there. Why is he a decent suspect? Because: he worked at the (general) location of the crime, where the victim had been immediately prior to her murder -- giving him "opportunity"; he knew the victim; the people who knew him and were familiar with this crime suspected him; he missed several days of work (i.e., the location of the crime) immediately after the murder; and he stopped wearing the clothes that he had worn every day after the murder. That is basically it. Does it mean that he was guilty? No. Absolutely not. What it means is that he should have been a person of interest if it could not conclusively be established that "Barnett" was the killer. Statement: "EVEN IF the same person who wrote the (first four) 'Zodiac' letters DID write the 'Bates Had to Die' letters, you sure can’t see it. Avery claimed that Morrill 'confirmed' a similarity in the handprinting, but Avery wrote a lot of horseshit that wasn’t true. An RPD spokesman specifically denied receiving any such report from Morrill. And Morrill never said anything about it in any interview—except for the one he SUPPOSEDLY gave at his home to Graysmith. The interview I debunk in my own humble missive, The Great Zodiac Killer Hoax of 1986. You have eyes. You tell me—is the handprinting on the first four letters a CLOSER match to the “BHTD” letters, or to Snook?" Response: Good stuff on the lack of 'Bates had to Die' letter and 'Zodiac' letters. As I said originally, I don't think there's any connection between the actual murder of Bates and any of the canonical 'Zodiac' incidents or communications. I've only left open the possibility of there being a connection between some 'communication' from the Bates period with some communication from the 'Zodiac' period, because I can't really disprove it, and I try to be as open-minded, but also critical-thinking, as possible -- which is the main reason I was turned on to your work. But I don't really see a connection there; and it's not something I'd focus on. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Apr 4, 2016 6:17:07 GMT -6
Amerigo:
That's it? How did Ross Sullivan even get to be a suspect? Do you know?
Now, then. Do you know what it COSTS to prosecute a murder case? Do you know how much is in the Riverside DA's budget? Let me clue (get it?) you in on a few things I learned as an insurance investigator:
1. If cops don't get a confession, there will probably be no trial.
2. Short of a confession, the DA MIGHT try to bluff out a plea deal.
3. If, because of publicity or some other political pressure, the DA decides MAYBE to roll the dice on a trial, then the cost of that trial is going to bankrupt the DA's office. In a small town like Riverside, that means they need outside funding. Which they don't always get. IF the victim had a BIG life insurance policy, then the insurance company MIGHT be willing to help. In fact, in maybe HALF of murder cases, a life insurance company has paid half the cost of the investigation. And by "murder" cases, I mean cases when someone who is not a criminal is killed.
Guess what? Most murders do NOT go to trial. Belieeeeeeeeeve me. Most murderers, IF convicted, are convicted (through plea bargain) of SOME OTHER CRIME, and John Law considers that a successful bid to get the perp off the streets for a while. You know why murder trials are always such big news? Because they NEVER HAPPEN.
F'r examples: Son of Sam: Confession. Jeffrey Dahmer: Confession. Albert DeSalvo: Confession. O.J. Simpson: LA went for broke; LA went broke.
See? RPD agonized over the HUGE financial gamble of putting Barnett on trial. He aaaaallllllllmost confessed. But without that confession . . .
|
|
