Debbie Faraday & one or two other points.

[Wolf 49]

I just can't figure out for the life of me how it is that Zodiac fires 6 bullets at Betty standing behind her as she tires desperately to run for her life, five of the six bullets impact her down the right side if her back and in response she stops dead in her tracks, turns around to look at Zodiac, then falls face first to her final resting position facing the rambler and, apparently, her killer. If she fell forward toward the rambler due to the impact of bullet after bullet and fell toward the Rambler then the shooter would need to be stood where many believe he parked his car in order to et Betty with 5 shots from behind and also fall consistently with momentum and gravity but i know what some are thinking....The shell casings! They were found grouped in the same small general area by David's Rambler and thus suggests the shooter was stood over this side of the gated entrance. Either he moved Betty's body to end up facing that way, or he hasn't touched Betty's body, then it surely has to be the shell casings he's deliberately picked up and placed from over here and put's them over there? If Betty fell facing the Rambler then that was her direction she was going in when she collapsed and if Zodiac was shooting from the rambler position then the slugs would have hit Betty in the front of her torso around the chest and lungs area.

It seems that no only do the Laws of the land not apply to Zodiac, but neither do the Laws of Physics.

But regarding Zodiac possibly 'posing' Betty's dead or dying body, I don't know..... This was Zodiac's first known attack in what would be a series of attacks with the intent being to commit homicide. Serial Killers will more often than not evolve and get more and more confident with each murder they get away with but that is over time. My own personal opinion on the likelihood of him re-arranging the body of Betty Lou, whether for maximum shock value for whoever is unlucky enough to stumble upon the scene or any other reason, then I'd probably say its entirely possible, yes. But probable? Not really. He's totally exposed there at that gravel gated entrance to the pumping station because as Pierre Bidou said "Your headlights shine right in there as you pass by."

Sod it, put it down to Z having OCD and can't leave the scene until it is just so (that was a bad attempt at being humorous, lol)

The position of her body is completely bizarre. (Not that the word 'bizarre' requires an intensifier, but there, I just used one....) It forces us to consider the possibilities of how it got that way. If naturally, then how? If artificially, then why?

NATURALLY: Let's say she fell that way and was left in the position in which she landed. If so, then... A) she is facing a direction that is counter-intuitive to the direction we would expect her to fall, given the direction we assume she was moving when the bullets hit her and the direction from which we assume the shots were fired; or B) we have all been wrong all along (say that clause three times fast!) and she was not killed by a man shooting from a stance over Faraday's body next to Faraday's car; i.e. there was a second assailant in the bushes or near the road--a lookout, perhaps?-- who she saw after she started to run. That second man is the one who shot her after she turned away from him, in a panic, not knowing which way to go next. After this second gunman shot her, she fell facing Faraday's body. The shell casings were then gathered up and placed around Faraday to present the appearance that there was a lone shooter. (Note -- I am just thinking aloud. I do not necessarily subscribe to the second gunman theory, and anyway I imagine ballistics verified that all shell casings were from a single handgun. Ergo, the Faraday shooter was also the Jensen shooter. BUT.... isn't there a report that someone saw two men in a car, and that those two men initiated then abandoned a car chase into Benicia, a little while before the killing? I am married to no theories nor suspects; I am open to every possible solution to this case. Every idea is worth noting, if only to rule it out sooner or later.) Getting back to A ... the possibility she fell in that position even though she was running from the car and away from the gunman. We can imagine, though not comfortably so, that she was spun around by one of the shots, or perhaps spun herself around just in the natural way one might clutch one's midriff in agony as five bullets rip through it. Can any of us say with certainty how a human being reacts while being gunned down? Maybe she hit her knees and spun, quite naturally, because that's just what she did. (Applause to the shooter, by the way, who from an impressive distance placed five shots in an amazingly tight group, with a handgun not know to lend itself to such feats. This fact has always led me, shakily, in the direction of the 'Zodiac as police officer/military marksman' theory. That was a hell of a shot group in that young lady's back. Might this lead back to the idea that a closer, second shooter did the killing. Just a thought...)

ARTIFICIALLY: The guy reversed her original position. (Although we must say it.... not a drop of blood evidence suggests she was moved or dragged anywhere. That lake of blood running from her face would have been leaking from her immediately upon hitting the ground. If her position had been tampered with, there would be a blood pool at the other end where her head used to lay.) All that parenthetical ruminating aside, let's assume he did move her. Why? To throw off the dogs, so to speak? Is he that adept at forward-thinking a crime scene and arranging the pieces just so? (A cop, again, was he, who knew what cops would zero in on, and what would confuse them?) Did he even have the time to do all that? He HAD to have realized the likelihood of road traffic, and most likely hauled balls out of there, and right quick. The guy got extraordinarily lucky, and not for the last time. (Unless he WAS a copper, and this whole thing was a cop-job from the get-go, and LE knew it sooner rather than later and this explains the grossly inept police work all over this case, from crime scene to crime scene. Maybe he never got lucky, he just 'got' away because he was allowed to get away. Again... I do not really buy into that--not a hundred percent, anyhow--but, well,t here it is. We've all thought it from time to time.)

Anyway, I'd love to go on further, but I have a Shakespeare class to teach. It has been fun reading all you guys since I joined this site in December. Kudos on all the terrific stuff....!!

[pittsburgh_phil]

Could you guys link the Vallejo fb page? Also, I could have sworn I have seen a picture of Betty that was in black in white facing the opposite direction. Maybe the color photograph is reversed. Back to your point concerning the other teenagers, David might have told his sister that so it wouldn't look like he was going to LH with just a girl. Maybe he didn't want to make his sister think that he was going there just to make out. Didn't he also tell his parents that he was going to a Christmas Dance or something along those lines?

I thought the photo wasa reverse negative possibly myself. If you look at it closely, you can see another photo os the Rambler that somehow superimpsed onto the picture of Betty

I noticed the artifacting as well I also tried using google image search to see if I could find instances of the same image, but I get a message that the image isn't publicly available or it has been removed.

[Welsh Chappie]

Could you guys link the Vallejo fb page? Also, I could have sworn I have seen a picture of Betty that was in black in white facing the opposite direction. Maybe the color photograph is reversed. Back to your point concerning the other teenagers, David might have told his sister that so it wouldn't look like he was going to LH with just a girl. Maybe he didn't want to make his sister think that he was going there just to make out. Didn't he also tell his parents that he was going to a Christmas Dance or something along those lines?

I thought the photo wasa reverse negative possibly myself. If you look at it closely, you can see another photo os the Rambler that somehow superimpsed onto the picture of Betty

The crime scene sketch even has Betty facing toward the Rambler:

Betty Body position.gif

[Welsh Chappie]

I just can't figure out for the life of me how it is that Zodiac fires 6 bullets at Betty standing behind her as she tires desperately to run for her life, five of the six bullets impact her down the right side if her back and in response she stops dead in her tracks, turns around to look at Zodiac, then falls face first to her final resting position facing the rambler and, apparently, her killer. If she fell forward toward the rambler due to the impact of bullet after bullet and fell toward the Rambler then the shooter would need to be stood where many believe he parked his car in order to et Betty with 5 shots from behind and also fall consistently with momentum and gravity but i know what some are thinking....The shell casings! They were found grouped in the same small general area by David's Rambler and thus suggests the shooter was stood over this side of the gated entrance. Either he moved Betty's body to end up facing that way, or he hasn't touched Betty's body, then it surely has to be the shell casings he's deliberately picked up and placed from over here and put's them over there? If Betty fell facing the Rambler then that was her direction she was going in when she collapsed and if Zodiac was shooting from the rambler position then the slugs would have hit Betty in the front of her torso around the chest and lungs area.

It seems that no only do the Laws of the land not apply to Zodiac, but neither do the Laws of Physics.

But regarding Zodiac possibly 'posing' Betty's dead or dying body, I don't know..... This was Zodiac's first known attack in what would be a series of attacks with the intent being to commit homicide. Serial Killers will more often than not evolve and get more and more confident with each murder they get away with but that is over time. My own personal opinion on the likelihood of him re-arranging the body of Betty Lou, whether for maximum shock value for whoever is unlucky enough to stumble upon the scene or any other reason, then I'd probably say its entirely possible, yes. But probable? Not really. He's totally exposed there at that gravel gated entrance to the pumping station because as Pierre Bidou said "Your headlights shine right in there as you pass by."

Sod it, put it down to Z having OCD and can't leave the scene until it is just so (that was a bad attempt at being humorous, lol)

The position of her body is completely bizarre. (Not that the word 'bizarre' requires an intensifier, but there, I just used one....) It forces us to consider the possibilities of how it got that way. If naturally, then how? If artificially, then why?

NATURALLY: Let's say she fell that way and was left in the position in which she landed. If so, then... A) she is facing a direction that is counter-intuitive to the direction we would expect her to fall, given the direction we assume she was moving when the bullets hit her and the direction from which we assume the shots were fired; or B) we have all been wrong all along (say that clause three times fast!) and she was not killed by a man shooting from a stance over Faraday's body next to Faraday's car; i.e. there was a second assailant in the bushes or near the road--a lookout, perhaps?-- who she saw after she started to run. That second man is the one who shot her after she turned away from him, in a panic, not knowing which way to go next. After this second gunman shot her, she fell facing Faraday's body. The shell casings were then gathered up and placed around Faraday to present the appearance that there was a lone shooter. (Note -- I am just thinking aloud. I do not necessarily subscribe to the second gunman theory, and anyway I imagine ballistics verified that all shell casings were from a single handgun. Ergo, the Faraday shooter was also the Jensen shooter. BUT.... isn't there a report that someone saw two men in a car, and that those two men initiated then abandoned a car chase into Benicia, a little while before the killing? I am married to no theories nor suspects; I am open to every possible solution to this case. Every idea is worth noting, if only to rule it out sooner or later.) Getting back to A ... the possibility she fell in that position even though she was running from the car and away from the gunman. We can imagine, though not comfortably so, that she was spun around by one of the shots, or perhaps spun herself around just in the natural way one might clutch one's midriff in agony as five bullets rip through it. Can any of us say with certainty how a human being reacts while being gunned down? Maybe she hit her knees and spun, quite naturally, because that's just what she did. (Applause to the shooter, by the way, who from an impressive distance placed five shots in an amazingly tight group, with a handgun not know to lend itself to such feats. This fact has always led me, shakily, in the direction of the 'Zodiac as police officer/military marksman' theory. That was a hell of a shot group in that young lady's back. Might this lead back to the idea that a closer, second shooter did the killing. Just a thought...)

ARTIFICIALLY: The guy reversed her original position. (Although we must say it.... not a drop of blood evidence suggests she was moved or dragged anywhere. That lake of blood running from her face would have been leaking from her immediately upon hitting the ground. If her position had been tampered with, there would be a blood pool at the other end where her head used to lay.) All that parenthetical ruminating aside, let's assume he did move her. Why? To throw off the dogs, so to speak? Is he that adept at forward-thinking a crime scene and arranging the pieces just so? (A cop, again, was he, who knew what cops would zero in on, and what would confuse them?) Did he even have the time to do all that? He HAD to have realized the likelihood of road traffic, and most likely hauled balls out of there, and right quick. The guy got extraordinarily lucky, and not for the last time. (Unless he WAS a copper, and this whole thing was a cop-job from the get-go, and LE knew it sooner rather than later and this explains the grossly inept police work all over this case, from crime scene to crime scene. Maybe he never got lucky, he just 'got' away because he was allowed to get away. Again... I do not really buy into that--not a hundred percent, anyhow--but, well,t here it is. We've all thought it from time to time.)

Anyway, I'd love to go on further, but I have a Shakespeare class to teach. It has been fun reading all you guys since I joined this site in December. Kudos on all the terrific stuff....!!

In regards to the the section of you comment I highlighted above, there was a footprint impression found in the Earth behind the fence according to one of the initial newspaper reports.

The other way this crime may have happened is if Zodiac pulls in and doesn't exit his car and Betty Lou, for whatever reason, exits the Rambler and walks over to Z and speaks to him. Betty realises that something is wrong and she turns to run back to David's Rambler when Zodiac opens fire and she collapses. In a panic, David starts the Rambler to speed off and Zodiac fires the shot into the Rambler and David is paralyzed with fear. Zodiac orders David out and David exits offering his high school ring in a vein attempt to save his life. Zodiac shoots David, goes back to where he's parked and picks the shells up and places them by the Rambler to 'give the cops some busy work', then he leaves. (Just another possibility for Betty facing that way).

[morf13]

"The other way this crime may have happened is if Zodiac pulls in and doesn't exit his car and Betty Lou, for whatever reason, exits the Rambler and walks over to Z and speaks to him. Betty realises that something is wrong and she turns to run back to David's Rambler when Zodiac opens fire and she collapses. In a panic, David starts the Rambler to speed off and Zodiac fires the shot into the Rambler and David is paralyzed with fear. Zodiac orders David out and David exits offering his high school ring in a vein attempt to save his life. Zodiac shoots David, goes back to where he's parked and picks the shells up and places them by the Rambler to 'give the cops some busy work', then he leaves. (Just another possibility for Betty facing that way)."

Welsh, that's a whole lot of speculation, with nothing to back it up. You're making too much out of this. Zodiac is really going to pick up all his casings and move them to another spot to give cops 'busy work'? Why would he do that when a person could come along any second? As far as heel prints,knee prints, etc behind the fence, so what, I am sure people were frequently going in and out of there.

I'll say this one more time, and you can either accept reality, or don't, JAMES OWEN DROVE BY AND SAW TWO CARS, NO PEOPLE,NO BODIES, NO NOTHING. BETTY WAS NOT OUT OF THE CAR TALKING TO SOMEBODY. 30 SECONDS LATER AFTER HE WENT BY THE SCENE,HE HEARD A SHOT(or so he claims).IF HE IS BEING TRUTHFUL,THERE'S NO WAY FOR ANY SCENARIO TO HAPPEN OF BETTY BEING WALKING AROUND OUTSIDE TALKING TO PEOPLE. If Owen is lying,it's likely that he is zodiac, either way, it didn't happen the way your theories are suggesting. This case is enough of a mystery without you adding wild speculation to the best clues & evidence/witness testimony we have. I am not a Doctor or physicist,or whatever, and I too would tend to think that Betty running from the car and getting shot in the back would make her fall forward, but who knows what reaction her body have, maybe the first bullet hitting her, made her stand straight up and stop, and she simply fell backwards. As a hunter, I have seen Deer do odd things after being shot, things I wouldnt think, maybe the same is true here

[traveller1st]

I posted, my theory on the body position, somewhere before. Maybe here or on the old board. To summarize. She was running, gets shot in the back on the right side, this spun her and she slipped (causing her to appear to have fallen backwards but really it's that the forward momentum and the turn made her legs go out from under her, halfway through the turn, and she fell on her side. The ground was frozen and she wasn't wearing shoes designed for grip.

I've pondered the "did he move her?" idea before but I was reading the reports and press articles recently and it was either the newspapers, quoting LE or the police reports indicate that she was found where she fell. That the body had not been moved. I states that somewhere so they must have had enough information from the scene to say that.

I know the body position seems, at first, to be "wrong" for want of a better word given where the shells were but after reading over the information about the scene it appears, to me at least, that she was shot, running away and fell as she did. As per my thoughts above I don't think it's impossible for her to have fallen the way she did considering the above factors. Movement, footwear, ground condition, shot clusters.

As for the unfolding of the attack, well, as with the whole thing really there's plenty of room for speculation. Especially considering the witnesses and who saw what or didn't and in that tight time frame. I agree with morf though that we might be straying too far from certain realities. Whatever happened, it was mostly confined to the right side of the rambler. That's where the shells were. That's the side that the shot was fired through the window and possibly through the roof? ( say possibly but reading the reports and articles it seems to be the case). The passenger door was opened when LE arrived, the other 3 doors were locked. That's were David was killed. Given these facts I think we could, even with some speculation, be able to arrive at a roughly agreeable and hopefully sensible series of events to fill in the gaps.

I have to say that I think the deductions/assumptions that LE made at the time seem pretty logical as far as they could be made. I've been checking the reports again as I'm posting this. I would like to mention a few points, just as points, nothing more, if it involves timings I tend not to pay too much attention but I think it's chronological and the details are in the reports.

I know that Owen statements are a sticking point because he didn't see anyone. I'm starting to think though that this isn't as weird as it sounds. For one thing he wasn't the only witness to state that, the hunters also stated that they didn't see anyone in the rambler when they passed it (more on that in a moment). What makes Owen's statement different is that he saw two cars. Or one and half given his keen observation skills lol. The assumption is (as suggested in the police report) that between the Your's seeing the rambler, and it's occupants, and the hunters seeing it, David and BL reclined the front seat, it was found in the reclined position.

Owens presumably saw the rambler in this state too, seat reclined, occupants not visible (lying down). This should be factored into the crime scene scenario when speculating.

It would seems that after the Your's passed them for the second time they decided to recline for privacy. They didn't sit when the hunters passed nor when Owens passed. It's possible they might not have when Zodiac parked in beside them. They may have peeked but if Owens is telling the truth and he saw what he says he saw then they went back to lying down. I don't think so though. I think they remained lying down, 'necking' as the police report puts it.

I'm wondering about a possible scenario but, as I said before, not concerned with timings for now so I won't go there until I do some proper reading in that regard and get my head around it all.

Still assuming that Owens did see a second car where was Z? Well given the dodgy nature of Owens statements (rightly picked up on by morf) I don't know how sure we can about what he means in that regard. If we take the other witness statements into account it seems likely that he (Owen) would be accurate in stating that he didn't see anyone in the rambler and should have had a good enough view to be sure. What about the other car though? He really didn't get a good look according to the reports. I even doubt the relevance of his later embellished statements concerning dark, lacking in chrome, not large, not compact. Pfft about as much use as saying it wasn't a pink helicopter. So with that amount of vagueness not seeing the car's occupant doesn't surprise me. All that suggests to me is that occupant wasn't running around outside the car waveing [sic] a gun.

That's my thought's/speculation on the recently discussed points.

I would like to add this though. IIRC Ed over on ZKF, when these same things were being discussed had suggested that Z simply saw the headlights of Owen approaching and ducked out of sight. Perfectly plausible but as I have suggested regarding Owens vague statements and lack of detail about the second car, possibly not necessary. There is of course another possible factor. Remember the 3 girls at Berryessa, the vehicle? "dark/heavily tinted rear window". Just a thought.

[Welsh Chappie]

"The other way this crime may have happened is if Zodiac pulls in and doesn't exit his car and Betty Lou, for whatever reason, exits the Rambler and walks over to Z and speaks to him. Betty realises that something is wrong and she turns to run back to David's Rambler when Zodiac opens fire and she collapses. In a panic, David starts the Rambler to speed off and Zodiac fires the shot into the Rambler and David is paralyzed with fear. Zodiac orders David out and David exits offering his high school ring in a vein attempt to save his life. Zodiac shoots David, goes back to where he's parked and picks the shells up and places them by the Rambler to 'give the cops some busy work', then he leaves. (Just another possibility for Betty facing that way)."

Welsh, that's a whole lot of speculation, with nothing to back it up. You're making too much out of this. Zodiac is really going to pick up all his casings and move them to another spot to give cops 'busy work'? Why would he do that when a person could come along any second? As far as heel prints,knee prints, etc behind the fence, so what, I am sure people were frequently going in and out of there.

I'll say this one more time, and you can either accept reality, or don't, JAMES OWEN DROVE BY AND SAW TWO CARS, NO PEOPLE,NO BODIES, NO NOTHING. BETTY WAS NOT OUT OF THE CAR TALKING TO SOMEBODY. 30 SECONDS LATER AFTER HE WENT BY THE SCENE,HE HEARD A SHOT(or so he claims).IF HE IS BEING TRUTHFUL,THERE'S NO WAY FOR ANY SCENARIO TO HAPPEN OF BETTY BEING WALKING AROUND OUTSIDE TALKING TO PEOPLE. If Owen is lying,it's likely that he is zodiac, either way, it didn't happen the way your theories are suggesting. This case is enough of a mystery without you adding wild speculation to the best clues & evidence/witness testimony we have. I am not a Doctor or physicist,or whatever, and I too would tend to think that Betty running from the car and getting shot in the back would make her fall forward, but who knows what reaction her body have, maybe the first bullet hitting her, made her stand straight up and stop, and she simply fell backwards. As a hunter, I have seen Deer do odd things after being shot, things I wouldnt think, maybe the same is true here

"Welsh, that's a whole lot of speculation, with nothing to back it up." Yes, it's speculation as to how the crime happened, but so is the accepted version because there were no witnesses to the actual crime. And "and you can either accept reality, or don't" That's your reality Morf because you choose to believe a Owen. I will also say this only one more time, there were no other witnesses to see a second vehicle there even though Owen himself claims there was a vehicle passing the crime scene second before he passed by going in the opposite direction. Owen's own account is inconsistent and at first he puts the 2nd vehicle 10 ft away, then 3 ft and then seems to want to pass the buck when being questioned by saying that actually, its not him they should be asking, but his colleague who was working that night and may have seen something and then when asked in a secon interview about this colleague, Owen says he spoke to him but that he can be of no assistance as he didn't drive by the scene that night when going to work. So to say we must accept this as 'reality' is, in my opinion, arrogant because the Reality is that nobody knows how this crime happened due to lack of witnesses.

The scenario above is just that, a scenario. I am not saying it's more likely than any other, just adding it as a possibility. Zodiac, when mentioning the BRS attack freely admits himself that he was in a vehicle: "The man who told the police my car was Brown was a negro rather shabbly dressed." So Zodiac responds to a witnesses claiming to see him and his car after the BRS attack while he was at a phone booth, but he mentions nothing what-so-ever about his vehicle in the LHR attack even though a witnesses, James Owen, claims to have seen the second vehicle.

[Welsh Chappie]

I have told you before Morf, I don't believe James Owen so using what he says he saw as a basis for what may have happened that night is not something I would bother doing. It's not like I'm just deciding "I don't believe James Owen because I don't want to." I don't believe him because what he claims is not only contradictory to the other witnesses, but he also contradicts himself. I base my opinion that Owen is not being totally truthul on the facts in this instance, not opinion, scenario or theory, and i'll list them here for the final time:

First statement Owen Gives he states the 2nd vehicle is 10 ft away from the rambler, which is basically the other end of the gravel entrance, then in his second statement, he put's the 2nd vehicle 3 ft away, which is almost right next to the Rambler.

Owen, while being questioned about what he saw that night, states that the police may have better luck if they talk to a colleague of his who was working that night and drives that way to work and offers to speak to this colleague. Next time police speak with him, he states this colleague of his said didn't drive that way to work that night. Owen states that this Colleague lives in the apartments at the end of Springs Road. (To me, an this part is opinion only, Owen seems uncomfortable and uneasy with the police questioning him about this crime and seems eager to send them off to interview a colleague of his rather than himself, a colleague who, it turns out, didn't drive to work that way because he came from Benicia).

Owen states that he saw a 2nd vehicle there at the scene, and that seconds before he did, a vehicle passed him going in the opposite direction toward Vallejo. (He never mentioned this passing vehicle in his first witness statement, this, like the gunshot he hears, he only remembers in the second interview) So, by his own admission, there was another vehicle that passed by the Gravel Gated turn in area when, he says, the second vehicle was on the scene. Yet that vehicles occupants never come forward to corroborate Owen claims.

Stella Borges is only minutes behind Owen travelling in the same direction and when she gets there, the body's of David and Betty are clearly in position on the ground. Stella states that no other vehicle passed her going toward Vallejo as she was on Lake Herman Rd approaching the scene even though Owen claims that one passed him going toward Vallejo and Stella was minutes behind him.

In Owen's second interview the report states "He definitely saw two cars. Did not see anyone in or around the cars. A station waggon and a second vehicle parked 3 to 4 ft to the right of it. Stated that as he drove approx. one quarter mile on passed the scene, he though he heard a gun shot." Owen doesn't remember hearing this gun shot until giving his second statement even though he knows two teens were shot dead while he gives his first statement? Please! And now the position of the 2nd vehicle is now thee times closer to the Rambler than he had first claimed.

See if Owen were being totally truthful, with nothing to hide, then his testimony should be consistent like the other witnesses. If I lie and tell you today I am 25 years old, I better remember I had told you that because if you ask me in 6 months again how old I am and I forget what I had told you 6 months ago and tell you I'm actually 32, then i'll get caught out. If I didn't lie to begin with and told the truth from the start, then my answer as to my age would be consistent and always be 32 because the truth is always the truth the same today as it was yesterday and will be tomorrow. In my opinion, given all the FACTS above and how they relate, Owen is lying!

[BuckwheatFlowers]

As a hunter, I have seen Deer do odd things after being shot, things I wouldnt think, maybe the same is true here

True dat. Some weird stuff happens when an animal is impacted by projectiles travelling over 2,000 ft/sec. And I'm an experienced, expert hunter.....

not some amateur like morf.












J/k morf

[BuckwheatFlowers]

So wc and morf both think Owen is lying. They only disagree on why he is lying. While I definitely find his statements odd and inconsistent, I haven't convinced myself (yet) that he was lying. One thing for sure, not recalling the gunshot in the first interview seems real strange. But then, there's a lot of strange things going on that night.

For instance, the hunters claim to have arrived at 9:00, a white impala is there. Bingo claims to have left at 10:00, the white impala was there. William Crow stated that he was there at 9:30-10:00, with no Impala there. They couldn't have all been correct, could they? So, was one of them incorrect? Two of them incorrect? All of them incorrect? If one or more was incorrect, does that mean they were lying or just incorrect.

Peggy Your claims the Rambler was facing east when she passed by. The younger hunter stated (twice) that it was is was parked on the bank (reference the police sketch). Owen says the Rambler was back facing East with another car parked beside it. That's a lot of moving around in a matter of minutes. Doesn't make sense. Maybe the hunter was incorrect. Certainly seems out of place.

James Owen said he passed one going the opposite direction. How come Stella didn't see it? That doesn't make sense. Okay, this one actually does. Its in the report that he passed the car in the area of the Borges ranch. So, she shouldn't have seen it. But why didn't the driver of the car come forward? Why didn't the hunters come forward?

And what about this drug bust? Can someone, anyone, for the love of God, please pm me or post a newspaper article on the big pot bust that took place that night on LHR? Thanks.