|
Lt. Larry Crompton admitted in his book Sudden Terror, the first book to bring us the dramatic details of the EAR/ONS, that when first dealt the case for investigation he was surprised to discover that EAR’s modus operandi was not unique. There were a number of incarcerated and never-apprehended criminals who used a very similar M.O.
On February 27, 2018, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department made an info dump of vintage unsolved cat burglary cases. These had been perpetrated over 1972-1973, three years before EAR began his crime spree of rape and terror. After reviewing this material one can well appreciate the information to which Lt. Crompton had been referring. Hints of the plague of similar suburban home invasion crimes had also come from Lt. Richard Shelby in his book Hunting a Psychopath.
The release of this information has a very logical reason. These cat burglars operated in the area of Rancho Cordova and, surprisingly, the East Area of suburban Sacramento— Carmichael and Citrus Heights; the exact communities EAR struck back and forth as well between 1976 and 1978. In essence, this or these cat burglars traveled north and south of the American River, most likely using the Watt Avenue and/or Sunrise Blvd bridges, and hit the same communities that EAR would concentrate within starting three years later.
This territoriality is surprising because if you know the area, you know that to use the Watt Avenue bridge to and from Rancho you must go through La Riviera, an area this or these cat burglars seem to have avoided. It is equally easy to drive up Watt Avenue and strike the suburban communities to the west of Watt Avenue. This is the Arden Arcade area of eastern Sacramento. This or these cat burglars conspicuously preferred to remain out of Sacramento Police jurisdiction (that we know of) and remain in Sheriff territory. La Riviera is also in Sac Police jurisdiction. To a large extent EAR would do the same thing 3 years later.
The territoriality was so similar that a neighbor of a future EAR victim and a future EAR victim were both struck by this or these cat burglars.
The reason for the release of the Sheriff information after so many decades is the hope this information may help identify these cat burglars this long after-the-fact and therewith eliminate them as possible leads to EAR/ONS’s identity. The greater hope, of course, is that they may be able to confirm that one of these (if there was more than one) cat burglars was indeed the villain who would become the scourge of California starting in 1976.
The Sheriff’s approach is that EAR exhibited signs of being a skilled cat burglar, a very rare type of serial offender. The Sheriff statement declares:
“Cat burglary, hot prowl burglary, or home invasion burglary as it is sometimes called is a very rare category of burglary that detectives are called upon to investigate. In the modern era, it is closely linked to sexual offenses and motivations, though not always. It is by its very nature extremely high-risk, and law enforcement goes to great lengths to solve these very rare crimes as a result. There is no question that the East Area Rapist was a prolific cat burglar as evidenced by the dozens of crimes he committed that were home invasion rapes. The stealth he showed in operating in the occupied home environment indicates he had experience with this type of behavior long before his rape series began.”
The Sheriff then rightly cautions us that other cat burglars were being dealt with at the time, and a few were captured and identified. General crime spree overviews follow of one or more sprees where the perp was never identified.
It is the purpose of this article to examine these crime sprees in general and compare them to the details of the EAR’s crime spree to see if there is any legitimacy to considering him as the perpetrator of one of these cat burglary sprees over 1972-1973.
The first case is just listed as “The Cat Burglar that strikes Rancho Cordova and the East Areas of Sacramento,” which is the only way this nebulous entity was referred to even back then over dispatches. He hit over 30 homes during 1972-73. He will be referred to here as Cat Burglar. Of him, the Sheriff elucidates the following:
His crimes were linked by M.O. and it was recognized by detectives of that time that the crimes were the work of one man. Only one other cat burglary series (albeit brief, and with a different M.O.) was occurring simultaneous to this series. When caught, the suspects in that case said they saw the success the cat burglar of Rancho Cordova was having, and thought it was an easy crime to commit (for them it wasn't.) A gap occurred at the end of 1972, but by spring of 1973, his offenses began anew and his re-emergence was documented by detectives. His method of operation was to enter a home quietly after the occupants were asleep. The burglar typically exited out a different pre-opened door from his point of entry, and evidence indicated the door was likely opened immediately upon entering the home as an escape route. The front door was frequently the exit point. A commonly hit area was the area between Dolecetto Drive and Malaga Way and near Coloma Road with over a dozen strikes. He also struck other areas of Rancho Cordova, and branched out to Carmichael, Citrus Heights, and other nearby areas.
The statement outlines the area of Rancho Cordova where he struck.
The release of information continues:
Once inside, the burglar went throughout the home as the occupants slept and took purses and wallets belonging to the victims. Victims included families with children, couples, and single women. Evidence from many of the scenes indicated the burglar had spent extensive time searching the residence, but most of the time items of value outside of the purses and wallets were disregarded. However, the burglar would sometimes take coin collections, silver, or other items including food and alcohol. The burglar also spent considerable time in the bedrooms of the victim(s) as they slept, without disturbing them. The purses/wallets were typically found nearby in an adjacent yard, or on the sidewalk of the residence. Occasionally they were left elsewhere in groups with other victims’ property from the same night. The only item typically taken from the purse was money, but occasionally small items or identification was also missing. In a few instances, victims awoke as the suspect was in the residence. The suspect would flee the residence out of one of the open doors, sometimes with the victim in pursuit. Additionally, the suspect would frequently strike multiple houses in a single night.
On one occasion, the suspect touched a woman’s breast as she slept, but left when she told him he needed to leave her house. That woman was alone at the time of the attack. In another case, a victim was awakened by a noise in her bedroom. She looked up and saw a man standing near the bedroom door, approximately 8 feet away. She sat up in bed and the suspect pointed a gun at her. The victim said nothing to the suspect, but an odd interaction occurred. The suspect stated “I just took a dollar off your dresser.” The woman told the suspect he should put it back and leave. The suspect complied and returned two dollars to the dresser, despite claiming he had taken only one dollar. He walked down the hallway, but stopped and looked in at the 17-year-old daughter, who then yelled at him to leave. Though the suspect left the residence without further incident, he took a quarter and a nickel from a table near the exit door.
The suspect in this series was seen by several victims and witnesses. Most only observed him briefly and in very low lighting conditions. Descriptions were of a white male in his 20’s, 5’6” to 6’0”, with a slender to average build.
Extensive investigation was conducted in attempts to apprehend this cat burglar, but it does not appear he was ever identified. The areas targeted include Rancho Cordova, Carmichael, Whitney/Mission area, and Citrus Heights. Three of the Citrus Heights cat burglaries were each within a block of one of the two East Area Rapist strikes four years later. The Rancho Cordova strikes were within blocks or closer to the Rancho Cordova EAR attacks. It was also believed the suspect had extensive knowledge of the drainage canals and of the American River Parkway.
The next case is titled Cordova Meadows Burglar. We are also given a map.
 There is a tenor of uncertainty in the Sheriff that this is a different cat burglar to the aforementioned Cat Burglar case. The aforementioned cat burglar was thought dormant at the end of 1972 and through the beginning of 1973, beginning again in Spring. The Cordova Meadows Burglar was active the most during the time the other was dormant. “These burglaries were occurring at their heaviest in the first half of 1973, and included over 20 burglaries by mid-March. Some of the items taken include coins, piggy banks, jewelry, binoculars, hunting knives (some in scabbards), photographic cameras and movie cameras, two-dollar bills (numerous,) Blue Chip Stamps, handguns, food, alcohol, and prescription medication. Larger items, most electronics, and other items of value were noted to be disregarded by the suspect.”
This burglar also struck “at all times of the day and night, including when people were home. It is unknown whether his activities are related to the cat burglaries occurring in the greater Rancho Cordova and East areas of Sacramento that were previously described, but the few descriptions of the suspects are somewhat consistent.”
It continues: “The burglar exhibited numerous quirks both in his behaviors as well as things he chose to steal. On one occasion, the burglar dumped the contents of a bottle of prescription Codeine pills into the sink, but took the empty bottle with him. Among the unusual items stolen by the offender were two sets of two car magnets, which are signs placed on the sides of vehicles typically to advertise a business. Two of the signs taken by the burglar advertised a painting and drywall company owned by the resident, and the other two were for a different business venture, also operated by the victim. Also taken during some of the burglaries were photos of female occupants, including a set of nude photos taken by the model’s husband. Additionally, single earrings were taken from pairs.
“Not all of the incidents have all M.O. factors in common [the first Cat Burglar seems to only have struck at night], but many are present simultaneously on some of the crime scenes, and some are present on most all of the cases. Geography and links via date and time of occurrence were also considered. Some of the M.O. factors (some quite rare) that frequently crop up in this series include the following:
- · Entry through a kitchen or sliding glass door
- · Opening of a window in a back bedroom and placing of the screen on the bed or inside
- · Deputies processing the scene noted that, in these instances, the window was as being used as an emergency escape only and was not the point of entry or preferred exit. This escape exit was used on two occasions where the homeowner interrupted the burglary
- · Unplugging of forced air furnace
- · Secondary securing of front door by chair, security chain, or other blocking item
- · Killing of small dogs by blunt force
- · Heavy ransacking of bedrooms and scattering of clothing articles on floor
- · Women’s undergarments stacked in other rooms
- · Ransacking of kitchen
- · Leaving numerous burnt matches on the floor of the home
“In addition, this burglar was responsible for other burglaries of the same type as that suffered by the family of a future EAR victim. The burglary to her home in March 1973 was one of three M.O.-linked burglaries that happened the same day, including one at the residence next door. [Poorly worded, it seems to be saying that a future EAR victim had also been a burglary victim in March 1973; thus this must be Victim 1 or 6.]
“In the burglary of the home next door to the future EAR victim, the suspect stole a movie camera, other related equipment, and money from a piggy bank (bank broken by suspect.) The burglary to the future victim was believed to have been a “no loss” burglary, and it occurred at the same residence where she would later be assaulted early in the East Area Rapist series, three years later. This victim also had a single earring stolen from her during the sexual assault incident (1976).
“A strange burglary occurred the same night and based on the timing is believed to be the last of the three. This burglary occurred across the river in Carmichael near Mission Ave and El Camino Ave that included the theft of eighty two-dollar bills and silver coins. There was heavy ransacking of the bedrooms, and a small poodle was also killed by the suspect.
“In another suspected related burglary two days prior in Rancho Cordova, entry was made through a side kitchen door. The suspect blocked the front door with a barstool, and ransacked the bedrooms heavily with drawers open and clothing scattered on the floor. The suspect took a Ruger, 7 shot .22 caliber revolver, watches, three rings including a ruby “Elks” head ring and an engagement ring, old silver coins and bills, a left handled hunting knife in a scabbard with name “Walt” printed on the scabbard, a single earring, Avon "Model A" yellow after shave lotion, and a broken lamp. Other items of value were left behind.
“Hang-up phone calls and odd communications were also present in this series, and were reported by victims in the area. One particular victim, a 17-year-old girl, was living in the 10100 block of La Alegria Drive. She received a suspicious unsigned letter stating:
"I love you."
“She then received numerous hang-up phone calls and a final call where a subject with a low, adult male voice, stated:
"I love you, this is your last night to live."
“This victim lived next door to the home where the killer of Brian and Katie Maggiore jumped the fence and fell into bushes in his escape from the crime scene on La Alegria Drive five years later.”
As we know from the Sheriff’s statement, they now believe EAR was responsible for the Maggiore Double Murders on February 2, 1978, though no statement was made back then or for decades.
The Cordova Meadows Burglar car may have been seen clearly. It was declared to be a green Opel Kadett. Although not noted by the Sheriff’s release of information, it should be noted here that in the case of EAR Victim No 5 in Citrus Heights a similar green car was associated with EAR, described as looking like a green earlier model Vega.
Sheriff photo of a green Opel Kadett
Photo of an early 1970s green Chevy Vega
Before we begin with a comparison to EAR’s crimes, let’s look at some of the similar elements in the above MOs to determine how odd they really are from the point of view of a logistical thinking and skillful cat burglar.
The First is easy to explain— “entry through a kitchen or sliding glass door.” At night nobody is going to be in the kitchen and it is usually furthest from the bedrooms where the occupants are. It is the safest point of entry.
The Second likewise: “Opening of a window in a back bedroom and placing of the screen on the bed or inside.” It is a point of escape on the other side of the house. The Sheriff even notes that. “Deputies processing the scene noted that, in these instances, the window was as being used as an emergency escape only and was not the point of entry or preferred exit. This escape exit was used on two occasions where the homeowner interrupted the burglary.”
The Third is equally logistic and not odd. “Unplugging of forced air furnace.” Cat burglars listen for every sound. None want to get caught. Forced air furnaces did and do make lots of noise when it comes on, confusing hearing.
The Fourth is yet another logical precaution: “Secondary securing of front door by chair, security chain, or other blocking item.” This alerts them if the owners come home.
The Fifth is unnecessary and ruthless: “Killing of small dogs by blunt force.” One would think that if alone in the house just throw the dog into a closet or feed it. Obviously, if the occupants were in the house the cat burglar would just run away. So this is truly pointless and shows how ruthless these/this cat burglar was.
The Sixth seems the result of haste, looking for concealed valuables. “Heavy ransacking of bedrooms and scattering of clothing articles on floor.”
The Seventh is bizarre and pointless to the logistics of robbery. “Women’s undergarments stacked in other rooms.”
The Eighth is still understandable— “Ransacking of kitchen.” Looking for hidden valuables or weapons.
The Ninth is understandable: “Leaving numerous burnt matches on the floor of the home.” Flashlight beams alert neighbors to prowlers inside a house. Matches are better for subtle lighting. Just toss the used one aside and strike another. It is really quite logistic.
The Tenth— hang up and crank phone calls littered the 1970s, and were one way to determine when the residents were usually at home or away. I remember my share of obscene phone callers as a kid.
None of the above are particularly odd from the point of view of a skilled home invader. Any good cat burglar would think them up, and their widespread use doesn’t imply the same perpetrator is afoot in all cases. What it comes down to is that the women’s undees stacked in another room constitute a pointless gesture from the point of view of robbery/cat burglary, and the murder of little yipping dogs is just vicious expedience. Those two stand out.
In comparing the list above to EAR’s modus operandi, we actually discover nothing that indicates he was one of these early cat burglars. In fact, we don’t encounter much that says he was ever a skilled home invader in the beginning. Later in his crime career he pulled the plug on a couple of forced air furnaces and turned the thermostat off once or twice. But we know there’s a very logical motive for this. Silence. Home invaders need absolute silence.
Let’s start at the beginning. It is agreed upon that EAR’s strike on Paseo Drive on June 18, 1976, begins his crime spree. There was nothing of a skilled home invader here, one way the detectives were able to determine his beginning point in time. Rather crudely he tried to cut the phone wire from the outside, even placing a birdbath underneath it where the wire leads to the house from the pole. He stood on the birdbath, it cracked, and he quit. Failing here he whittled the door frame and entered the house. Yet he forgot to cut the phone lines inside. There is no indication he had opened any other window or door as an exit point, a trademark of cat burglars meant for quick escape.
At his attack on Victim 3, a couple of doors away, he is a bull in a china shop. He won’t quit, even when seen before-the-fact. He was stupidly trying to get in an occupied bedroom window (not the move of a skilled cat burglar) then finally lunges through and has an altercation with the family. He flees out the front door with them.
Victim 4 he punches and drags into the house.
Victim 5 hears something and then hears him running down the hallway toward her.
At Victim 7, he doesn’t stop despite the yipping dog unleashed on him. At other attacks the dogs remain quiet or a young pitbull just croaks a growl. He picked it up and removed it off the victims’ bed and put it in another room; closes the door. EAR, in fact, is never known to kill a dog.
At Victim 10 he kicked down the fence between properties.
EAR’s early strikes are noteworthy for showing shoe prints for hiking or construction boots— not the quietest of footwear for prowlers. Eventually he switches out to tennis shoes.
At Victim 15 he bursts in with an ax over his head, then leaves it on the back fence, giving away his line of departure.
At Victims 29/20 he kicks in the front door.
At Victim 32, he kicked the side door in and came rushing in with an ice pick!
These are just a few examples. In no cases do I recall points of exit being pre-arranged.
EAR left many shoe prints, but the other cat burglars mentioned above were apparently so skillful they left none. At least we hear of no comparison made in shoe sizes.
In short there is no indication EAR was a skilled cat burglar. This is underscored in his earliest attacks. Nor is there any indication he ever acquired that finesse, certainly not the finesse of the Cat Burglar over 1972-1973. Further to this he confined himself to a limited area in Rancho Cordova which reflects his prowling method in other areas— Paseo and Malaga are main roads. Nothing indicates EAR was extensively familiar with Rancho Cordova.
What is very curious about the Cat Burglar is that he consciously (so it would seem) limited himself to Sheriff territory— in other words, places in the county with no public street lighting. For the East Area this would mean Rancho and Carmichael/Citrus Heights but not La Riviera. At an opposite, EAR struck in La Riviera, Sacramento Police jurisdiction. A tall street lamp is one house over from the first victim’s residence in La Riviera in the cul de sac on Glenville Circle. The same for the victim on Grand Rio Circle.
If anything, the East Area Rapist was very bold. He showed none of the calm of the Cat Burglar.
There is, however, a similarity between him and the Cordova Meadows Cat in that this burglar apparently is the one who used hang up phone calls and may or may not have been the one responsible for harassing the 17 year old girl. Yet the latter could have been a high school joke or just another one of the derelict minds of the Swingin’ ’70s.
The possibility there is a connection between any of these events in Rancho Cordova in the years prior to the EAR’s crime spree prompted the Sheriff to release the information on the Sarda Way Incident of Thursday September 14, 1973 (burglary and assault). The case is very different from the above two crime sprees. On the face of it there are a couple of good reasons to consider this case a link to later attacks, maybe even to EAR. For one, the house backed a school, and EAR would show a tendency to pick houses that backed schools, parks, or fields, areas that are dark and ideal for night time stalking. There is another connection, but let us first present the case as the Sheriff has released it:
“Just before 11:00 a.m. on September 14, 1973, a 28-year-old woman had just put her 18-month-old son down for a nap when she heard a knock on her front door. Assuming it was a religious solicitor, she disregarded it and did not answer. Additionally, she had only a few minutes earlier seen a man in the backyard, prompting her to arm herself with a handgun, although she believed it was just an electrical utility man. He eventually left the area. Within a few minutes, she heard a noise in the rear portion of the home where the bedrooms are located. She went back to check on her son, and when she came to the master bedroom she observed the suspect attempting to break into her house via the master bedroom window. The suspect was removing the screen, and she observed the gate that opened to the school behind her home was open. The suspect, upon seeing the victim, ducked and ran around the side of the house.
“The victim secured the residence by checking every door and window. She made sure everything was locked, and put a chain lock in place on the door from the garage to the kitchen. The overhead garage door was open as the victim had been doing laundry in the garage. She called her husband at work and advised him of the incident. A few minutes later, the suspect forced open the door between the garage and kitchen. He also defeated the chain lock by forcing the door open with enough force to pull the nails holding the lock away from the frame base. The victim, still armed, raised the handgun and yelled to the suspect that if he came in she would shoot him. With that, the suspect walked away from the door and out of the garage. The victim called the Sacramento Sheriff’s Department to report what happened.
“While the victim waited for the Sacramento Sheriff’s Department, she heard the screen door between the garage and kitchen opening and the suspect came through the still broken door rapidly and attacked her. He grabbed her hands and they struggled over the handgun. The suspect forced the gun towards her, but she was able to quickly pull it up. The gun then discharged over her shoulder and the suspect fled out the garage door again and did not return. The victim passed out briefly as she was recovering from a recent surgery and was medically fragile, but she awakened and began writing a description of the suspect as she waited for the Sheriff’s Department. They arrived and a check of the area was conducted, but the suspect wasn’t found. The investigating deputies felt the incident was likely sexually motivated, and noted the persistence of the suspect.”
Not only persistent, but we can note today the vengefulness— he turned the gun on the intended victim. This guy was definitely a lower form of creep. With her help and an Identikit, the victim presents to us a composite of her attacker. This is the Identikit:
According to the Sheriff the following is his description from the victim.
- · White male
- · 20’s (believed close to 27)
- · 5’8” tall/140 pounds (thin build)
- · Medium brown hair, neck to shoulder length, neatly combed
- · Big, thin nose
- · Sunken Cheeks
- · Narrow deep set eyes with bags
- · Mark or mole on lower right corner of mouth
- · Pock marks on chin
- · Appeared to have a generally sick or tired look
Suspect was dressed well and neatly, wearing:
- · Brown, possibly corduroy jacket, hip-length
- · Blue scarf in right pocket of jacket
- · Beige shirt and trousers
- · White shoes
- · Ladies white dress gloves
. . .Ladies white dress gloves— so we’re talking about a real fruit loop. This sketch proves of great, perhaps even vital interest as it strongly reflects the Identikit of the Ripon Court Shooter, whom some suspect of having been EAR. This is that Identikit below:
With the release of all this pre EAR prowling information, however, one must wonder whether the Ripon Court Shooter was just another armed prowler who had operated for years. Moreover, it still appears to this writer that the sketch above is dated to February 11, 1977, and the Ripon Court shooting took place on February 16, 1977, 5 days after the sketch is dated.
The release of Sheriff information is also only for the years of 1972-1973. Nothing is offered from 1974-1976 to allow us to contextualize what other unidentified prowlers or burglars may have been active at this time and during EAR’s crimes. There is clearly room for other home invaders and suburban prowlers to have been afoot.
If the Identikit above is dated before the Ripon Court shooting, then it could represent the “suspicious person” seen in connection with Victim 13 in Del Campo Park area. This would be preferable for those trying to make a link with EAR and earlier Rancho Cordova prowling, as Victim 13 was the result of a bona fide EAR attack.
In conclusion: the release of information is invaluable and it shows admirably Sac Sheriff Department’s dedication to the case. However, some of it may have the reverse effect than that desired by those looking for yet more EAR crimes to rehash and consider. There is no DNA from any of the Sacramento area EAR crimes so far, so that there is still some uncertainty about some of the cases categorized as an EAR attack. Even back 40 years ago there was some debate on whether there were two EARs. Details about these other cat burglars and home invaders should cause us some caution over some of the other cases usually attributed to EAR but where it seemed some of the MO just wasn’t the same or the description was seriously different.
For example, there is more than one case where EAR’s offending organ, most often reported as quite small, was described as more than average. DNA information indicating a 97% probability for certain EAR features categorically refutes the account of one witness regarding one of the characteristics he insisted EAR had. Attacks 7 and 8 occurred within a 24 hour period, and there was little motive for the aborted attack on Victim 8. On one occasion EAR was described as having stubble on his legs as if they were shaved, and a couple of other times as having wide thighs. Yet other times he had very hairy and thin legs.
If forensic DNA deposits still exist from Sacramento it would be well worth it for them to be tested so that definite links can be made and perhaps even a second perpetrator identified. This one might lead to the one who we classify today as the Original Night Stalker. The DNA tying EAR to the ONS comes only from a couple of the Contra Costa County rapes and nothing from the Sacramento, Stockton, Modesto or Davis rapes. If two perpetrators were involved for a short time in the beginning only one went on to become the most elusive scourge in California’s history.
|
