What’s not rational is pretending Cheri’s killer was not fantasy driven. Read the confession letter FFS. Or are we pretending the original investigators were idiots and her killer didn’t actually type the confession?
LOL, so your multiple killer/conspiracy theory is reasonable and rational? LMAO
I posited 2 scenarios, one involved 2 guys (one restraining, one stabbing) as a possible explanation why the stabber (for example, Ross) might not have scratch marks.
My other scenario involved just one guy being involved. In this case, he would be the sole killer and the guy who was scratched.
Either way, Cheri discovers her car isn’t working that evening, she goes into the alley presumably with the killer in search of a phone, and is killed. Pretty straightforward.
The Berryessa investigators have proof their killer did the shootings. But you know better, eh?
Wowza.
What is the proof? And please don’t say the writing on the car door, or the halloween card………
I’m confident Cheri would have known there was no phone anywhere near the alley. So no, not straightforward at all.
What is the proof? And please don’t say the writing on the car door, or the halloween card………
I’m neither going to reveal what I was asked not to, or anything else that could piss off my sources and/or hinder a potential conviction.
For those who don’t like my answer, put the work in that I did and get your own sources.
What’s not rational is pretending Cheri’s killer was not fantasy driven. Read the confession letter FFS. Or are we pretending the original investigators were idiots and her killer didn’t actually type the confession?
The confession letter is somewhat sexual. If the killer had Cheri held captive for 3 hours as you say, one might thing such fantasies might’ve been played out a bit more than bringing her back to the library and stabbing her in the breasts a few times.
But, I know, killers are not logical so maybe instead he dressed up in an elephant costume and entertained her for a few hours before taking her back to the library, letting her out of the car with no restraints, hoping she wouldn’t run away, then led her into the alley and killed her.
The confession letter is somewhat sexual. If the killer had Cheri held captive for 3 hours as you say, one might thing such fantasies might’ve been played out a bit more than bringing her back to the library and stabbing her in the breasts a few times.
The confession was obviously an instrument used to terrorize the community. The sex killer is on the loose! But if you want to believe it was somehow sexual, have at it.
I’m confident Cheri would have known there was no phone anywhere near the alley. So no, not straightforward at all.
I am confident Cheri would’ve run away screaming after her abductor stopped the car near the alley. She wouldn’t have gone in there quietly after having been kidnapped and held for hours.
You can use your "anything is possible" nonsense when discussing the killer, but not with Cheri. She would’ve begun the struggle for her life the instant she was out of that kidnapper’s car, if not long before.
She wouldn’t have gone in there quietly after having been kidnapped and held for hours.
Well apparently she screamed, though. You didn’t know that? Also, if she thought he was returning her to let her go, you think she’d start fighting? Ok. 
She wouldn’t have gone in there quietly after having been kidnapped and held for hours.
Well apparently she screamed, though. You didn’t know that?
Yes, probably when she first suspected her companion had evil intent (like, when he started using the knife.) But if we go with your kidnapping scenario, I would expect the screaming to begin as soon as that car stops near the alley and she gets out. I would also expect to see scuffle and/or drag marks from wherever the kidnapper’s car stopped, all the way to where she died.
Also, if she thought he was returning her to let her go, you think she’d start fighting? Ok.
LOL. "But, my car is on the street, not halfway down this dark deserted alley….." Where, as you have stated, she knew there were no telephones…
I would expect the screaming to begin as soon as that car stops near the alley and she gets out. I would also expect to see scuffle and/or drag marks from wherever the kidnapper’s car stopped, all the way to where she died.
That’s your problem. You keep assuming.
I would expect the screaming to begin as soon as that car stops near the alley and she gets out. I would also expect to see scuffle and/or drag marks from wherever the kidnapper’s car stopped, all the way to where she died.
That’s your problem. You keep assuming.
And you are not assuming?????
You assume Cheri could have her car disabled, be kidnapped at gunpoint, held for 3 hours, and fail to understand she was in danger.
Tom, I get it. You have staked out a position and you’re trying to defend it. Problem is, you have to stretch logic so very far in your attempt.
You assume Cheri could have her car disabled, be kidnapped at gunpoint, held for 3 hours, and fail to understand she was in danger.
Well that’s a completely incorrect take away. You’re pretty arrogant for someone who can’t even read clearly.
What’s your reddit nick?
Tom, I get it. You have staked out a position and you’re trying to defend it.
No, I’m going by what we know to be true and not a bunch of nonsense about workmen with super powers of observation, and assumptions about how Cheri would have certainly reacted in different scenarios. That’s all low-hanging fruit, as is the multiple perp nonsense, which is 99.999% never the case.
Well there would be no need to disable her car if the plan is to approach her with a gun. The gun is the gun.
But hard to focus on that when Shooter Z blah blah. A shot in the dark theory is more logical than logic. Impressed.
