Won’t argue with that. Lots of other things, but not that.

Except that he worked there and potentially could have been in the area lol is there a speck of evidence potentially putting any of the other suspects within 1000 yards of RCC library the day?

Ross was the most probable person to be on campus that late at night around/in the library out of all the suspects. Probability.

My point exactly.

You said "Ross did it and whoever else is trying to discount that in an effort to be right about their suspect is mistaken and blinded by wanting to be right."
No evidence Ross was there. No mention anywhere that Ross was there.

There were 60 + people there that night in the library alone. No telling how many total on campus. Police met with them all. I haven’t found any mention of Ross being there or being interviewed.

I haven’t found any mention of Ross being there or being interviewed.

Somewhere, there’s a blurb about Ross being questioned and that he had an alibi. Can’t recall if it’s in a police report or if it’s something that just got passed along word of mouth, but I’ve never actually seen anything.

And p.s. In the letter he said she put up no struggle and went to the slaughter like a lamb. How does it break during a struggle if she put up no struggle?

I always looked at it as: she went willingly (didn’t put up a struggle) to the location that would ultimatly be the place she died. But what do I know.

Soze

And p.s. In the letter he said she put up no struggle and went to the slaughter like a lamb. How does it break during a struggle if she put up no struggle?

I always looked at it as: she went willingly (didn’t put up a struggle) to the location that would ultimatly be the place she died. But what do I know.

Soze

She went ‘willingly’, which if true, shows she was not abducted, and it was likely somebody she knew. Some People have suggested that the confession letter was a red herring for the perp to throw police off the trail. If Cheri was killed by a stranger, why would they need to do that, they would have no connection to Cheri.

I haven’t found any mention of Ross being there or being interviewed.

Somewhere, there’s a blurb about Ross being questioned and that he had an alibi. Can’t recall if it’s in a police report or if it’s something that just got passed along word of mouth, but I’ve never actually seen anything.

Here you go, from the letter to Dave Peterson

She went ‘willingly’, which if true, shows she was not abducted, and it was likely somebody she knew. Some People have suggested that the confession letter was a red herring for the perp to throw police off the trail. If Cheri was killed by a stranger, why would they need to do that, they would have no connection to Cheri.

Assuming the killer and the letter writer are identical, it does seem like an odd move on the part of a stranger.

He pretends to know the victim in order to send the cops on a wild goose chase, rather than focusing on…what? Finding a complete stranger with no ties to the victim? What he gains is hardly much more than what he already has. Unless he got a kick out of messing with the cops, it seems like a pointless exercise.

Then again, if this is Z we’re talking about *, the above isn’t far fetched – because he DID get a kick out of messing with the cops.

* I’m by no means convinced it is, just for the record.

I haven’t found any mention of Ross being there or being interviewed.

Somewhere, there’s a blurb about Ross being questioned and that he had an alibi. Can’t recall if it’s in a police report or if it’s something that just got passed along word of mouth, but I’ve never actually seen anything.

Here you go, from the letter to Dave Peterson

Yup, that’s the one. Thank you.

And p.s. In the letter he said she put up no struggle and went to the slaughter like a lamb. How does it break during a struggle if she put up no struggle?

I always looked at it as: she went willingly (didn’t put up a struggle) to the location that would ultimatly be the place she died. But what do I know.

Soze

She went ‘willingly’, which if true, shows she was not abducted, and it was likely somebody she knew. Some People have suggested that the confession letter was a red herring for the perp to throw police off the trail. If Cheri was killed by a stranger, why would they need to do that, they would have no connection to Cheri.

I wouldn’t think that’s entirely true. The simple act of messing with her car could be thought of as an abduction. Would she have gone with him "willingly" if he hadnt? Also, just because she went willingly, I wouldn’t think suggests an absolute "she knew him" scenario. He could have been a complete stranger but had either the look or attire of someone to be trusted (someone of authority). This authority figure could be someone like a police officer, clergy, teacher etc. An authority figure could also explain the whole "miss Bates" thing too. As far as the "why would they need to do that" when thinking of a complete stranger, someone like a police officer, would have an interest in stearing things away.

Just things to think about.

Soze

Personally I don’t believe he was a stranger to Bates because he mentions Bates had brushed him off for YEARS prior. This implies that he had been attempting to have contact with her with little success for some time and likely was not a stranger. Likely was an acquaintance. Then again one could argue he was lying about that, too. I personally don’t believe he lied about her brushing him off the years prior to her death. (Btw, It screams stalker)

Personally I don’t believe he was a stranger to Bates because he mentions Bates had brushed him off for YEARS prior. This implies that he had been attempting to have contact with her with little success for some time and likely was not a stranger. Likely was an acquaintance. Then again one could argue he was lying about that, too. I personally don’t believe he lied about her brushing him off the years prior to her death. (Btw, It screams stalker)

"Screams stalker" is taking it a bit to the extreme don’t you think? Maybe an admirer?

Soze

If someone continues to pursue someone for years repetitively despite that person’s lack of reciprocated interest I’d consider it soft stalking at the very least. Typically people get the message. But there’s a reason why I added "screams stalker" in parenthesis bc it was an afterthought.

Additionally, YEARS. He’s not a stranger. He’s within her social circles enough to have contact with her, but no direct personal relation hence why he had to lure her to gain her trust.

Morf: Is San Jose close enough to Vallejo to interest you? If so, you know my POI’s name. Check the San Jose phone book ca. 1970. If you find him, check out the street he lived on.

^what on earth does this post have to do with the Bates letters? Just curious. Sorry TBH I get annoyed when ambiguous personal convo/info is posted in a public forum and the other users are not privy to the information and cannot learn/debate.

Dag, please PM me this kind of message