Quite possible. I think the chance that he happened upon three sets of couples in remote locations is quite unlikely — I think that is what piques my interest about a connection between/among the victims. And some insight into the potential suspect.

Quite possible. I think the chances that he happened upon three sets of couples in remote locations is quite unlikely — I think that is what piques my interest about a connection between/among the victims. And some insight into the potential suspect.

i respect your opinion but believe the exact opposite. i think his purpose and intent on the days of the murders was to drive around looking for victims. he was looking for young couples in remote locations. we don’t know how many days he may have looked for victims and not found any, or not found any in a position where he could control the situation. for all we know, lhr might have been his twentieth night driving around. maybe the time between each murder is simply a function OF it being difficult to find victims that fit his specifications.

to me, for the "he knew them" theories to work, he would have needed to stalk each set of victims, waiting for an opportunity to get them together but in a remote location where others weren’t around. that just seems really implausible. he would have needed to follow the lb victims around while they were shopping that day, driving all over the place, and not get spotted. the lhr and brs victims by all accounts didn’t even really know where they were going that night so it’s not like he could have laid in wait. he would have needed to follow both around all not while being noticed. it just seems less likely and more complicated than the theory that he was trolling for young couples who were alone and on three occasions found what he was looking for.

I fully agree with masootz on this issue.

Me too.

Although, Darlene & Mike could have been different, but I don’t see that happening with the rest.

I think his victims were just easier opportunities, but it wouldn’t surprise me if he knew at least one of them.

If he was a local man, i.e. had specific connections to the Vallejo/Benicia area (which I think he had), then he certainly could have known one or more victims, in the sense that he knew or realized who they were – perhaps after attacking them.

I doubt very much that he knew them in a real sense, though – as in, targeted them because he knew them.

I fully agree with masootz’ reasoning. He trolled for victims, in short, going for locations that were fairly out-of-the-way and thus safer. In its own way, PH conforms to this too, although it’s clearly different in other ways.

Quite possible. I think the chances that he happened upon three sets of couples in remote locations is quite unlikely — I think that is what piques my interest about a connection between/among the victims. And some insight into the potential suspect.

i respect your opinion but believe the exact opposite. i think his purpose and intent on the days of the murders was to drive around looking for victims. he was looking for young couples in remote locations. we don’t know how many days he may have looked for victims and not found any, or not found any in a position where he could control the situation. for all we know, lhr might have been his twentieth night driving around. maybe the time between each murder is simply a function OF it being difficult to find victims that fit his specifications.

to me, for the "he knew them" theories to work, he would have needed to stalk each set of victims, waiting for an opportunity to get them together but in a remote location where others weren’t around. that just seems really implausible. he would have needed to follow the lb victims around while they were shopping that day, driving all over the place, and not get spotted. the lhr and brs victims by all accounts didn’t even really know where they were going that night so it’s not like he could have laid in wait. he would have needed to follow both around all not while being noticed. it just seems less likely and more complicated than the theory that he was trolling for young couples who were alone and on three occasions found what he was looking for.

How is your first paragraph different from the second? Both are the same except for the knowing them part. He would have spent a considerable amount of time in either situation. And what are his specifications by the way? None of the victims look alike. None of the victims are the same age group. Paul Stine, as has been pointed out by many, was a lone man and not a couple. We can’t even say that locality can be a specification because of where Paul Stine was killed: a subdivision. Houses everywhere. The potential for people to walk outside their door at any moment. The potential for people to just look outside their bedroom window. There was no sense of remoteness.

Soze

Thanks for all thoughts!

I agree that the compounded stalking would be implausable — at least with such a time-sensitive matter as "getting caught killing people." Seems it would be hard to be both fanatical about stalking multiple people, and still effective enough to improvise when needed (as in PH.)

I’m not sure I believe Z knew all victims either, or even one. I pose it as an approach to discovering who he might be — what might link him to something discoverable. I can see it possible that he knew the women involved, and that Z may have acted on a judgment of their behavior (with the men being unfortunate victims of circumstance.)

But the argument is strong that Z was primarily motivated by the impression he could make on the community through his legacy of killing, and the attention it brought him.

How is your first paragraph different from the second? Both are the same except for the knowing them part. He would have spent a considerable amount of time in either situation. And what are his specifications by the way? None of the victims look alike. None of the victims are the same age group. Paul Stine, as has been pointed out by many, was a lone man and not a couple. We can’t even say that locality can be a specification because of where Paul Stine was killed: a subdivision. Houses everywhere. The potential for people to walk outside their door at any moment. The potential for people to just look outside their bedroom window. There was no sense of remoteness.

Soze

first paragraph = he looked for random victims in specific locations
second paragraph = he looked for specific victims in random locations

there’s no way any of us knows what his specifications were, but to imply he didn’t have any because you can’t see a similarity seems brash to me. similarly, to say the locations weren’t remote because of stine ignores the fact that he wasn’t caught even with "a subdivision. Houses everywhere. The potential for people to walk outside their door at any moment. The potential for people to just look outside their bedroom window." the stine killing was obviously remote enough for him to get away with it.

Stine: he steps it up by moving into the city, but he still opts for a relatively “safe” kill. The target is defenseless, the area is quiet, the hour is late, etc.

All of that fits the bill. We can always ask why he didn’t have a cab driver take him to a truly isolated spot, but for whatever reason he decided to strike in a residential area. Perhaps he liked the idea itself. Affluent neighborhood = more notoriety.

Excellent! You brash hussie!

I believe CJB knew him and he stalked her before killing her for who knows how long.

The double lover’s lane murders seem like they are random attacks Imo. The thing connecting victims to Z is the similarity of locations and physical profile of his victims, not the victim’s relationships to eachother prior to the murder or the killer. We do know he really took more out on the girls so they were his target – not the boys. The boys were just something in the way of what he wanted … Always had been. He MIGHT have soft stalked the females prior to the lovers lane murders, but Imo I doubt it. IMO I think he picked the females at the lover’s lane murders according to the way the female looked when he was stalking his prospective victims at the lovers lanes. If the female didn’t fit the profile he preferred he would move on. Why was it so important she have the profile physically he prefers? Bc there was someone he couldn’t have long before the murders that fits that profile. As Hannibal said, "He Covets".

If there are any other lone female victims he likely knew them for a brief amount of time or maybe longer before murdering them. His MO is to gain a woman’s trust before killing her. Maybe he offered her a ride in his car when she was hitchhiking, maybe he offered to fix her car like he did CJB, whatever it took to gain her trust and then shock her when she realized he should not have been trusted.

Male victims are likely victims of opportunity and/or they have a secondary purpose in serving his primary intent

First of all I believe he knew Darlene, because didn’t Mike,reply that the murderer called her Dee?
I believe that Darleen was a target. And I believe she knew her attacker.

Bryan and Cecelia, I believe this crime scene was staged,in other words,it was planned in advance.
The murderer had a costume and also rehearsed lines. The kill was personal he wore the costume,because he did not want to be recognized. What trinkets did he remove from both of them?

Now, Paul S. is an interesting crime scene. And this is why,I do not believe that Paul S.
Was the Target. It was the other Taxi driver who called out. That was targeted inadvance,. This was a situation of ,wrong place,wrong time and this is why. Paul S. stepped in for someone
Else also the fact that bloody fingerprints were left at the crime scene.
This says to me,that someone else was with the killer. He brought an audience.

First of all I believe he knew Darlene, because didn’t Mike,reply that the murderer called her Dee?

nope.

Bryan and Cecelia, I believe this crime scene was staged,in other words,it was planned in advance.
The murderer had a costume and also rehearsed lines. The kill was personal he wore the costume,because he did not want to be recognized. What trinkets did he remove from both of them?

None. Bryan lived to tell about it.