John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

case files, articles, etc

John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:04 pm

Here's John Douglas' complete FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders.

<deleted>
<deleted>
<deleted>
<deleted>

TRANSCRIPT OF REPORT, IN FULL
==========================================

UNSUB;
TINA SHARP-VICTIM
POSSIBLE KIDNAPPING
(00: SACRAMENTO)


IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE ATTACHED ANALYSIS IS
NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A THOROUGH AND WELL-PLANNED INVESTI-
GATION AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ALL INCLUSIVE. THE
INFORMATION PROVIDED IS BASED UPON REVIEWING, ANALYZING,
AND RESEARCHING CRIMINAL CASES SIMILAR TO THE CASE SUB-
MITTED BY THE REQUESTING AGENCY. THE FINAL ANALYSIS IS
BASED UPON PROBABILITIES NOTING, HOWEVER, THAT NO TWO
CRIMINAL ACTS OR CRIMINAL PERSONALITIES ARE EXACTLY ALIKE
AND THEREFORE Tl-IE OFFENDER AT TIMES MAY NOT ALWAYS FIT
THE PROFILE IN EVERY CATEGORY.

The following psychological profile was prepared by SA John E.
Douglas of the FBl's Behavioral Science Unit. This profile is
based upon the personal research conducted by SA Douglas and other
members of the Behavioral Science Unit. It should be noted that
this profile is based upon certain "probabilities" and suspects
developed by your department may fit this profile in part or whole.

Victimology
Noting the personal background of each of these victims, they
all could be categorized as a "high risk" to be the recipient of a
violent crime. Victim Dana Wingate, however, appears to fit a prior
pattern of behavior that could very definitely lead him down a self-
destructive path. His previous antisocial acts, which stem from a
poor family upbringing, were such that his only associates would in
all probability be very much like himself. He is a diabetic and is
known to have tortured animals. In all probability, Wingate had a
poor self-image and was involved in criminal offenses that may have
not been known by police agencies. Wingate in all probability, in-
volved himself in criminal offenses to include burglary and arson.

Crime Scene
The crime scene reflects that the offender responsible for
these murders exhibited great control if he, in fact, acted alone.
The crime scene reflects that he did not precisely plan on killing
all the victims. With exception of a .177-caliber pellet recovered
at the crime scene, all of the "weapons" appear to have come from
the residence of the victims (i.e., steak knife, hammer, etc.). This
indicates that killing the victims was in all probability an after-
thought.

In order for the subject to gain and maintain control of the
victims, he would have had to have some assistance. It appears that
victim Dana Wingate was not killed in the same fashion as the other
two victims (beaten but not stabbed) and was made comfortable by re-
ceiving a cushion from the couch to rest his head on prior to his own
execution. Wingate may have been utilized to assist in the binding
of the victims. Statements made by associates support the fact that
he would probably succumb if threatened rather than strike back at an
assailant.

Blood is observed on the feet of Glenna Sharp to indicate she
was alive when she walked in a pool of blood. This profiler does
not know at this writing whose blood was on the feet of Glenna Sharp,
noting that this information could modify this profile.

According to investigative reports, Glenna Sharp was covered
with a blanket after she was killed. This blanket came from her bed.
This one act on the part of this offender(s) is probably the key as
to who is responsible for the murders in part or whole.

Summary

This triple homicide appears to be without any motive. Neither
sex nor money was the motivating factor. The crime scene reflects
anger and rage on one hand and remorse and guilt on the other. It
appears at this point that there is more than one murderer involved
in this triple homicide.

Offender Profile
The offender responsible for this triple homicide did not
initially plan on killing. It was an afterthought as evidenced by
the weapons he selected. All weapons could be referred to as Weapons
of Opportunity. This offender knew his victims, particularly John
and Glenna Sharp.

This offender was motivated by his commitment and love for Tina
Sharp. He loves her like a father. In all probability, Tina Sharp
was planning on running away with him. She had nothing left at home
and it was obvious, according to witnesses, that her mother no longer
had control of her family.

It was Tina Sharp who probably went to her mother's bedroom after
she was killed, got a blanket from her bed, and covered her mother
with same. Tina Sharp, at 12 years of age, may have had conflicts
with her mother like many pre-adolescent girls at that age. However,
since the homicide, she has probably demonstrated a great deal of
remorse and guilt. Her feelings will be in direct conflict with her
abductor and may lead to her own death if her abductor feels that she
may go to the police.

If Tina Sharp is still alive, she will find that she will-become
increasingly depressed on significant anniversary and holiday dates
(i.e., mother's birthday, her own birthday, Thanksgiving, and Christmas).
Her depression will cause her to seek out her father as well as the
gravesite of her mother and brother. It should be noted here that in-
formation received by the Behavioral Science unit is that the father
had an alibi at the time of the homicides and therefore is not suspect.
Tina Sharp may have already attempted to locate her mother's place of
burial and may have visited the burial site.

This offender demonstrated control and confidence and therefore
he is not a juvenile nor is he free of any prior police record. He
is fixated on young females and has been involved with them in the
past, be it for sex or for personal profit (i.e. child pornography).

Investigative Techniques
Your investigation should direct itself in saturating Sacramento
and the San Francisco areas with local media accounts of this crime
in hopes that Tina Sharp, if still alive, will see one of these
articles. The articles should reflect sorrow for the victims, par-
ticularly Tina‘s mother, who was recently divorced and struggling to
raise her children. .

These articles must be timely. They should appear at times
(dates) which are significant. The articles should set forth data
relative to the burial location of her mother and the exact location
and address of her father. The victim will in all probability be
drawn to the cemetery and/or attempt to get in contact with her father.

As stated earlier, Tina Sharp's age works to the advantage of
the investigator if tactics are utilized (media) to remind her of this
crime and her surviving family members. However, her age will also
work against her if her abductor feels he no longer has control over
her and feels that she may go on the run and go to authorities.

If you have any questions relative to this profile, suspects
developed, and/or interrogation techniques that may be found to be
effective, you may telephonically contact SA Douglas at the FBI
Academy, telephone number (703) 640-6131, Ext. 2254.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:46 pm

John Douglas wrote:
Crime Scene
The crime scene reflects that he did not precisely plan on killing
all the victims. With exception of a .177-caliber pellet recovered
at the crime scene, all of the "weapons" appear to have come from
the residence of the victims (i.e., steak knife, hammer, etc,). This
indicates that killing the victims was in all probability an after-
thought.


This is faulty in that the killers came with a kill kit, and disregards the two widths of tape, the extensive amount of tape used (almost 2 full rolls), the gun, and the pocket knife found in the dumpster by the Gen Store.

John Douglas wrote:In order for the subject to gain and maintain control of the
victims, he would have had to have some assistance. It appears that
victim Dana Wingate was not killed in the same fashion as the other
two victims (beaten but not stabbed) and was made comfortable by re-
ceiving a cushion from the couch to rest his head on prior to his own
execution. Wingate may have been utilized to assist in the binding
of the victims. Statements made by associates support the fact that
he would probably succumb if threatened rather than strike back at an
assailant.


Dana was strangled to death, and the crushing blows to his skull came much later, after lividity had set in. His head being on the cushion was all about staging, and had nothing to do with compensation or comfort. There is only one known 'statements from associates' to support the idea Dana was passive, while LE also had another account from a friend saying he would fight back if provoked, so concluding Dana was passive is a very weak deduction.

John Douglas wrote:According to investigative reports, Glenna Sharp was covered
with a blanket after she was killed. This blanket came from her bed.
This one act on the part of this offender(s) is probably the key as
to who is responsible for the murders in part or whole.


The blanket and sheet came from Tina's bed, nor do we know who covered Sue.

John Douglas wrote:The crime scene reflects
anger and rage on one hand and remorse and guilt on the other. It
appears at this point that there is more than one murderer involved
in this triple homicide.


The remorse statement stems from Sue being covered, so it's important to note we don't know who covered nor, therefore, the origin of that remorse.

John Douglas wrote:The offender responsible for this triple homicide did not
initially plan on killing. It was an afterthought as evidenced by
the weapons he selected. All weapons could be referred to as weapons
of Opportunity. This offender knew his victims, particularly John
and Glenna Sharp.


Again, he's ignoring the kill kit and the other weapons, and the elaborate staging that came after the murders.

John Douglas wrote:This offender was motivated by his commitment and love for Tina
Sharp. He loves her like a father. In all probability, Tina Sharp
was planning on running away with him. She had nothing left at home
and it was obvious, according to witnesses, that her mother no longer
had control of her family. It was Tina Sharp who probably went to her mother's bedroom after
she was killed, got a blanket from her bed, and covered her mother
with same.


In all probability, John Douglas would not stand by this statement, nor this profile, today.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Tue Jul 24, 2012 9:41 pm

here's something that bugs me: LE took photos indicating they fully understood the complexity of the staging, of dried blood, of multiple overlapping dried blood patterns, of the cushion being blood-soaked on both sides. They took those photos within hours of the discovery of the crime, yet FBI John Douglas was apparently totally clueless about the cushion and the staging and the SHEET and blanket and which bed and blood on that bed, etc etc etc.
JOHN DOUGLAS WAS LIED TO!

The photos were taken in color. Sent as black and white. How complete? I look at one color photo of the crime scene and I see 1000 more things than from the PCSO b&w prints from those same color negs.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby not sure » Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:55 pm

Sorry, MK. I totally disagree. And I'm with SammieJo on this...I don't think their behavior or activities should be off limits. There are lots of statements on the timeline about the behavior of the victims and survivors. Are we to ignore all of them but the ones that show them in a favorable light?

The sad truth is that these people are dead and some people said ugly things about them. It happens in cases like these. People speak ill of the dead and, yes, the rumor mill can be vicious. But often there is some truth to those rumors. To get to the bottom of the crimes you have to get to know the victims. You're not going to get to know the victims if you only speak to those people who want to canonize them. Clearly they weren't perfect because someone had it in for someone in that cabin and it didn't come from a place of love or admiration. To get to know them you have to listen to everyone, not a select few. To get to the bit of truth in those rumors you have to find out where that "rumor" is coming from.

Zonita knew the Sharp family well. She was the closest neighbor, the one who harbored Sue's children on many occasions, the one who's house Tina and Sheila both wanted to spend the night in. But we should exclude her because she admitted to being judgmental? She didn't say she was mistaken. Just judgmental. And how do you know Metcalf didn't have trusted sources who knew Sue personally? Reading the recent documents I am inclined to believe there was a grain of truth in what she said. According to several statements, there were men in Sue's life, obviously more than her family or close friends knew about, or, at least, wanted to admit to. Right? So do I believe that man who gave an official statement saying he met her and dated her 3 times the week prior to the murders or do I believe her good buddy who says she didn't date anyone except one guy the whole time she knew her? She'd been observed in this guy's company but I'm to ignore that because her "best friend" said no?

I don't need to KNOW my neighbors to be a good observational witness. If I see a neighbor who's name I don't know, walk down the street and put his garbage in my other neighbor's garbage can, assuming my other neighbor didn't give permission for him to do so, does it make me a poor witness because I don't know him and I'm judgmental about his actions? Can't I still attest to what I observed? My judgment wouldn't discount the FACT that I observed his action, right? So why would we exclude those witnesses who seem judgmental but may have observed something?

You mention Tina's teacher Virginia Ball...okay, she knew Tina but so did her other teacher, Joel Lipsey. He had her in his class 3 hours a day for the last two school years. Most school days are only 6-7 hours long so that means he had her in his class almost half of her time at school! Does that mean he knew her less than Virginia? Does that disqualify what he observed in her behavior just because it didn't show her in a favorable light? Why would we discount his statements over hers? Did she observe Tina sitting on Lipsey's lap? Giving him hugs? Does that mean it didn't happen? I'm sure one would only need to ask around to the classmates to see if someone else witnessed such behavior to know. Why would we discount it altogether? Personally, I think what he had to say was very relevant. And I think the FBI profile is right on in many parts. And I'd be surprised if it would change very much even if they had access to all of the information.

Sorry if most of you disagree with me. None of these people were perfect and I think we should stop trying to keep them from falling off the pedestal. We're not doing them justice. They didn't deserve to die like this but they don't deserve to have this go unresolved because we're afraid of painting them in a bad light.
User avatar
not sure
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:52 pm
Location: stuck in the middle with you
Has thanked: 351 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby meankitty » Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:44 pm

NS, you do have a point here. They don't have to only use stuff that puts people in a favorably light, but they should listen to the truthful statements, and take all of them into account. As for Victoria Metcalfe and her 'sources', tcmc has said in the thread 'the original smoke and mirrors'
tcmc wrote:I was told by Victoria Metcalf about Sue's purported "misdeeds" about 15 years ago. When I asked her to explain the information or provide some sourcing for me, her response was "you can just tell by looking at her."

Ridiculous, malicious and hateful.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=58

I think this says a lot about Victoria Metcalfe.
meankitty
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:17 am
Location: Quincy
Has thanked: 626 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby not sure » Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:09 am

Okay, point taken...Victoria wasn't a good source. I can see someone like VM being jealous or envious of the male attention Sue got and hence the malice. Shame on the editors for allowing the story to be published without reliable sources sited. However, as far as I know, it wasn't disputed nor was the information retracted. So I can't blame JD for including it in his report.

As for what she said, you can't deny that Sue dated numerous men...Alton Sharp, Joe Baze, Robert T. and Josephson are all listed on the timeline, with the possibility of others (the Avery Schriever look-a-like?). So the part about men coming and going is not so far off...malicious, maybe, but not necessarily inaccurate. You also can't deny that Zonita knew her and observed her activities and so did the other neighbors. I re-iterate--Zonita said she was judgmental not wrong.

The FBI profile has disclaimers. LE knew it wasn't written in indelible ink and had to be taken for fact. It was merely an aid to help them with possible directions to concentrate their efforts, especially in their search for a living Tina.
User avatar
not sure
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:52 pm
Location: stuck in the middle with you
Has thanked: 351 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby meankitty » Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:53 pm

That malicious gem VM came up with was not published, fortunately. But she did say it on part one of the DVD. I know Sue did have dates, but she didn't have a revolving door at her place. And there is the possibility that some of the stories like the Avery look-alike could be embellished.
meankitty
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:17 am
Location: Quincy
Has thanked: 626 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby IPO » Thu Aug 02, 2012 1:17 pm

I think that Zonita was a very credible witness. Not only did she live next door, but often had Tina and Sheila at her place. Girls at Tina and Sheila's age at the time are great sources of information. Whether they talked directly to Zonita or she overheard conversations with her daughters. As an adult she'd also be aware of non verbal clues to the girls' home life. I think that she was being honest, yet kind, in carefully framing her words. She was in a difficult position when commenting on her observations of life next door. She'd either have had to have lied or said very little. I think she made a wise choice. She did not seem to be a spiteful person imo.

What I've noticed a lot in Keddie/Quincy LE interviews is that the interviews don't seem to be very in depth. Either that or we're just getting very abridged parts of the interviews. I've mentioned before that I worked for CID in our Police Services Department. The murder and sexual assault interviews went on for hours and hours. Suspects and witnesses were also re-interviewed many times. I also noticed that the detectives would ask the same questions over and over - "reframed" - throughout the lengthy interviews. The suspects/witnesses would sometimes give different answers, not realizing that when the case would reach the courtroom the witnesses/suspects responses would be brought to the attention of the judge/jury.

Just my observations.
IPO
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:48 pm
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby krazykat » Thu Aug 02, 2012 2:02 pm

As an outsider who's spent a lot of time in Qunicy I think it's a miracle that Josh got anyone to talk at all.
krazykat
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:53 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby Chichibcc » Thu Aug 02, 2012 2:06 pm

Yes, it really is...because without their help and contributions, the documentaries may not have became a reality otherwise.
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Thu Aug 02, 2012 2:54 pm

Wait a minute... MK's claiming that DT's and FBI John Douglas' opinions that Tina was (at least in part) responsible for the murders is based on an unpublished opinion from Metcalfe and the "peanut gallery rumor mill"?! And that "at least two people were responsible for the profile based on the way it was written"?! As usual, MK says 2+2=6.782, and doesn't show her work.

Tell us, MK- When and how did Metcalfe meet with DT and influence him with her unpublished opinions? Similarly, which parts of Douglas' profile were each of the two FBI agents responsible for?

Douglas' opinions didn't come from Metcalfe, the rumor mill, the lumber mill, or from Sheila. They came mainly from information fed him by PCSO and CA DOJ reports and evidence. His job was to look at the CRIME ITSELF and determine the profile of the killer based on how the crime was carried out, the condition of the victims and crime scene-- not what his 'ear to the ground' tells him.

Metcalfe wasn't whispering in his ear, nor was Sheila. The reports he read were misleading, and written by morons. I doubt he even saw the criminally corrupt interviews with Bo and Marty. He was given B&W photos instead of color, and we don't know if he was given full sets of THOSE. Why was he not sent color prints from those color negs? I have found, in my own attempts, that those black and white prints from color negs are the single-most crippling hurdle in working out the crime. It's like a chalk & crayon drawing of a Monet: a totally different picture.

If JD looked at the photos carefully (and only if he had the full sets) he should have seen massive blood spills on BOTH SIDES of the cushion, indicating it was used as a staging ground instead of a comfort to Dana; he should have understood the MASSIVE postmortem staging (including weapon 4), etc. Those failures were his- if he got everything LE had to offer at that point. Was he relying too much on faulty and incomplete information from other agencies? Or was he relying on Metcalfe's research involving flashlights and flour?
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby greyhound » Sat Sep 08, 2012 5:43 pm

dmac wrote:thanks for proving my point. The photos were taken in color. Sent as black and white. How complete? BULLSHIT. I look at one color photo of the crime scene and I see 1000 more things than from the PCSO b&w prints from those same color negs.


Why would crime scene photos been taken in black and white? What the fuck is wrong with this picture? (Pardon the pun!) Of course there where colour pics, but for some reason LE did not want to send them. Or, did not want anyone else to see them. Why would they be worried about the FBI viewing gore and drama? After all the FBI is accustomed to such issues. I think that LE was way!!! too embarrassed to admit defeat here. Small town American trying to avoid big fuck up; yet another case lost because of arrogance.
greyhound
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 4:35 am
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:42 pm

Time to update this thread by re-evaluating the John Douglas FBI profile of the Keddie killer(s). The text of his report is in the OP.

John Douglas had to get most, if not all, the info to formulate his profile of the killer(s) from the very people screwing the case: Crimely, and Sly's SS (Scum Squad). Having just picked apart and pissed on the Crimely Quantico report from 4/15, let's look at Douglas' profile again.

First off, there's no date anywhere on the copy we've seen. This was 1981, making it one of John Douglas' earliest profiles. Too bad he was being fed lies, huh?

When John says the profile is based on personal research, I believe he's talking about their research in FBI's newly-formed BSU on psychology, methodology, MOs, etc. By this time, they'd established many killers work within geographical boundaries (the Comfort Zone), etc. Of course, they aren't talking about research into the particulars of the Keddie Murders, which they had to trust corrupt cops to supply.

I think his take on Dana is a tad over the top. He brings up "torturing animals" <plural>. My understanding is it was just the one incident, told to LE after the murders, and included another kid. Evidently, they injected a cat with some of Dana's insulin. I don't know who instigated it, but going along with such actions is indefensible. Still, I don't believe the one supposed instance of animal abuse is anything like the kind of crap we hear connected to what he's making Dana potentially out to be. It's clear all these Vx had bad upbringings, were high risk, but it seems he's making Dana out to be a mini-Dahmer.

The killer "exhibited great control if he, in fact, acted alone" At least three killers, plus Justin. They brought bindings, a rifle, hammer, knives. They went straight to Sue and had her and Tina controlled before J&D could get upstairs. I believe the killers used the girls as leverage to get J&D restrained.

The killer "did not precisely plan on killing all the victims". Bingo. Some of the dumbest premed ever. They came loaded to the teeth, but had no game plan other than to 'Get Sue'?! Idiots.

Douglas parrots the Crimely/SSS lies about all the weapons coming from the house. He's obviously been fed lies for this. Rifle? Knife found in dumpster? The sheer amount of tape used? The fact the knives found could not possibly be responsible for all the wounds- OR the marks in the wall. Therefore, these killings were no 'afterthought'. LE intentionally did not provide Douglas with the truth, nor the details necessary to make proper deductions.

In trying to explain how the killer must have had assistance to gain control of the scene, he jumps straight to "Dana and the Comfy Cushion." First, that cushion saw a lot of action that night- layers of blood on both sides. Second, Dana had been dead for over an hour before his head was placed on that cushion and pulverized with W4. I also think the assessment from Dana's 'friends' that he would wilt if threatened is proved ridiculously false, as he knew some bad shit was going down before he and John ran upstairs. He ran upstairs, not away.

Douglas was right-on about the blood on Sue's feet. When he says knowing whose blood was on her feet could change his assessment, he's saying, for instance, if that's Dana's blood, then perhaps Dana didn't assist. A moot point, as we know more than he did.

Note, again, as with the report to Quantico, there is ZERO MENTION that Sue had been posed, or that she was both MOVED and covered by someone much later. The fact Justin did both nullifies that paragraph, other than to again emphasize how John was working with intentionally shoddy intel.

"This triple homicide appears to be without any motive." Multiple killers, multiple motives, insanely schizo staging, making it difficult to read the scene.

"Neither sex nor money was the motivating factor." Sexual rage is all over the place here. Particularly considering, again,. John was not informed of the sexually humiliating pose Dana and Seu were originally in before Justin undid some of it.

"The crime scene reflects anger and rage on one hand and remorse and guilt on the other." Rage by the killers, remorse and guilt by Justin.

"It appears at this point that there is more than one murderer involved in this triple homicide." Bingo.

"The offender responsible for this triple homicide did not initially plan on killing. It was an afterthought as evidenced by the weapons he selected. All weapons could be referred to as weapons of opportunity. This offender knew his victims, particularly John and Glenna Sharp."

Yes, there was definite premed. They brought and took weapons. Again, Douglas is INTENTIONALLY MISINFORMED.

"This offender was motivated by his commitment and love for Tina Sharp. He loves her like a father. In all probability, Tina Sharp was planning on running away with him." Complete hooey, based on Tina being missing. Note how the Quantico report at least mentioned Tina may have been killed in 28, but other 'intel' Douglas was fed has killed that possibility for him. Unfortunately, since he's not seeing the truth, his profile starts falling apart immediately.

"It was Tina Sharp who probably went to her mother's bedroom after she was killed, got a blanket from her bed, and covered her mother with same." His profile keeps sliding downhill.

"Tina Sharp may have already attempted to locate her mother's place of burial and may have visited the burial site." Well, that means it was written after the funeral service. But it seems to be weeks, months later from his wording.

"This offender demonstrated control and confidence and therefore he is not a juvenile nor is he free of any prior police record." Both true.

"He is fixated on young females and has been involved with them in the past, be it for sex or for personal profit (ie child pornography)." Based solely on Tina as perp & target, so toss it out.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby justice17 » Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:35 pm

"Neither sex nor money was the motivating factor." Sexual rage is all over the place here. Particularly considering, again,. John was not informed of the sexually humiliating pose Dana and Seu were originally in before Justin undid some of it.


?! Dana was originally staged in a sexual pose? :-??|

Reasearching now....
Justice for all
User avatar
justice17
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 10:17 pm
Has thanked: 88 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Wed Sep 27, 2017 7:24 pm

I'm talking of revolutionary leaps and bounds in how (and why) to process a case. These 'leaps and bounds' are commensurate to 1981, but the MAIN GUY <at least historically> was

FBI John Douglas.

JD is seen as GOD to many in Behavioral Science. Look, right here in an early case, he was fed lies, and turned out a report not remotely centric on Sue or Cabin 26.

Doug Thomas' crew consistently LIED to John Douglas at FBI Quantico.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Thu Sep 28, 2017 12:37 am

I believe Sue was placed in a position where one would likely assume Dana's positioning was related. It's one of my weakest bits of the theory, but DAMN it makes sense. To me being kinda inside their heads, it makes sense. They've already admitted they wanted to blame it on Dana, so this was the next best thing.

I want someone WITH DEGREES and EXPERIENCE to pick apart all the stuff we have. My logic works for me, and many of us have dragged this never -"Cold Case" out of the freezer by using similar logic.

I was writing a MASSIVE post about Sue last summer when I realized what I saw in slab photos had multiple explanations, neither of which the examiner noted as he didn't BOTHER TO MENTION the phenomena. Short & sweet, when re-analyzing the autopsy photos, I recognized what I'd long-thought to be blood spatter on her skin could be petechiae. That huge revelation led me to not only abandoning hours, DAYS, of work, but rethinking the core logic of many connected theories.

I also spent HOURS and HOURS researching the kind of petechiae I think has been misconstrued as spatter in so many photos of so many victims. Bottom line is I don't buy into US versions of "the truth" and embrace Eurpoean standards, where many more things are possible than in the US-blinkered bullshit version. I chose to understand MANY MORE CAUSES made sense, meaning I am absolutely NOT buying what I thought was spatter on Sue's skin. It could be petechiae, particularly considering the pattern on her skin. NOT Dana's head-splatter. Which leads to:

WHERE the FUCK was Sue's bare skin while Dana's head was being pulverized? Seriously, it's a major problem in all scenarios. I know I'm going way out of bounds here, but nobody's brought it up and I'd better run with it while I'm thinking of it.

The specks of dark on Sue's legs seem logically to be blood, based solely on photos. (No they DON'T). On second look, when I was looking EVERYWHERE for spatter on Sue (from Dana's postmortem head smashing), I noticed ZERO trails. Nothing. The dots were on her are ROUND. No trails. Petechiea.

Mind, the wall spattered with blood also shows very few trails or directional trails. I don't believe I've found ONE. All the trails are directly downward. Really old, thick, dark blood hit the wall and eventually left a gravity-forced trail directly down.

That realization made me pull back further.

In he end, I further researched the separation of blood that occurs quite quickly aftr death. This is the degradation that results in thick, dark, clotting matter separating from a clear fluid. Don't believe me? Those that saved old CS photos from this forum will immediately recognize this phenomena when looking at some Dana shots.

After doing all that work on one post about Sue, I realized what I thought was spatter isn't remotely proved to be such. This mindbender didnt lessen my belief in the overall timeline, but shook me enough to quit that level of processing until I could look at all the other photos. AGAIN.

This was so easy to solve, before all the wrong people got involved.

In the end, I KNOW Sue's positioning was intentional as further (sexual) humiliation.

I still believe Dana's head was placed on that cushion VERY INTENTIONALLY. DELIBERATELY. The impact of the W4 wounds made his head bounce to a position not intended, and none of the fuckers involved were "man enough" to put the resultant mush back in place.

Yes, I still believe Dana's placement was intended to amplify the effect of Sue's posing.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:48 pm

justice17 wrote:?! Dana was originally staged in a sexual pose? :-??|

Reasearching now....


YES! When Justin was found, his pulverized head was dangling off the cushion, but his face was placed, DIRECTED, to Sue's original position.

Before Justin dragged, shifted, rolled, covered her, Sue's privates were in Justin's face.

Justin was PLACED ON THAT CUSHION as part of the staging. When they crushed his head with W4, his head bounced from the massive impacts. WHACK SMACK WHACK WHACK. His head was barely left on the cushion as the pulverizing blows bounced the pulp that was once his head.

The killers didn't have the guts to pick up Dana's pulverized and shifted sludge of a head just to stick his face back closer to Sue's privates. His "found" position is all about the bouncing from the original placement!

Sorry for not being so fucking clear and explicit before. The original positioning was NSFW, and I'm not sure I should be talking about it years after I realized- AND HID- it. Years of contemplation leave me just as useless when trying to explain the staging, and my lack of ease discussing it.

This was a sexually motivated staging. Big time.

When looking at CS photos early on, I at times wondered if Tina was once part of it. She would had to have been similarly staged: left in a pool of blood and tied up to herself and to the others. All were bound individually with tape before being falsely bound by wire AFTER DEATH.

Anybody adding up the inches of med tape brought AND USED need to bounce up the numbers to nearly FOUR rolls to account for Tina's bindings. No blood underneath, of fucking course!

Has anyone else here seen the crime scene and added Tina to those blood stains, original posing?

Fucking disgusting, and it hurts to do it, but I've been doing it for years and still cannot timeline what's in the crime scene with Tina being part of that staging. Literally, I think one of the first things they did was take Tina out of Keddie as INITIAL STAGING. Yes, Tina was Big Time early staging. They thought, then took her over the bridge just because it was about staging her to mislead. Get Tina the fuck out of Keddie because "she's the key".

Sorry if many don't see what I do. At least, I seem frustrated nobody believes me, even after revelations prove me right. At most, I'm a cunt with a vision of what happened only a perp would know. Either way, I'm often an unfriendly piece of shit. And I do apologize. I like being me about as much as you hate me.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:27 am

As for "rolling over", humans are built like tops- wider at the top than the bottom. The blood patterns may seems like a body being rolled over, but they ain't. These are DISTINCT and INDIVIDUAL bleed-outs. Not 'individual' as in one person per. No, the same persons was/were responsible for multiple.

Sue
Tina
Dana
Johnny

all dealt with in the Kill Zone, the area lit by the bathroom light.

Multiple times.

I'd think it harder for the killers to remove Tina if she was a bleed-out. They'd absolutely try to mask that, and I mean more than just by removing her. They masked enough for us not to know WTF many times, and with Tina as such a misdirect, why wouldn't her blood be a stain we can't identify?

But we SEE the KZ because of 3-D recreation, lighting. We SEE the LIES indicate much of what happened:

"The bridge is locked. Period."

The fuck it was, Marty.

The fact Mike looked that up about the bridge and notified me tells me he's exactly aware of where I'm headed with my Qs. I hadn't talked about the bridge in months. Mike's looking at Tina, and he's proving what I said 'must be' lies ARE LIES.

Look at recent info:

FALSE REPORTS filed by Crimely about Marty's confession
DNA (that came from multiple sources, all ok with my outing Justin as the cunt he is- Justin has NO TRUE FRIENDS)
The Bridge Was NOT LOCKED, just as I've said since I read Marty said it was.

Mike's given me many revelations to reveal, but we talk on so many things so quickly that I doubt my doubts rather than publish things. For instance, I asked Mike probably five times about outing Justin's DNA hit.

Mike and I talk about many things during, say, a five minute phone call. They usually last an hour, but the point is we don't equivocate over shit like what can be released. Some of it is broadly obvious, and when I look at other stuff I wonder if it's a pull. Shit, don't ask me about what I know concerning Kathy. I think I know exactly who did that shit. That was true torture and abuse BY... fucking asshole, I want him dead. Kathy wasn't done by one person. Nor was Keddie. I don't believe Lyn could be done by one lone wolf.

See a pattern? Mike's got wide open eyes about all this stuff, while mine are kinda blinkered by years I've wasted blinded by Keddie.

Just to throw some reality into the mix, Mike, Greg, and I completely differed on who the target was in 28. They hadn't read or vetted everything, because I'm fluid and full of paragraphs when not new intel. 10,000 posts now, even if half that all Mike had was every bad name I'd ever called him. No, he seriously had printouts of our discussions within binders on many topics. Hell, he had a binder named "Princess" and one named "dmac". He wanted to recite my first direct email to him, but I said, "NO! NO! It's too fucking embarrassing!" I'd called him every name in the book, plus a few new ones I'd made up.

Bottom line is we talked for hours and rooted through piles of photos and binders. One last photo at the end of a binder, I said, "Holy fuck! I bet that's the pink pant suit!" Mike looked at the numbers on the photo and cross-referenced it to "pink pantsuit found by Alyssa Seabolt"

Anyone hooked on Vidocq need look no further than how Mike has put boxes of files int cross-referenced binders. Sure, it may be old skool, but he confirmed the pink pantsuit within about 20 seconds. It would have taken him longer to figure out a search window in Windows 98, the computer he chooses to avoid.

Look up my old posts about faked evidence. Mike DESPISES computers and typing. He never typed a report in his whole fucking life, man. Fuck you, Don! YOU ARE FUCKED!

Greg and I talked much longer that night last year- he was so kind and approving of our work, despite me calling him heinous names on the site. He said he deserved far worse for not vetting our info earlier. It's a light switch: "We gotta kill this website" vs. "Should we see if they're right first?" and he chose, politically, to vet rather than contest. At least he decided to confront rather than ignore, and decided to work our info rather than deny. His teeth hit our info as flesh rather than dust, and he was impressed.

So much happened in the hours I spent at PCSO. We were all clicking at full speed, riffing off each other, and none of our perceptions of the case weren't wonked as a result. In good ways. We were telling each other new things, and completely changing our outlooks and opinions on WTF went down in 28 and AFTER. Well, at least thinking on new ideas.

I've spoken, for instance, on the Lyn Mollath photos and my disagreement it was related to Keddie or Bo, despite Bo having been released from a nearby prison. Damn, I can go on and on about Lyn- Mike is relatively secure the shit I compiled about her parents could have made her a target. So am I. Lyn's execution is marked by the clean delivery of one disparaged human, a blatant message, whereas Keddie is a pile of complete fuck.

Not the same killer. Had Bo done Lyn years prior to Keddie, he'd be the evil genius, not Marty's new carny dad. Fucking laughable concept, but Mike's in the right zone: Lyn's murder smells of a hit and message concerning her parents. Just not Bo- he was a stupid fuck, the third in any party.

Holy shit, I made that above joke about Bo being Rini's 'third' in the gang to assassinate Zelko. I now know Bo was openly available, as our government only has two conflicting documents about his whereabouts for Zelko. Fucking liars. At least with the Loonabi, all you need do is reverse-analyze every truth and lie into reality. But the "third in any party" rings true so many ways, even with Loon's absolute LIE about knocking on Sue's door.

Loon was fucking Wade, wanted out from under Marty, and Bo was not her cup of tea at all. You figure that last bit out. Loon recognized a mark, and Bo recognized her first.

Damn, that line goes in the book.

This is still our job, folks. At least we now have LE friends on our side.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Wed Oct 04, 2017 2:08 am

I started this thread. Read my OP and see how my recent posts vary from the OPs from 2010. Not much to many, but to me, I missed so much OBVIOUS shit. Read how wrong (and right) i was in 2010.

This is a short thread, particularly if you ignore my last posts. Please read them. The other voices kick this thread into the stratosphere.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Re: John Douglas' FBI Profile of the Keddie Murders- 4 Pages

Postby dmac » Wed Oct 04, 2017 2:30 am

When looking at the case, you must put a timeline in place. Otherwise you're a manageable moron from some CSI phony bullshit TV show.

In reality, these crimes happened on a timeline told by the bodies. LE and the ME didn't do shit to note these facts, but we must- and can from what meagre info we've had on hand.

Name the dead, DONE. Find the crime area: DONE. Find the methods of killing. DONE- and they don't match shit left behind by killers.

Find staging. SHIT that's over-done. That toasty is burned. Scrape off the bad shit and nothing's left.

PLEASE build a functional timeline if you want to understand what really happened.

Many disagree with me simply because they never put a timeline to their line of shit.

Build a timeline, but don't be a bitch about my info because you're too lazy to think logically. That's a statement all newbies should read, and many oldies ignore.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2667 times

Next

Return to keddie files

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 0 guests