from a "Case Study for Applied Criminal Psychology"

case files, articles, etc

from a "Case Study for Applied Criminal Psychology"

Postby jhancock » Wed Jul 28, 2010 10:13 am

EDITED by DMAC on 29 Aug 2015 TO POINT TO THE FULL DOCUMENT, PROVING JOSH ROUTINELY HID TRUE FINDINGS OF MANY DOCUMENTS, SO AS NOT TO ANGER ANY OF THE PARTICIPANTS HE WAS STRINGING ALONG. IT WAS A CABIN INDUSTRY FOR JOSH, AND HE WILLFULLY LIED AND HID FACTS IN ORDER TO PROLONG THE CASE. ALL TO STRING PEOPLE ALONG FOR FILTHY LUCRE.

The following is an excerpt from a project completed for a course in Criminal Psychology. I thought a lot of you would find it interesting.

Summary of Case

Sometime between 10:00 pm on 4/11/81 and 8:00 am on 4/12/81, three individuals, Glenna Susan Sharp (age 36), John Steven Sharp (age 15), son of Glenna Sharp, and Dana Paul Wingate (age 17) were brutally murdered in the Sharp's residence located in a small railroad community known as Keddie, California. A fourth victim, originally presumed kidnapped from the residence at the time of the murders, was Tina Sharp (age 12), daughter of Glenna Sharp. Tina's remains were discovered three years later approximately 80 miles from Keddie in a remote area known as Feather Falls. To date, there has been no motive established for the murders, and this case remains unsolved.

Victimology

Glenna was in the process of getting a divorce from her husband, who was in the U.S. Navy...at the time of the murders. She lived with her husband for several years as a military wife. She is described as being a white adult, 5'2" tall, and weighing 100 pounds...Her only source of income was as a CETA worker, wherein she was paid to attend college, and learn a business trade. She was described as being a good student who studied hard and obtained good grades. She had no local criminal record, nor was she known to use drugs or alcohol. No drugs and alcohol were found in the house at the time of the murders.

John Sharp was described as a white juvenile, 5' 5 1/2" tall, weighing 105 pounds. He was a student at Quincy High School with no prior arrest record in Plumas County. He was described as having few close friends, with Dana Wingate, the third victim at the residence, as his closest friend. John was known to use and possibly sell marijuana, but the frequency is unclear. He did not have a job or have any source of income. His primary source of transportation was hitchhiking around the Quincy and Keddie area. He had no known enemies at the time he was murdered. Associates described John as an aggressive individual who was prone to fighting.

Dana Wingate was described as being 5'10", weighing 140 pounds. He lived in a foster home in Quincy, having been placed there by the Plumas County Probation Department in 1979. Prior to that he lived with his father who also lived in Quincy. Dana was suspected of using marijuana. He was also a known diabetic who required regular insulin shots. For this reason it is suspected that he was not a heavy user of drugs or alcohol because of his reliance on insulin and the reported adverse reactions they have when mixed. Dana attended Quincy High School. He was placed on probation after being charged with torturing a cat in the Quincy area. He and another friend injected the cat with insulin and the friend then burned the cat alive. He was described as an individual who...probably would not defend himself if provoked. He was known to have a more adult sense of humor. He had no known enemies at the time of his murder.

Tina Sharp was described as being a white juvenile, 4'10", weighing approximately 90 pounds. She looked physically younger than her actual age. She was described as being sweet and innocent...Tina was known to have "forts" and hide-outs in the hills near her home where she often went to play alone, sometimes taking friends with her. Nothing unusual was found at these forts or hide-outs.

Observations/Perceptions

...The offender(s) spent a fair amount of time in the house in order to gain control, bind, and kill the victims. However, the scene indicates that the offender(s) left immediately after killing the victims. The three younger children were left unharmed in the next room, either because the offender(s) did not know they were there (indicating they were in a hurry), or there may have been some proprietary interest on the part of the offender(s). The offender(s) also used a vehicle, in order to kidnap Tina, plus the nearest town is at least seven miles away, and they would have been seen walking on the highway by someone.

Sex and money were not the motive for the three murders. However, it is unknown of Tina was sexually assaulted before she was killed. The fact that Tina left willingly (i.e. put on her shoes and coat) indicates that there may have been a bond between Tina and the offender...

The covering up of Glenna's body after she was killed, and the pillow being placed under Dana's head, demonstrates "undoing" on the part of the offender(s). This, coupled with the battering of the victims' faces indicates that the offender(s) knew the victims. Tina may have placed the blanket on her mother, or if Justin did in fact witness the murder of Glenna, he may have covered her body after the offender(s) left, feeling that she should not be seen partially clothed.
jhancock
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:59 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 273 times

Re: from a "Case Study for Applied Criminal Psychology&

Postby dmac » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:20 pm

Great post, fantastic summation. Keep it coming.

I do, however, take exception to this:

excerpt wrote:The fact that Tina left willingly (i.e. put on her shoes and coat) indicates that there may have been a bond between Tina and the offender...


The terminology, "left willingly", is an incredible overstatement. It would preclude her seeing the crime scene, much less witnessing any of the assaults that took place, which must have occurred prior to her abduction. If she had left willingly, it would indicate she left prior to the murders in the cabin. Otherwise, she saw plenty, and did as she was told by the perp(s).

I do agree Tina likely knew the perp(s), but putting on shoes and clothing does not, in itself, imply preferred action. Instead, I'd infer Tina cooperated against her will, under clear and immediate threat of dire bodily harm.

I also take exception to this bit:

excerpt wrote: The offender(s) also used a vehicle, in order to kidnap Tina, plus the nearest town is at least seven miles away, and they would have been seen walking on the highway by someone.


I can't wholly agree. Simply because Tina wasn't found locally during searches doesn't mean she wasn't nearby, nor that it wasn't a locally-instigated crime; Clearly, a vehicle was used to remove her from the Keddie region, but when?

Still, a much cleaner, terser summation than I'm used to seeing, with additional bits not often referenced before.
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3215
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 710 times
Been thanked: 2669 times

Postby Night Rider » Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:44 pm

Most everything in there is in line with what we have known over the years, only the "fort" bit has never really been mentioned.

There seems to be two statements in there that are in juxtaoisition. They concern time of occurence, you will figure them out.

There are also a few missing pieces, no discussion of what Dana was afraid of? And no mention of Dana "playing PYRO again" That was mentioned on Cabin28 by a poster who claimed to have known him.

I also noticed the one original thought: was Tina possibly sexually assaulted in the cabin?

I notice something in this and Josh's interview with the psysics on ParanormalTV, both seem to take very little note of Justin's role and his story. Notice the remark in this summary.

It's a good beginning for some real discussion, I hope there is more info about possible suspects from the time, and no, I'm not referring to POI...
Night Rider
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Sacramento
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Postby jhancock » Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:16 pm

A few additional excerpts:

The offender responsible for the four murders displayed the following characteristics consistent with those of a psychopath:

Absence of Guilt: The crime scene reflected a lot of anger and rage on the one hand, and remorse and guilt on the other. Since it is unknown whether the offender or Tina or Justin placed the blanket over Glenna's body and the pillow under Dana's head, the remorse may not have been that of the offender. The manner in which the three victims were killed indicates a lack of guilt as does the subsequent murder of Tina. The offender most likely rationalized the need to kill the victims, placing blame on them for being at the wrong place, saying the wrong thing, etc.

Immediate Satisfaction: Whatever the motive was for the murders, the offender wanted it right then. He was not willing to wait for another time wherein he may not have had to kill the victims to prevent him from getting what he wanted. This was evidenced by the weapons and the bindings coming from inside the residence.

Extroverted: There was no evidence of forced entry into the residence, another indication that the offender knew the victims. In order for the offender to gain access into the residence, gain control of the victims, and take Tina with him, he must have played against reactions of all the victims, especially Tina. The offender demonstrated control and confidence, consistent with someone who is generally outgoing and accepted by others, even looked up to.

Disregard for Community or Group Standards of Behavior: The need to kill all the victims demonstrates the offender's loyalty only to himself. Brutally murdering women and children is the ultimate disregard for acceptable social standards.

I put the sentences in bold because they really speak to me after the revelations in part II. The report goes on to describe that the crime scene reflected the characteristics of both an organized offender and a disorganized offender, which I'll post tomorrow.

I agree about the word choice of "willingly" when it comes to Tina's abduction. Yes, her shoes and coat and possibly even the shoebox were gone, but Tina could have been wearing both the shoes and the coat when she was taken. She could have been holding the shoebox (security blanket of some kind?) when she walked out into the room.
jhancock
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:59 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 273 times

Postby bliss » Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:17 pm

who wrote this Josh?
bliss
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:58 pm
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 62 times

Postby the celt » Thu Jul 29, 2010 3:33 am

josh, what condition was johns room? was it ransacked, messy for a normal teenager, neat? just because no drugs where found at the cabin doesn't indicate that drugs where not taken from the cabin, right? if Tina was removed before the murders took place, could Tina have been used a leverage to compel sue or the boys to give up what ever the perps where after? just tossing thoughts around.
kathy
the celt
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:27 pm
Location: ohio
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 6 times

Postby jhancock » Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:50 am

Bliss, these were written by a student for a Criminal Psychology class as part of a project.
jhancock
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:59 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 273 times

Postby jhancock » Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:25 pm

Continuing from this report...

The crime scene displayed characteristics of both an organized and disorganized offender. The reasons for this would be best explained if there was more than one offender. The following characteristics of the crime scene are consistent with those of an organized offender:

--The kidnapping appeared to have been a planned event
--The crime scene reflected a lot of control, with submissive action on the part of Dana
--Restraints were used on all the victims
--There was a great deal of violent aggressive behavior in the course of murdering the victims, and there were no signs of sexual acts prior to or after death

The following characteristics of the crime scene are consistent with those of a disorganized offender:

--The murders of the three victims at the residence appeared to have been an afterthought and were unplanned
--The offender was familiar with the Sharp's residence, and he was known by the victims
--There was minimal conversation between victims and offender, except that which was necessary to gain control
--The crime scene was sloppy, bindings and weapons were obtained from and left at the residence, and potential witnesses were left unharmed
--The attack on the victims was sudden and very violent, probably triggered by resistance, especially by John
--The bodies of Glenna, John and were left in view at the crime scene
--No efforts were made to hide the weapons used to kill the victims
--Blood was spattered throughout the crime scene

Summary

Based on the demographics of the violence profile, an analysis of the crime scene, and characteristics of anti-social behavior displayed by the offender, it can be concluded that the person responsible for this triple homicide, kidnapping, and subsequent fourth murder is a psychopathic, disorganized, or perhaps an inexperienced organized offender who is not likely to benefit from any form of punishment or attempts at rehabilitation.
jhancock
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:59 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 273 times

Postby meankitty » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:27 am

I do have some problems with the thought of the perps knowing the family. They left behind witnesses, and if they knew the family, they would have had to have known about the other kids. (Ricky, Greg, and Sheila) Yet, there seems to be no evidence that the perps really looked for them. I don't think the perps would knowingly leave behind any witnesses that could point to them.

Tina could have came out as they were leaving and was kidnapped on the spur of the moment. I would have thought if it was planned beforehand, they could have caught her outside in one of her forts.
meankitty
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:17 am
Location: Quincy
Has thanked: 626 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Postby dmac » Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:03 pm

Making the case that Tina was the intent, the perps would have done a better job. We don't even know when Tina came home that night, yet we speculate she was the intended? How does that work, exactly?

Sue knows the perps, they come in, don't go directly to Tina, then John and Dana walk in and hell ensues?

I'm not on board with that.

Simplification works for me. These perp(s) clearly knew the victims and showed utter rage towards Sue and John. Not to Dana, not to the boys, not to Tina initially.

Sue and John, bless him, got the most damage. There was conversation between perp(s) and victims. And it was loud enough to be heard throughout the cabin's top floor, but not outside the walls of the cabin. The cabin was small, yet the walls were damned thick, and the windows probably still had double-panes installed for winter cold.

After researching the layout of the cabin and thickness of walls (hell, the front door was four inches inside the supporting wall), I believe noise would not easily escape it's confines.
Last edited by dmac on Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3215
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 710 times
Been thanked: 2669 times

Postby meankitty » Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:14 pm

According to Mr. Seabolt, Tina left their place at 9:30 p.m. to go home. And if the perps knew the victims, why were the other boys left alone?
meankitty
 
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:17 am
Location: Quincy
Has thanked: 626 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Postby dmac » Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:31 pm

The perp(s) didn't initially give a rat's ass as to whom was on the home team. How this progressed points directly to the perps going at Sue, John defending somehow, and Tina as an afterthought (depending on what the PCSO interview with her was really about). The three boys were known to be in the house by perp(s), yet left untouched.

It was an act of great stupidity which progressed into a horrible crime.

Was Tina a witness, Josh? You ensure us that Tina had just been interviewed by cops, but why? Details are helpful. A little bit of info can drastically change appearances. Don't choke us just for a film we'll buy anyway.

Somebody has to say it, Josh. We don't appreciate being played.
Last edited by dmac on Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3215
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 710 times
Been thanked: 2669 times

Postby gotbier » Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:41 pm

dmac: Maybe you could create a couple more 'polls' for us:

1. Do you believe the perp(s) knew the family?

2. Do you believe the perp(s) knew the boys were in the bedroom?

Then if anyone wants to know what everyone thinks they could go to the polls and everyone won't have to repeat their opinion in every post!!

I would, but I don't know how.

I hope no one takes this as a 'dig' or rudeness, that's not how it's meant.
Last edited by gotbier on Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
gotbier
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:44 am
Location: Reno, Nevada
Has thanked: 243 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Postby Magnum PI » Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:53 pm

dmac...I concur, i said it in my other posts....I believe Tina was taken as an afterthought! She came walking out they saw her, to me it was opportunity!!! Depending on, of course, what Tina was questioned about. I could think of a few things that may have happened.

As far as the boys, i believe one of two things.

a. They were totally overlooked by the perp(s) or

b. Justin was untouchable!
User avatar
Magnum PI
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:33 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Postby the celt » Thu Aug 05, 2010 3:37 pm

Maybe the reason that sue and john got the brunt of the rage was they tried fighting back as for Dana didnt he try to make a break for the back door and was hit on the head with the claw hammer? If he was knocked out then he didnt put up a fight like john and his mother did. I asked on the other board, what about people sue met at college. Maybe someone who met sue but didnt know about five children per-say ,maybe that she just had children. Justin did say that one of the killers called her sue. Was she known at school by sue or Glennis? It just makes no sense, this family only lived in the cabin for 6 months. not long at all, makes me wonder, what followed them there?
kathy
the celt
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:27 pm
Location: ohio
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 6 times

Postby Night Rider » Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:25 pm

Celt: please be careful in basing your thoughts upon what Justin said. He said some things which are probably truthful, but the seem to be interspered with the confabulations.

His story would seem to indicate that Dana was number one. And it that is true may not that indicate that he was running AWAY from the killers?

MK: there seems to be two sides to that story, his and hers.

"Wrong time, wrong place." Someone tried to sell me that story a long time ago. I didn't buy it then, nor now, it was too canned and well prepared. If? that was true, why not hit the Seabolt's instead?

We all know about the blood around the back area, but we do not know how and when it got there. And that blood around the door handle of Sue's car? You could dream about that.

I found a long buried post somewhere else, the person who was quoted said: "Look for a Pedo around the resort property, that's your killer".....
Night Rider
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Sacramento
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Postby Red Violin » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:03 pm

How about the perps were from out of town and the focus was Sue. Perps didnt think that little kids could identify them so they left them alone. Justin peaked out and saw them, they didn't see him, later he gave a description. Tina walked in on them and was taken so that there is no witness.???
Red Violin
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:52 am
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Postby TinyDancer » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:38 pm

"I found a long buried post somewhere else, the person who was quoted said: "Look for a Pedo around the resort property, that's your killer".....

Indeed, wasn't it stated by the profilers that the kidnapping of Tina looked planned?

If she were the target, this would make sense.
TinyDancer
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:07 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 12 times

Postby Ausgirl » Fri Aug 06, 2010 12:11 am

Night Rider - blood around the back area? I haven't read this anywhere yet, could you PM or post me that info, at all?

The blood on the car door suggests someone with bloody hands tried the handle, doesn't it? So why would they do that, if they had a car already waiting somewhere?

So many 'whys'!

As to Tina being the focus: I don't know, and cannot really guess. But I think the killer(s) knew the boys were not home. I think they knew damn well, because they were watching the house. I think they were maybe watching the house, because of the suspicious van and car activity around at the time, and that they used a time when the older boys/Sheila were out. I do not think they expected the boys to come home and everything does point to the killer(s) being surprised in the act of threatening/harming Sue and things escalating from there.

The drop of blood in Tina's room and the blood on the car door - were samples taken of those? So much could be worked out from those alone.

Just a thought on this:
it can be concluded that the person responsible for this triple homicide, kidnapping, and subsequent fourth murder is a psychopathic, disorganized, or perhaps an inexperienced organized offender who is not likely to benefit from any form of punishment or attempts at rehabilitation.


Why can it not be concluded that there were two persons responsible? One organised, one disorganised? Perhaps "Disorganised" derailed the plans of "Organised" and things went not according to plan, but completely haywire? It may speak to why there were displays of both incredible ferocity and rage -and- remorse/shame (the covering up, etc).

Two perps, two different motivations/reactions. It's possible one killer did this all alone, but I really doubt it.

What Plan A might have been, I cannot guess. Not robbery or rape, that much is clear. Scaring the heck out of Sue was part of it, I gather from the fact she was still alive when the boys came home.

What if Tina was removed/in the process of being removed by Perp 1 or 2, before the boys got home? Asked, before things escalated, to get her shoes & coat on, and she's grabbed the box (which box was taken? Her homework project?)- why? It's something a kid would do, if they expected to be going on a trip somewhere, or if they were told to get their things.

We only have Justin's word that Tina wandered out after/during the killings, and it's very possible the time frame was skewed in his recall of the event. Not saying it -was- but it's more than possible that plan A involved grabbing Tina (as a means of intimidating Sue?), and plan B (disorganised, full of rage) happened when plan A was disrupted.

Could one of the perps have wanted to get the hell out of there, when his buddy went nuts and killed people? Is that why there's blood on the car door?
User avatar
Ausgirl
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:35 pm
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 359 times

Postby Night Rider » Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:56 am

That is an excellent post, there isn't much more you could have said

The blood: there could have been more than just the two or three we have heard about, on was on the car door handle, and one was on the tall support post at the top of the stairs. This was reported by Richard Meeks when he was given the "tour."

Some? tire marks were supposedly seen, but I have never seen any report of blood found on the ground around the rear of the building.

I hope quite a few of you were questioning some of the wording in that document. I'm kinda wondering if the writer(s) even know as much about the case as most of us long-timers do?

Also, this is the third discussion of the scene that I have seen, and do you all notice that in all of them that Justin seems to be treated as sort of a footnote??? Maybe some of these writers have read the boards...
Night Rider
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Sacramento
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Next

Return to keddie files

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests