Arrest of Suspect in Homicide of Central Valley Woman Chips Away at Dubious North Coast Serial Killer Narrative— A Criminal Profiler Weighs-In
Four women speculated to be the victim’s of a serial killer even though law enforcement adamantly denies a connection. Clockwise: Cynthia Crane, Crystal McCarthy, Amber Dillon, and Alyssa Mae Sawdey.
At this point, many residents of the North Coast have heard that a rumored serial killer lurks in their midst. Web sleuths had surmised upwards of four deaths spread across Mendocino, Sonoma, and Napa Counties were the result of this murderer.
Last week a Reddit post claimed the speculated serial killer’s territory grew dramatically after a poster claimed the murder of 20-year-old Rancho Cordova Emma Roark woman was the fifth victim of this fabled North Coast Killer.
That theory was proven false yesterday when the Rancho Cordova Police Department announced a 37-year-old transient from the Sacramento area named Mikilo Morgan Rawls was arrested in the “brutal sexual assault and homicide of Emma Roark.” As per a press release issued by RCPD, he was booked into the Sacramento Main Jail on “felony charges of murder, rape, and sodomy and is being held without bail.”
The internet’s reflexive instinct to invoke this unsubstantiated killer reared its head in the comment section of Redheaded Blackbelt and its coverage of Leah Hoffman, a 30-year-old woman who went missing in Trinity County this last Monday, February 7, 2022.
One commenter responded to the news saying sarcastically, “And there is no serial killer in this part of CA. Get it together cops!” Another commenter offered, “There may be a serial killer in the Northern part of the state. Trinity county is no longer such a faraway place. We have had several dead women in Sonoma and Mendocino County in suspicious circumstances.”
However, as was reported here, Hoffman was found, alive and well, two days later.
Though these two cases were quickly proven unconnected and not the product of a speculated serial killer, four active investigations of North Coast women are continuing to fuel the belief that a serial killer could be preying up the area’s women.
- Cynthia Crane, a 33-year-old Guerneville woman’s death was labeled “suspicious” after she was found floating in a rural Sonoma County waterway on December 18, 2021.
![33-year-old Guerneville woman Cynthia Crane [Photo provided by her mother Leslie Booker]](data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%20364%20600'%3E%3C/svg%3E)
33-year-old Guerneville woman Cynthia Crane [Photo provided by her mother Leslie Booker]
- Crystal Lea McCarthy was found deceased floating in the Napa River on December 23, 2021.
Crystal McCarthy [From her missing poster put out by the Napa Police Department]
- On January 7, 2022, 33-year-old Willits woman Amber Dillon was found deceased in a rural area near the Mendocino/Sonoma County line. The Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office would later deem her death as “suspicious.”
Amber Dillon
- 22-year-old Alyssa Mae Sawdey was found dead north of Ukiah. Later the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office would also deem her death as “suspicious.”
Alyssa Mae Sawdey [Picture provided by a family friend]
![33-year-old Guerneville woman Cynthia Crane [Photo provided by her mother Leslie Booker]](https://kymkemp.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/271713178_473685214406634_8618550296196124921_n-1.png)
These four women had lost their lives within one month of each other. All four were young, the pictures of them floating around online showed them all as vibrant and attractive, and they would be found dead within a 90 miles radius of each other.
Compounding the public’s speculation, all three law enforcement agencies uttered almost the exact same words regarding their deaths–deeming them “suspicious” and saying they were unable to release more information on the cases pending toxicology and autopsies.
We reached out to Sacramento Sheriff’s Sergeant Rod Grassman, the lead investigative agency looking into the death of Rancho Cordova woman Emma Roark recognized these sorts of responses from law enforcement can prompt public speculation which he described as “human nature.”
Knowing that potential suspects could be watching the news, Sergeant Grassman said during active investigations, law enforcement will release very limited information and if a suspect thinks law enforcement is searching for them they could “destroy evidence or start changing their patterns.” Releasing information to satisfy a curious public would “do nothing but compromise the investigation and is a disservice to victims,” he added.
Having multiple law enforcement officials attest to the information vacuum typical of active investigations and the public’s habit of filling the void with speculation, we sought out a third party who could offer insight into the tension between law enforcement’s process of identifying a serial killer and the internet’s stubborn instinct to blame a serial killer for deaths even when that speculation is not backed by concrete evidence and is contradicted by law enforcement
Professor David Canter is currently a Visiting Professor at Liverpool Hope University in England who has made a career in forensic and investigative psychology. He wrote seminal texts in the field of serial killer profiling such as Criminal Shadows: Inside the Mind of the Serial Killer, Mapping Murder: The Secrets of Geographical Profiling, and Investigative Psychology: Offender Profiling and the Analysis of Criminal Actions. Professor Canter’s collaboration with London law enforcement in 1985 led to the identification of the infamous Railway Killers,
From 1982-1986, southern England was terrorized by a pair of men who came to be known as the “Railroad Killers” responsible for raping upwards of twenty-five women and killing three others.
On the evening of December 29, 1985, 19-year-old Alison Day exited a train to visit her boyfriend who worked near Hackney Wick Station. The “Railway Killers” saw Day exit the area of the train station, confronted her on a darkened path and sexually assaulted her. She walked away across a nearby bridge, falling into a canal below, and the Railway Killers met her on the bank and strangled her to death.
Four months later in April 1986, 15-year-old Dutch school girl Maartje Tamboezer was raped and murdered by the men after she collided with a metal wire tied between two trees while riding her bike.
The last killing associated with the men was in May 1986 when 29-year-old Anne Lock was abducted and murdered after getting off a train near Hertfordshire.
Dr. David Canter, a psychologist from the University of Surrey at the time, was consulted to help solve the crimes in what would be British law enforcement’s first use of psychological offender profiling. Dr. Canter examined each crime and built up a profile of the killer’s habits and traits. Police investigation and Dr. Canter’s profiling would lead to the identification of the Railway Killers as John Francis Duffy and David Mulcahy.
Hoping to understand a different perspective on the tragic deaths of four North Coast women and the internet’s stubborn instinct to blame a serial killer, we sought the knowledge of a Professor Canter.
When presented with the serial killer narrative that has arisen amongst Northern California residents, Professor Canter did say there was a concept that could cause law enforcement to overlook a possible killer, he called this “linkage blindness”, which he attributed to the University of Illinois Steven A. Egger. “Linkage Blindness”, Professor Canter explained, is a tendency for American law enforcement to have difficulty forming a “coherent view” about potential connections between crimes. This tendency is an outgrowth of law enforcement agencies “not sharing information with each other.”
Another factor that informs this “Linkage Blindness” is “a reluctance to identify serial killings because of the pressures that puts on the whole investigation process and the need to get help, say, from the FBI”, Professor Canter told us.
Asking Mendocino County Sheriff Matt Kendall about this concept of “linkage blindness” and how it could manifest in Northern California, he did not think it was a factor in counties like Mendocino, Lake, Humboldt, Sonoma, and Trinity, where staffing is limited and jurisdictional collaboration is commonplace.
“We are not an island unto ourselves,” Sheriff Kendall said. “We talk about what is going on, our detectives work together. When we need assistance on a homicide, nearby agencies send personnel,” Sheriff Kendall told us.
Another tool of Northern California’s law enforcement infrastructure that keeps agencies abreast of any potential connections between cases is the Department of Justice Regional Laboratory in Eureka that serves the counties of Humboldt, Del Norte, and Mendocino. Sheriff Kendall explained investigators there actively look for connections between any cases that might inform local agencies.
Sheriff Kendall also pointed towards technology and the move towards surveillance in various forms have led to a world where citizens are “constantly being watched.”
Sacramento Sheriff’s Sergeant Grassman agreed with Kendall’s point sayinghis agency is constantly utilizing data to look for patterns in local crime, a methodology he told us could “tie things together.”
Through a combination of license plate readers, the ubiquity of surveillance cameras, and tracking human movement with GPS technology, Sergeant Grassman assessed the possibility of a serial killer moving across a large geographic footprint and entering multiple municipalities unnoticed: “It’s almost impossible to get away with that [anymore].”
These technologies, Sergeant Grassman said, have created a world where “you’re not going to see another serial killer like the Zodiac or the Unabomber”
Professor Canter provided us with a traits often represented in serial killers:
- Serial killers “typically have no pre-existing relationship to their victims, who are often typically women.”
- Victimss of serial killers often “are vulnerable women, such as street sex workers, or people living on the street.”
- Serial killer behavior usually involves “some sort of related sexual activity, unless there is robbery or some other obvious crime involved.”
- Geographically, serial killers have “a tendency to keep some distance from the previous offense.”
- The method of killing will often have “some obvious similarities, as will how the victim’s body is dealt with, but can change over time as the offender becomes more ‘expert’.
Another metric that could suggest a serial killer is at play, Professor Canter said, is what he called the “base rate” of murders within a given area. If deaths are occuring “in an area with very few murders,especially stranger murders, rather than the more common domestic/associate murders, then the possibility of one culprit increases.”
When presented with his base rate murder metric, Sheriff Kendall agreed with Canter’s concept but added that environmental factors need to be taken into account as well. A common environmental factor shared across the three counties where the four women whose deaths have not been explained publically is the accessibility of fentanyl and overdoses that result from use.
When asked whether social media users and websleuths could be an antidote to the “linkage blindness” and recognize potential criminal patterns before law enforcement, Professor Canter said, “The problem with social media…is that people can work up a storm just because it seems interesting.” The online ecosystem is one where “conspiracies thrive” and Professor Canter joked, “It won’t be long before someone claims the Clintons are behind these murders!”
Professor Canter did give ground that “there are also examples of the citizenry drawing attention to something important because they are all in touch with each other.”
We spoke with Sergeant Juan Valencia regarding the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office investigation into Amber Dillon and Cynthia Crane. As in previous inquiries, more information regarding their deaths would not be released until completion of toxicology and autopsies.
Sheriff Matt Kendall said the investigation into Alyssa Mae Sawdell is stalled at the same point.
The only law enforcement agency we were unable to get an update from was Napa Police Department and their investigation into Crystal Lea McCarthy’s death.
These agencies are tasked with bringing closure to these womens’ families and making sense of their untimely deaths. In those efforts, they are asking the public for information regarding these four cases.
If you know anything about the circumstances surrounding Dillon’s or Crane’s death, contact Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office at (707) 565-2650.
If you have information about Sawdey’s death, contact Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office at (707) 234-2100 or the WeTip anonymous crime reporting hotline at (800)782-7463.
If you have information about the death of Crystal Lea McCarthy, contact Napa Police Department Detective Brendt Keown at (707) 257-9592.
Earlier:
- Mendocino County Sheriff Kendall on Rumors a Serial Killer Is Behind Recent ‘Suspicious’ Deaths of Two Mendocino County Women
- Despite Law Enforcement’s Emphatic Denials, Social Media Insists Four Women Are Victims of a North Coast Serial Killer
- Conjecture on Social Media Grows as a Central Valley Woman’s Homicide Is Added to a Dubious North Coast Serial Killer Narrative
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Don’t forget Kathy Griffin.
Why?
Here’s a story from 1/08/2022 on,
“The Shopping Cart Serial Killer”,
and one of his many victims, Stephanie Harrison, 48, from Redding, CA.
So, it’s really not that unheard of.
Have you ever found a woman’s skeleton?
I have.
I wasn’t believed about that either.
As I recall, she was from Eureka, CA.
Kathleen “Kathy” Griffin.
Reported found dead January 28, 2022
Thanks
“After an investigation, authorities do not believe foul play was involved.” https://mynews4.com/news/local/missing-reno-woman-found-dead-in-california
Kym, I wouldn’t put to much stock in these, so called, investigations, if I was you. I could tell you a story about a person you most likely knew of, and eyewitness details that would call their deemed “accidental death”, not only into serious question, but should convince you that it was almost absolutely, a murder, but that the person most certainly didn’t die in the way which was simply just accepted.
And, I can guarantee you of that. 100%
Kym, who builds a fire in the van that they are in?
If that’s not suspicious, I don’t know what is.
I could tell you what I’ve witnessed that would curl your hair, it very nearly curled mine, and it definitely turned it white, and it wasn’t deemed suspicious, but it was way beyond suspicious, that’s for sure, and quite possibly, or even probably, a murder, and someone you knew, but not necessarily.
Maybe we could have coffee sometime, and I’ll tell you what I saw, and who it was. You might find it very interesting. Then again you might not even believe me, even though I was a hands on eye witness.
It might be a real eye-opener for you, as far as just accepting these type of, “investigations”, are concerned.
It sure was for me.
Trust me, your too trusting of them, and maybe even some others.
She had medical issues- she was not murdered. She was a truly kind and incredible woman bless her heart.
Thank you…..Great to hear some empathy and understanding…
Who killed Kadie Lynn Jones?
Discovered deceased and burning near the river behind CalTrans in Garberville Can, on October 9, 2020.
Homicide investigation.
As yet unsolved, to my knowledge.
That means a killer and burner of women, associated with a river, is on the loose, for sure, and has been for some time, very close by.
Tell me this doesn’t fit a pattern…
Fire and all.
Or have they caught this person yet?
I don’t think that they have. So it’s possible.
She is someone’s daughter, and she should not be forgotten.
This isn’t speculation.
All facts.
@Kym..thought we agreed that not communicating with each other was the best idea?
I told you to stop insulting each other and said “To be on the safe side, maybe avoid speaking to each other.” This isn’t insulting. As long as he isn’t insulting then I’m not worried if he responds to you.
Fine just wanted to make sure. I find it’s just best if I Ignore him. Will stick with that. Tired of going down the rabbit hole.
Another good example of speculation was all the claims made because the Friday dashboard wasn’t put out, when it was clearly stated in Thursday Dashboard that it would be delayed until Monday because of holiday.
GF,
[edit]
You know who’s right, stop worrying about proving it to those who refuse to hear it.
Boo again Kym.
Your right
That means a killer and burner of women, associated with a river, is on the loose, for sure, and has been for some time, very close by.
Tell me this doesn’t fit a pattern…
Fire and all.
The pattern is obvious: comments lacking substance, evidence or sense, and pointing that out being intolerable for you, Kym.
I didn’t say she was murdered, did I?
I only said it was suspicious.
And I said not to simply accept every law enforcement investigation’s conclusion as fact, because they are not always accurate, no one is infallible.
And that is a fact.
And that is all I said about that.
And I certainly didn’t call into question her character, which I would not have had any reason to do.
Was she a friend of yours?
“That theory was proven false yesterday when the Rancho Cordova Police Department announced a …transient ….was arrested”
Was it though? That statement is bold. And it makes a lot of assumptions namely his guilt in this murder, and innocence in the remaining unsolved deaths!
The police talk of multiple women dying at the hands of another like they talk about routine mechanical problems in a car. The dehumanization of female victims of assault and murder is systemic sexism.
Exactly! Thank you for saying this!
The online ecosystem is one where “conspiracies thrive” and Professor Canter joked, “It won’t be long before someone claims the Clintons are behind these murders!”
Thanks Matt for saying what needed to be said about this whole thing, its been shameful……
so everyone should ignore the fact that anyone willing to spill the beans on the clintions just happened to die by chance in very odd way right ? Just like they need to throw away us military spec ops statements that there was no snipers anywhere near mrs clintion when she was arriving to speak to the troops right ? Or that her servers and emails were completely gone and no evidence could be obtained . But we should trust what she says the same woman who when she was sos claimed who would answer their phone at 3 am when it has been proven she was briefed on the state of affairs and knew the ambassadors life was in danger . We should all over look the massive holdings of the Clintons in hattie and the weird way that whole thing went down. Yes it is disgraceful that people would jump to say there is a rotting fish somewhere in that family’s dealings when so much smells like rotting fish
Don’t believe everything you think.
When are you going to start?
Don’t believe every “Guest” is me, if that’s what you think…, Rimme.
You are replying to two different “Guests”, at least. 🤔🧐🤷♂️😉😁
That’s what I “know”, not what I “think”.
It’s kind of funny, that you got us confused with each other, and then gave some otherwise undeserving Guest, a “ration”.🤦♂️
Could change your username.
🤔🧐And spoil all the fun?😉 😁
Naah! 😅
So keeping the username Guest, affords you the opportunity to conveniently say, “It wasn’t me, it was the other guy“. Not seeing the fun.
👍 good thinking
No, that’s definitely not why. I’ve never done that.
I would never even suggest it.
I have way more integrity than that.
Show me one instance that I have done that
You wont find even one instance.
Actually Eyeball Kid, I used to change my username on on just about every comment or thread, but a certain commenter whined about that sooo much, a rule was established against doing it. And plus it led to unnecessary delays.
And as soon as I use another username, not only does that create a delay, the way I’m set up, when I try and go back to guest I inadvertently start commenting on threads with more than one username, by mistake.
It never fails, and it’s against the rules, so I end up breaking the rules by accident.
So I just stick with Guest.
It’s kind of like, damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
I figure maybe I won’t take so much flak if other commenters aren’t sure if they are insulting me, or someone that isn’t me.
That’s not why I stick with Guest, call it a fringe benefit.
Less grief, coming from,
“the fringe”.
Re, “I’ve never done that.
I would never even suggest it.
I have way more integrity than that.
Show me one instance that I have done that
You wont find even one instance” …
You did it right here
👍
Why do you follow me around down voting every one of my comments within minutes, no matter which thread they are on, like they represent little kernels of cracked corn, and it’s some kind of race, like they are little “cheep” shots that you don’t want to miss even one little opportunity to amass?
Nope eyeball kid, that’s a misunderstanding on your part. I can see how you misunderstood that but a misunderstanding it is.
Me saying that “I can guarantee that, too”, just means it is something that I can guarantee, in addition to what mlr guaranteed.
Not that I’m two different, “Guests”, that are guaranteeing the same thing.
That misunderstanding is on you eyeball kid, not any deception on my part.
But, to be fair, and completely honest, I did once put three comments in in rapid succession that I intentionally worded so they could be taken either way long long ago, as if to agree with “me, myself, and I”, that I structured in double meaning to also clearly be simply three successive responses, all from me, as a multiple personality joke.
That’s a little different.
See if you can find it.
Other than that, you won’t find anything, and you won’t even find the example I gave you, I would bet.
I didn’t say “I, too, would guarantee that”, and that is what your accusing me of.
I said, “Unfortunately, I can guarantee that, too”.
Mlr made one guarantee and I made a guarantee, too.
No sale.
I have no bone to pick with you, Guest, nor with anyone else around here, for that matter. I like to keep it on the discussion level, as opposed to the accusation level. If I sense something starting to go sideways, my own personal WGAF kicks in, like it just did. 🙂
That’s cool, I only recall you ever being totally reasonable, if you sensed something wonky about what I was saying, I appreciate you calling me out on it. My comments probably do start to go sideways pretty often. Good looking out. I’ll try to stay more focused, and less peripheral.
When there’s enough smoke, I guarantee there’s a fire.
I totally agree, mlr.
And sometimes, when there is smoke, and there’s a fire, your gonna find a body that’s burning, or that is about to start burning.
Unfortunately, I can guarantee that, too.
Buttery Males!!!! Buttery Males!!!
OMG, I just realized from your convincing argument that these recent deaths really are the work of the Clintons!
Internet, don’t disappoint here… I am foreseeing at least one reference to Donald Trump, Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Gates, Joe Biden, and COVID-19/Fauci for good measure.
Don’t forget left wing commie liberals having something to do with it
Incomplete theory.
Only with George Soros included will you get the tinfoil-chastity award.
Incomplete theory.
Only with George Soros included will you get the tinfoil-chastity award.
Oh, and it’s Agenda 21 at work….of course😂😂😂😂
You can probably squeeze antifa and critical race theory in too.
COVID-19 didn’t hang itself.
Don’t forget The Pope…
Well, at least one of them…
Or The Cardinal…
Or the… The… (you get the idea).
Kym, did you catch that one?
It was subtle, a very subtle hint…
Cryptic even …
For you to ponder…
Here’s a little tidbit to stoke you…
Contrary to popular speculation
Being, “unvaccinated”, doesn’t kill you.
It’s just that there is a small chance, that the Covid19, might.
And also, a small chance, that the vaccinations, might.
Just an FYI, FWIW.😉
QAnon did it.
Is that better?
.
You should sue Alex Jones for the severe psychological damage he’s done to you!
The Clinton Cartel…
Not so shameful. It doesn’t insult the victims to take note of the similar circumstances, and speak of them. The Weaverville “case” never seemed like a case, and many comments here reflected that. Burying ones head in the sand isn’t offering respect though. They mention linkage blindness. That is a phenomenon that has played a part in many investigations. Having a group of unsolved separate murders by domestic violence, or od’s isn’t much more comforting or “nice”.
Another “environmental” factor might be the Holiday season. I suspect there might be upticks in domestic violence around certain times of year.
If someone has credible evidence what happened to these missing women by all means report it. . What exactly is the point of referencing other cases other than just trying to prove a point. And it was shameful all the speculation about the woman that was found. Why inject more fear into the situation and cause grief for the family.
The shameful thing is you trying to shame people for speculation.
There’s no shame in speculation.
I lost a loved one in a traffic accident. I would not have wanted to hear speculation about what happened. I believed it to be a terrible accident (which it was) Would not have wanted to hear a bunch of speculation about what caused it. It was painful enough without some a**h***e telling me it could have been something else.
And some of the comments about the missing woman were shameful.
What if your daughter went missing and people started telling you about serial killings that had happened lately in your area how would that make you feel? As a father I would want people to just STFU unless they had some important information.
Ok shame police, whatever you say.
Scroll down see what More damage than help has to say about it. I couldn’t have said it better.
Yet the Rancho Cordova police issue a terrible descriptive, extra info -the-public-doesnt-need account of the crime too. Things I cant read as a parent of a lady that age. That is somehow more respectful to her family? I hope they have good evidence linking the convenient crazy homeless guy to the crime…it would be nice to wrap up the case without involving anything complicated, like a criminal ass cop like the Rohnert Park Robbers or the Ukiah raper…
Apparently, what the Rancho Cordova Police Department had to say about the victim, or the suspect, wasn’t offensive.
They’re lucky they didn’t go as far as to conjecture that the suspect had possibly struck before!
And say the suspect might be a “SERIAL KILLER ?”
No way!
Because that would have
totally “CROSSED THE LINE ! ”
(and then, “they’d be in for it”, for sure!)
I was almost killed by a serial killer many years ago. He was threatening to cut me up. He had killed several women in the city I was in. They were cut to pieces. The police laughed at me when I reported it and never seriously pursued it. AFAIK the man was never arrested.
I find it disrespectful to victims and potential victims of serial killers to shame anyone mentioning if there is any chance of a serial killer. There may or may not be one responsible for all of these 4 killings but there is definitely “linkage blindness”. People are compensating for that because they *do not trust LE to look at that possibility closely enough*!
Whenever a woman is found kidnapped and held on a property bring the damn dogs!!
Uh, yes, yes there is shame in baseless speculation about murder victims. It is a shameful thing to do.
It’s not baseless speculation. Your opinion means next to nothing to commenters who are speculating about a serial killer. I guess you think people should shut up and close mouths, probably into censorship and mandates.
Like I said your opinion means nada.
The only shame is you trying to shame people.
Bringing up your loved one who died in a car accident to try to make a point is shameful in my opinion.
It is actually the definition of baseless, because there is not a shred of evidence to support it. My opinion means next to nothing? On an anonymous local comment section? You bet! Guess how much your opinion means? Also nothing! “Probably into censorship and mandates?” Let’s review how freedom of speech works: you’re allowed to say whatever BS you want, that’s your right and you’re clearly exercising it. But the flip side of that is everyone else in the world has the right to think your opinion is stupid (like really, really stupid) and tell you exactly that. See how that works both ways? You have the right to think what you want, and so do we.
If showing empathy and understanding to someone who has lost a loved one is shameful so be it.
That loved one would be proud that I stood up for what is right. That was how she was taught
Nice virtue signaling, don’t sprain yourself patting yourself on the back.
“Lots of nice homes, are totally built, on speculation”
Anonymous Contractor.
More like calling out your lack of virtue.
That’s not very nice.
More like justthe use of a different connotation of “speculation”, and a different connotation of “values”, both connotations which are unrelated to those that might be negatively associated, somehow, with, “conjecture”, and it’s associated drawbacks.
Upon speculation, I can follow the “rails” of the “train” of thought, that led to the “Andrew” quote.
And even how it stopped at “Carnegie Station”.
But, concluding that it is certainly what transpired, would merely be conjecture.
The quote certainly could be construed that way, nothing wrong with that, I just don’t agree with the idea that, it is what Andrew Carnegie really meant.
Having, “speculated”, I will now, “conjecture”, that a quote from Andrew Carnegie concerning, “speculation”, would have more to do with “financial speculation”,
and less to do with, “conjecture”.
But, it is virtually certain.
Non-financial, “speculation”, say as a mental exercise, is akin to, simply, “contemplating ones navel”, or say, “meditating”.
No harm in that.
“Financial speculation” would be the connotation associated with “parasitism’, and not “mental speculation”, which is just, pondering.
“Conjecture”, is much different, than, “speculation”, if that is what your referring to.
I’m not really one to ever speculate, financially.
To conjecture, on the other hand, that is a totally different story…
And as far as Carnegie’s quote, there are,”monetary values”, and then there are, “moral values”,
and they are very different, too.
As far as, “speculation” being “parasitic”, in any way, upon, “values”, that would only ever apply to “financial speculation”, and never, “mental speculation”.
Robert M. Price said that.
It’s got to be much, much, more shameful, to incorrectly conclude, accidently or intentionally, that an actual murder victim, was simply the victim of an, “accident”, wouldn’t you say?
I would.
How is that relevant at all?
He is trying to get back at me. Referring to me posting earlier about an accident. Totally uncalled for as far as I’m concerned. and sad.
It’s farther up the thread
That’s pure conjecture.
Totally relevant.
It’s totally possible that a victim of murder, could be misatributed to being a victim of an accident, so no suspect was ever even sought? Maybe intentionally?
Wouldn’t that be much worse than conjecture that an accident might be murder?
At least it should be given due consideration.
Sure, let’s give it the consideration it’s due: about five seconds, and then it’s easily dismissed. It isn’d due much consideration at all when it’s made by an anonymous commenter, with no actual information, on a local news article about how there is no connection between these women’s deaths. Sure, it’s possible. But it’s ridiculously unlikely. And you keep saying “But what if…what if it’s the most unlikely explanation?” Like I said before…you absolutely have the right to think that. But no one else in the world, including the police, have the responsibility to take your opinion seriously or give it any consideration at all. “Due consideration…” the words have meaning, dude. You aren’t due anything here.
It’s already been reported, as you have noted, that the missing woman from the “Weaverville case” has, fortunately, already been found safe.
The rest of them, have, unfortunately, been confirmed dead.
So, the only hope we really have, is to try and prevent more deaths.
And if we call attention to the missing, even excessively,as if that is even possible, then it may increase the likelihood that they are thoroughly searched for, as it may have in this case, lead to them being found quickly, and still alive.
Nothing shameful about that.
It should be rejoiced.
“even excessively”, some online wanna-be detective with far less info than law enforcement already has? No. That’s just stroking one’s own ego, needing to be heard (again and again), fantasy assistor.
Pushing it, Rimme
Just so you know, I have been respectfully resisting the urge to reply, to this kind of “bait”, as you’ve requested. But it is “tempting” bait. 🤷♂️😉
Boooooo.
Rimme is completely right and justified to say that.
[edit]
Not attacking you Kym, just responding.
👍
I down voted Kym, with respect.
Rimme was just speaking the truth. Should be applauded for that
Also, let’s take it one step further here and keep in mind that law enforcement in each mentioned jurisdiction have each ASKED the PUBLIC for any information they may have pertaining to each individual case at hand.
This would mean that should no information arise, the next priority SHOULD be to take consideration of some of the speculation taking place .
One cannot simply invite the public to take part in discussions that could possibly help narrow the possibilities, and then discredit those theories because it should be known that two of those young ladies in fact very possibly knew each other as they shared mutual acquaintances and that in itself has not once been a point or “credible ” topic.
I’m just saying if the cops are so interested in finding the right information they have to be willing to swallow their pride and give the community a chance to speculate if needed and to me it seems that it must be, cause they are clearly requesting that from the public yet when viable leads arise out of those requests, it would also appear that they have gotten shut down before they have been truthfully fully evaluated. There is a reason or two why people are feeling like this. Because blindness is a factor that should DEFINITELY BE CONSIDERED.
They are asking for RELEVANT information. They discredit BASELESS theories. The speculation drowns out the real information, do you understand that? Wading through a bunch of ignorant “HAVE YOU CONSIDERED A SERIAL KILLER?” tips just wastes time.
In my experience, depending on which county your dealing with, for example when I called Mendocino with what I thought may have been something relevant to a hit and run fatality recently in Covelo, they were very professional and appreciative, and assured me that although my information ended up being unrelated, they still encouraged ANY information.
Humboldt, not so much…
I’d say it was more discouraged here. It’s a wonder anything is solved at all.
Including false information based on conjecture? Do they actually want internet rumors? Do you think that?
Is that what I said?
Yeah, you said “any.”
Tell it to the judge.
🤦♂️That would be a “no”…
That’s not what I said.
Your evidence would never “stick”.
Who is following who?
Your comment is 3 minutes after mine., Supposedly, a reply to a comment from ABA, from 4 hrs ago?
Totally adds up.🤷♂️🤦♂️
Yep, you said it, law enforcement has asked the public for “Information”. Full stop. They did not ask for social media down-the-rabbit hole speculation, Wild even. Got “information” to share with the law? OK, then share it … with the law. And if anyone wants to actually sleuth potential crime, then sleuth away. But such does not require posting and replying every bit of brain-fart on an online news story. Surely there are better, more appropriate, online venues available to play sherlock. If I were close to or a family member of a missing, disappeared, or murdered, I’d be troubled by some of the posts I’ve read, here, to a here posted news story.
Amen
👏
I told you she was partying in Redding.
Here is what isn’t so comforting, as well…
Knowing damn well that a
certain death attributed to an accident, was anything but attributable to that particular accident, because you were a hands on, eye witness, and yet, the “official determination”, after whatever, so called, “investigation” took place, of the cause of the associated person’s death, determined that particular accident, was,”in fact”, the cause of the person’s death, when , IN FACT, it damn sure wasn’t.
I guarantee it.
Details that would prove it.
From what I eye-witnessed first hand, what I saw, and what I felt with my own hand, it was a botched investigation.
Is that “credible evidence” enough?
To be sure.
So I damn sure know for a fact that anyone who just believes these dubious conclusions based on these dubious investigations are even close to being necessarily factual, is simply very naive, and hasn’t seen, what I have seen.
That’s silly everyone know it wasn’t the Clinton’s….. just Hillary!
That type of behavior from ‘Shillary’ is entirely likely!!!
Whether or not there is a serial killer- why do we have four unsolved deaths of women? How many more unsolved cases until the public realizes the only thing police do is regulate where money goes. How many man hours are spent busting grows (small or large legal or illegal) while the casefiles of ‘suspicious’ deaths pile between mendo and humboldt? Violent crimes should be the first priority of our police. Protect and serve us or protect and serve the financial interests of the state? Human life deserves better. Shame.
I’m not really comforted by the prospect of four separate murdering creeps running around any more than I would be about hearing there’s no serial killer.
At this point, there is nothing to base the characterization of “murder”. Labeling a death as “suspicious” does not equal homicide. Sadly, there are more common causes of death that are initially labeled suspicious, namely overdoses, that require toxicology tests which can take months.
That, in fact, might be the bigger story. Why is law enforcement’s forensic science infrastructure so incredibly slow to provide findings from arguably routine exams such as toxicology screenings?
“Suspicious”, does not mean, “no foul play suspected”, or, “from natural causes”, either, quite frankly.
I’m not the one characterizing the deaths as anything. You described the crimes suggesting “the prospect of four separate murdering creeps”. There is no evidence of that, and that is pure speculation.
Could they be homicides? Sure. Do we have any information at this point that points that way? No.
It’s okay to say, “We don’t know yet.”
I did? or Rob Ash did?
Who’s jumping to the wrong conclusions now?
That would be you.
I never said anything about “murderous creeps”.
It’s okay for you to simply only say, we don’t know, yet, too…
So just say that if that’s what you think.
I’ll ask you also, have you found the skeleton of a missing woman before, along the shore?
I have.
She was from Eureka.
Or…
A dead man in a wreck that was an obvious set up made to look like an accident?
Or…
And an OD of a man that had just received an inheritance, with a missing accomplice?
Etc.
No foul play suspected in any of those cases either.
I watched as two out of three of those likely or definite murders get swept under the rug.
Things aren’t always as they appear.
Changes your perspective.
And who builds a fire in the back of their van while they are in it?
If that isn’t suspicious, I don’t know what is.
Or the sudden passing of a former sohum woman in her 50’snup in Trinidad, caught up in a $700,000 IRS lien / property seizure from her dead husband’s estate, who was both last seen (displaying obvious medical emergency or drug induced behavior) and then “found” again, the next afternoon dead , by the boyfriend (to whom she had lent 100’s of thousands of dollars, which he had reportedly recently stopped making any attempts to repay.)
Another dead lady. Suicide? Random natural causes? (Unintentional) overdose? Or murder.
It was unreported. Investigation efforts minimal. Swept under the rug is an accurate description.
Unfortunately death investigations around here seen to involve lazy law enforcement men taking the word of other men, with women throttled and diminished. Especially once they are dead.
And who the heck murdered Stephanie Gawboy?
HCSO is lazy lazy lazy , except when it comes to their 🥒 abatement efforts .
No, motels are known to house serial killers
Doesn’t ring a bell. How recently?
Barking up the wrong tree,
Matt LaFever.
How many dead people have you found, Matt LaFever?
Give me the number.
Any?
Even one?
Please be specific.
Crickets.
Come on Matt LaFever,
How many?
Any?
Even one?
How much real first hand experience do you even have, on the subject?
None?
Let’s hear it.
Baiting much?
Why do you refer to it as “baiting”?
Just looking for some answers, from people questioning my character, and judging me, telling me that what I do is inappropriate, and that somehow, law enforcement is infallible.
My “character”, might surprise you, from time to time…
From one extreme to the other.
This guy questioned me, so what’s wrong with it, if I’ve also got questions for him?
How does finding dead bodies prove one’s character?
You are paraphrasing.
I didn’t say that, you did.
What is the likelihood that you would change your already made up mind about me, if I was to explain it to you?
Not likely, I would think.
So, what’s the use?
Suffice it to say, that either they weren’t all for sure dead, or weren’t quite dead yet, when I found them, and some situations, (fortunately not the victims), demanded attention more urgently than others, either way.
Think, FIRE!
What the fuck would you do, ABA, run away? Not me. Think, run towards. That what I did. And I gave it every bit of what I had to give, right up to the point that I was about to start burning to, and then I had to give up, or start burning, too. That’s how it proves my character, ABA. That’s how.
Does that mean I’m crazy?
Maybe, maybe it does. I don’t GAF.
But, thanks for the reminder.
I still shake, just thinking about it.
It’s been nigh of 18 years, and I thought I had quit shaking from the memory 12 years ago, until today. So yeah, thanks a bunch.
And that doesn’t even include the ones that I happenstance upon, and ran towards, that lived.
How many of those?
Way, way, more. Beyond my ability to count or remember. Some I thought would die, that lived, some I thought would live, that may have died. And even one that crashed into the river, was badly injured, that ended up hating me, for my assistance like it was my fault he went to jail for a spell. I’ve stopped for cops that wrecked after passing me to make sure they were ok.
And, so, how does my use of conjecture, prove my character?
Wouldn’t that be conjecture on your part?
As to your question, it proves that I have at least had some experience, with deaths from overdose, from an “accident” that was clearly staged, another “accident” that I basically watched the man die, whose head injuries were a little inconsistent with the mechanism of injury, and one whose injuries were, one from a suspicious drowning, floating in Humboldt Bay, one discovery of skeletal remains, found partially exposed on the shore at Shelter Cove, of a woman from Eureka, from an unknown cause, and one from a gunshot wound, determined to be self inflicted.
And most pertinently to this article, another that I just remembered, a blond haired woman, in a sleeping bag, that I didn’t discover but happenstanced upon, just after law enforcement arrived and confirmed her death, at the mouth of Bear Creek, about a quarter mile upstream of where Kadie Lynn Jones’ body was found.
Pre Carl Carter bridge, low water bridge era.
She should be included in this article as well, as Kadie Lynn Jones.
Six of these I happenstanced upon at random.
Way more than my share. Way more. Many people have very little or no experience with this.
All 9 of these deaths were suspicious, as far as I am concerned, except one, and how many arrests, convictions, or even serious investigations, for that matter?
Not One.
Excuse me if I seem a little callous. Cut me some slack.
👍
How does not finding dead bodies prove one’s character?
About the same way as finding dead bodies proves it…not at all.
I knew explaining it to you would be a waste of time.
👍
Depends on whether you run away or not.
Anyone who doubts that their is at least one serial killer loose in our community has not been paying attention…
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/ca-james-eugene-jones-43-humboldt-county-poi-serial-murders.376261/
And Jeffery Epstein committed suicide. Or didn’t.
Why does the Rancho Cordova police department allow a large homeless camp to exist here https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Rancho+Cordova,+CA/38.6186653,-121.2947604/@38.6188188,-121.2966712,1706m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!4m7!1m5!1m1!1s0x809add04d3e5f3ed:0x94bf4e65c74e2554!2m2!1d-121.302728!2d38.5890723!1m0 despite receiving many reports of violent crime? Are they complicit in the death of Emma Roark? Are they really going to keep allowing these type of camps to exist in public parks and right next to neighborhoods? This is a war of violence against women.
Hats off to Matt for writing a great, very informative article, especially the great discussion with the UK prof and all the legwork with area law enforcement.
I really enjoy hearing my neighbors’ real opinions on local issues (whether or not I agree or disagree, whether or not they are right or wrong, whether or not they are politically correct).
Human brains are naturally great at recognizing patterns so it isn’t surprising that people look for patterns when several area young women are found dead under suspicious circumstances.
I can understand why the area LE are awaiting the results of the toxicology testing. Btw, CDC says fentanyl is the leading killer of 18 to 45 year olds.
C’mon guys we all know or have known someone who was held against their will around here and we all know someone who knows someone who was murdered or has disappeared in our area! Just because your a drug addict or died of an overdose it does not mean there was no foul play involved, in fact often the opposite. We all know more needs to be done about the murders and disappearances in the Emerald Triangle. More funding for local law enforcement maybe? Whatever the case, should have been done long ago!
Do you think some of the fentanyl overdoses in the local area are actually murders?
If a fentanyl user is murdered via fentanyl OD, how would LE be able to differentiate between an accidental OD and a murderous OD?
For that matter, if a fentanyl user committed suicide by fentanyl, how would LE know that it was suicide, not accidental OD?
If one illegal drug is cut with a more dangerous drug but the user is unaware of it and therefore likely to overdose, why would that not be at least criminal manslaught? The motive is profit and the result inevitable. The only difference between that and murder is pretty much intent. If a person supplied an adulterated drug when they knew death would result and they just didn’t care or even wanted the death, then proving murder is not that far a leap.
I can see manslaughter charges for fentanyl OD deaths but I think it will be unlikely (but not impossible with enough corroborating evidence) to prove murder of a habitual fentanyl user by intentional fentanyl OD.
Fentanyl ODs are the leading cause of death for young adults in USA (more than covid, for example). We have to make sure everybody is aware of how deadly fentanyl is.
This.
It’s called a “hot shot” and it definitely happens more than we think. Someone gives an intentional overdose to a fellow user, typically in romantic relationships, as a way to murder them.
Sorry but, no, as to “we all know or have known someone” murdered or disappeared. That implies everyone has first-hand association with gone and/or dead. Now if “know of”, most people might. Important distinction. If we all personally knew of murdered and disappeared, probably be thousands gone all around us last X years or so, with law enforcement citing national emergency, media screaming Ruby “Blood Red” Triangle top o their printer-press lungs, investigators crawling round everywhere.
Just my take. All of these women are attractive. That makes me think the serial killer must be attractive as well. Somehow he’s been able to lure these women into a vulnerable situation that resulted in their death. Seems obvious, but have they checked to see if these women were using dating apps before their disappearance and if so who did they connect or have contact with?
Ok that narrows it down, definitely not anyone from humboldt Mendo or trinity 😆
“Pretty” funny!
I’m definitely off the list!
🤔🧐 Yeah, me too.
I was going to say earlier that it gives me an alibi, but I didn’t want anyone thinking that would somehow incriminate me, just that it would certainly rule me out. 🥴😁
Well hot damn, Sherlock Holmes in the house.
You keeping an absolutely ridiculous, fabricated falsehood in the mind of an idiot going sure isn’t helping law enforcement or these grieving families. These women did not die 90 miles away; that’s another lie. Since when is it 90 miles from Napa, California to Humboldt or Rancho Cordova. These women didn’t even have the same cause of death.
👍
no ones attributing serial killer status to all the missing and murdered Indigenous women.
I would think that four unsolved homicides, of a suspicious nature, would prompt the investigating departments to not only consider the possibility that they are connected in some way but to also move forward in their investigations as if they in fact are connected. There is definitely something to be said about maintaining a certain level of secrecy when dealing with homicide investigations as far as the public is concerned. But it seems to me that the officers who were questioned about the possibility Seem to have excuses as to why that theory (the theory of this possible serial killer) is not sound. Dismissing a concept such as linkage blindness simply because you say or or assume that these agencies share information with each other because we are all part of this rural area seems more defensive to me than objective I am definitely no homicide investigator but it seems to me that there are enough glaring similarities that I would consider the possibility until it had been proven otherwise with factual evidence. I mean 4 homicides of a suspicious nature in such close time And relatively close geographical proximity. All 4 victims female all 4 bodies dumped (now I am assuming) not not where the murder was committed or Where the initial abduction occurred Seems to be enough evidence enough evidence to consider this a little more than a coincidence.
“At least”, 4 victims…
Kadie Lynn Jones’ burning body was found not that long ago, and totally fits the pattern.
Why only go back so recently?
Whoever killed Kadie Lynn Jones, is still on the loose.
Is that even still an active investigation?
It ought to be part of these, or more approximately, these should be included as part of that investigation.
I completely agree. Also to be fair there is plenty of speculation in my comment I suppose you couldn’t call these homicides yet but They don’t really resemble the circumstances of any of the drug overdoses that I have seen and kadie Lynn Jones was certainly not an accident. I would think it Is sensible to group these investigations together or at least reasonable.
Thank you.
The Kadie Lynn Jones investigation, is a homicide investigation.
The proper order, it would seem to me, would be that all these other cases, should be compared to it, for similarities and patterns, instead of the other way around.
An obvious pattern will never be noticed, by only looking into the future cases, while ignoring the past cases.
And she should be included in an article such as this one, not excluded.
Unless you of course the whole, “objective”, of the article, is to dismiss the possibility of these 4 women, being the victims of homicide at all, let alone by the same individual.
Then of course it would be imperative, to specifically not include Katie Lynn Jones, because she IS associated with a homicide investigation.
It would undermine the narrative, and we can’t have that now, can we?
Two cents in. I know Mikilo Rawls. He went to school with my daughter and they dated for a while. He started showing up at my house, where my daughter and her kids live, I believe it was in late November, but did so quite a few times in December. When I looked at the time frame of the other women who have died, I don’t think that it is possible that he would have done anything to them. He had no vehicle, for one thing, so transportation would have been very difficult for him. He had changed, quite a bit, since his friendship with my daughter. His behavior, recently, was very strange. He seemed paranoid but also kept talking to us about his inner journey. He must have stopped by three or four times during this time frame.
I am so sad about poor Ms. Roark and this must be so difficult for her family. My thoughts and prayers are with them. I don’t know how this will resolve and I am mindful that Mikilo, while arrested has not been tried or found guilty. If he has done this horrible crime, it boggles the mind that he was as close to my family as he recently was. We hadn’t seen him in over a decade, and all of the sudden, he was around. You never know.
Good comment regarding his not being tried yet or found guilty. All this talk of “speculation” and nobody seems to care about this aspect (assumed innocent until proven guilty). The officers who are on the case seem sure it is him due to “forensic evidence”, but do not say what that evidence is. If one checks the track record of Sacramento law enforcement one wonders if the suspect being Black and homeless has anything to do with it. I am all for catching whomever did this and feel great sorrow for the victim and family, but let’s not jump to conclusions too quickly. That thought might bring a cry of outrage from those who “believe” the suspect has been caught and that solves everything, but we should withhold judgment for the time being.
👍
Sharing potentially case-worthy worthy assumptions with law enforcement is one thing, but excessive speculation in online media is another. The primary outcome of the latter appears mostly about the poster trying to look somehow intelligent and helpful. If, as to past instances, they get it wrong, they should take the clue and desist. They should not double-down on poor ideas; they should not promote (encourage) continued excessive attention-drawing, continued excessive online speculation. Got something potentially worthy to share as to a case, or cases? Then contact law enforcement, this as opposed to singing what you yourself think is “obvious” to the internet masses. Cuz the latter action isn’t really about helping any case move forward. Rather, it’s about … you.
I’m going to guess that you were talking about my comment I’m glad that it came across exactly how it’s supposed to the comment is about me or more specifically my opinion formulated through speculation just like every other comment and opinion about this article And I am hardly trying to look intelligent just trying to speak my mind
To my knowledge, not you. (Unless, by chance, you post under multiple names here. At least one has been caught up doing that here, changing writing style, whatever. How many folk post regularly, multiple names, multiple times a day — or respond to posts regularly, multi names — is anybody’s guess. The funniest however are those who respond to posts over and over again, sometimes including their own, a certain need (need) to always add more … wind.
When I see them talking to themselves, I worry even more about their mental well-being.
Featured snippet from the web
1 in 5 Americans will experience a mental illness in a given year
” The fact is, “5 in 1 American’s”, already are experiencing a mental illness.
Featured snippet from the “Guest”.
👍
👍
That poor transient! I hope he gets the help he needs! Why even arrest him? Shouldn’t a crisis counselor be able to handle this situation?
Those who claim to discover everything but produce no proofs of the same may be confuted as having actually pretended to discover the impossible.
Archimedes
Just because each victim was not killed in the EXACT same way means absolutely nothing. There’s a hearty handful of serial killers that either adapt/alter their style or really have no specific murder style at all (look up Ivan Milat if you want to read one that’s truly terrifying). But honestly, it’s even more horrific to think it’s okay to commit open murder against women right now in NorCal and multiple people are getting away with it. I’ve said it before: LADIES please take self defense classes, always keep trusted love ones informed on your whereabouts, invest in your CCW or take a basic firearms safety course so you are familiar if you’re ever in a situation when you need to use one. It’s better to be educated and to have these skills and never use them than to be ignorant when your life is on the line. Education is the best weapon of all.
“One picture is worth a thousand words”.
Fred R. Barnard
“A thousand words leave not the same deep impression as does a single deed”.
Henrik Ibsen
And this little tidbit, of advice from a genius, on how one’s noodle might learn to loaf…
We probably have more than one.. What better place to hide? I also wonder about the homeless woman who was found by the Eel river in Garberville or Redway a while ago.
“Through a combination of license plate readers, the ubiquity of surveillance cameras, and tracking human movement with GPS technology, Sergeant Grassman assessed the possibility of a serial killer moving across a large geographic footprint and entering multiple municipalities unnoticed: “It’s almost impossible to get away with that [anymore].””
What a crock. Like they’re hiring anyone to go through all that. & Is there even ONE license plate reader in Humboldt and Trinity?
I can’t help but connect these cases to previous unresponsive attitudes involving crime in this region (Northern California). I agree with others commenting that this seems like more than coincidence that at least four females were mysteriously killed and their bodies dumped in this region on dates that were close together. It breaks my heart that women are held in such nonchalant disregard. It also makes me angry. I want to see some kind of cleanup in our justice system that would put more value on human life and quality of life especially for women, i.e. not having to live in fear, some kind of feeling of security that the people we hire (and our taxes pay for!) are doing their jobs to make this a decent place to live.
And for those who would like to make snarky comments, check today’s Press Democrat, front page, about a string of cold cases that for years were unsolved and are now (finally!) attributable, in some cases possibly, in one case definitely, to one assailant/murderer. When they found his dna was connected to one cold case murder, he was already in prison and had in fact died there, on charges of crimes similar to the tragic ones committed years ago on little girls and young women. Not to say that his not being caught initially was the fault of law enforcement, but just think of the difference it could have made to his later victims if he had been!
Could this have been Troy Edward Driver?
Troy Edward Driver is the guy to check out. He is also the alleged killer of Naomi Irion in fernley Nevada.please get the FBI working to connect the dots.
Barbie and others missing what about James Ugene Jones .issuing five still st it