Missing/Murdered California Women, 1965 to 1979.

I’ve been keeping a running list of girls/women that went missing/were killed in Oregon from 1969 to 1979, and I realized this morning it would be a good idea to do it with California too. I’m constantly coming across new names from the Golden State, I’m going to put them all here.

Doreen Heskett (March 25, 1963, Napa): on the afternoon of March 25, 1963, five-year-old Doreen was walking home with a friend after a playdate; when it came time for the girls to go to their respective houses they parted ways, and this was the last time Doreen was seen alive. When she failed to return home for dinner, her mother contacted the Napa Police Department and reported her as missing. I know this falls outside of my time frame, but it’s suspected that Heskett was killed by a man I will be bringing up again later, Claude Ray Junior (he killed his daughters, and Doreen went to kindergarten with one of them).

Morgan Rowan (1965 & 1968): she wasn‘t killed or is missing but she is worth mentioning: Morgan Rowan survived two separate encounters with Rodney Alcala. The first one took place when she was thirteen (and Alcala was twenty-one): Rowan scratched Alcala’s arm to get his attention at a teen nightclub, and he responded by dragging her into a back alley, beating her, and knocking her unconscious before the club owners intervened. The second encounter took place when she was sixteen in 1968 and was much worse: Alcala pulled her into a bedroom at his Hollywood home during a party, then dropped a metal bar securely into brackets to lock the door: from there, he wrapped his belt around his fist, punched Rowan with extreme force directly between the eyes, then used a knife to cut a tie off her neck, which caused heavy bleeding. When Morgan got to the point where she feared she was going to die, her friends broke into the room and helped her flee. When she spoke to law enforcement, an officer dismissed the severity of the event, and she never filed a formal police report.

Brenda Sue Sayers (January 7, 1965, Brawley): on the day of her disappearance, the ten-year-old left home to go roller-skating at a nearby school. A witness spotted her talking to a stranger shortly before she was last seen, which prompted an LA Police Department sketch artist to draw a composite image based on the description, which was printed on the front page of every local newspaper, which quickly led to the identification of the suspect. The child’s partially dressed body was found on January 10, in a concrete water meter well near Mecca. Her killer was identified as Robert Eugene Pennington, a convicted sex offender who had recently escaped from Atascadero State Hospital.

Floy ‘Faye’ Redmon (May 6, 1965, Orange): theseventy-five-year-old widow was murdered inside her home on East Walnut Avenue: her killer had brutally bludgeoned her over the head with the heavy lid of a kitchen pressure cooker. Because Redmon lived alone and had no surviving relatives, her tragic death quickly disappeared from the media and faded away into a cold case file for nearly thirty-nine-years when Orange Police Department detectives tracked a lead to a Texas prison. Confronted with the evidence, inmate William Self officially confessed to the 1965 homicide.

Carol Frances Metzener-Norton (June 2, 1965, El Cerrito): Carol’s sister went to visit her trailer home on June 3, 1965 and found the lights on and coffee on the stove; her husband, Harvey Arnold Norton, was later arrested and charged with the $11,700 holdup of a Sandia, TX bank on July 14, 1965. He told investigators that he had left his wife in a Portland motel on June 14th after the two had gotten into an argument. and from there he went to Texas. Harvey’s car was found abandoned in downtown Corpus Christi, and inside it, detectives found bloodstained floor mats with strands of human hair and a dirty shovel; he was charged and served jail time only for the robbery. In 1971, Norton drove to an isolated trailer home in Marshall, TX, tied up the two teenage girls who lived there and stole their fathers rifle; when one of their boyfriends showed up and tried to rescue them, Norton killed him. Immediately after, he ate some vanilla wafers with peanut butter, drank a six-pack of beer, then used the same rifle to kill himself.

Diane Louise Gerrish (discovered on August 30, 1965, Albany): three soldiers discovered the remains of the nineteen-year-old cosmetologist on the grounds of the San Francisco Presidio, an army post near the southern entrance of the Golden Gate Bridge; investigators determined that she had been severely beaten and choked to death with a garrote made out of her own clothing approximately eight hours prior to her discovery; she had also been subjected to severe post-mortem sexual mutilation. Following an argument with her family regarding the use of a car, Gerrish left her home on Friday, August 27, 1965, telling her parents she was going to a movie. She was later spotted at a liquor store purchasing cigarettes and gum before getting into a late-model sedan with an unidentified person. On the morning of Monday, August 30, 1965, three soldiers discovered her body hidden in a bed of ice plant near Lincoln Boulevard, close to the southern entrance of the Golden Gate Bridge.

Jeanette Louise Ray (disappeared on October 4, 1965, Napa): Jeanette was last seen with her seven-year-old sister, Renay Ray, on the morning of Monday, October 4, 1965; their father claimed he had dropped the pair off in front of Westwood Elementary School at 8:30 AM, but they never made it to class. On October 10th, Renay’s body was found at Schooner Gulch State Beach at the bottom of a 90-foot cliff by a family looking for seaweed; her cause of death was asphyxiation. Their father, Claude Ray Junior was arrested later same day Renay’s body was found and on January 27, 1966 he was found guilty of the first-degree murder. He received a life sentence but committed suicide in 1983. Jeanette is believed to have met the same fate as her sister however her remains have yet to be recovered. Ray is also the suspect in the unsolved murder of five-year-old Doreen Heskett.

Cheri Jo Bates (October 30, 1966, Riverside): Bates was found stabbed to death on Halloween 1966 on the campus of Riverside City College after she had been studying at the library; LEO’s said her car had been disabled, and her body was discovered about 100 yards away.

Dorothy Jean William-Vaillancourt (found December 18, 1966, Tiburon): on December 18, 1966, a woman’s body was found on a cliff near the edge of Paradise Drive in Tiburon, California. A hunter made the discovery and alerted authorities. The woman could not be identified and became known as Marin County Jane Doe. It was estimated that the woman was between forty-five and sixty years old at the time of her death. She had auburn red hair, was 5’2” and weighed 105 pounds. She was wearing a red cotton dress and an off-white trench coat. The woman’s cause of death could not be determined.

Lillian Marie Cardenas (discovered on February 3, 1967, Jenner): her mummified and badly decomposed remains were found by a hiker at the base of a steep cliff north in Jenner; they went unidentified for nearly sixty years. An initial autopsy revealed that the woman suffered multiple fractures to her skull and ribs, though investigators at the time could not determine exactly how she sustained those injuries, and because early identification efforts failed, she was buried as a ‘Jane Doe; in the County of Sonoma Cemetery. In 2009, the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office exhumed the body to perform an anthropology review, and it was confirmed that the victim was a white woman between forty and forty -six years of age. A breakthrough occurred in 2023 when the California Department of Justice partnered with forensic genetic analysis company Othram Inc and using genetic genealogy, investigators tracked down living relatives and positively identified the remains as Lillian Marie Cardenas. As of July 2026, her killer remains unknown.

Sue Alice Beaulieu (February 18, 1967, Redwood City): the nineteen-year-old mother of two was found deceased in her Redwood City apartment by her brother; investigators determined she was struck on her porch, moved inside, and killed via ligature strangulation in the bathtub. The killer also turned on all the gas jets in the kitchen before leaving, though her brother and two young children sleeping in the next room; they narrowly survived the gas accumulation. Her murder remains unsolved.

Elaine Kirschke & Orville Drankhan (April 9, 1967, Long Beach): Kirschke was shot in the head along with her lover, Orville Drankhan, in her bedroom; Kirschke’s husband, Jack (a Los Angeles deputy district attorney), was convicted of their murders after a sensational, eighty-eight-day trial dubbed ‘Long Beach’s trial of the century,’ and sentenced to life in prison; he was released after less than ten years, and died in 2004.

Dominga H ‘Dee’ Montoya (April 29, 1967, Bakersfield): twenty-three-year-old Montoya was brutally murdered inside of a 24-hour laundromat in East Bakersfield; she was employed as a receptionist and secretary for California Assemblyman Kent Stacey. At the beginning of his shift, a Kern County Sheriff’s deputy noticed her car outside and went into the laundromat and he discovered her lifeless body crudely stashed in a back storeroom; her clothing had been ripped, and she had suffered severe, fatal head injuries. Because of the brutal nature of the attack and her high-profile job her death made major headlines throughout California. Despite an intensive investigation by local law enforcement, detectives were unable to identify her attacker. As of July 2026, her murder remains an unsolved cold case.’

Lynn Marjorie Bandringa (May 29, 1967, Hesperia): Bandringa was a twenty-one-year-old newlywed who had been married for only seven weeks at the time she disappeared, and lived with her husband, Philip ‘Jan’ Bandringa, in a trailer home located in the 13800 block of Main Street (which doubled as the office for their family business, ‘Bandringa Trailer Sales’). On the day she disappeared, Lynn was left alone to mind the office while her husband and FIL went to Barstow for a service call; a customer later reported seeing her at the office at approximately 5:15 to 5:30 PM. Debris and evidence at the scene indicated she may have been painting a wooden fence in front of the business. Around that same time, two separate witnesses reported seeing her cross Hesperia Road, walking away from the trailer property. A second customer arrived roughly fifteen minutes later to find the office completely empty, and when her husband came home later that evening, he found their two dogs running loose outside. Lynn had left behind her purse, identification, clothing, and all other personal belongings, and Philip reported her missing to the sheriff’s deputies at 11:50 PM.

Enedine Molina & Fermin Rodriguez (June 8, 1967, Sunol): thirty-five-year-old Enedine Molina and her companion, Fermin Rodriguez, were parked on Vallecitos Road in Alameda County, California, when they were confronted by an armed attacker. The man interrupted the couple and ordered them to exit their vehicle, and as Rodriguez stepped out of the car, the assailant shot and killed him. The attacker forced Molina into his own vehicle and drove away from the initial scene. Following reports of gunshots from a nearby resident, local authorities initiated a search and discovered Molina’s body later that evening around 11:00 PM. Due to the similarities in the method of operation, this double homicide is frequently discussed by researchers as a possible unconfirmed early crime linked to the notorious Zodiac Killer, though it has never been officially solved or definitively connected to the serial killer.

Magdalena Barreto (reported as missing on July 11, 1965, Los Angeles): Barreto was the victim of a homicide committed by her husband, and the exact date she went missing is unknown. Her husband, Carlos Ignacio Barreto, claimed during his 1967 California appellate case (People v. Barreto) that she had died in an unwitnessed automobile accident, though police and coroner records found no evidence of any such event nor did they have a body. A jury subsequently found him guilty of voluntary manslaughter, but he appealed the conviction, which resulted in the landmark California Court of Appeal ruling People v. Barreto on November 27, 1967 (even though he lost). As of July 2026, Magdalena has never been recovered.

Cecilia Renee & Roberta Ann Barili (August 9, 1967, Altadena): seven-year-old Cecilia Renee Barili and her six-year-old sister Roberta Ann vanished while playing near their home; following a large search, the sisters were found strangled to death. A suspect was initially convicted of the murders, but he later received a new trial and was acquitted, leaving the case officially unsolved.

Nikki Alexandra Benedict (October 10, 1967, Poway): the fourteen-year-old was walking home from a friend’s house along a dirt path near Poway Road and Carriage Road when she was attacked, suffering fatal stab wounds to her neck and chest.

Verna Smith (February 1, 1968, Matrina): Smith went missing in Feburary of 1968 under suspicious circumstances. Her children were very young at the time of her disappearance and have not heard from her since. Verna’s husband did not file a missing persons’s report.

Anita Louise Piteau (found on March 14, 1968, Huntington Beach): when the young boys playing in the oil fields of Huntington Beach found the deceased woman in March of 1968, she had been dead for only a few hours. Sometime between the night of March 13 and the early evening of March 14, 1968, Anita had been assaulted, severely beaten, and her throat had been slit.

Elizabeth Ernstein (disappeared on March 19, 1968, Mentone): the fourteen-year-old was abducted while she was on her way home from Moore Junior High School in Redland. In May 1969, human remains were discovered in a shallow grave near Wrightwood (about thirty-five to forty-five miles away from her home) but they went unidentified until 2012.

Christine Ruth Cooper (May 25, 1968, Richmond): eighteen-year-old Christine Ruth Cooper was found murdered in a remote area near standard lover’s lanes in Richmond, California. She had been strangled and assaulted.

Wanda Gail Loe (July 26, 1968, Tahoe City): Wanda Loe had been working atSunnyside Restaurant and Lodgefor six weeks as a waitress in North Lake Tahoe, when she failed to show up for work and suddenly disappeared without picking up her last paycheck. Nor had she picked up her mail for about three weeks. Her vehicle, a green 1969 Buick with a black vinyl top and Washington license plates, was found in the parking lot of the restaurant. Her mother reported her missing in August 1968. Sometime shortly before or after her disappearance, Wanda’s campsite in the Blackwood Canyon area near Homewood was dismantled and property stolen from it. In November of 1981, the Nevada County Sheriff’s Office received information that Wanda may have been murdered in Truckee. In 1991, investigators received a tip that a man confessed to a friend to murdering Wanda and burying her somewhere in the Carpenter Valley near Truckee. The suspect committed suicide soon after the confession.

Madeline Anna Babcock (June 30, 1968, Tahoe City): Madeline had a hysterectomy performed at Skyline Hospital in 1963 or 64, She was born with Hydrocephali, She had a bulge on the right side of her forehead due to her condition, This caused her to grow her hair in bangs to cover the sight of it, She has had her nose broken previously, On n a Saturday of June 1968, Madeline (or ‘Lyn’ as called by her friends) called her mother & sister. She informed them she was planning to visit them the following day and would be driven the 20 miles by a friend. She never mentioned who this friend was. This was the last that was ever seen or heard from Madeline. She failed to show up at both her jobs. She worked the assembly line at ‘Plastic Glide’ and as a barmaid in ‘Fred’s Tavern’ both in Santa Monica, California. All her things were missing from her apartment. After her separation from her husband Madeline turned to drink and became an alcoholic. Madeline loved playing the guitar and could sing with a fine voice. She was very close to her family and it was out of the ordinary for her not to have regular contact of some form. She had very few friends in Venice. Madeline was born hydrophilic which means she must have her spine drained with a lumbar puncture every seven years, the last one being when she was fourteen years. There is a possibility she may be suffering from amnesia because of her medical condition.

Dixie Lee Arensen (August 25, 1968, Granada Hills): Arensen was last seen by her husband when she left her home in Granada Hills at 7:30 AM to prepare a bulletin at the church office of Hillcrest Christian Church located at 17531 Rinaldi Street. Her glasses, without which she could not see well, were found on the floor of the small office by her husband who arrived at the church around 9:15 AM the morning of her disappearance. The electric typewriter with which she prepared the bulletin was still running. Her keys were also found in the church office and her blue automobile was parked outside. There were no signs of a struggle. Her purse was missing but a check showed no withdrawals from her personal checking account. She has not been seen nor heard from since.

Mary Lou Boston (September 1, 1968, Sacramento): Boston vanished from Sacramento and is presumed to have been murdered by her husband, Silas Duane Boston. At twenty-three-years-old, the devoted mother of three told her husband she wanted a divorce and intended to take their children. Her body has never been found, and her case remained cold for nearly fifty years.

Wendy Jo Halison (September 29, 1968, Los Angeles): the twenty-two-year-old San Fernando Valley State College (now Cal State Northridge) art student was last seen filling her green Ford Thunderbird up at a gas station (she had plans of buying a hairdryer that had been on sale at a Thrifty drug store on Wilshire Boulevard). When she failed to return home, her family launched a private search and by the following morning, they discovered her Thunderbird parked on Fairfax Avenue; inside the trunk was Wendy’s body. She had been sexually assaulted and strangled to death. In 2016, LAPD cold case detectives ran DNA testing on preserved fluid found on Wendy’s clothing, which cleared all of the known local suspects but triggered a 99% match in a national database to Edwin Dean Richardson, a violent career criminal that was on parole in California at the time of Wendy’s death. He had gone on to murder other women across the country and died in an Ohio prison in 2013.

The Lancaster Desert ‘Red Coffin Jane Doe (found on December 8, 1968, Lancaster): refers to a highly unusual and baffling cold case involving an unidentified woman found buried in the California desert. On December 8, 1968, a group of hunters discovered a shallow grave just 15 feet off a dirt road near 188th Street East and Fort Tejon Road in Lancaster, California. The grave was intentionally concealed from the roadway with rocks, dirt, and dead tree branches.

Betty Lou Jensen & David Arthur Faraday (December 20, 1968. Benicia): were the first confirmed victims of the notorious, unidentified serial killer known as the Zodiac Killer.

Marina Habe (abducted on December 30, 1968, West Hollywood): seventeen-year-old Marina was the daughter of a prominent writer and an actress, and she was abducted from her driveway on December 30, 1968; her body was found days later down a ravine in the Angeles National Forest. Due to the timing, location, and brutality of the crime, her case has frequently been theorized to have links to the Manson Family.

Mary Corrine Amos (December 31, 1968, Montclair): Mary Amos left her home on December 31, 1968, after an argument with her husband. She was staying in a motel in Bell or Bell Gardens and has not been seen since. Her daughter reported her missing in 1991 upon learning that Mr. Amos had not reported Mary missing.

Jeannetta Ruth LaBelle (January 25, 1969, Ojai): Jeannetta was swept downstream during a creek flood. In 1990, partial human remains were discovered along Highway 33 in Ventura County, California, and LEO’s initially scrutinized the remains (they referred to them as the Ventura County Jane Doe) to determine if they belonged to LaBelle. However, comprehensive forensic matching never confirmed an identity, and the connection remains unproven.

Shirley Elizabeth Frew (May 4, 1969, Long Beach): Shirley Stevens was last heard from around 1970 or 1971 when she phoned her mother in Seattle to tell her she thought she had cirrhosis of the liver and needed money. It is unknown where she was at the time, but she may have been in CA, because she lived there for years. She was married twice and had five children

Lompoc Jane Doe (found on August 3, 1969, Lompoc): an unidentified young woman found stabbed to death in a quarry near Lompoc on August 3, 1969; she remains an active cold case with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office

Cecelia Ann Shepard (September 27, 1969, Lake Berryessa): Shepard and her twenty-year-old friend, Bryan Calvin Hartnell, were relaxing on a picnic blanket at Twin Oak Ridge along the shores of Lake Berryessa in Napa County, California. While they were talking, Cecelia noticed a man watching them from a distance. The man disappeared behind a tree and emerged wearing an elaborate, terrifying disguise: a square-shaped, black executioner-style hood with clip-on sunglasses over the eye slits. On the front of the hood’s waistline bib, there was a white cross-circle symbol—the infamous signature mark of the Zodiac.

Reet Silvia Jurvetson (November 14, 1969, Los Angeles): (Estonian: Jürvetson; September 23, 1950 – c. November 14, 1969) was an Estonian-Canadian woman who was murdered in California in November 1969 at age 19. Her body remained unidentified for forty-six years, until an online mortuary photograph was recognized by her family and friends in 2015. Her body was found with over 150 stab wounds from a pen-knife to her neck and upper body, along with defensive wounds on her hands and arms. She had died one or two days before. Her body was disposed of along Mulholland Drive in Los Angeles, California. It appeared that her killer intended for her body to remain unnoticed in the canyon, but it became tangled in the brush. Police believe the murder was likely committed by someone she knew, based on the level of overkill. It is known Reet left her home in Toronto, Ontario, Canada to meet with a man named ‘Jean’ or ‘John’ in California. Weeks after her arrival, Jurvetson contacted family stating she was happy in America, and the return address on the postcard was the apartment in which he lived.

Questa Leone Burns (January 1, 1969, San Bernardino): Questa has always lived in the Los Angeles County/Riverside/San Bernardino County areas. Her family had not seen or heard from her since 1969.

Mary Elizabeth Lozano (February 13, 1969, Venice): Mary Lozano was last seen in Venice, California on February 13, 1969. A family member had checked on the children at 2:15am. Mary had been heard yelling after this time. A neighbor reported seeing a man in the backyard of the Lozano home at 3:00am. The sliding glass door leading into the bedroom of Mary had been left unlocked. The suspect was described as twenty-years-old, wearing dark pants & a dark shirt.

Michelle Kelly Pulsifer (July 1, 1969, Huntington Beach): Pulsifer was last seen in California in 1969. The exact date of her disappearance is unknown, however, she is missing under suspicious circumstances. She was living with her mom, Donna Prentice, her mom’s boyfriend and her six-year-old brother in a house on Tigerfish Circle in July 1969 when she vanished. Sometime during the next two or three days the family suddenly moved to Illinois. Michelle’s brother said he last saw his sister when he was 6 and she asked him to hide her. He hid Michelle under the bed covers, but their mother came and got her. When the family moved to Illinois, the brother was told there was not enough room in the car for Michelle. No one filed a missing-person report.

Darlene Ferrin (July 4, 1969, Vallejo): Ferrin is one of the five confirmed victims of The Zodiac Killer: around midnight between July 4 and July 5, 1969, Ferrin and her nineteen-year-old friend, Michael Renault Mageau were sitting in a parked car at the Blue Rock Springs Park parking lot in Vallejo when a second vehicle drove into the lot and parked near them; shortly after an unknown gunman exited the vehicle with a flashlight and a 9mm handgun, firing multiple rounds directly into the vehicle, heavily wounding both occupants. The gunman initially began to walk away, but upon hearing Mageau groaning returned to fire more shots into the vehicle; Mageau survived the encounter, but sadly Ferrin did not.

Murders Linked to Manson Family Cult (August 1969): I am going to touch on the murders committed by the followers of cult leader Charles Manson as a whole: on August 8–9, 1969 they committed what are known as ‘The Tate Murders:’ members Tex Watson, Susan Atkins, and Patricia Krenwinkel broke into the Beverly Hills home of film director Roman Polanski and brutally murdered his pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate, along with four of her friends: coffee heiress Abigail Folger, celebrity hairstylist Jay Sebring, Polish writer Wojciech Frykowski, and eighteen-year-old Steven Parent. On August 8–9, 1969 they performed ‘The LaBianca Murders’ when Manson and his followers targeted the Los Feliz home of grocery executive Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary; they brutally stabbed them to death. Some miscellaneous additional victims of the Manson cult were musician Gary Hinman, who was killed in July 1969 by Manson family member named Bobby Beausoleil; later in August, they also killed stuntman Donald ‘Shorty’ Shea.

Ann Bernice Duncan (October 3, 1969, San Francisco): Ann Duncan was last seen October 3, 1969, at an appointment with Social Services in San Francisco, regarding placement of her then 6 week old infant son in foster care. She never showed up for her next appointment. The courts later declared the baby was abandoned by all parents, and deemed available for adoption. Routine weekly visits to her other children in foster care abruptly stopped in this same approximate time frame. Ann’s family feels she would not have abandoned her children whom she dearly loved, and although was not able at the time to care for them herself, visited weekly without fail while all were in foster care. Occasional phone calls routinely made to her mother also stopped in this time frame. From 3 different statements Ann made to 3 different people, family feels she was fearful of her well being and suspect she may have been murdered.

Mary Scott (November 20, 1969, San Diego): when the twenty-three-year-old mother of two failed to show up for her job as a cocktail waitress a friend went to her apartment in the City Heights neighborhood of San Diego and found her door kicked open. Scott had been severely beaten, raped, and strangled to death. The case remained completely cold until 2020, when forensic genealogy tied DNA preserved from the crime scene to former Navy sailor John Sipos, who had been arrested in Pennsylvania in October 2020, convicted of first-degree murder in March 2022, and sentenced to seven years to life in state prison.

Elaine Louise Davis (December 1, 1969.Walnut Creek): A seventeen-year-old from Walnut Creek who was abducted from her home. Her body was found floating near Santa Cruz later that month and was identified decades later in 2001 through DNA and dental records.

Cynthia ‘Cindy’ Lee Mellin (January 20, 1970, Ventura): nineteen-year-old Mellin mysteriously vanished from the Buenaventura Shopping Center’s parking lot in Ventura, California; she was a full-time student at Ventura College studying education and was working part-time as a sales clerk at The Broadway Department Store.

Deborah ‘Debbie’ Wharton Beeler (February 22, 1970, Berkeley): was a twenty-three-year-old teacher, graduate student, and political activist whose unresolved murder is frequently discussed due to her ties to high-profile legal figures. She was born at Lawrence Memorial Hosnpital in New London, Connecticut, to parents John and Elizabeth ‘Betty’ Beeler. She grew up in a prominent family from the Chestnut Hill area of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and her family was listed in the local Social Register

Vicki Dawn Lynee Miner (October 30, 1970, Buena Park): around 9 AM, Vicki Lynne Miner, a sixteen-year-old high school student, was going to school. Her parents were notified that she never arrived to her classes or school itself which led them to file Vicki as missing. Dec 11, 2017.

Judith Hakari (March 7, 1970, Sacramento): On the night of March 7, 1970, the twenty-three-year-old nurse finished a late shift at Sutter Memorial Hospital then drove back to her apartment complex located at Alta Arden and Markston Way, where her fiancé was waiting for her. Her car was later found parked in the complex lot with the passenger door ajar, the headlights or interior lights on, and her keys on the floorboard; Hakari was nowhere to be found. Evidence inside the vehicle (which included torn coat buttons and ravels of toweling) pointed towards a violent struggle and abduction from the parking lot. On April 25, 1970, hikers discovered the remains of Judith Hakari in a shallow grave in a remote, rural area near Weimar in Placer County, approximately forty miles away from her home; an autopsy revealed she had been sexually assaulted, beaten, and strangled.

Jacqueline Ann Gasperian (July 1, 1970, Los Angeles): Jacqueline Gasperian was staying with a friend in Los Angeles when she vanished without a trace (sometime in July 1970, not specifically the first); Gasperian was reportedly driving her friend’s vehicle when it was found abandoned on the Santa Monica freeway.

Donna Ann Lass (September 6, 1970, South Lake Tahoe): twenty-five-year-old Lass’ final entry in the casino’s nurse’s logbook (where she worked as a nurse) was recorded around 1:45 AM to 1:50 AM and she vanished without officially clocking out at the end of her shift. The following day, an unidentified man called both her landlord and her employer. The caller claimed Lass had left town abruptly due to a family emergency. Law enforcement later determined the call was a complete hoax. Her vehicle was found parked normally at her apartment complex, and all of her personal items (with the exception of her purse and the clothes she wore to work) remained untouched.

Phyliss O’Brien-Carson (October 1970, French Camp): A thirty-two-year-old mother from French Camp; On October 24, 1970, Phyllis went out with her brother and sister to the Francis Truck Stop, a popular bar and restaurant in French Camp. Late that evening, she called home to check on her children and told her family she was getting a ride home from a friend. She never arrived. Witnesses later recalled seeing her leaving the venue with an unidentified man. Nearly a month later, on November 21, 1970, two pheasant hunters discovered her badly decomposed remains in a rural field in French Camp. Due to severe decomposition, authorities could not establish an exact cause of death, but the manner of death was officially ruled a homicide.

Nancy Bennallack (October 25, 1970, Sacramento): a twenty-two-year-old court reporter who was brutally murdered in her apartment on October 25, 1970. Her case remained cold for over fifty years until investigators used investigative genetic genealogy to identify her killer as a neighbor, Richard John Davis, who died in 1997.

Robin Ann Graham (November 15, 1970, Los Angeles): A eighteen-year-old student who vanished on November 15, 1970, after her car broke down on a Los Angeles freeway. Highway patrol officers spoke with her while she was stranded, but she disappeared while seemingly talking to an unidentified young man. Her body was never found.

Christine ‘Christy’ Marie Eastin (January 18, 1971, Hayward): on the evening Eastin disappeared Eastin spent time shopping with a friend at a local Mervyn’s department store, where she purchased a new pair of boots using money she had saved. After dropping her friend off and returning home, she borrowed her former boyfriend’s 1969 blue Ford Maverick. She promised to wash the vehicle before picking him up from his workplace at midnight. At approximately 10:00 PM, Eastin drove to Charlie’s Car Wash, a self-service facility located at 25400 Mission Boulevard in Hayward. She was never seen again.

Lisa Michele Smith (March 16, 1971, Petaluma): was last seen hitchhiking, a short distance away from her foster home, along Hearn Avenue in Santa Rosa. She was initially reported missing from Petaluma, California, by her foster parents on March 16, 1971. Shortly afterward, a young woman named ‘Lisa Smith,’ was hitchhiking on March 26, 1971, and was picked up by a male driver. He reportedly brandished a gun and threatened to rape her. She jumped out of the pickup, which was going about 55 miles per hour south of Novato, California. She was treated at Novato General Hospital for a skull fracture and multiple, severe cuts and bruises. A nurse at the hospital thought she looked about twenty-one-years-old.

Denise Kathleen Anderson (April 13, 1971, Sacramento): Denise Anderson was last seen by her roommates at their apartment in the early morning hours of April 13, 1971. She has not been seen or heard from since. Anderson was known to wear a wig, black, short hair style. Roommate stated this item was missing from apartment.

Christine Betty Moore (May 1, 1971, McFarland): Christine was last seen by her family when she traveled to visit her mother in McFarland; her daughter (who was only a young child at the time) shared that Mother’s Day in May 1971 was the very last time she ever saw her.

Ingrid Angela Anderson (May 20, 1971, Richmond): on the day Ingrid vanished, her husband (Steven) had reportedly left her home and taken their two young sons to visit a barbershop, and when they returned a few hours later, she was gone.

Debra T. Pscholka (June 5, 1971, Corona): Pscholka was last seen June 5, 1971 in Corona, CA, after going to the movie theater with some friends. Pscholka told them she was going to the local park. The movie theater was on 6th Street but it is no longer there. Debra was last seen around 20.15. Foul play is suspected.

Elizabeth ‘Betty’ Marie Cloer (June 18, 1971, Cameron Park): was a twenty-one-year-old beautician and mother from Eugene, Oregon, who was brutally murdered in Cameron Park (northern California) on June 18, 1971. Her slaying went unsolved for over 30 years, eventually becoming the oldest cold case in California to be successfully resolved using DNA evidence. In 2002, DNA recovered from the crime scene matched Phillip Arthur Thompson, leading to his conviction in El Dorado County in April 2008.

Beatrice Susan Calderon (August 17, 1971, San Jose): Beatrice Calderon was reportedly last seen in the area of Bailey Avenue and Santa Teresa Avenue in San Jose.

Maureen Hattem (November 21, 1971, Beaumont): eighteen-year-old Hattem and a companion were hitchhiking near Anaheim when they were picked up by an armed gunman, who forced her friend out of the vehicle then sped away with Hattem. Following an agonizing search, Riverside County sheriff’s deputies found her naked body at the bottom of a brush-covered embankment near Beaumont.

Murders Linked to Ed Kemper (1972–1973): I am going to touch on Ed Kempers murders as a whole: from 1972-73 were his ‘student murders:’ he murdered eighteen-year-old Mary Ann Pesce and nineteen-year-old Anita Luchessa from Fresno State students killed in May 1972. Kemper killed fifteen-year-old Aiko Koo (a high school student) in September 1972 and eighteen-year-old college student Cynthia Ann Schall in January 1973. He killed twenty-three-year-old Rosalind Thorpe and twenty-year-old Allison Liu in February 1973. His final murders took place in April 1973, when he took the life of his mother) Clarnell Strandberg along with her friend, Sally Hallett.

Jesta Wilson (February 17, 1972, Ventura): the ninety-one-year-old was found deceased from upper body trauma in her downstairs bedroom; investigators determined an intruder entered through a kitchen window. The case is still actively maintained as open on the City of Ventura Cold Case Investigations database.

Maureen Sterling & Yvonne Weber February 4, 1972, Santa Rosa): Maureen Louise Sterling, 12, and Yvonne Lisa Weber, 13, both Herbert Slater Middle School students, disappeared around 9 PM on February 4, 1972, after visiting the Redwood Empire Ice Arena. Both girls, like other young people in that era, often hitchhiked. They were last seen hitchhiking on Guerneville Road, northwest of Santa Rosa

Kim Wendy Allen (March 4, 1972, Santa Rosa): Santa Rosa Junior College art student Kim Wendy Allen, 19, was also a frequent hitchhiker despite hearing warnings from her mother and one of her college professors about the danger of rape and/or murder for young female hitchhikers. Allen, like many other young women during that era, did not believe she was at risk. She was given a ride by two men on March 4, 1972, from her job at Larkspur Natural Foods to San Rafael. They last saw her at approximately 5:20 PM hitchhiking to school near the Bell Avenue entrance to Highway 101, northbound, carrying a large wooden soy barrel with red Chinese characters on it. Her body was found the following day down an embankment in a creek bed 20 feet off Enterprise Road in Santa Rosa. The victim had been bound at the ankles and wrists, raped and slowly strangled with a cord for an estimated thirty minutes.

Aunrayna ‘Rayna’ Cluett (March 10, 1972, San Diego): the twenty-year-old college student vanished after hitchhiking home from a friend’s house; her body was discovered weeks later in a remote area near Alpine, California. She had been strangled.

Jeannette Kamahele (April 25, 1972, Santa Rosa): a twenty-year-old Santa Rosa Junior College student of Hawaiian descent was last seen on April 25, 1972, hitchhiking near the Cotati on-ramp of Highway 101. Like other young people in the early 1970s, she often hitchhiked to get around. A friend witnessed her likely abduction and reported that she entered a faded brown Chevrolet pickup truck fitted with a homemade wooden camper and driven by a twenty to thirty-year-old Caucasian male with an Afro hairstyle. Her body has never been found.

Erma Lou Struthers (May 1, 1972, San Jose): Erma was last seen at St. James Park in San Jose, California.

Nellie Hicks (May 10, 1972, Newark): a beloved elementary school teacher and mother of six was sexually assaulted and beaten to death inside her Newark, California home while her family slept. The suspect gained entry through a rear door, and her body was later discovered by her son. Though DNA was meticulously collected during the initial 1972 autopsy, technology at the time could not process it. Decades later, the Hayward Police Department partnered with the FBI and forensic labs like Othram Inc. and Astrea Forensics. They successfully built a comprehensive DNA profile from the decades-old evidence.

Sherry Jean Pickle (May 16, 1972, Long Beach): Sherry was last seen at Coronado Avenue and Broadway in Long Beach, California on May 16, 1972. She possibly traveled to the Borrego Springs area, 150 miles southeast of Long Beach, afterward. She has never been heard from again. She may have traveled with a male companion after she went missing, or she may have tried to hitchhike to Los Angeles, California.

Katrina Iris Ashford (July 11, 1972, San Rafael): Katrina was last seen by her parents on July 11, 1972; two days later, on July 13, 1972, her abandoned vehicle was recovered in Marin County. No trace of her has ever been recovered.

Pamela Kay Masten (August 1, 1972, Sacramento): Pamela was reported missing in 2023 at a Missing & Murdered Indigenous Person conference in Humboldt County, CA, by two relatives who had never personally met her. She was reportedly last seen in the West Sacramento area in 1972 or 1973. The photo shown here is from the 1972-1973 Washington High School (West Sacramento), yearbook, meaning that she was alive until at least August or September of 1972. She would have been sixteen or seventeen years old at the time of her disappearance. She may have been planning to travel to Alaska. A legal document was filed in Sacramento County in 1976 in her name, indicating that she was still alive then, but public records searches show no details about the type of filing.

Alice Meyler (August 2, 1972., Santa Monica): (83): Murdered inside her Santa Monica security apartment in 1972. Her case went unsolved for forty-four years until LAPD cold case detectives utilized modern forensics to link the crime to a prolific burglar and killer, leading to a conviction in 2017. (Santa Monica)Alice Meyler (83): Murdered inside her Santa Monica security apartment in 1972. Her case went unsolved for forty-four years until LAPD cold case detectives utilized modern forensics to link the crime to a prolific burglar and killer, leading to a conviction in 2017.

Lori Lee Kursa (November 20/21, 1972, Santa Rosa): Thirteen a Lawrence Cook Middle School student, had been reported missing by her mother on November 11, 1972 after disappearing while they shopped at a U-Save and was last seen on November 20 or 21 in Santa Rosa while visiting friends, having deliberately run away. Someone reported possibly seeing Kursa hitchhiking on November 30. Her home life was troubled and she was a frequent hitchhiker and habitual runaway. Her frozen remains were located on December 14, 1972, in a ravine approximately 50 feet off Calistoga Road, northeast of Rincon Valley in Santa Rosa. The killer had thrown the body at least 30 feet over an embankment. The girl had a single wire loop in each earlobe, but the rest of the earrings were missing and were not found at the scene.

Terri Lynn Hollis (November 23, 1972, Torrance): The eleven-year-old disappeared on Thanksgiving 1972 in Torrance, California, and was later found dead in Ventura County. Her case was solved decades later in 2019 using genetic genealogy, identifying drifter Jake Edward Brown as the perpetrator.

Paula Ann Pope (September 3, 1972, Fresh Pond): On Labor Day weekend of 1972, she, her husband, and their friends were camping at either the Cripple Creek Campground or the Icehouse Reservoir Campground, near Fresh Pond in El Dorado County. After an argument with her husband, Paula became frustrated because she wanted to go to a rock concert in Carson City, Nevada. However, her husband couldn’t go because he was on parole and could not leave the state. Upset, Paula stormed out of the camper. Her friend followed her briefly but returned to grab Paula’s coat, as it was raining. When her friend went back outside, Paula had disappeared. Later, it was discovered that Paula had somehow made it to the concert and was given a ride by a couple from the venue. They dropped her off at an exit near Highway 50, not far from the campground. No one has seen her since. There were rumors that she might have been spotted with a group of people who appeared to be bikers after she was dropped off at the exit.

Linda Ann Miller (September 9, 1972, San Rafael): On August 18, 1972, Linda Miller and Cary Kristal left for Guadalajara, Mexico aboard a Greyhound Bus. They planned on returning to San Rafael by September 9th in order to register for fall semester at the College of Marin. In early September of 1972, Linda’s family received a letter from Linda postmarked in Guadalajara. That is the last time her family has had any contact from Linda. In early October of 1972, San Rafael police were asked to send Linda’s dental plates to Mexican authorities on the theory she may have died in a rooming house fire in Mexico City. Linda’s stepfather instead believed she and Cary were being held incommunicado in a Mexican jail. Linda’s missing persons case was reopened in 2001.

Marla Jean Hires (October 29, 1972, Stanton): on the morning the twenty-three-year-old mother of one disappeared she left her home to drive to her job at the Southern California Edison headquarters, but she was abducted from outside her residence; her 1971 Mazda sedan was found abandoned later that day at a bank drive-up window in Stanton, near a construction site where her killer had been working. The following day, her battered body was found wrapped in carpet and discarded down an embankment near the Yorba Linda Country Club; she had been raped and strangled to death. The case went cold for over 30 years (which unfairly left her husband in a cloud of suspicion) until a 2004 DNA database search matched evidence preserved from the crime scene to Edwin Dean Richardson, a convicted serial offender who was extradited to California and sentenced to life in prison.

Lois Petrie (December 26, 1972, San Pedro): forty-three-year-old Petrie was found sexually assaulted and strangled to death inside her San Pedro home; decades later, DNA extracted from a discarded coffee cup linked the crime to Adolph Theodore Laudenberg, who was subsequently dubbed the ‘Santa Claus Strangler’ and charged him with multiple area slayings.

Cheryl Lanier (January 1, 1973, San Francisco): twenty-seven-year-old Cheryl Lanier disappeared from San Francisco in 1973. For over 50 years, her whereabouts and fate remained a complete mystery to her family and the San Francisco Police Department.The Resolution: In May 2026, the SFPD officially closed the cold case. Authorities revealed that a cross-state DNA match confirmed her remains belonged to a “Jane Doe” who had been recovered in Harris County (Houston), Texas n September 30, 1976.

Anne Marie Robinson (January 3, 1973, Gardena): Anne vanished after leaving work. Her car was found parked a few blocks from her job with a flat tire. She is feared possibly kidnapped or murdered per newspaper articles.

Anna Christian Waters (January 16, 1973, Half Moon Bay): Anna Waters was last seen between 2:00 PM and 2:15 PM, playing in her family’s backyard in a rural area near Half Moon Bay in unincorporated San Mateo County on January 16, 1973. In the beginning of the investigation, it was theorized that she had fallen into Purisima Creek, located near the family’s home, and drowned. The area around the creek and the waters were searched but no trace of Anna was found. With time, investigators and her family started to suspect foul play was involved in her disappearance. Her stepbrother told his family he remembered a strange couple driving alongside Anna, trying in vain to tempt her into the vehicle.

Pamela Jean Spencer (January 26, 1973, Santa Monica): Pamela Jean Spencer was last known to be hitchhiking, on her way to a friend’s residence in Malibu, California. She was traveling with a long-hair gray and white Malamute Shepherd dog (female) which answered to the name “Layla”.

Carolyn Nadine Davis (February 6, 1973, Anderson): ran away from her home outside Anderson in Shasta County on February 6, 1973, and spent the next five months traveling. She had left her mother a note that said: “Dear Mom. Don’t worry too much about me, the only thing I’m gonna be doing is keeping myself alive. Love, Carolyn.” She posted a letter to her mother and stepfather shortly after she ran away in which she wrote that she had left voluntarily and never planned to return home. Her older sister told an interviewer in 2022 that Davis actually stayed with her in her duplex apartment in Garberville, California after she ran away. Davis claimed she had witnessed a double murder in Shasta County and that she was afraid for her life. Eventually Davis, increasingly paranoid that she might be found by someone connected with the murders, left her sister’s apartment and hitchhiked to Illinois. She returned to Garberville in the summer of 1973 because her sister was about to give birth. Davis stayed with her grandmother for about two weeks in July 1973 before she decided to leave to return to her boyfriend in Illinois. According to accounts, Davis told her grandmother that she planned to hitchhike to Modesto, California and stay there with friends. Her grandmother drove the fifteen-year-old girl to the downtown district of Garberville on July 15, 1973, and parked in front of the post office, which was located two city blocks away from Highway 101. Davis was last seen hitchhiking that afternoon near the Highway 101 ramp, southbound, in Garberville. Davis was never heard from again. Her body was discovered on July 31, 1973 in Santa Rosa, just 3 feet from where the remains of Sterling and Weber had been recovered seven months prior.

Leslie Marie Perlov (February 13, 1973, Los Altos Hills): Twenty-one-year-old Stanford graduate Leslie Marie Perlov vanished after leaving her job in Palo Alto on February 13, 1973. Her car was found parked by an old quarry later that day, and her body was discovered three days later under an oak tree. She had been strangled. In 2018, genetic genealogy linked crime scene DNA to John Arthur Getreu, who was subsequently arrested and convicted for her murder.

Kathleen Edna Rodgers (March 3, 1973, Oroville): Kathleen was last seen by her step mother Elda Stevens on March 3, 1973 at approximately 12:00 PM at their residence at the 1500 Block of Keko St in Oroville after an argument between the two of them took place. Kathleen was seen in the Oroville area after she was reported missing. Kathleen was living with and hanging out with her friends. Kathleen was associated with and possibly dating Dale William Kirk at the time. After that, Kathleen disappeared and hasn’t been seen or heard from by her family and friends. Several attempts have been made to locate Kathleen’s remains from information provided to the Butte County Sheriff’s Office in this case. Kathleen’s remains still haven’t been located. Foul play is suspected.

Rosa Vasquez (found on May 29, 1973, San Francisco): 20, last seen May 26; her body was found on May 29, 1973 near the Arguello boulevard entrance at Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. The victim had been strangled and her body thrown seven feet off the roadway into some shrubs. Vasquez had been a keypunch operator at Letterman General Hospital on the Presidio.

Tracy Lynn Davenport (April 27, 1973, San Rafael): Tracy was last seen on April 27, 1973, walking to school. She lived with her grandmother and other family members at the Bermuda Palms motel, located at 737 Francisco Blvd East (now a Motel 6). Tracy never arrived at the Bahia Vista School that day and failed to return home. She was reported missing the next day.

Yvonne Quilantang (June 10, 1973, San Francisco): 15, was found strangled in a vacant Bayview district lot on 3. She was seven months pregnant and had been out to buy groceries. Yvonne J. Quilantang was a fifteen-year-old pregnant teenager from San Francisco who became a victim of an unsolved homicide in June 1973. Her death is historically linked by law enforcement to the Santa Rosa Hitchhiker Murders, a series of unsolved killings targeting young women and girls in Northern California during the early 1970’s.

Arminda Grangela Rodrigues da Silva Ribeiro (found on June 13, 1973, San Diego): On June 13, 1973, fishermen in the San Diego Bay discovered an orange suitcase and plastic bags containing the dismembered remains of an unidentified woman. For 50 years, she was known only as a ‘Jane Doe’ and in October 2023, the San Diego Police Department utilized advanced investigative genetic genealogy to officially identify her as Arminda Grangela Rodrigues da Silva Ribeiro, a twenty-nine-year-old woman who had ties to the East Coast. Law enforcement continues to seek tips to find her killer.

Angela Thomas (found July 2, 1973, Daly City): Angela Thomas, 16, a resident of Belton, Texas, was found July 2, 1973, smothered on the playground of Benjamin Franklin Junior High School in Daly City. She had last been seen the previous evening at the Presidio of San Francisco walking away from the area at 9:00 PM. A locket was recovered near the body.

Linda O’Keefe (July 6, 1973, Back Bay): eleven-year-old Linda O’Keefe disappeared walking home from school on July 6, 1973. Her strangled body was found the next day in the Back Bay area. Using genetic genealogy and preserved crime scene DNA, police arrested James Alan Neal in Colorado in 2019.

Nancy Patricia Gidley (July 12, 1973, San Francisco): a twenty-four-year-old radiographer last seen at a Rodeway Inn motel , was found strangled behind the George Washington High School gymnasium three days later. The victim was unclothed except for a single fish-shaped gold earring and was determined to have died within the previous 24 hours. Gidley had served four years in the Air Force and told friends and family in Mountain Home, Idaho that she intended to become a freelance writer for the San Francisco Chronicle and was going to San Francisco to be the maid of honor at the wedding of a friend from Hamilton Air Force Base, all of which proved false.

Rochelle Claudia White (July 30, 1973,San Juan Capistrano): Rochelle was last seen on July 30, 1973 at her home in San Juan Capistrano. According to her husband, Gary White, Rochelle was asleep in bed when he left for work about 6:30 AM. Rochelle worked at the Carlsbad United Parcel Service at the time, and had recently been promoted. She did not come to work that day. Her car was located the morning of July 31, in the UPS parking lot. Inside was her purse, her wallet, and driver’s license. She was in the process of divorcing her husband. They still lived together at their home. A court date was scheduled for July 31, 1973. Rochelle never showed up for court. When questioned by authorities, it was learned that White hadn’t gone into work on the day of his wife’s disappearance. Instead, he drove aimlessly around the beaches that morning, then drove to the San Juan Capistrano dump to drop a load of trash from his pickup. Detectives found nothing unusual in the house shared by Rochelle and her husband. They also spent three days sifting through debris at the dump. Foul play is suspected.

Kim Louise Mallon (September 30, 1973, Los Angeles): Mallon was last seen in Los Angeles, California on September 30, 1973. She was reported missing from a UCLA Mental Facility after her father dropped her off there. Foul play is suspected.

Valerie Lane & Doris Derryberry (November 12, 1973, Linda): twelve-year-old Valerie Lane and thirteen-year-old Doris Derryberry vanished on November 12, 1973, after going on a shopping trip in Linda, California. Their bodies were found shot with a shotgun near Marysville. Decades later, DNA testing matched evidence to cousins Larry Don Patterson and William Lloyd Harbour, who were sentenced to prison in 2017

Theresa Diane Smith-Walsh (December 22, 1973, Zuma Beach in Malibu): Theresa Diane Smith Walsh, 23, left her home in Miranda, in the winter of 1973 to spend time away from her husband and young son. She hitchhiked her way across California, often catching rides along Highway 101. She had never before had any difficulties or thought she was in danger while hitchhiking. In late December 1973, she was in Malibu, California but wanted to go home for Christmas to see her mother and son. She was last seen on December 22, 1973, at Zuma Beach in Malibu, intent on hitchhiking to Garberville. Her partially submerged body was found six days later by kayakers in Mark West Creek. She had been hogtied with clothesline rope, sexually assaulted, and strangled, and was determined to have been dead approximately one week. High water marks contemporaneous with heavy rains in the area suggested the body could have drifted several miles.

Rose Lena Cole (July 1, 1973, Oakland): Rose, originally from Flint, Michigan, was last seen in the summer of 1973 (missing date is an approximation). Ms. Cole ran away from a Synanon Foundation facility in Oakland, California, an institution that treated persons suffering from alcohol and drug abuse, where she was sent in 1972 by a Michigan judge when caught using drugs. She wrote to her family while she was there, and ran away sometime toward the end of 1972. She sent a letter in early February 1973 from an unknown location; that was the last time anyone heard from her. On January 4, 1974, a petition to the court of Michigan was granted to drop all charged against Ms. Cole.The Synanon Foundation (originally the Tender Loving Care club) was founded by Charles Dederich, Sr. in 1958 as a rehabilitation center for both drug and alcohol addicts. Its headquarters was originally in Santa Monica, California, but as it gained popularity and wealth over the years, it had chapters in other California counties, Detroit, and as far away as Germany and Malaysia. Over the years, Synanon became a utopian society/ cult not unlike Jim Jones’ Peoples Temple. Dederich declared Synanon a religion in 1974 and was forced to give up operations of Synanon when he pled no contest to conspiracy to commit murder in 1978.

Nancy Feusi (remains were found on July 22, 1973, Redding): 22, disappeared after going dancing at a club in the Sacramento area. Her remains were found on July 22, 1973, in Redding. She had been stabbed to death. In 2011, one of Feusi’s five children, Angela Darlene Feusi McAnulty, was convicted of torturing, beating, and starving to death her fifteen-year-old daughter Jeanette Marie Maples. McAnulty became the second woman ever sentenced to die in Oregon and the first since the 1984 reinstatement of the death penalty.

Corinne June Groenenberg (November 1, 1973, Modesto): Groenenberg had recently moved to Modesto from Southern California with her family, and on the afternoon of November 1, 1973, she left her family’s residence and walked toward a nearby highway; a friend later witnessed her hitchhiking and entering a blue or green truck driven by an unidentified white male, and she has never been seen or heard from since. She is around fifteen to sixteen years of age.

Laura Albright O’Dell (November 4, 1973, San Francisco): 21, missing since , was found three days later in bushes behind the boathouse at Stow Lake in Golden Gate Park. O’Dell’s hands were tied behind her back, and the cause of death appeared to be from head injuries or strangulation.

Lulaida Morales Sejalbo (November 25, 1973, Santa Clara): Sejalbo was last seen on November 25, 1973 in Santa Clara, CA. She disappeared on her way home from work and has not been seen nor heard from since. A month later, her car, with her purse, keys, and other personal items were found abandoned in Santa Clara, CA. Foul play is suspected.

Ana Daisy Guevara Valdez (January 1, 1974, Los Angeles): at the time of her disappearance, Anna was twenty-years-old, worked in Los Angeles, and had been in regular contact with her relatives until 1974 when they suddenly stopped hearing from her.

Brenda Kaye Merchant (February 1, 1974, Marysville): 19, was found stabbed to death at her home in Marysville. She had been stabbed over 30 times with a long bladed knife and had asphyxiated on her own blood from her many wounds. The killer left a bloody handprint on the screen door of the apartment, and it is believed that Merchant was attacked between when she was last seen at 6 PM to when a loud argument was heard by neighbors at around midnight.

Charlotte Cook (January 4, 1974, Daly City): A young mother of two who went missing and was murdered in 1974. Decades later, investigators definitively linked her case to serial killer Joseph Naso, making it one of Daly City’s oldest cold cases to be resolved.

Cynthia Lynn Sumpter (April 27, 1974, San Jose): Sumpter was last seen playing outside her apartment complex on Elm Street in San Jose, California. Her mother discovered her missing between 1:30 PM and 1:45 PM. She searched on her own for about a half hour, called her parents to see if they had her and then contacted the police. One neighbor told police that she had left her small son with Cindy while she dashed to her apartment for a baby bottle. When she returned a moment later, her son was alone. Another witness spotted Cindy from her car and reported that the outgoing little girl had stuck her head in the window to say hello. Witnesses reported they had seen her in a blue car driven by a mysterious young man with blond hair and a mustache; these sightings have not been confirmed. At first, police considered Cindy’s father a suspect, as the parents were divorced. Sumpter’s parents had had a bitter divorce a year before her disappearance and each one accused the other of hiding her. Eventually, both parents took lie-detector tests that showed they knew nothing of Cindy’s whereabouts. Police decided they were no way involved. Several people claimed to know Sumpter’s whereabouts and attempted to extort money from her parents, but none of them really knew anything about her case. Antonio Madrid was investigated for possible involvement in her disappearance. He was the stepfather of one of her friends and only lived about 100 yards from her apartment. Madrid committed suicide two days after Sumpter’s disappearance. After his death, police found a bloodstained shirt belonging to him, and blonde hairs in his car. A convicted murderer named Eugene Joseph Wesley is also a possible suspect. He took two polygraph tests about Sumpter’s case and the results indicated that he knew more than he was saying about her disappearance. Wesley was never charged in connection with her case, however, and has since died in prison.

Laura Maureen Davis (July 20, 1974, Dixon): Laura was last seen on July 20, 1974, at the Sacramento Bus Depot. Husband stated he dropped her off and was believed to be going to San Diego to visit relatives.

Hester Lee Chandler (September 13, 1974, Modesto): Hester was last seen on September 13, 1974, shortly after withdrawing almost $9,000 from her bank. Her car was found parked outside of her home. Inside the car were cardboard boxes full of Hester’s clothing. All of her credit cards and ID’s, except her driver’s license, were left inside the house. Some of the cards had been partially burned. Her house keys were found on the living room. Hester was employed at Tri-Valley Growers, prior to her disappearance. James Toliver, the main suspect in her disappearance, worked with Hester as a forklift driver. In 1980, Toliver died of a heart attack while fleeing from the murder scene of Florence Richina. Toliver is the suspect in the murder of Richina and the disappearances of his wife Patricia Toliver 4524DFCA, Mary Watson 1149DFCA, Jacqueline Cooper 4525DFCA.

Tiffany Doyle (November 8, 1974, Santa Cruz): Tiffany was last seen in Santa Cruz and may have been hitchhiking on the day she went missing. Tiffany vanished from Santa Cruz on November 8, 1974. She may have gone hitchhiking or possibly traveled by bus on the day she disappeared, and she has never been heard from again. Records indicate she may have left of her own accord, but very few details are available regarding the exact circumstances. The case features a significant administrative gap: though originally reported missing by her sister shortly after her disappearance, the original missing persons report was eventually purged by law enforcement. As a result, the case was essentially lost to official records for decades until her family reported her missing again in 2014, nearly forty years after she went missing

Mercedes Lodge (December 14, 1974, Castro Valley): Lodge had been attending AA meetings at the Hayward, California Fellowship and was last seen at her home in Castro Valley.

Patricia Suzanne Wilson (January 1, 1975, Glendora): Patricia Wilson was last known to be in Glendora, California at some point in 1975. Very few operational details surrounding her disappearance have been publicly released and she continues to be listed as an active missing person case through the California Department of Justice.

Consuella LeShaun Cash (January 3, 1975, Los Angeles): very few public details are available regarding the exact timeline or circumstances surrounding the day the seven-year-old vanished and because she disappeared under highly suspicious circumstances without a trace, investigators have long feared she was a victim of foul play. No clothing details, dental files, or DNA records were originally available to assist the initial search.

Beverly Jean Ribley (April 27, 1975, Spring Valley): Beverly Ribley was last known to be at her residence in the 2400 block of Trace Road in Spring Valley around 10:30PM on April 27, 1975. She had spoken to a friend via telephone and that was the last time anyone heard from her. There was no evidence of foul play, and friends and family say that her disappearance is out of character for her.

Marion Cornelia Hawkins (May 1, 1975, Los Angeles): In May 1975, Marion Hawkins moved from Marin City, California to live in Los Angeles. Her mother (reporting party) received a letter from Hawkins shortly thereafter but she disappeared soon after and was never heard from again.

Harry Flamburis & Dannette Barrett (January 4, 1977, Daly City): Harry Flamburis was president of the San Francisco Chapter of the Hell’s Angels Motorcycle Club. He and his girlfriend, Barrett, were found shot to death in their home. The house was also set on fire by the suspect(s). Their murders are believed to be motorcycle gang-related.

Patty Hearst (February 4, 1974, Berkeley): Nineteen-year-old college student kidnapped from Berkeley by the Symbionese Liberation Army on February 4, 1974, in a high-profile abduction case. After being kidnapped in 1974 by the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA) and later joining them in a bank robbery, Patty Hearst was convicted of the crime in 1976. She served nearly two years in prison before President Jimmy Carter commuted her sentence. In 2001, President Bill Clinton granted her a full pardon. Now known as Patricia Hearst-Shaw, she leads a quiet, mainstream life. She married her former bodyguard, Bernard Shaw, and resides in Connecticut.

Peggy Ann Reed (some sources state March 1, 1974 where others say March 28, 1974, Santa Rosa): fifteen-year-old Peggy was last seen on March 1, 1974 (though some records cite March 28, 1974) after she visited the area around Guerneville Road and the Coddingtown Mall in Santa Rosa. Investigating authorities believe she may have been hitchhiking at the time she vanished, and she has never been seen or heard from since. Due to the timeframe and geography of her disappearance, internet sleuths and independent researchers have frequently speculated about a potential connection to the notorious Santa Rosa Hitchhiker Murders, though no official connection has ever been conclusively proven by law enforcement.

Janet Taylor (March 25, 1974, Woodside): twenty-one-year-old Janet Ann Taylor was last seen alive hitchhiking near Junipero Serra Boulevard near the western edge of the Stanford University campus (her car had broken down) after she spent the afternoon with a childhood friend; she left around 7:00 PM to return home to feed her dogs, and her strangled body was found off Sand Hill Road in San Mateo County on March 25, 1974; her murder was eventually linked via cold case investigation to suspect John Arthur Getreu.

Long Beach Jane Doe (May 27, 1974, Long Beach): an unidentified young woman in her late teens or early 20s who was raped and strangled in May 1974. Her body was discovered on a city beach near Ocean Boulevard. In 2013, a suspect named Gary Stamp confessed to her murder before his arraignment, though the victim’s true identity remains unknown (he believed her name was ‘Anna’).

Mary Sue Kitts (July 18, 1974, Fresno): Mary was last seen leaving her parents house on July 15, 1974 with Roger Dale Allen in anel Caminosecurity vehicle owned by Allen Security. At the time of her disappearance, Mary worked at aDenny’s Restaurantin Fresno. The last day she worked was on July 18, 1974 and she never picked up her check. For three years, she was presumed to be a runaway.

Donna Maria Braun (September 29, 1974, Monterey): fourteen-year-old Brauns strangled body was found at 7 PM on September 29, 1974 in the Salinas River near Monterey by a crop dusting pilot who was flying overhead. She was an Alisal High School freshman who lived with and was eventually identified by her mother and was last seen at 6 PM. on September 27, leaving her Salinas home.

Arlis Perry (October 12, 1974, Stanford): Nineteen-year-old newlywed found murdered inside Stanford Memorial Church at Stanford University on October 12, 1974; DNA linked the crime to a security guard in 2018. Arlis walked to Stanford Memorial Church at approximately 11:00 PM to pray following a minor disagreement with her husband. Campus security guard Stephen Blake Crawford claimed he locked the doors at 11:45 PM but later reported finding her body inside at 5:45 AM on October 13. She had been sexually assaulted, strangled, and left with an ice pick lodged in the back of her head.

Linda Ross-La Palma (December 11, 1974, La Palma): A young woman who was violently murdered in her apartment in 1974 just after finalizing the sale of her plant business. The case went cold for over forty years before modern detective work and forensic reviews allowed the La Palma Police Department to identify a prime suspect.

Joyce Elizabeth Harper (January 1, 1975, Potrero): Harper was last seen on or about January 1, 1975. Her daughter reported her missing on December 15, 1995. Another of Harper’s daughters,Kimberly Cozart, disappeared in February 1977 from Julian, California, and was reported missing on the same day as Harper. It is not known whether Harper’s and Cozart’s disappearances are related.

Geraldine Thomas (February 9, 1975, Castro Valley): family and friends last saw twenty-two-year-old Geraldine on the evening of Friday, December 20, 1974 at a cookware party. Investigators established that during the party, she had been picked up by an unknown individual that had been described as a Black male, approximately forty-five-years of age, 5’3″ tall, weighing 145 pounds, with short-cut salt-and-pepper hair. On Sunday, February 9, 1975, Geraldine’s remains were discovered in a rural area of Castro Valley roughly two miles into a trail, near mile marker 1.67 on Eden Canyon Road; the Coroner’s Bureau subsequently ruled her death a homicide.

Tiffany Claudette Wise (March 30, 1977, San Bernardino): Wise and her older sister, 322dfca Brandi Summers, were abducted from their San Bernardino, California home on March 30, 1977. Their mother, Beverly Wise, was found murdered inside the residence. The girls’ eight-month-old sister was left behind unharmed. Police issued a bulletin for Roy Summers, 30. Missing from the house were Brandi Summers, the daughter of Summers, and Tiffany Wise whose father is Claude Wise. There were unconfirmed sightings of the girls in the Boise, Idaho, area around 1979.

Eileen Hynson (June 1, 1975, Napa): nineteen-years-old On June 1, 1975, Eileen left her family home in Napa, California. Conflicting reports suggest she was either headed to a bridal gown fitting in Benicia or traveling to attend a wedding. Critically, she left all her packed luggage behind, indicating she did not intend to vanish. Due to the geographic overlap, investigators have historically looked at potential ties to the Zodiac Killer’s earlier territory, and her file remains active with the Napa County Cold Case Unit.

Philip & Cheryl Beadles (October 17, 1975, Daly City): Philip and Cheryl Beadles were a young married couple who were found dead in the living room of their home by their young children in the early morning hours. The couple was murdered execution style with strong suggestions of a sexual motivation.

Linda Allomong (Long Beach, November 1975): She would leave her home for days on end before returning. But in November 1975, she never returned. Linda’s decomposing body was discovered in an oil field in Long Beach, California. Her clothes had been pulled up over her head, which concealed the severe blunt trauma she took to the head.

Deborah Jean Cargill (Santa Cruz, December 22, 1975): Nineteen-years-old. was kidnapped, and her body was found near. San Lorenzo River train trestle in Santa Cruz on December 22, 1975.

Sarah Rachel Tokier (January 1, 1976, Montebello): Sarah went missing sometime in 1976 or 1977. Very little is known about her disappearance. Her parents are both deceased and her siblings are searching for answers.

Karen Ann Fischer (reported missing on January 15, 1976, Arcata): from Boulder, CO Fischer was reported missing on January 15, 1976 by her boyfriend. Fisher was reportedly last seen by her boyfriend on January 14, 1976 at approximately 9:50 AM in Arcata where she was planning to hitchhike to go sightseeing in the Trinidad area.

Marie Elizabeth Spannhake (January 31, 1976, Chico): Marie Elizabeth Spannhake disappeared January 31, 1976, from Chico. She and her boyfriend went to the flea market inside theEagles Hallat 19th and Mulberry streets. They got into a fight and Marie left after asking directions home because she had moved to Chico from Cleveland, Ohio the previous month. She headed out on foot. That was the last anyone saw of her. Marie’s boyfriend filed a missing-persons report February 2. He said nothing was missing from the apartment; clothes were as they should be and toothbrush and suitcases still in place. In 1984, the wife of a convicted kidnapper told police her husband abducted and killed Marie. She said Marie was walking home when they picked her up. They allegedly drove her to their home, where she was tortured and murdered. The couple wrapped Marie’s body in blankets, put it in their car, and buried her between Redding and Lassen Park. Authorities accompanied the wife to the alleged area in an unsuccessful effort to locate Marie’s body.

Margarita MacNeill (February 7, 1976, Salinas): Margarita was last seen on February 7, 1976 in Salinas, California. She reportedly dropped her children off at a babysitter’s and stated she was going to Santa Cruz. Her vehicle, a yellow 1974 Toyota Celica was never recovered as well.

Kristina Sue Allen (February 28, 1976, Los Angeles): Kristina went to a bar with her brother in Venice Beach. She left the bar alone to walk back to her apartment and did not make it home.

Wilma Rae Vermaas (April 3, 1976, Los Angeles): Wilma was last seen April 3, 1976 in West Los Angeles. When family and friends tried to contact her, her husband simply said ‘she is not here now.’ Eventually he admitted to not knowing where she was.

Lynn Ruth Connes (May 20, 1976, Berkeley): Lynn was last seen at her home in Berkeley, California on May 20, 1976. She left her apartment to keep an appointment with a man named ‘Jeff’ at Carleton Street and Telegraph Avenue. According to police, Lynn advertised for work as a photographer’s model and received a telephone call from someone named Jeff. He made an appointment to meet her at the Bateau Ivre Restaurant, 2629 Telegraph Avenue. The restaurant is four blocks from her residence at 2817 Regent Street. An unidentified waitress said that a woman matching Lynn’s description came to the restaurant at 10:15. The restaurant was closed, but the waitress let her sit at a table while waiting for the appointment. The waitress did not see her leave and Lynn has not been seen since. Police officers found her locked bicycle near the restaurant.

Eileen Francis Hynson (June 1, 1976, Napa): left the residence she shared with her father and brother to go to a resort at Lake Berryessa on June 1, 1976. She supposedly left the resort to go to Benicia, California to attend a bridal party dress fitting. She has never been seen again. Her suitcase was reportedly left at her residence.

Sherry Elizabeth Roach (June 8, 1976, San Mateo): Sherry was last seen on June 8, 1976 when she left the halfway house she was living at to take the bus to work. She has not been seen since. Sherry was known to hitchhike often. According to Sherry’s brother, they grew up in Santa Rosa in a violent household, resulting in Sherry being placed in several foster homes and group homes. In 2020, police released a photo of Sherry with an unknown man (see above). Dated 1975 on the back, it shows a man with his arm around Sherry’s shoulder. Family members stated that they did not recognize the man, but thought Sherry might have had a boyfriend. Police are interested in speaking with the unknown man to order to learn if he has any information on Sherry’s disappearance.

Elaine Faye Lehtinen (June 14, 1976, Napa): Lehtinen was last seen on June 15, 1976 in Napa, California at her residence. Her home was searched and her vehicle and identification were at the home. There was no sign of physical force. She had her clothes laid out for the next day’s work. She was a naval officer stationed at Mare Island Naval Facility when she was reported missing.

Pepper Reed (June 15, 1976, Anaheim): Pepper’s family last saw her in Houston, Texas between December 12 and December 18, 1975. At this time, Pepper introduced her brother and mother to her new boyfriend, Terry Rasmussen. Pepper also told them she was pregnant with Terry’s child. Their child, Rea Rasmussen, was born in Orange County California on June 15 ,1976. In 2000, Rea was found deceased in Bear Brook State Park in New Hampshire. Rea’s body was recently identified by Investigators. Pepper’s boyfriend Terry was convicted of a murder in California and was a suspect in the Bear Brook Murders. Pepper’s family last spoke to her in December 1975. Pepper was last known to be alive in Orange County California on June 15, 1976.

Christine May Gregg (June 16, 1976, Sacramento): Christine was last known to be in Sacramento after the birth of a daughter on June 16, 1976. She has not been seen or heard from since.

Victoria ‘Vickie’ Lynn Schneider (June 16, 1976, Eureka): Victoria Lynn Schneider was last seen leaving her home in Eureka on June 16, 1976, to hitchhike to Samoa Beach. Schneider was located deceased, buried in a shallow grave on Samoa Beach on June 30, 1976.

Dianne Jane Carlson (August 14, 1976, Petaluma): Dianne was last known to be at home in Petaluma on August 14, 1976. She is missing under suspicious circumstances.

Lisa Carol Dickinson (September 5, 1976, Walnut Creek): Lisa was last seen riding her bike in Walnut Creek, California at 7:00 PM. on September 5, 1976. She was going to the BART station from her home in the area of Los Cerros. She was supposed to be home by 8:00 PM, but didn’t return to her family home and has never been heard from again. Her parents reported her missing at 9:00 PM. Lisa’s bike (a red Raleigh 10 speed) was found in a grove of walnut trees at Heather Farm Park, near the Contra Costa Canal, three hours after she was last seen. A search of the canal turned up no clues as to her whereabouts, but witnesses said they saw Lisa at the park entrance. Several witnesses reported seeing a Caucasian male driving a medium sized motorcycle on Ygnacio Valley Rd and Walnut Ave, two blocks east of Heather Farm Park, at approximately 7:30 pm. The man was not wearing a helmet and is described as being in his early 40’s, with brown curly hair, a mustache, and ‘chunky’ build. A Caucasian female wearing a white helmet, aged between eight and twelve-years-old, was riding the motorcycle with him. It hasn’t been verified that the child was Lisa, and the man’s identity has never been confirmed. Louis Richard Fresquez is the primary suspect in Lisa’s disappearance. He was born in 1942, making him thirty-four-years-old at the time of Lisa’s disappearance. He is 5’5″ and 140 pounds, with black hair and brown eyes. Fresquez was imprisoned for sex crimes between 1987 and 2002. He has never been charged in connection with Lisa’s disappearance due to a lack of evidence.

Jacqueline Lucille Cooper (November 12, 1976, Modesto): Jacqueline was last seen in Modesto, California on November 12, 1976, after withdrawing $4000 from her banking account. Jacqueline had worked at Tri-Valley Growers, prior to her disappearance. James Toliver, the main suspect in her disappearance, worked with Jacqueline as a forklift driver. In 1980, Toliver died of a heart attack while fleeing from the murder scene of Florence Richina. Toliver is the suspect in the murder of Richina and the disappearances of his wife Patricia Toliver 4524DFCA, Mary Watson 1149DFCA and Hester Chandler 4526DFCA.

Kimberly Cozart (February 1, 1977, Julian): Kimberly Cozart, also known as Kimberly Harper, has been missing since February 1977. She was last known to be living on Banner Grade Road in Julian, California. Cozart’s mother,Joyce Harper, disappeared on or around January 1, 1975 from Potrero, California. It is not known whether Cozart’s and Harper’s disappearances are related. They were both reported missing, by Kimberly’s sister, to the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department on December 15, 1995.

Brandi Jondell Summers (March 30, 1977, San Bernardino): Summers and her younger sister, 323dfca Tiffany Wise, were abducted from their San Bernardino, California home on March 30, 1977. Their mother, Beverly Wise, was found murdered inside the residence. The girls’ eight-month-old sister was left behind unharmed. Police issued a bulletin for Roy Summers, 30. Missing from the house were Brandi Summers, the daughter of Summers, and Tiffany Wise, whose father is Claude Wise. Summers was born in San Jose, California. She had a petite stature at the time of her abduction; she and Tiffany were approximately the same size, although there is a three-year age difference between them. There were unconfirmed sightings of the girls in the Boise, Idaho, area around 1979.

Murders Linked to ‘The Ventura Strangler’/Warren Luther Alexander (1977): I am going to touch on Warren Luther Alexanders murders as a whole, who is linked to four cold case strangulation murders across California (three, May to December 1977) and North Carolina (one, 1992). On May 29, 1977 he killed Kimberly Carol Fritz in Port Hueneme: the eighteen-year-old recent high school graduate had been found strangled to death in Room 18 of the Marv-Inn Motel in Port Hueneme. She had been working as a commercial sex worker under the alias ‘Carol Brown,’ and LEO’s quickly noted her murder shared distinct patterns with two other local strangulations that occurred later that same year. Thirty-one-year-old mother of three Velvet Ann Sanchez was found strangled on September 8, 1977 at the Via Motor Court in Oxnard: she was originally from Texas, and had recently worked at the US Navy Exchange, and witnesses at the time reported seeing her return to her room shortly before her death with a stocky, bearded man wearing a tan jacket and overalls. On December 27, 1977 the body of twenty-one-year-old mother of two Lorraine Ann Rodriguez was discovered on a bridge along Laguna Road in an unincorporated section of Ventura County. Lastly, on July 7, 1992 twenty-nine-year-old Nona Stamey Cobb was discovered strangled to death, alongside Interstate 77 in Surry County, North Carolina. Decades later, investigative genetic genealogy identified Alexander as the primary suspect, a seventy-three-year-old former long-haul trucker that was (miraculously) already in custody in North Carolina awaiting trial for a separate 1992 cold case strangulation murder. As of July 2026, Alexander is in custody at the Ventura County Jail in California, where he is being held without bail as he awaits trial for multiple decades-old cold-case murders.

Theresa Elizabeth Baxter (June 1, 1977, Huntington Beach): Baxter was last seen at home in Huntington Beach; little details are known about her disappearance.

Evangeline Rodriguez Silva & Rebecca Rodriguez & Kenneth John Beltram (July 16, 1977, Brentwood Park): was last seen with her boyfriend, Kenneth John Beltram and her younger sister, Becky Rodriguez. They had told others in the park that they were either going home to Oakley, or to Hogg Island then got into Beltram’s car and left. Beltram was reportedly seen by his brother the next morning, who did not see the girls, and in late July, the vehicle was reportedly seen in Concord by friends of Beltram and that an unidentified white male had been driving it; it eluded them and hasn’t been seen since.

Violet Bobbie Matory (July 20, 1977, Compton): Violet Matory was last seen on July 20, 1977, in Compton, CA, with her siblings, Ivy Matory, 878DFCA Yolanda Williams, and her friend 491DMCA Sir-Kristopher Clayton Marshall. The house burned down during the night and the children’s mother, Earlene Williams, was found deceased inside the home the following morning. There was no sign of Matory or the other children. The next day, Yolanda Williams’ father, James Williams and the children were seen at a Denny’s restaurant in Grapevine at approximately 05:30 AM. James Williams was picked up by friends in Riverside later that day, but did not have the children with him. He was tried for murder of his wife but refused to reveal the whereabouts of the children. James Williams is now deceased. Ivy’s remains were located in Corona, California in 2014. They were identified in 2019.

Kimberly Ann Stewart (May 24, 1977, Sheridan): Morgan was only 15 and still in school when she got married, in January 1972. The couple had two daughters. The couple separated frequently and Kimberly twice filed for divorce, once in 1974, and again on April 13, 1977, little more than a month prior to their final meeting at a pizza parlor in Wheatland. The husband had met with Kimberly to give her some money. Patrons at the restaurant were interviewed later and remembered that the couple had argued and departed shortly after their arrival. The husband told police he and Kimberly left the restaurant in separate vehicles and that, hours later, a member of his family had spotted her car, a 1975 gray Chevy Vega hatchback with California plates, parked on Highway 65 approximately two miles from Sheridan. When the husband went to that location with his brother, they found the car, keys still in the ignition, and her checkbook. Friends interviewed after her disappearance said Kimberly would never have left her daughters voluntarily, and sheriff’s investigators announced that she was likely a victim of foul play.

Yolanda Marie Williams (July 20, 1977, Los Angeles): Yolanda Williams was last seen on July 20, 1977, in Compton, CA, with her siblings Ivy Matory, 1274DFCA Violet Matory, and her friend 491DMCA Sir-Kristopher Clayton Marshall. The house burned down during the night and the children’s mother, Earlene Williams, was found deceased inside the home the following morning. There was no sign of Williams or the other children. The next day, Yolanda Williams’ father, James Williams, and the children were seen at a Denny’s restaurant in Grapevine at approximately 05:30 AM. James Williams was picked up by friends in Riverside later that day, but did not have the children with him. He was tried for murder of his wife but refused to reveal the whereabouts of the children. James Williams is now deceased. In May 2014, Ivy Matory’s (former case 41273DFCA) skeletal remains were found in Corona, California, about an hour’s drive east of Compton, but remained unidentified until 2019.

Julie Elizabeth Soracco (August 1, 1977, Placerville): According to family rumors, Soracco was visiting friends in El Dorado County (Placerville), she left their residence to walk to another friend’s house and never made it. The DLC is unknown and approximated.

Rachel Hanna Ziselman (September 5, 1977, Pacific Palisade): Ziselman was last seen walking home from a local supermarket in Pacific Palisade, California on September 5, 1977. There are reports that the clothing listed as being worn by Rachel, was later found in her bedroom.

Elizabeth Dorothy Funchess (September 6, 1977, San Jose): Elizabeth was last seen with her mother Diane on September 6, 1977 at the family home. The mother’s remains were located in September 1981. The child has never been found. Height and weight are approximations.

Murders Linked to ‘The Hillside Strangler,’ Angelo Buono and Kenneth Bianchi (October 1977 to February 1978): I am briefly going to touch on THS murders as a whole: nineteen-year-old Yolanda Washington was discovered on October 18, 1977, on a hillside near the Ventura Freeway in Los Angeles. Fifteen-year-old Judith Miller was found on November 1, 1977 on Alta Terrace Drive in La Crescenta. Twenty-one-year-old Elissa ‘Lissa’ Kastin was discovered: November 6, 1977, near the Chevy Chase Country Club in Glendale. Eighteen-year-old Jill Barcomb was found onNovember 10, 1977, in the Verdugo Hills near Los Angeles. Twelve-year-old Dolores ‘Dolly’ Cepeda and fourteen-year-old Sonja Johnson were discovered on November 20, 1977 on a hillside off Landa Street near Stadium Way and the Golden State Freeway in Los Angeles.  Twenty-year-old Kristina Weckler was discovered on November 22, 1977, in La Crescenta.  Eighteen-year-old Lauren Wagner was found on November 29, 1977, near a sunland off-ramp of the Golden State Freeway. The remains of seventeen-year-old Kimberly Martin were found on December 13, 1977 in a vacant lot on a hillside in Sun Valley, and on February 17, 1978 twenty-year-old Cindy Lee Hudspeth was recovered inside the trunk of her car down an embankment off the Glendale Freeway.

Mary Elizabeth, Fannie Fawn & Jessie Flo Stuart (December 10, 1977, Honeydew): Mary Stuart left home in Honeydew, California on Saturday, December 10, 1977, at 10 AM in a red Opel station wagon with her daughters, Fannie and Jessie. Stuart was reportedly heading for a television repair shop in Fortuna or Eureka and possibly was planning to go to an optometrist. She was supposed to return before dark. Approximately one month after they were last seen, their family station wagon was found abandoned a few miles from their home but their whereabouts remain unknown. At the time of her disappearance, Stuart, who may also be known by the name Benson, was living with her husband in Honeydew. A friend first reported her missing to the sheriff’s office the following Tuesday. Foul play is suspected in their disappearance.

Sylvia Helen Carlson (December 12, 1977, Santa Monica): Sylvia Helen Carlson was last seen in Santa Monica, California on December 12, 1977. Her vehicle, a brown 1977Ford Thunderbird with California tag 893RXB, was found on January 4, 1978, parked in front of 1922 Penmar Avenue in Venice, California. The vehicle had reportedly been at the location since mid-December.

Melinda Beardsley (disappeared on December 17, 1977, Emigrant Gap): Emigrant Gap Jane Doe was a formerly unidentified murder victim whose body was found on December 17, 1977, near the intersection of I-80 and Highway 20 in Emigrant Gap, California. Despite extensive investigation by the Placer County sheriff’s office, no identification of this decedent was made at the time. NamUs and The Doe Network announced that the woman had been identified in 2026. On 18 March 2026, the identity of the victim was released to the public as Melinda ‘Pip’ Beardsley. (30): Originally from Michigan, Beardsley was living a transient lifestyle out West and was last confirmed alive by her family in 1975/1976. In 1977, skeletal remains were discovered in the remote Emigrant Gap area of Placer County, California. For nearly fifty years, she was known only as ‘Emigrant Gap Jane Doe’ until forensic genealogy through Moxxy Forensic Investigations successfully identified her. Her case has now been officially re-opened as a homicide investigation.

Marilyn Denice Waltz (January 7, 1978, Bakersfield): Marilyn Waltz was last seen by her family in Bakersfield on January 7, 1978. She was reported missing on the same date.

Essie Margarette Hiett (February 13, 1978, Oroville): Hiett was last seen in downtown Oroville, California on February 13, 1978. Essie worked as a hostess at an Oroville card room. She vanished while returning to her home sometime between 02.00 and 04.00 am. Her disabled car (1975, Oldsmobile, Toronado Trofeo) and her clothes were found, but her body was never located. Foul play is suspected.

Cheryl Schille Wyant (May 28, 1978, San Bernadino County): Cheryl Wyant ran away from her children’s home in Corbett, Oregon about a week after her 14th birthday. She was last seen in San Bernardino County, where she may have been placed in a crisis center or children’s home. She left this facility and was reportedly injured in a traffic accident. She then reportedly walked out of an unknown hospital and has not been seen or heard from again. She was not reported missing until 1995, when the report was filed in Rohnert Park. Cheryl has no other connection to Rohnert Park.

Connie Gail Minchaca (June 9, 1978, Napa): Connie Gail Minchaca was last seen in the late afternoon after a family friend drove her to a western clothing store where she was supposed to meet a friend. She planned to attend a party the night she disappeared. Friends claim she never arrived to the pary. She left her personal belongings behind at the home she shared with her father. Her mother received several mysterious calls in the weeks after Connie disappeared. Sometimes the caller would be a male, sometimes a female. Each time they claimed to know what had happened to Connie, sometimes claiming she had been kidnapped and other times claiming she had been killed. Connie was dating a twenty-five-year-old man whom her family did not approve. She would often sneak out of her bedroom window to meet him. Each time her room was discovered empty, the family would call the police and officers would pick Connie up. The police have at least six reports of her running way in the months prior to her disappearance.

Norma Louise Houghland (July 11, 1978, Sacramento): Norma and her sons 5777DMCA Thomas and 5778DMCA Richard were last seen on the evening of July 11, 1978, at a relative’s house in Sacramento, California. They left the residence around 8:00 PM and were believed to be headed to their residence (also located in Sacramento). Norma drove a 1965 light blue Pontiac Lemans (CA Plate 254SBI, VIN: 237375K134785), which is also missing and has never been recovered. Family members, unable to contact Norma in the days following, responded to the family’s residence. They found all their clothing and belongings inside and some dishes in the sink, along with the children’s bicycles, unopened mail, an uncashed welfare check, and Norma’s eyeglasses. The Houghland family has not been seen or heard from since.

Patricia Gay Toliver (August 12, 1978, Modesto): Patty was last seen by her mother, sister, and brother-in-law on August 11, 1978. Early the next morning, Patty’s family returned home to Redding after an overnight visit to Patty and her husband, James Toliver. Patty did not come out of her bedroom to say goodbye to them, which was unusual. After Patty’s family got to Redding, they made several unsuccessful attempts to to phone her before Toliver told them she was missing. Patty’s sister reported that Patty had told her she and her husband were going away on a trip. Yet, after Patty’s disappearance, the sister noticed all her makeup, luggage, and clothing were in her house along with her keys, ID, and other personal items. A year after Patty’s disappearance, Toliver asked a realtor to prepare and record a quit-claim deed showing Patty had signed over to him her community property share in their home. The deed was dated several months prior to Patty’s disappearance. Toliver failed a lie detector test when questioned about Patty’s disappearance but he was not arrested because of lack of additional evidence. In 1980, Toliver died of a heart attack while fleeing from the murder scene of Florence Richina. Toliver is the suspect in the murder of Richina, the disappearance of his wife Patty, as well as the disappearances of Jacqueline Cooper 4525DFCA, Mary Watson 1149DFCA and Hester Chandler 4526DFCA.

Wendy Susan Byron (August 18, 1978, Glendora): Wendy Byron was last seen August 26, 1978, in Glendora. Her car was found at the Ontario International Airport (Ontario, San Bernardino County, CA). Wendy’s case is classified as suspicious, and authorities have not confirmed foul play. The backyard of the home Wendy lived in with her husband at the time of her disappearance was excavated and searched with cadaver dogs in 2013, but no evidence was found.

Marilee Bruszer (disappeared on August 22, 1978, Long Beach): thirty-three-year-old Bruszer vanished from her apartment in the Belmont Shore neighborhood of Long Beach; on September 3, 1978, the unclothed remains of a woman were discovered near the Yuba Lake campground at Yuba Reservoir in rural Juab County, Utah. The state medical examiner determined that the cause of death was strangulation, but investigators were unable to identify the body at the time.  During the 1980s, convicted serial killer Henry Lee Lucas falsely confessed to her murder, a claim that was later determined to be coerced and unreliable. A major breakthrough occurred when a detective searching through an evidence room found a archived hair sample simply labeled, ‘Hair from Yuba Lake body,’ and in 2014, the Juab County Sheriff’s Office sent the hair sample to the University of North Texas Health Science Center for advanced profiling; a match was finally made in August 2015.

Peggy Joyce Jones Mandeville (September 1, 1978, Camarillo): Peggy Mandeville was admitted to Camarillo State Hospital due to chronic depression. She left the facility and phoned both her husband and mother from a pay phone, but has not been heard from or seen since. Peggy was reported as missing to the Camarillo and Oxnard Police Departments in California and Cape Girardeau Police Department, in her mother’s home state of Missouri.

Elizabeth Mary Byron (May 1, 1978, Oxnard): Elizabeth Mary Byron is an endangered missing person who disappeared from her home on May 1, 1978. The thirty-six-year-old was approximately 5’6″ tall, weighed around 115 pounds; she had brown hair, hazel eyes, and a prominent, large scar on her right leg.Very few details are available regarding the exact circumstances under which Byron went missing.

Lisa Rene Sprague (September 1, 1978, Venura): Lisa was last seen in Ventura in the fall of 1978, and no additional details are known. At the time, she had emancipated and married at the age of 15, and was caring for a young daughter.

Gabriele Uralli (September 28, 1978, Walnut Creek): On September 28, 1978, Gabriele Uralli went missing from her home on Walker Avenue in Walnut Creek, California after an argument with her husband. She has never been heard from again. The California Highway Patrol recovered Gabriele’s vehicle (a brown 1960’s Chevrolet station wagon) near the Golden Gate Bridge on September 30, 1978. Her purse, wallet, and ID were in the vehicle.

Anna Venerenea Amici (October 3, 1978, Palmdale): Anna disappeared under suspicious circumstances. She was last seen on October 3, 1978, at 10:00 PM, leaving her place of employment in the 37000 block of 47th Street East in Palmdale. On October 5, 1978, the missing person’s grand-daughter checked the missing person’s residence and found all the doors unlocked and the lights were left on. Anna was not at home, nor were any of her personal property missing.

Deborah Diane Owens (November 19, 1978, Oroville): Deborah Diane Owens was last seen at her home around 8:30 AM, on November 19, 1979 in Oroville by her husband, Marvin Gail Owens, who reported her missing two days later. On March 19, 2015 he pled guilty to manslaughter in her death and admitted that he strangled his wife during an argument then buried her body in a shallow grave near the Oroville Wildlife Area; as of July 2026, her remains have not been recovered.

Kerry Ann Graham & Francine Marie Trimble (December 16, 1978, Forestville): fifteen-year-old Kerry and fourteen-year-old Francine disappeared on December 16, 1978 after leaving their homes to visit a shopping mall in Santa Rosa. According to some reports, the girls had planned to attend a party in Santa Rosa, and an acquaintance saw them hitchhiking at a gas station in Forestville. Their remains were discovered in July 1979 approximately 80 miles north of Forestville, concealed within duct-taped garbage bags and buried within an embankment of a heavily overgrown woodland area located beside a remote section of Highway 20, twelve miles from the city of Willits. Due to their advanced state of decomposition, their specific cause of death has never been established, although both girls have always been considered to have been murdered. The bodies of Graham and Trimble would remain unidentified until November 2015, when their identities were confirmed via the use of DNA profiling.

Anita Anne Qvist (January 1, 1979, San Francisco): Anita’s family last saw her at a family event in San Francisco around 1979. Anita last spoke with family via the telephone around 1984. No contact has been made since.

Murders Linked to the ‘ToolBox Killers’ (February to June,1979): I am going to touch on the murders of Lawrence Bittaker and Roy Norris, who roamed Southern California in their silver 1977 GMC cargo van (nicknamed the ‘Murder Mac’) and they brutally tortured and murdered five teenage girls and young women: their first known victim was Lucinda Lynn ‘Cindy’ Schaefer, a sixteen-year-old from Torrance that had been walking back to her grandmother’s home after attending a Christian youth fellowship meeting at St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church. Sometime along her way, Bittaker and Norris abducted her into their van then drove her into a remote area of the San Gabriel Mountains via a fire road, and after subjecting her to physical and sexual assault, they finally strangled her to death then dumped her body in a remote canyon gorge. Next is Andrea Joy Hall, who was eighteen-years-old when she became the second victim of Bittaker and Norris; she had relocated to LA from Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio in February 1978, and on July 8, 1979, she was hitchhiking along the Pacific Coast Highway in Redondo Beach with the hopes of visiting her boyfriend when she was picked up by the two. They took her into the San Gabriel Mountains, where they subjected her to horrific torture, rape, and psychological torment before eventually taking her life: Bittaker stabbed an ice pick through her ear into her brain, which failed to kill her instantly, and he ultimately strangled her to death using a wire coat hanger. On September 2, 1979, fifteen-year-old Jacqueline Doris ‘Jackie’ Gilliam and her thirteen-year-old friend, Jacqueline Leah Lamp, were hitchhiking in Redondo Beach when they were picked up by Bittaker and Norris in a customized van. Once inside, the men subdued the two girls and drove them into an isolated fire road area within the San Gabriel Mountains. Over a fifty-eight-hour long ordeal, both girls were subjected to extreme sexual assault and torture: Gilliam was ultimately murdered after being struck in the head/ear with an ice pick and strangled by Bittaker, and Lamp was killed alongside her using a sledgehammer. Their partial remains were later recovered in the mountains after Roy Norris reached a plea deal with prosecutors. Sixteen-year-old Shirley Lynette Ledford from Burbank, California was the Toolbox Killers last victim when they killed her on Halloween night in 1979; Ledford attended a party and was hitchhiking home when she accepted a ride from Bittaker and Norris, and instead of taking her to her house, they abducted her at knifepoint and drove her to a remote location in the San Gabriel Mountains. She was subjected to hours of extreme physical and sexual torture was ultimately strangled to death; Bittaker and Norris left her body on a front lawn in Sunland, where it was discovered by a jogger on the morning of November 1, 1979; because of the timing, neighbors initially mistook her remains for a discarded Halloween decoration.

Mary Louise Watkins (May 17, 1979, Modesto): Watkins was last seen on May 17, 1979 in Modesto, packing her belongings into a car. She was last seen by a friend, with who she had been living. She told her friend she was moving to San Jose to live with her daughter. Watkins never made it to her daughters home. Her vehicle was found two days later in the parking lot of what now is known as the Sutter Gould Medical Foundation building at 600 Coffee Road. None of her property was in the car. Mary had $28000 in cash with her when she left for San Jose. The money was from the sale of her Modesto home. She had told her banker she was going to use the money to invest in property together with a friend. Police contacted Mary’s daughter who said she knew nothing about her mother’s plan to move in with her, nor that she had sold her home. Several days after Mary’s car was found, her daughter received a letter from Mary saying she was eloping. Mary’s disappearance is suspicious since she gave several friends different stories as to why she was going out of town. It seemed sge was trying to keep her plans a secret. Foul play is suspected. Charles Toliver is the main suspect in Mary’s disappearance. In 1980, Toliver died of a heart attack while fleeing from the murder scene of Florence Richina. Toliver is the suspect in the murder of Richina and the disappearances of his wife Patricia Toliver 4524DFCA, Jacqueline Cooper 4525DFCA and Hester Chandler 4526DFCA.

Sonoma County Jane Doe: On July 2, 1979, the skeletal remains of a young white female were found in a ravine off Calistoga Road approximately 100 yards from where the body of Lori Lee Kursa had been recovered seven years earlier. Due to the age of the remains, authorities initially believed them to be those of Jeannette Kamahele until a comparison of dental records later proved negative. The victim had been hogtied and her arm fractured around the time of her murder, and her corpse had been stuffed into a laundry or duffel bag before being dumped in the ravine, but there was no other evidence to establish a cause of death. It was determined that the unidentified victim was approximately sixteen to twenty-one-years-old, wore hard contact lenses (kept in a metal candy tin with a picture of cherries on it), had red, auburn, or brown hair, was about 5’3″ tall and at one time had broken a rib which was healed by the time of the murder. Her weight and eye color could not be ascertained, and no clothing was found. One expert consulted by authorities determined that the victim was likely killed between 1972 and 1974 and was about nineteen years old. Hard contact lenses were not often sold in the United States and Canada after the mid-1970s when soft contact lenses became available. She had also been bound in the same manner as Walsh.

Debra Lee Vowell (January 24, 1979, San Diego): Vowell was last seen in Southern California on January 24, 1979. Debra had been married just a short time at the time of her disappearance. On that day, Debra, her husband Dennis Vowell and Gary Newton disappeared off the coast of San Diego on their 41 foot fishing boat, ‘The Armistice.’ An air/sea search by the United States Coast Guard from San Luis Obisbo to Ensenada, Mexico yielded negative results. Two years later, Debra’s grandfather, a Los Angeles Sheriff Sergeant received a collect call late at night. When he asked the operator who it was from he heard Debra shout ‘it’s Debbie I am trying to get to California.’ The phone then went dead and there has been nothing heard from her since. A background investigation into the history of The Armistice linked the boat to a large scale marijuana smuggling organization which was connected to several sunken boats and other crew members missing. On 1979, Debra’s parents reported her missing to the Coast Guard only. In 2003, a family member asked an investigator with the Los Angeles Cold Case Unit for help. At the request of this investigator, Orange County Sheriff took a courtesy report, and then the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Cold Case Unit opened an investigation into Debra’s disappearance. Debra is the daughter of retired Hollywood producer David Powers. The boat and all occupants are still missing.

Cristina Parodi (February 2, 1979, Psadena): Cristina was last seen in Pasadena, California on February 2, 1979. She was original reported missing in 1979, but the Pasadena Police Department has no documentation to support it. A new missing persons report was submitted in 2014.

Tara Cossett Cossey (June 6, 1979, San Pablo): Tara Cossey was last seen in San Pablo, California on June 6, 1979. She was walking to Pirelli’s Liquor Store to purchase a bag of sugar for her mother at the time of her disappearance. Tara never returned to her family’s residence and has not been heard from again.

Robin Samsoe (June 20, 1979, Huntington Beach): the aspiring gymnast vanished while riding a bicycle to ballet class in Huntington Beach. Her skeletal remains were found two weeks later in a remote area of the Angeles National Forest. Her killer was later identified as Rodney Alcala, the notorious serial killer known as ‘The Dating Game Killer.’

Adrianne Gilliam (June 22, 1979, San Jose): Gilliam met Gary Neal Johnson while hitchhiking in San Jose, California in 1977. She was employed in a hospital and earned her GED (General Education Development) and her California Nurse’s Aide license. She and Johnson moved into an apartment together when their finances allowed it. Gilliam had been employed as a nurse’s aide for three weeks on June 22, 1979. She was sent home from work on that day when she failed to arrive in her uniform. According to Johnson, Gilliam was last seen returning to their residence and disappeared. She has never been seen again. Several of Gilliam’s family members testified that they believed Johnson was responsible for her death. He was convicted of her murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Johnson maintains his innocence. Gilliam’s body has never been located.

Angela Mae Jeff (June 24, 1979, Oakland): Angela was last seen by her family during the summer of 1979. She was last known to be in the Oakland area. (According to Angela’s CA DOJ profile, she was last seen in the Sacramento area). At the time of her disappearance, Angela was in a relationship with a boyfriend. Shortly after she was reported missing by her family, Angela’s boyfriend fled to Mexico. Foul play is suspected.

Debra Lynn Kidwell (May 4, 1979, Ventura): on May 9, 1979, Debra’s husband, John Needham Kidwell, reported her and their twin sons missing, and told detectives he had dropped his wife and kids off at the LA International Airport on May 4, 1979. Because of the timeline and nature of the disappearance, Kidwell was initially treated as a suspect by law enforcement, but he later took a polygraph test (which he passed). No definitive trace of Debra or her two sons has ever been uncovered.

Lucinda Lynn Schaefer (June 24, 1979, Torrance): Schaefer was last seen in California on June 24, 1979, as she was walking back to her grandmother’s house, after a Christian youth meeting at St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church. Lawrence Bittaker and Roy Norris confessed to her abduction and homicide. She has never been located.

Andrea Joy Hall (July 8, 1979, Redondo Beach): Hall was last seen at Redondo Beach, California on July 8, 1979, while hitchhiking. Convicted serial killers Lawrence Bittaker and Roy Norris confessed to her abduction and homicide. She has never been located. Homicide reportedly took place on a remote fire road in the San Gabriel Mountains, overlooking Glendora.

Shannon Eileen Staal (July 10, 1979, Menifee Valley): Staal was thirty-six-years-old when she was last seen at her residence in Menifee Valley; at the time she was 5’2″ tall and weighed approximately 125 pounds. She has blonde hair and blue eyes, and her official records note several distinguishing physical characteristics: a scar between her big toe and second toe on her right foot and another one on her left middle finger below the second knuckle. She also fractured her nose and right foot; her tonsils have been removed. She has previously given birth, and she wears a full denture plate. She was known to wear a gold wedding band set with a small diamond, alongside a silver ring featuring a round, star-shaped Alaska Black diamond.  Very few details surrounding the circumstances of her disappearance have ever been made public and she left behind five siblings.

Diane Genice Dye (July 30, 1979, San Jose): Dye was last seen leaving her residence in San Jose, California on July 30, 1979. She was distressed by her parents’ marital problems. She was reportedly last seen by a friend evening of July 30, 1979, when he said he found Diane on her doorstep crying outside. When he went to console her, she told him of her plans to run away. Her friend spent over an hour trying to talk her out of it, and she asked him to leave her alone, so he left. That was the last time anyone saw Diane. There was another report of her being seen in late December 1981 by a friend at a shopping mall about 50 miles north of San Jose. She told the friend she did not intend to go home and didn’t particularly want her whereabouts known.

Carolyn Maryann Bealer (August 23, 1979, Los Angeles): Bealer was last seen August 23, 1979 in Los Angeles, CA. Foul play is suspected. Larry Donald Smith was charged with Bealer’s abduction and presumed murder shortly after she vanished. Authorities believe that Smith disposed of Bealer’s remains in the Pacific Ocean. He was convicted of the charges and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole in 1980, one year after Bealer disappeared. 30 witnesses were called, including family members, to testify about Bealer’s life and daily routine. The aim was to convince the jury that she never would have left on her own. One witness told of seeing Smith and a young woman arguing as they boarded a boat in Dana Point Harbor. The vessel returned later, the witness said, without Bealer or the anchor.

Teresa Lynn McKinley (September 16, 1979, Vacaville): it was reported that the twenty-seven-year-old mother had left her residence ‘to get away’ so she could clear her mind, so she went to Pena Adobe Park in Vacaville and read a book. She never returned, leaving behind her husband and two young daughters; on October 2, 1979, her green 1979 Volkswagen Dasher was found abandoned miles away at Lake Berryessa.

Judy Lynn Smithson (October 1, 1979, North Hollywood): Judy was last seen in North Hollywood by her boyfriend, however according to family accounts shared through online investigation communities, she had recently broken up with him and intended to drive back home, however she never made it; she has not been heard from since.

Edith Irene Bonham (October 8/17, 1979, Monrovia): Edith lived alone in a Monrovia trailer park following a divorce and was last seen attending a SNAP meeting on October 17, 1979 (although some reports give her missing date as October 8). On October 18, 1979, her credit card was used to buy gasoline in La Habra, California, featuring a signature investigators believe belonged to her. On November 10, 1979, her son visited her home after failing to reach her and he discovered she was gone, leaving behind uncharacteristic dirty dishes in the sink but no signs of a physical struggle. Her green 1970 Chevrolet Nova was also missing.

Betty Jean Elias (October 28, 1979, Oakland): Elias was a forty-five-year-old bartender who was raped then brutally beaten, stabbed, and strangled in her apartment on San Pablo Avenue on October 28, 1979; her case went unsolved for nearly forty years thanks to bloody fingerprint and semen samples that had been collected from the scene at the time of the murder. Due to the persistent inquiries of her daughter, Joanne Paletta (who frequently checked in with investigators) the murder was kept alive and in 2015, the preserved DNA profile was run through a federal database and a match came back to Dennis Ray Eagle (a later check verified that the fingerprint on a crime scene curtain rod also belonged to him). Eagle was eighteen-years-old at the time of the murder and had no known personal ties to Elias or the Oakland area; in May 2019, the fifty-seven-year-old was convicted of first-degree murder with a special circumstance allegation of rape, and in June 2019 he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Donella ‘Jeannie’ Jean Coultas (December 18, 1979, South Pasadena): on the night she disappeared, Donella and her husband, Leonard Coultas, had gotten into a ‘violent domestic dispute:’ according to his statement to police, Donella struck him with a rock during the argument, however he did admit to striking her in the head with a vase, which shattered and caused her to bleed heavily from her nose and ears. He also claimed that she then ran out of the house angrily into the night and never returned. She left behind all of her personal items, including her purse, wallet, wedding ring, and keys, and Leonard claimed she left with only $50 and a single credit card in her possession; records show the card was never used

Patricia Evans Gomez (December 26, 1979, Belvedere): at the time of her disappearance the twenty-two-year-old had reportedly been en route to San Anselmo; Patricia was 5’6″ tall, weighed around 100 pounds, had brown hair and ‘multicolored eyes’ (one report said they were ‘blue/hazel’). According to reports, Gomez has a long, thin nose and her ears were pierced. Authorities believe Gomez jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge, but her body has never been recovered. 

Tami Lee Sussi (December 30, 1979, Los Angeles): Tami was last seen in Los Angeles (Pacoima area) on 12/30/1979. One possible destination was Medford, Oregon however her family never saw or heard from her again. few concrete details are available surrounding the night Tami vanished from Los Angeles. Investigators and regional cold case databases note that she may have subsequently traveled north to Medford, Oregon, though her ultimate fate and whereabouts remain entirely unknown

Cecelia Ann Shepard, Autopsy Report.

Twenty-year-old Bryan Calvin Hartnell and twenty-two-year-old Cecelia Ann Shepard were both stabbed on September 27, 1969, at Lake Berryessa in Napa County; Hartnell survived eight stab wounds to the back, but Shepard died as a result of her injuries on September 29, 1969.

The couple had been enjoying a picnic at Lake Berryessa by Twin Oak Ridge when Cecelia noticed a man close by acting strangely: he had been observed taking refuge behind a tree and had been dressed in a black executioner’s hood and a waistline bib that was decorated with the Zodiac crossed circle; he was also wearing a pair of clip-on sunglasses. He then approached the young couple pointing a gun, to which Cecelia would alert Bryan with the words, ‘oh my God he’s gotta gun!’

Shepard later recalled these details to Deputy Dave Collins after she was attacked, and in an interview, Collins would later said she told him that, ‘Brian and I were here on the blanket, down by the water and we’re just enjoying the afternoon having a nice time talking and I saw this guy, he was coming down the hillside and he seemed to stop and watch us, looking at us.’ Collins asked her, ‘what distance, how far away was he?’ to which she pointed to an area; in response the deputy said, ‘that’s about 200-300 yards away,’ and she nodded then added, ‘that’s where I first saw him.’

It is suspected they are victims of the notorious Zodiac Killer.

Cecelia Ann Shepard.
Cecelia.
Cecelia Shepard and her mom just a few months before her murder.
A picture from the crime scene of theThe Zodiac Killer’s Lake Berryessa attack that took place on September 27, 1969. 

Page one of Cecelia Ann Shepard’s autopsy report.

Page two of Cecelia Ann Shepard’s autopsy report.
Page three of Cecelia Ann Shepard’s autopsy report.
Bryan Hartnell.
Part one of the conversation between Bryan Hartnell’s and the Zodiac Killer on September 27, 1969 in Lake Berryessa.
Part two of the conversation between Bryan Hartnell’s and the Zodiac Killer on September 27, 1969 in Lake Berryessa.

Theodore Robert Bundy vs. Richard L. Duggar (Secretary, Department of Corrections), July 7, 1988.

Theodore Robert Bundy, Petitioner-Appellant versus Richard L. Dugger, Secretary, Department of Corrections, State of Florida, Respondent-Appellee. No. 86-3773.
United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
July 7, 1988.
Polly Nelson, Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering, James E. Coleman, Jr., John Byron Sandage, Andrew James Munro, Washington, D.C., for petitioner-appellant.
850 F.2d 1402
Mark Menser, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Fla., Dept. of Legal Affairs, Tallahassee, Fla., Raymond L. Marky, John M. Koenig, Jr., Asst. Attys. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., for respondent-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Before Vance, Kravitch, and Johnson, Circuit Judges.

JOHNSON, Circuit Judge:

Theodore Robert Bundy was convicted and sentenced to death in Florida for the murder of Kimberly Leach.1 On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. Bundy v. State, 471 So.2d 9 (Fla.1985), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 894, 107 S.Ct. 295, 93 L.Ed.2d 269 (1986). The Governor of Florida signed a death warrant scheduling Bundy’s execution for November 18, 1986. On November 17, Bundy was unsuccessful in state post-conviction and habeas corpus proceedings. Bundy v. State, 497 So.2d 1209 (Fla.1986).

Bundy immediately filed an application for a stay of execution, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and an application for a certificate of probable cause with the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. On November 17, the district court, having reviewed the trial record in advance, dismissed the petition without a hearing and denied the applications for a stay of execution and for a certificate of probable cause. Bundy v. Wainwright, No. 86-968-CIV-ORL-18 (M.D.Fla. Nov. 17, 1986). This Court subsequently granted a certificate of probable cause and a stay of execution pending appeal.

After briefing and oral argument, this Court remanded the case to the district court for the limited purpose of conducting an evidentiary hearing into Bundy’s competence to stand trial. Bundy v. Dugger, 816 F.2d 564 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —-, 108 S.Ct. 198, 98 L.Ed.2d 149 (1987). On remand, the district court conducted an evidentiary hearing and concluded that Bundy was competent to stand trial. Bundy v. Dugger, 675 F.Supp. 622 (M.D.Fla.1987). This Court ordered supplemental briefing on the competence to stand trial issue and heard oral argument.

I. Abuse of the Writ: We expressly state at the outset a conclusion implicit in the earlier decision of a limited remand: Bundy’s first federal habeas corpus petition should not be dismissed for abuse of the writ. Typically, ‘abuse of the writ’ principles apply to second or successive petitions that present claims that were raised, or that could have been raised, in previous petitions. Although this is Bundy’s first petition, the district court considered the petition abusive:

At approximately 2:30 PM on November 17, 1986, sixteen and one half hours prior to the time Mr. Bundy is scheduled to be executed, the petitioner filed a 183-page petition for writ of habeas corpus asking this Court to stay the execution and grant relief to the petitioner. This Court considers the petition filed under these conditions to be abusive.

We disagree.2 Even assuming arguendo that a first petition could be dismissed as an abuse of the writ because it was filed on the eve of execution,3 this case does not present an abusive situation. The United States Supreme Court denied certiorari review of Bundy’s direct appeal on October 14, 1986. On October 21, the Governor of Florida signed a death warrant scheduling Bundy’s execution for November 18. Bundy began state postconviction and habeas proceedings on November 7 and those proceedings concluded on November 17. Bundy then filed his federal petition. Under these facts, the filing on the eve of execution does not constitute abuse of the writ.

II. Competence to Stand Trial: As set forth above, the district court, after a limited remand from this Court, conducted an evidentiary hearing and concluded that Bundy was competent to stand trial. Bundy v. Dugger, 675 F.Supp. 622 (M.D.Fla.1987). We begin our analysis by setting forth the applicable legal standards central to our review of the district court’s conclusion. First, ‘the legal test for mental competency is whether, at the time of trial and sentencing, the petitioner had ‘sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding’ and whether he had ‘a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.’ Adams v. Wainwright, 764 F.2d 1356, 1359-60 (11th Cir.1985) (quoting Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, 402, 80 S.Ct. 788, 789, 4 L.Ed.2d 824 (1960)), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1073, 106 S.Ct. 834, 88 L.Ed.2d 805 (1986). Second, Bundy had the burden of proof on remand: ‘At the ensuing district court hearing, petitioner [the defendant] bears the burden of proving the fact of incompetency by a preponderance of the evidence.’ Price v. Wainwright, 759 F.2d 1549, 1553 (11th Cir.1985) (citing Zapata v. Estelle, 585 F.2d 750, 752 (5th Cir.1978) (en banc)). Third, the standard of appellate review provides:

Before the court can meaningfully apply [the Dusky ] legal standard … it must often ascertain the nature of petitioner’s allegedly incapacitating illness. It is at this initial juncture that expert testimony is particularly valuable, for the existence of even a severe psychiatric defect is not always apparent to laymen. Because of this difficulty in detecting medical diseases, the trial court may find it necessary to make an initial factfinding on whether the accused suffers from a mental defect at all. Although sometimes dispositive of the ultimate competency question, this medical inquiry is properly classified as pure fact finding and reviewable only under the clearly erroneous standard.

Once it is established that an individual suffers from a clinically recognized disorder, the court must decide whether such condition rendered the accused incompetent under the Dusky formulation…. This second stage determination of legal incompetency is subject to a review more stringent than the clearly erroneous rule. To insure protection of valuable constitutional rights, this court is bound to take a hard look at the ultimate competency ‘finding.’

Bruce suggests that a district court’s determination of competency should proceed in two parts: (1) Does the defendant suffer from a clinically recognized disorder? and (2) if so, did that disorder render the defendant incompetent under the Dusky standard? In the present case, Bundy argued that he suffered from bipolar mood disorder.6 Although the district court did not segregate its analysis as suggested by Bruce, our reading of the district court’s opinion, particularly the conclusion,7 indicates that the district court determined that, even if Bundy otherwise suffered from bipolar mood disorder, the disorder was not manifesting itself so as to affect his competence to stand trial. Consequently, pursuant to Bruce, we take a ‘hard look’ at the ultimate competency ‘finding.’

Bundy argues that, although he had a factual understanding of the proceedings against him, he lacked a rational understanding of those proceedings and a rational understanding necessary to consult with his lawyer. We have undertaken a detailed review of the record and given a ‘hard look’ to the district court’s conclusion of ‘competency.’ Based upon the record evidence of the testimony (including depositions) at the evidentiary hearing and the associated exhibits, we hold that the district court’s findings of historical fact were not clearly erroneous, see Amadeo v. Zant, — U.S. —-, 108 S.Ct. 1771, 100 L.Ed.2d 249 (1988), and thus we will not reiterate the district court’s findings here. We do, however, highlight the record evidence that leads us to conclude, after a ‘hard look,’ that Bundy was competent to stand trial.

Dr. Dorothy Lewis and Dr. Emanuel Tanay, both psychiatrists, testified9 that Bundy was incompetent to stand trial. Dr. Charles Mutter and Dr. Umesh Mhatre, both psychiatrists, testified in rebuttal for the State. The district court credited the testimony of Drs. Mutter and Mhatre. We agree with the district court’s observation that their testimony better accorded with the testimony of other witnesses and the associated exhibits.10

For example, Judge Wallace Jopling, the presiding judge at the Lake City trial, and prosecutors George Dekle and Jerry Blair testified about Bundy’s actions at trial. This testimony indicates that Bundy’s actions were inconsistent with the actions of a person manifesting bipolar mood disorder.

In addition, the exhibits from the hearing, largely ignored by Bundy in his supplemental brief, indicate that Bundy was competent to stand trial. The videotape of Bundy’s argument to Judge Jopling prior to sentencing shows that Bundy delivered a cogent, well-reasoned argument. Bundy focused on the effect of pretrial publicity on the jury and argued that the jury was overwhelmed more by the quantity, than the quality, of the state’s evidence. Bundy can be seen flipping pages of a legal pad as he goes through his argument.

The tapes made by Bundy12 while awaiting the verdict and shortly after the verdict strongly demonstrate that Bundy had a rational understanding of the proceedings. For example, on tape I (recorded while the jury was deliberating), Bundy describes his displeasure at one of the trial judge’s instructions, evaluates some of the evidence against him, and criticizes the state’s closing argument for referring to facts not in evidence. On tape G (recorded two hours after the jury returned its guilty verdict), Bundy recalls that after closing argument he bet members of the defense team that the jury would be back within three hours with a guilty verdict: ‘I was attempting to protect myself–insulate myself from the terribly harsh consequences of a guilty verdict….’ On that tape, Bundy recalls evaluating the trial proceedings: ‘I can remember throughout the course of the trial, my counsel, myself, speculating on the reactions of jurors to state witnesses, the reactions of jurors to defense witnesses, speculating on the ineffectiveness of certain state witnesses, and the convincing qualities of our witnesses.’ On tape H (recorded on the morning after the jury returned its guilty verdict), Bundy describes how, when he woke up that morning, ‘I immediately began thinking about the statements I’m going to make to the jury during the penalty phase and the statements I’m going to make to the judge when he sentences me. Right now my concern lies with just what the tenor of those comments should be.’ Consequently, a ‘hard look’ at the record evidence supports the conclusion that Bundy was competent to stand trial.

III. Choice of Counsel: Bundy argues that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to choice of counsel. This claim overlaps with Bundy’s claim that his counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to raise this claim on direct appeal. Shortly after his indictment, Bundy asked the trial court to grant the motion of Georgia attorney Millard Farmer to be admitted pro hac vice. The trial court denied the motion after conducting an evidentiary hearing and allowing oral argument. See State v. Bundy, No. 78-169-CF (Fla.Cir.Ct.Columbia County Sept. 22, 1978) (Jopling, J.) (R. 14,117; vol. 156, app. 37).14 On direct appeal, Bundy did not claim that he was denied the counsel of his choice. Bundy then raised this claim in state postconviction proceedings. The Florida Supreme Court found this claim procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal. See Bundy, 497 So.2d at 1210. The Court also found Bundy’s related ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim to be without merit. Id. at 1211.

Bundy then raised the choice of counsel claim and the related ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim in his federal habeas corpus petition. The district court determined that the choice of counsel claim was procedurally defaulted, see slip op. at 9, and the related ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not a basis for relief because the district court had denied relief on the merits of the choice of counsel claim.15

We conclude that Bundy’s failure to raise the choice of counsel claim on direct appeal constitutes procedural default. See Murray v. Carrier, 477 U.S. 478, 106 S.Ct. 2639, 91 L.Ed.2d 397 (1986). Consequently, Bundy must show both cause for noncompliance with the state rule and actual prejudice resulting from the alleged constitutional violation. Smith v. Murray, 477 U.S. 527, 533, 106 S.Ct. 2661, 2665, 91 L.Ed.2d 434 (1986).

Bundy contends that ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel satisfies the cause requirement.16 See Carrier, 477 U.S. at 488, 106 S.Ct. at 2646 (‘Ineffective assistance of counsel … is cause for a procedural default.’). We disagree as we do not find Bundy’s counsel ineffective.17 The Supreme Court’s decision in Smith informs our analysis. The Supreme Court reasoned that, when viewed in light of state law at the time of direct appeal, the decision not to raise the claim ‘fell well within the ‘wide range of professionally competent assistance’ required under the Sixth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.’ Smith, 477 U.S. at 536, 106 S.Ct. at 2667 (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 690, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2066, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)); see id. at 535, 106 S.Ct. at 2667 (‘Nor can it seriously be maintained that the decision not to press the claim on appeal was an error of such magnitude that it rendered counsel’s performance constitutionally deficient under the test of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 [104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674] (1984)’); see also Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 751-54, 103 S.Ct. 3308, 3312-14, 77 L.Ed.2d 987 (1983) (recognizing that appellate counsel needs latitude in selecting issues to raise on appeal).

In his direct appeal in the Leon County case, which antedated the direct appeal in the present case, Bundy raised the choice of counsel claim and the Florida Supreme Court found it without merit. See Bundy v. State, 455 So.2d 330, 347-48 (Fla.1984).18 Consequently, pursuant to Smith, Bundy’s counsel was not ineffective for not raising the choice of counsel claim on direct appeal.19 Finally, this is not ‘an extraordinary case’ where the writ should be granted even absent a showing of cause.

IV. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: Bundy argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial on a number of grounds. The Florida Supreme Court, see Bundy, 497 So.2d at 1210, and the district court, see slip op. at 9-12, held this claim without merit. We affirm the district court because none of the asserted grounds satisfies both the performance and prejudice prongs enunciated by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Bundy first complains of ineffectiveness of trial counsel in relation to the investigation concerning fiber evidence, the hearing on the motion in limine to exclude such evidence, the failure to object to the conclusions testified to by the state’s expert witness, and the failure to have a defense expert testify regarding the fibers. We have reviewed the record evidence and, particularly based upon the cross-examination regarding the source of the van’s carpet, the users of the van, and the clothes worn in the van; the arguments on the motion in limine; the cross-examination of the state’s expert, and the examination of witnesses recalled as part of the defense’s presentation, we conclude that Bundy has failed to satisfy Strickland ‘s performance prong. In addition, in ruling on this claim in the state postconviction proceeding, the trial court stated that it would have permitted the evidence anyhow. Consequently, it does not appear that the prejudice prong was met.

Bundy next argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with the plea agreement. A review of the record again demonstrates that Bundy has not satisfied the performance prong. In addition, Bundy asserts that counsel had to disclose damaging information to the state in the course of negotiations. Bundy does not allege what that information was or whether it was used at trial. Consequently, this assertion does not raise a colorable showing of prejudice sufficient to trigger an evidentiary hearing.

Bundy next claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because no evidence was presented at the penalty phase of trial that he was suffering from a mental disorder. As a related claim, Bundy argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel by counsel’s failure to investigate an insanity defense. The record indicates an insanity defense was investigated and that Bundy rejected any suggestion that such a defense be presented. In addition, Bundy would not admit complicity of the crimes upon which he was convicted. Based upon Bundy’s actions and the actual presentation at the penalty phase, we cannot say that Bundy has satisfied the performance prong. The record also indicates that, even if such evidence were presented, the state could produce countering evidence and thus, in light of the aggravating circumstances, no prejudice resulted.

Finally, Bundy argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because no challenge was made to the use of prior convictions as aggravating circumstances. Bundy does not suggest any basis for a challenge to the Utah convictions. We cannot say that Bundy has satisfied the performance prong as to his Leon County convictions. That conclusion is buttressed by the Florida Supreme Court’s subsequent affirmance of those convictions. In addition, we do not believe Bundy has satisfied the prejudice prong. Three aggravating circumstances remain independent of the Leon County convictions.

V. Faretta Inquiry: Bundy claims that the trial court failed to conduct a proper inquiry into whether he should have been allowed to represent himself during critical stages of the prosecution. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). This claim overlaps with Bundy’s claim that his counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to raise this claim on direct appeal.

On September 21, 1978, after the trial court orally denied the motion for Farmer to appear pro hac vice, the trial court asked Bundy if he had other counsel to represent him. In relevant part, Bundy replied:

[S]eeing that the Court in its wisdom has denied me representation by Mr. Farmer, I will proceed pro se.

In the first instance, I guess I should ask for leave to proceed in proper person and submit in support of my motion the case of Anthony Pasquale Faretta versus the State of California 42 U.S. 806 [95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562], case decided in 1975.

Supp. R3:144-45 (footnote omitted). The trial court permitted Bundy to proceed pro se. Subsequently, at the request of the state’s attorney, the trial court asked Bundy what education he had. Bundy replied in relevant part:

I have a Bachelor of Science in Psychology from the University of Washington and two years of law school. I think, however, if the Court will read Faretta, the United States Supreme Court has said that the legal background or legal training of a defendant who wishes to represent himself is not an issue. If the man or woman wishes to represent himself or herself, understandingly, knowingly and voluntarily expresses the desire to do so, he or she may exercise that Sixth Amendment right applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment and so I don’t really think that an inquiry into my background, beyond my stating that I knowingly and voluntarily and understandingly take this step, is necessary.

Id. at 147-48. On June 21, 1979, Bundy withdrew his waiver of counsel and accepted Victor Africano as his attorney in the Lake City case. R157:14,383. Africano served as Bundy’s attorney from that pre-trial point to the conclusion of the direct appeal. On direct appeal, Bundy did not claim he was denied a proper Faretta hearing. Bundy then raised this claim in state postconviction proceedings. The Florida Supreme Court held:

We find that the appellant’s fourth claim [i.e., the Faretta inquiry] could have been raised on direct appeal and is therefore barred from consideration. Even if we were to examine the claim, however, we would find it lacking in substance. The trial court conducted an inquiry into appellant’s ability to act as his own counsel prior to allowing him to represent himself, and during this inquiry appellant himself alerted the trial court to the teachings of Faretta. We may not now reverse the trial court’s finding of appellant’s ability to pursue his own representation.

Bundy, 497 So.2d at 1210. The Court also found Bundy’s related ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim to be without merit. Id. at 1211. Although the state asserted before the district court that the Faretta inquiry claim was subject to the procedural default doctrine, the district court did not mention that doctrine but rather concluded that Bundy was not entitled to relief on the merits.

On appeal, the state renews its argument that the claim is subject to the procedural default doctrine. When it is clear that a state court is addressing a particular claim (i.e., the Florida Supreme Court’s reference to ‘the appellant’s fourth claim’) and the state court expressly states that the claim is barred from consideration, we conclude that the state court has not excused the procedural default when it proceeds alternatively and hypothetically to address the merits of the claim. Consequently, we conclude that Bundy’s failure to raise the Faretta inquiry claim on direct appeal constitutes procedural default. See Murray v. Carrier, supra. Bundy thus must show both cause for noncompliance with the state rule and actual prejudice resulting from the alleged constitutional violation.

Bundy again contends that ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel satisfies the cause requirement.20 See Carrier, 477 U.S. at 488, 106 S.Ct. at 2646 (‘Ineffective assistance of counsel … is cause for a procedural default’). Again, we rely on the Supreme Court’s analysis in Smith to conclude that Bundy has not met the cause requirement. In light of Bundy’s citation of the Faretta decision to the trial court, his comments to the trial court, and Africano’s serving as Bundy’s attorney from well before trial to the conclusion of direct appeal, ‘the decision not to press the claim on appeal was [not] an error of such magnitude that it rendered counsel’s performance constitutionally deficient.’ 21 Smith, 477 U.S. at 535, 106 S.Ct. at 2667; see also Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 751-54, 103 S.Ct. 3308, 3312-14, 77 L.Ed.2d 987 (1983) (recognizing that appellate counsel needs latitude in selecting issues to raise on appeal).

Alternatively, if the procedural default doctrine did not preclude us from examining the merits of the Faretta inquiry claim, we would conclude that Bundy was not entitled to relief on this ground. This Circuit generally requires that a trial judge conduct a waiver hearing to make sure that the accused understands the risks of proceeding pro se. See Jackson v. James, 839 F.2d 1513, 1516 (11th Cir.1988) and cases cited therein. In the present case, the passage quoted above indicates that the trial court did not inform Bundy of the disadvantages of proceeding pro se. Bundy, however, cited Faretta to the trial court and asserted that he was ‘knowingly and voluntarily and understandingly taking this step.’ We do not decide whether these facts constitute a ‘rare’ case in which an exception to the hearing requirement will be made. See Fitzpatrick v. Wainwright, 800 F.2d 1057, 1064-68 (11th Cir.1986). Rather, we conclude that any error by the trial court was harmless. As set forth above, well before trial in the Lake City case, Bundy accepted Victor Africano as his attorney. Africano served as Bundy’s attorney from that point to the conclusion of direct appeal. Accordingly, the Faretta inquiry claim and the related ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim are without merit.

VI. Race of the Victim: Bundy argues that the Florida death penalty is unconstitutionally applied because it is disproportionately imposed in cases, such as the present case, where the victim is white. On collateral review, the Florida Supreme Court held that this claim was without merit. See Bundy, 497 So.2d at 1210-11. Consequently, the procedural default doctrine does not apply.

The district court also held that this claim was without merit. On appeal, Bundy argues that the district court erred in denying him an evidentiary hearing on this claim. We disagree. Bundy relies solely on studies allegedly showing systematic discrimination on the basis of the victim’s race. This Court repeatedly has rejected these studies as grounds for an evidentiary hearing or relief. See Funchess v. Wainwright, 788 F.2d 1443, 1445-46 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1133, 106 S.Ct. 1668, 90 L.Ed.2d 208 (1986); Thomas v. Wainwright, 767 F.2d 738, 747-48 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1031, 106 S.Ct. 1241, 89 L.Ed.2d 349 (1986), and cases cited therein. In addition, Bundy points to no evidence that the decision makers in his case acted with discriminatory purpose.

VII. Hypnotically Refreshed Testimony: Bundy argues that the use of Clarence L. ‘Andy’ Anderson’s hypnotically enhanced testimony violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation and his Fourteenth Amendment due process right to a fair trial.22 Anderson was the state’s only eyewitness to the abduction of Kimberly Leach on February 9, 1978. On July 18, 1978, Anderson first went to the police because the profile of a person he had seen on a television newscast bore a striking resemblance to the man he had earlier observed with a girl near the Lake City Junior High School. Anderson was hypnotized twice in order to enhance his recollection. After conducting a hearing and taking testimony, the trial court denied Bundy’s pretrial motion to suppress Anderson’s testimony. The denial was without prejudice to Bundy’s right to object at trial to specific portions of that testimony. At trial, Anderson made an in-court identification of Bundy as closely resembling the man he saw and, from a photograph introduced into evidence, identified Kimberly Leach as the girl.

On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court held ‘that hypnotically refreshed testimony is per se inadmissible in a criminal trial in this state, but hypnosis does not render a witness incompetent to testify to those facts demonstrably recalled prior to hypnosis. Relying on harmless-constitutional-error cases of the United States Supreme Court, the Florida Supreme Court went on to conclude that the admission of Anderson’s hypnotically refreshed testimony was harmless error.23 Id. at 19. The district court held this claim without merit.

We first address Bundy’s claim that admission of Anderson’s testimony violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. In Rock v. Arkansas, 107 S.Ct. 2704, 97 L.Ed.2d 37 (1987), the Supreme Court held that a state’s per se rule excluding hypnotically refreshed testimony impermissibly infringed on a criminal defendant’s right to testify. Although the Supreme Court expressly did not address the issue presented here. Its reasoning informs our analysis. The Court stated that ‘it has not been shown that hypnotically enhanced testimony is always so untrustworthy and so immune to the traditional means of evaluating credibility’ such that a per se ban is warranted. Id. at 2714. The Court recognized that cross-examination remained as an effective tool for revealing inconsistencies, id., even though hypnosis may lead to the introduction of inaccurate memories, ‘making effective cross-examination more difficult.’

Rock thus teaches that, although hypnosis may make effective cross-examination more difficult, it does not always make it impossible, thereby preserving the opportunity for effective cross-examination safeguarded by the Sixth Amendment. See Delaware v. Fensterer, 474 U.S. 15, 20, 106 S.Ct. 292, 295, 88 L.Ed.2d 15 (1985) (‘The Confrontation Clause guarantees the opportunity for effective cross-examination….’ (emphasis in original)); accord Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 678, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1435, 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986). Consequently, we decline to hold that the Confrontation Clause requires a per se ban on the admission of hypnotically refreshed testimony.

We thus examine whether, on the facts of the present case, a Confrontation Clause violation occurred. ‘The sixth amendment confrontation clause is satisfied where sufficient information is elicited from the witness from which the jury can adequately gauge the witness. Such information was elicited here. In particular, Anderson admitted that the hypnotic sessions he underwent, to some degree, had an effect on the testimony he was giving. Moreover, defense counsel explored why Anderson took so long to come forward; Anderson’s activities on the morning of February 9th; the relationship between the prosecution’s search of Anderson’s work schedule records and Anderson’s understanding that February 9th was the date of Kimberly Leach’s disappearance; Anderson’s identifying Bundy on television but never participating in a photo line-up or a live line-up; Anderson’s travelling the route from the fire station past Lake City Junior High School many times before; and the discrepancies between Anderson’s trial testimony and his statements prior to hypnosis. The record does not demonstrate that the trial court impermissibly limited the cross-examination of Anderson. In addition, Bundy examined the two hypnotists concerning their qualifications. Finally, the tape recordings of the two sessions were played to the jury, each juror received a transcript of those sessions, and Bundy presented an expert witness who addressed what he characterized as the flaws in those sessions. In light of these facts, Bundy certainly had the opportunity for effective cross-examination and no Confrontation Clause violation occurred.

We next examine Bundy’s claim that admission of Anderson’s testimony deprived Bundy of his Fourteenth Amendment due process right to a fair trial. We note at the outset that Rock rejects the suggestion that hypnotically refreshed testimony is so unreliable that a per se ban on such testimony is warranted. Accordingly, we must determine whether, on the facts in the present case, the hypnotically refreshed testimony was so unreliable as to violate due process. We conclude that the use of Anderson’s testimony accorded with the dictates of due process.

In the present case, as set forth above, Anderson first went to the police on July 28, 1978, because the profile of a person he had seen on a television newscast bore a striking resemblance to a man he had earlier observed with a girl near the Lake City Junior High School. Before going to the police, Anderson had noticed a resemblance between his niece and Kimberly Leach and thought, before seeing Bundy’s picture on television, that Kimberly Leach was the girl he had seen: I probably knew it for some time. Exactly when I realized that it was the Leach girl, I have no earthly idea. I just would not admit it to myself. Prior to coming to the police, Anderson had thought what he saw was what he testified to at trial. Indeed, during the search for Kimberly Leach, Anderson expressed his thoughts to a fishing companion: And I said, I don’t recall specifically what I said, but I stated that I may have seen the guy that picked the Leach girl up or I may have seen someone that could have picked up the girl.

Anderson gave a statement at the police station. He described the man he had seen as of medium build, 5-foot-7 to 5-foot-10, and having medium or darker brown wavy hair. The man wore a light shirt or jacket. Anderson described the girl as 12 or 13 years old with shoulder-length brown hair parted in the middle. She wore dungarees or slacks and a dark pullover, and carried a sweater, jacket, or large pocketbook. He said the man led the girl, by her elbow, around the front of the van and helped her in. The girl had an unhappy look as if she had been in trouble at school. The van was white and its rear windows were covered so that Anderson could not see the man after he entered the van. He described his observation as taking place in April.

After Anderson gave his statement, the prosecutor asked Anderson if he would undergo hypnosis. Anderson agreed. Thirty to forty-five minutes later, Imogene Keene, a hypnotist, arrived. Prior to hypnosis, Anderson repeated his statement. Keene then began the procedure to hypnotize Anderson. The session was tape recorded. (The tape recording was played to the jury and each juror received a transcript of the session.) The prosecutor and police investigator were also present. Anderson testified at trial that he did not believe he was hypnotized. He recalled that his neck bothered him and affected his concentration. He remembered that people kept walking in and out of the area. The descriptions offered by Anderson suggest that he was not hypnotized. For the most part, Anderson recited the facts he had given in his statement to the police. Although he initially stated that he could not see the girl’s face, in response to a question, he stated that the girl was crying. In addition, Anderson described the color of the van’s license plate, although the true color was different.

At the conclusion of this first session, the prosecutor asked if Anderson would undergo hypnosis again. Anderson agreed and a second session took place three days later on July 31. After the first session, the prosecutor or police investigator suggested that Anderson go home and think about the date of his observation. Prior to the second session, Anderson recalled the date of his observation as February 9th:

[A.] … I talked it over with my wife. I was very concerned about it, very upset about it. I didn’t even know what day the girl was missing. I believe my wife said it was around the time of our little girl’s birthday and then it began to dawn on me as I went over it in my mind that I saw the little girl and the man coming home from the fire department the day after my little girl’s birthday.
Q. What was you little daughter’s birthday?
A. February the 8th.
Q. Had you planned any events in connection with her birthday or what caused you to focus attention on her birthday?
A. My wife had planned a party where [sic] some of her friends and a movie, and I was looking forward to, you know, going to the party and taking the kids to the movies, you know, helping chaperone the kids. And I didn’t make it because I was working overtime at the fire station. I got called in quite often that day to work overtime. It seemed like every time I went home, I walked in the door, the phone would be ringing and them asking me to come back down to the fire station and, late that afternoon, I got a call to go back down to the fire station, they had a trip going to Gainesville, and we needed the money, so I went and I called my wife and told her that I’m sorry, go ahead and take the kids to the party and the movie, I wasn’t going to be able to make it.
Q. Okay. What, if anything, happened on February the 9th, after you got home, that allowed you to tie that incident in with your little daughter’s birthday party?
A. I remember going in. I remember feeling guilty about not being with the kids at the party. Well, the first thing I did was eat a piece of my daughter’s birthday cake. I asked my wife to iron me a shirt, a uniform shirt. I think probably eating the cake and just I remember feeling guilty about not making the party makes me remember it as clear as anything else.
Q. Okay. And are you certain in your own mind, as you have testified this morning, on February the 9th is the date that you made those observations that you have described to the Court?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, do I understand your testimony to be that, in between July the 28th and July the 31st, you made this determination?
A. Yes, sir.
R21:4087-89.
On July 31, the second session took place. Anderson, Keene, the prosecutor, the police investigator, Johnny ‘Jack’ Burnette, and a stenographer were present. The session was tape recorded. (The tape recording was played to the jury and each juror received a transcript of the session.) In this second session, Burnette, another hypnotist, placed Anderson under hypnosis. Anderson believed he was hypnotized during this session. During this session, Anderson stated, inter alia, that his observation was on February 9; that the man was fairly young (29, 30, or 31), was good looking, and was wearing a white jacket or white pullover with a shirt underneath; that the girl was wearing a blue football jersey with ‘3’ and either ‘6’ or ‘8’ on it; and that the van had clear rear windows through which Anderson could see the man scold the girl. After the session, Anderson ‘felt better,’ but ‘there are still some things bothering me. I couldn’t definitely identify the man. I couldn’t remember exactly what the man was wearing. There were still some questions that I had that I would like to have been able to answer.’ R21:4120.
At trial, Anderson testified in relevant part as follows:
Q. What, if anything, did you observe in the vicinity of Lake City Junior High School on that morning [February 9th] as you travelled to your home?
A. The first thing I noticed was there was a white van parked in the westbound lane of Duval Street, that, as I approached it, several cars had, were going around it. There were still two cars behind the van and then my truck. And I was sitting there waiting for the truck to move or waiting for traffic to clear so I could go around it. And on my left, I noticed a young girl, approximately twelve or thirteen years old, dark hair, shoulder length, parted in the middle. Probably the only reason I noticed this girl was she looked very much like one of my nieces.
Q. Was there anyone with the young girl?
A. Yes, sir. With her was a man, approximately early thirties, had brown hair, you know, light to dark brown hair, was full cut of hair. It was one of the things that I really paid any attention to as far as the man was concerned. It was kind of wavy, but it was full cut, you know, really a nice head of hair.
I got the impression that the young girl was either crying or had been crying. The man had a scowl on his face. And I felt like probably the girl had gotten in trouble at the school or misbehaved in some way and had called her father to come pick her up and take her home. And as I was sitting there, watching them, I remember thinking to myself, you know, the daddy is going to take the little girl home and probably, you know, give her a spanking or something like that.
Q. Would you tell us how the girl was dressed, as you recall?
A. She was wearing a pullover football jersey and probably dungarees.
Q. What was the color of the football jersey?
A. It was dark blue.
Q. Did the jersey have any distinguishing marks or characteristics?
A. Yes, sir. It had some letters on it, ’63’ or ’68’, red-orange, something like that.
Q. Did the girl appear to be carrying anything?
A. Yes, sir. In her left arm, kind of clutched to her chest like this (demonstrating), was a medium-sized object like, so it could have been a pocketbook or a rolled-up jacket or maybe both. I don’t know. The man had her by her left arm, right about the elbow, and he was leading her towards the white van. The little girl was not actually resisting. It was pretty evidence [sic] that, that, you know, she wasn’t really anxious to go. They was, from the sidewalk, probably six to ten feet from the sidewalk when I first saw them. They continued to walk to the sidewalk. He stopped–
Q. Did the man have the girl by the left arm during the entire time that you observed them?
A. Yes, sir. They stopped and a car came by, going east, and they crossed in front of the white van. The man opened the door.
Q. Which door did he open?
A. The door on the passenger side. And helped the girl get in the van, slammed the door, and kind of jogged in front of the van, got in the passenger side, and they drove off.
R21:4063-65.
Q. Were you able to tell how the man was dressed?
A. Yes, sir. He had a pullover sweater, with a shirt underneath the sweater. I don’t recall the exact color of either one of them. The sweater was a neutral color, tan, light grey, something like that. I don’t recall the color of his trousers.
Q. You have described the van as being a white van. Can you give any further description of it. particularly with respect to any windows?
A. All I seen was a, was the very back of it and it had two windows, the rear doors.
Q. Okay. I’m going to have you a photograph, which has been marked for identification as State’s Exhibit J. I ask you to examine this photograph and tell us whether or not that photograph is similar to the white van that you observed on the morning of February the 9th in front of the Lake City Junior High School.
A. Yes, sir, it’s very similar.
Q. Now, after the person placed the girl in the white van and got in on the driver’s side, what happened then?
A. The van drove off, you know, a normal rate of speed. As I said before, there were two vehicles between me and the van. The closest one to the van was a small, dark blue foreign car of some kind. I have no idea what kind.
Q. Did you remain behind the white van?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And approximately at what distance behind the white van?
A. Two car lengths. We were all fairly close together. Nobody was keeping the proper distance between the vehicles, if I remember correctly. Somewhere between the junior high school and 7th Street, which is roughly seven blocks, six blocks, the small car turned off to the right. I don’t recall what street it turned off. And then the van stopped at the red light at 7th Street.
Q. Were you able to observe the driver as he was stopped at the red light there at 7th Street?
[A]. Okay. When the van stopped at 7th Street, I could see the silhouette of the driver turn towards the passenger side.
Q. Could you see anyone in the passenger side at that point in time?
A. No, sir.
Q. Had the girl been sitting up straight in the seat, do you know of any reason why you could not have seen her at that time?
A. No, sir.
Q. What, if anything, did you see the driver doing?
A. He was gesturing, turned to his right, and moving his head like he was talking, and gesturing with his left hand.
Q. And when you say he was turning to his right, that would have been toward the passenger side of the–
A. Toward the passenger side.
Q. How long after that did you lose sight of the van?
A. Approximately two, two and a half blocks, U.S. 90 veers left and West Duval Street continues straight west.
Q. Mr. Anderson, I’m going to hand you a photograph, which is in evidence as State’s Exhibit 1, and I ask you to examine that photograph and tell the members of the jury whether or not you recognize that person depicted.
A. Yes, sir, I do.
Q. Who is that person?
A. It’s the young girl I saw at the school.
Q. On the morning of February the 9th?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I’m going to ask you, Mr. Anderson, if you will look around the courtroom and tell the members of the jury whether or not you can positively identify the man that you observed leading that young girl from the school ground on February the 9th.
A. No, sir, I’m not absolutely certain.
Q. I ask you then to once again to [sic] look around the courtroom and tell the members of the jury whether or not there is anyone in the courtroom who closely resembles the person that you observed leading the young girl to the white van on the morning of February the 9th.
A. Yes, sir, there is.
Q. Would you point that person out, please?
A. The defendant.
….Q. Are you aware of any dissimilarities in the appearance between the person that you pointed out in the courtroom and the person that you saw leading the girl to the van on that morning?
A. No, sir, they were very much alike.
R21:4068-73.

We hold that Anderson’s hypnotically enhanced testimony was not so wholly unreliable that its admission violated Bundy’s due process right to a fair trial. Indeed, Anderson’s knowledge independent of the hypnosis sessions defeats the inference that the hypnosis was unduly suggestive. The above recitation of the facts makes clear that, prior to going to the police, Anderson strongly suspected that he had seen Leach’s abduction–a suspicion he shared with a fishing companion. Upon seeing Bundy on television, Anderson’s suspicions grew to a certainty that outweighed his fears of getting involved and sending police on a ‘wild goose chase.’ At this point, Anderson went to the police and gave a statement reflecting his thought that a man resembling Bundy had abducted Kimberly Leach. Independent of hypnosis, Anderson recalled that the date of his observation was February 9th.

We also cannot say that the hypnotically enhanced details of Anderson’s trial testimony were the product of impermissible suggestions or techniques by the hypnotist. Indeed, the jury heard tapes of the two sessions, received transcripts of those sessions, and heard testimony of an expert witness who addressed what he characterized as the flaws in those sessions. Cross-examination was the avenue with which to attack Anderson’s testimony. We have held above that an opportunity for effective cross-examination was available here. That holding buttresses our conclusion that Anderson’s testimony was not so unreliable as to violate Bundy’s due process right to a fair trial.

VIII. Exclusion of Jurors: Bundy argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to limit death qualification of the jury, permitting such qualification, and excusing for cause jurors who expressed opposition to the death penalty, notwithstanding their ability to vote for guilt or innocence. Bundy argues that, because of the capital sentencing procedures of Florida law, the rule enunciated in Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510, 88 S.Ct. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776 (1968), and refined by its progeny does not apply. Bundy asserts that under Florida law the trial judge solely determines whether a defendant receives a death sentence and that the jury renders an advisory opinion only. Bundy concludes that, because the jury has an advisory role only, Florida lacks the usual state interest in excluding jurors who would automatically vote against the death penalty. As a result, Bundy argues that his interest in a jury composed of a cross-section of the community controls and the trial court erred in excusing those jurors who were unalterably committed to vote against the death penalty.

On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court held that it was precluded from ruling on this claim because objections as to this claim were not raised in the trial court. Bundy, 471 So.2d at 19. The district court held that the claim was procedurally barred and, alternatively, without merit.

We conclude that Bundy’s claim is without merit.26 Supreme Court precedent clearly establishes that a state can exclude for cause a prospective juror whose opposition to the death penalty ‘would prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath.’ See, e.g., Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412, 420, 105 S.Ct. 844, 850, 83 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985) (quoting Adams v. Texas, 448 U.S. 38, 45, 100 S.Ct. 2521, 2526, 65 L.Ed.2d 581 (1980)). Bundy attempts to avoid the force of this Supreme Court precedent by characterizing the role of the sentencing jury as advisory under Florida law. We disagree. See Mann v. Dugger, 844 F.2d 1446, 1449-54 (11th Cir.1988) (en banc). As a result, Witherspoon and its progeny apply to jury selection in Florida cases. Because Bundy admitted in his brief on direct appeal, see page 56 of that brief, that the jurors were properly excluded under Witherspoon,27 this claim is without merit as are any claims that ‘death qualification’ violates the fair cross-section or impartial jury requirements of the Sixth Amendment. See Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162, 106 S.Ct. 1758, 90 L.Ed.2d 137 (1986).

IX. Frye Test: Bundy argues that the trial court erred in not conducting a sua sponte inquiry into the scientific reliability of fiber and shoe track evidence presented by the state. See Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923) (expert testimony admissible only if based on well-recognized and generally accepted scientific principles). On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court noted that Bundy failed to object at trial and thus the claim was procedurally barred. See Bundy, 471 So.2d at 20. The district court held that the claim failed pursuant to the procedural default doctrine and, alternatively, was without merit. See slip op. at 14-15.

This claim is not procedurally barred. If the trial court truly had an independent duty to conduct a Frye test, then Bundy was not obligated to request a Frye test or to object at trial to the court’s failure to conduct one. Consequently, the Florida Supreme Court improperly refused to consider the merits of this claim, and its mistaken reliance on a procedural bar does not provide an adequate basis for denying federal habeas review.

Although this claim is not procedurally barred, it is without merit. In substance, Bundy seeks to avoid Florida’s contemporaneous objection rule and associated procedural default, see Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 97 S.Ct. 2497, 53 L.Ed.2d 594 (1977), by requiring that the trial court object sua sponte to the admission of evidence. In Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. at 86, 97 S.Ct. at 2506, the Supreme Court rejected the suggestion that the trial court had an independent duty to conduct a hearing as to the voluntariness of a defendant’s confession. Similarly, we agree that, even assuming that evidence must meet the Frye test as a matter of constitutional law,28 the trial court has no independent duty to challenge the evidence and the admission of the evidence must be challenged by the defendant at trial or not at all.

X. Jury View: Bundy claims he was denied due process when his motion for a jury view of the scene around the school was denied by the trial court. On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion. See Bundy, 471 So.2d at 20. The district court held that this claim was addressed to an issue of state law and thus was not a basis for federal habeas relief. Alternatively, the district court held that the trial court’s ruling did not deny Bundy fundamental fairness. See slip op. at 15.

We disagree with the district court’s characterization of this claim as addressed to an issue of state law. An evidentiary ruling is a cognizable ground for federal habeas corpus relief if it deprived the state court defendant of fundamental fairness. See Jameson v. Wainwright, 719 F.2d 1125, 1126 (11th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 975, 104 S.Ct. 2355, 80 L.Ed.2d 827 (1984). We agree with the district court, however, that the ruling did not deprive Bundy of fundamental fairness. To constitute a denial of fundamental fairness, the evidence at issue must be crucial and highly significant. 719 F.2d at 1127; see Williams v. Kemp, 846 F.2d 1276, 1282 (11th Cir.1988). In the present case, the scene had been significantly altered because of the construction of a four-lane highway. In addition, photographs of the scene were admitted into evidence, and cross-examination as to the scene was allowed. Consequently, denying the jury an actual view of the scene cannot be said to have deprived Bundy of a fundamentally fair trial.

XI. Evidence of Flight: Bundy claims he was denied due process when his motion in limine to exclude evidence of flight was denied by the trial court and when the trial court instructed the jury regarding the evidence of flight. On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court relied on federal cases binding on this panel and held that the evidence was properly admitted and that the related instruction was proper. See Bundy, 471 So.2d at 20-21. The district court noted that this claim raised state-law issues and thus was not a basis for federal habeas corpus relief.29 Alternatively, the district court held that the evidence was properly admitted and that the jury instruction did not render the trial fundamentally unfair. See slip op. at 15-16.

The state presented evidence of two instances of flight by Bundy. The first instance occurred on February 11, 1978 (two days after the abduction of Kimberly Leach) at 1:47 a.m. in Tallahassee, which is approximately 100 miles west of Lake City. In this instance, after being stopped by a police officer, Bundy successfully fled. The second instance occurred on February 15, 1978 (six days after the abduction of Kimberly Leach) at approximately 1:30 a.m. in Pensacola, which is approximately 200 miles west of Tallahassee and 300 miles west of Lake City. After being stopped by a police officer, Bundy began to flee down a street, but was caught and arrested within a few minutes. The trial judge permitted evidence of both instances of flight and, prior to the jury’s deliberations, instructed the jury as follows:

You are instructed that the flight of the defendant is a circumstance which may be taken into consideration with all other facts and circumstances in the evidence and, if you, the jury, believe and find from the evidence beyond every reasonable doubt that the defendant fled for the purpose of avoiding arrest and trial under the charges herein, you may take this fact into consideration in determining guilt or innocence.

R35:6939-40. We find no error in the admission of the evidence of flight and no error in the trial court’s instructions as to that evidence.

XII. Doubling of Aggravating Circumstances: Bundy argues that constitutional error occurred when the trial court relied on Bundy’s conviction in Utah for aggravated kidnapping to find two aggravating circumstances: (1) Bundy was under a sentence of imprisonment when he committed the present crime and (2) Bundy previously had been convicted of a violent crime. On direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court applied the test enunciated in Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), and rejected Bundy’s claim. See Bundy, 471 So.2d at 22.

The district court recognized the Florida Supreme Court’s reliance on Blockburger and concluded it was ‘convinced that the [Florida] Supreme Court’s decision on this issue [was] correct.’30 Slip op. at 16. We agree that Blockburger renders Bundy’s claim without merit. In Blockburger, the Supreme Court stated that ‘the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not.’ 284 U.S. at 304, 52 S.Ct. at 182. In the present case, each aggravating circumstance clearly has an element different from the other.

XIII. Penalty for Requesting Jury Trial: Based on the state’s original agreement to a life sentence in this case,31 Africano filed a motion that would have prevented the court from convening the penalty phase and from returning a death sentence. The motion stated that Bundy was unconstitutionally forced to risk death in order to exercise his right to a jury trial. The trial judge denied the motion. Although Bundy challenged this denial in his brief on direct appeal, the Florida Supreme Court did not address it.

In his federal habeas petition, Bundy claimed that the trial court erred in denying his motion to enter a life sentence on the verdict and to prohibit the penalty phase of trial. The district court observed that Bundy ‘essentially concedes that this ground is procedurally barred’ and, alternatively, held the claim without merit. See slip op. at 16-17. Although this claim is not procedurally barred,32 we agree that the claim is without merit. There is no hint in the record that Bundy received a heavier sentence after trial as a result of judicial vindictiveness or punitive action. See Hitchcock v. Wainwright, 770 F.2d 1514, 1518-20 (11th Cir.1985) (en banc), rev’d on other grounds, — U.S. —-, 107 S.Ct. 1821, 95 L.Ed.2d 347 (1987).

XIV. Clemency Hearing: Bundy argues that he was denied his right to apply for executive clemency in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Florida Supreme Court, see Bundy, 497 So.2d at 1211, and the district court, see slip op. at 17, held this claim without merit. We affirm the district court, but do not share its reasoning.

We begin our analysis of the procedural due process claim by determining whether Bundy has a protected liberty interest in being accorded a hearing for executive clemency. ‘Liberty interests protected by the Fourteenth Amendment may arise from two sources–the Due Process Clause itself and the laws of the States.’ Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 466, 103 S.Ct. 864, 868, 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983). This Circuit’s predecessor has held that such a liberty interest does not arise from the Due Process Clause itself. See Spinkellink v. Wainwright, 578 F.2d 582, 617-19 (5th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 976, 99 S.Ct. 1548, 59 L.Ed.2d 796 (1979). Accordingly, we turn to the Florida Rules of Executive Clemency. See Sullivan v. Askew, 348 So.2d 312, 319-25 (Fla.) (setting forth clemency procedures), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 878, 98 S.Ct. 232, 54 L.Ed.2d 159 (1977).

In Hewitt, the Supreme Court observed that the mere enactment of regulations does not automatically give rise to a liberty interest, especially if the regulations are nothing more than guidelines for the exercise of executive discretion. 459 U.S. at 471, 103 S.Ct. at 871. The Court recognized, however, that a liberty interest is present when the regulations are of an ‘unmistakably mandatory character’ and require ‘specific substantive predicates.’ Id. at 471-72, 103 S.Ct. at 871.

Florida’s clemency procedures do not satisfy either requirement. Cf. Sheley v. Dugger, 833 F.2d 1420, 1424 (11th Cir.1987) (Florida ‘rules and regulations concerning administrative segregation and close management create for inmates a liberty interest in remaining in the general prison population’); McQueen v. Tabah, 839 F.2d 1525, 1527-29 (11th Cir.1988) (following Sheley ). First, the clemency procedures do not unmistakably indicate that a prisoner sentenced to death is entitled to a clemency hearing. Rule 7, a special rule for executive clemency in capital cases, provides that ‘the Governor or any member of the Cabinet, after reviewing a certified copy of the conviction and sentence, may request the Florida Parole and Probation Commission to make an appropriate investigation, inquiring into any factors relevant to commutation.’ Although Rule 7 sets forth required procedures, these procedures are required only after the discretionary request to the Commission. See also Sullivan, 348 So.2d at 318 (England, J., specially concurring) (procedures are required ‘once triggered’). Second, no specific substantive predicates govern this discretion; the decision whether to grant clemency is wholly a matter of executive discretion. Sullivan, 348 So.2d at 314-16; Fla. Const. Art. IV, Sec. 8. The clemency rules do not require the Governor to make any factual findings in order to deny clemency to a capital defendant.

Finally, Bundy’s claim that the lack of a clemency hearing violates his Eighth Amendment right is without merit. This is not the situation where a state prohibits executive clemency. See Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153, 200 n. 50, 96 S.Ct. 2909, 2937-38 n. 50, 49 L.Ed.2d 859 (1976) (opinion of Stewart, Powell, and Stevens, JJ.) (prohibiting executive clemency ‘would be totally alien to our notions of criminal justice’). In addition, the concern derived from the Eighth Amendment regarding capital cases focuses on the judicial processes of trial and appellate review, not on the discretionary state process (i.e., executive clemency) succeeding them. See Spinkellink, 578 F.2d at 619 & n. 45.

XV. Pretrial Publicity: Bundy argues that his jury was both presumptively and actually prejudiced on account of adverse pretrial publicity concerning his conviction in the Leon County case. By statutory choice of permissive venue, venue initially was in Suwannee County. (Lake City is located in Columbia County.) After the start of voir dire in Suwannee County, the trial court granted Bundy’s motion for a change in venue and moved the case to Orange County. The trial court refused to grant Bundy another change of venue, or abatement in the trial, even though Bundy contended that the jurors in Orange County were as equally prejudiced as the jurors in Suwannee County. The Florida Supreme Court, see Bundy, 471 So.2d at 19-20, and the district court, see slip op. at 17-19, held this claim without merit. On appeal, Bundy argues that the district court erred in denying him an evidentiary hearing on this claim.

Jury prejudice can be presumed from pretrial publicity if that publicity is sufficiently prejudicial and inflammatory and if it saturated the community where the trial was held. Murphy v. Florida, 421 U.S. 794, 798-99, 95 S.Ct. 2031, 2035-36, 44 L.Ed.2d 589 (1975); Rideau v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723, 726-27, 83 S.Ct. 1417, 1419-20, 10 L.Ed.2d 663 (1963); Coleman v. Kemp, 778 F.2d 1487, 1490 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1164, 106 S.Ct. 2289, 90 L.Ed.2d 730 (1986). This principle is rarely applicable and reserved for extreme situations where pretrial publicity renders ‘virtually impossible a fair trial by an impartial jury drawn from the community.’

We hold that the coverage of the Leon County trial,33 although extensive, does not satisfy the heavy burden associated with presumed prejudice. In support of his motion for a change in venue or abatement of prosecution, Bundy presented the testimony of local television personnel. See R6:1159-98, R7:1202-18. The public television station had broadcast half-hour summaries of the Leon County trial. These summaries were factual accounts; the station was prohibited by law from offering editorial comment. At the time of jury selection in January 1980, the station had not broadcast anything about Bundy since the conclusion of the Leon County trial in late July 1979. Although the commercial television stations provided extensive coverage of the Leon County trial, the coverage was factual in nature and not designed to inflame or prejudice the public. In addition, prior to the verdict, these stations did not broadcast editorials about whether the defendant was guilty in that case. Bundy also presented newspaper articles from the local newspaper. See R12:2222-24. Again, these articles are largely factual in nature. Consequently, unlike Coleman, the coverage of the Leon County case was not infested with inflammatory and prejudicial remarks from the police and prosecutors. See also Murphy, 421 U.S. at 802, 95 S.Ct. at 2037 (news articles were largely factual in nature); United States v. Klacker, 811 F.2d 555, 556 (11th Cir.1987) (‘The news reports detailing appellant’s flight from justice were largely factual reports, devoid of inflammatory material’).

Likewise, we are unpersuaded by a public opinion poll proffered by Bundy in support of his motion. The poll, conducted among residents of Orange County, showed that 98% of those who responded indicated their familiarity with the name Bundy. See R7:1237. Of that number 58% stated that they knew Bundy had been involved in the Leon County case. Of that number, 31% believed that Bundy’s conviction in that case strongly indicated that he was guilty in the present case. See id. at 1240. Although publicity concerning a defendant’s involvement in other crimes is relevant in presuming jury prejudice, especially if the defendant’s involvement in that crime is inadmissible in the guilt/innocence phase, Murphy stands for the proposition that prejudice is not presumed simply because the defendant’s criminal record is well publicized. Thus, even assuming that the methodology of the public opinion poll is such that it accurately reflected the attitude of Orange County residents, the poll does not demonstrate that the community was so predisposed to Bundy’s guilt in the present case that prejudice must be presumed.

Nor can we say that Bundy has demonstrated actual prejudice in the entire venire. See Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717, 727, 81 S.Ct. 1639, 1645, 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961). We have carefully reviewed approximately 19 volumes of voir dire. We note that the trial court propounded general questions to each set of prospective jurors, the panels ranging from eleven to fifteen persons. As one of the general questions, the trial court requested that prospective jurors raise their hands to indicate if they had heard of the defendant, but that they not reveal the source or extent of their knowledge. Thereafter, those prospective jurors who remained after general questioning were individually questioned by the trial court, one prosecutor, and one defense attorney. No other prospective juror was present during this individual questioning. Our review of the record indicates that as part of this individual questioning the trial court permitted a searching inquiry into knowledge and thoughts about the defendant.

Our review of the record indicates that 172 prospective jurors were called and 56 were excused for reasons relating to health, family, employment, or school. Of the 116 remaining prospective jurors, 42 were excused because they could not (1) be impartial based upon their extensive knowledge of the Leon County case, (2) set aside preconceived notions of guilt, and/or (3) could not accord Bundy a presumption of innocence.34 Of the remaining 74 jurors, a small minority also stated that they had a preconceived notion of guilt. Consequently, we cannot say that Bundy suffered actual prejudice from the entire venire.

Before we examine whether Bundy has demonstrated actual prejudice regarding the trial jury as a whole, we examine Bundy’s challenge to an individual juror. The Supreme Court has recognized that the question of the partiality of an individual juror is one of historical fact to which the presumption of correctness of a state court’s factual findings under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254(d) applies. Patton v. Yount, 467 U.S. 1025, 1036, 104 S.Ct. 2885, 2891, 81 L.Ed.2d 847 (1984). ‘Thus the question is whether there is fair support in the record for the state courts’ conclusion that the juror[ ] here would be impartial.’

We conclude that there is fair support in the record for the trial court’s conclusion35 as to this individual juror. This juror, the twelfth juror selected and eventually the jury foreman, was pre-press manager of the local newspaper. In response to the trial court’s questions, he stated that he understood that the defendant was entitled to be tried on the evidence presented in the present case alone, that he would follow the trial court’s instructions as to the law, that he would accord the defendant a presumption of innocence and hold the state to its burden of proof, that he would not require the defendant to take the stand, and that he would set aside any opinion or impression he had about the defendant. See R18:3455-58. Assuming a guilty verdict, he stated that he was not committed to voting automatically for the death penalty or life imprisonment. Id. at 3465. He again stated that the defendant need not take the stand, the defense need not prove the defendant not guilty, and that the burden rested on the state.

On questioning by Africano, see generally id. at 3473-89, the juror stated that he knew Bundy was convicted of murder in Miami of ‘the Tallahassee girls’ and that ‘it sounded like a pretty gory case’ and ‘some brutal murders.’ He knew Bundy was sentenced to death. Unlike most prospective jurors, he recalled the bite-mark evidence from that case, although he stated, ‘I believe that was the Bundy case.’ He guessed that death was by bludgeoning and that there was more than one murder. Unlike most prospective jurors, he recalled that Bundy had escaped from prison in Colorado. He knew that Bundy ‘is highly intelligent and he had some law background or something somewhere along the line.’ He did not recall if co-workers had reached a consensus of Bundy’s guilt prior to the Leon County verdict, but said that family and friends thought Bundy was guilty. Twice, he stated that he had no thoughts as to Bundy’s guilt prior to the verdict.36 After conviction in the Leon County case, his feelings were ‘not too good towards Mr. Bundy.’ He stated that he still felt that way, but that he would listen to the evidence in the present case.37 Upon further questioning, the juror adhered to his earlier stated positions.38 Based upon our examination of the record, we hold that there is fair support for the trial court’s conclusion.

We proceed to examine whether Bundy has demonstrated actual prejudice regarding the trial jury as a whole. In this context, the ‘Supreme Court has questioned whether the ‘fairly supported by the recor’ standard of 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254(d) supplanted the ‘manifest error’ standard enunciated in Irvin. Patton v. Yount, 467 U.S. at 1031 n. 7, 104 S.Ct. at 2889 n. 7. The Court, however, did not resolve the question because it concluded that the defendant had not satisfied the ‘manifest error’ standard. Id. at 1032 n. 7, 104 S.Ct. at 2889 n. 7. Because we conclude that Bundy has not satisfied Irvin ‘s standard, we also do not determine whether Section 2254(d) has superseded that standard.

We have already set forth the relevant voir dire of the twelfth juror. We now summarize the individual voir dire of the other eleven jurors:

Juror Number One (R6:1017-1049): She stated that she could follow the trial court’s instructions. She knew that Bundy was on trial for some murders in the northern part of Florida. She believed he was convicted, but did not know the sentence. No challenge for cause was made.

Juror Number Two (R6:1080-1116): He stated that he could follow the trial court’s instructions. He had heard Bundy’s name before, but could not recollect why. No challenge for cause was made.

Juror Number Three (R8:1482-1530): She stated that she was not sure that she had a fixed opinion regarding guilt/innocence, but that she would follow the trial court’s instructions. She stated that she was not sure if she had an open mind regarding hypnosis and that she had mixed feelings about the death penalty. Although she ‘may even have the wrong thing,’ it seemed that Bundy was involved in the crime involving three girls in upstate Florida. She had formed a negative opinion about Bundy, but could fairly and impartially judge the evidence, although there might be a glimmer of a doubt that she could do that. She thought she would require some evidence tending to show innocence, even though there is a presumption of innocence. She thought she might be influenced by the fact that Bundy did not take the stand. However, she would just have to keep reminding herself of the instructions of the court. The trial court found a firm indication of impartiality and denied the motion to excuse for cause.

Juror Number Four (R9:1686-1729): He stated that he could follow the trial court’s instructions. He knew that Bundy was found guilty of murder in the previous trial and sentenced to death. He knew nothing of Bundy’s background. He stated that what happened before would not have any effect on the guilt/innocence in the present case. The trial court found that the prospective juror could be impartial and denied the motion to excuse for cause.

Juror Number Five (Rl0:1974-98, Rll:2002-12): He stated that he could follow the trial court’s instructions. He heard Bundy’s name mentioned around his workplace. He knew Bundy was tried for something in northern Florida, but he did not know the charges or the outcome of the trial. He knew nothing of Bundy’s background. The trial court credited the truth of the prospective juror’s testimony and denied the motion to excuse for cause on that basis.

Juror Number Six (R11:2013-51): He stated that he had no preconceived notion of Bundy’s guilt or innocence and that he could follow the trial court’s instructions. He knew that Bundy was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death in Miami for the murders of two sorority sisters at Florida State University. Unlike most prospective jurors, he recalled the dentist’s testimony about the bite marks and recalled that Bundy was a law student out west and possibly wanted out there. Prior to the verdict in the Leon County case, he had formed an opinion that Bundy was guilty. He stated that he had no opinion about Bundy personally and that his knowledge would not influence his decision because the present case was a totally different case. He stated that he believed in the notion of innocent until proven guilty. The trial court denied the motion to excuse for cause.

Juror Number Seven (R14:2698-2737): She stated she could follow the trial court’s instructions. She was dubious about hypnosis, but could consider the testimony. She read the newspaper once she knew Bundy was coming to Orlando for trial. She learned that Bundy had been tried and found guilty. She did not know what sentence was imposed. The trial court denied a motion to excuse for cause.

Juror Number Eight (R14:2737-80): She stated that she could follow the trial court’s instructions. She stated that she first heard of Bundy in the context of jury selection for this case. She expressed no knowledge of the Leon County trial. No challenge for cause was made.

Juror Number Nine (R16:3102-46): She stated that she could follow the trial court’s instructions. She knew that Bundy was convicted of murder in the earlier trial, but did not know if any sentence was imposed on Bundy. No challenge for cause was made.

Juror Number Ten (R16:3191-98, R17:3202-27): She stated that she had no feelings or opinions about the defendant that would prevent her from serving as a fair and impartial juror. She stated that she could follow the trial court’s instructions. She knew there was a prior trial, but did not know where it was held. No challenge for cause was made.

Juror Number Eleven (R17:3227-52): She stated that she could follow the trial court’s instructions. She did not have a television, did not get the newspaper, and heard of Bundy through conversations only. She did not recognize Bundy when she came to court and thought one of the defense attorneys was Bundy. She stated that she had never heard of Bundy before reporting for jury duty. No challenge for cause was made.

Based upon the composition, as summarized above, of the trial jury as a whole, we hold that Bundy has not shown that the trial court committed ‘manifest error.’ Consequently, we reject Bundy’s claim that he suffered presumed or actual prejudice as a result of pretrial publicity. Accordingly, we hold that none of the grounds asserted by Bundy for federal habeas corpus relief merits the granting of his petition. Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court.

During the time Bundy was awaiting trial in this case, he was convicted and sentenced to death for two murders committed in Tallahassee (‘Leon County case’). Bundy v. State, 455 So.2d 330 (Fla.1984). This Court has remanded Bundy’s federal habeas corpus challenge in that case to the district court for proper consideration under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Bundy v. Wainwright, 808 F.2d 1410 (11th Cir.1987) (Bundy I )

Despite its comment that it considered Bundy’s petition abusive, the district court added that it would ‘give the petitioner a conscientious review of the issues.’ Slip op. at 1. Consequently, it cannot be said that the district court dismissed the petition for abuse of the writ.

The district court misplaced its reliance on Justice Powell’s concurring opinion in Davis. See 107 S.Ct. at 18 (Powell, J., concurring) (‘In the future, and here I can write only for myself, I will expect counsel whose papers are filed with me as Circuit Justice on the eve of the execution date, to make an appropriate explanation.’). Despite Justice Powell’s admonition, the full Supreme Court granted stays of execution, although the applications for stay were not filed until the day before the scheduled execution. Consequently, Davis does not support the district court’s observation. Likewise, none of the cases cited by the state support the proposition that a first petition can be dismissed as abusive because it was filed on the eve of execution. Furthermore, this Court subsequently held in Davis v. Dugger, 829 F.2d 1513, 1514 (11th Cir.1987), that ‘the scheduling of an execution does not, in and of itself, create a basis for dismissing a petition under the abuse of the writ doctrine.’ See also Antone, 465 U.S. at 206 n. 4, 104 S.Ct. at 965 n. 4 (time constraints do not excuse failure to raise claim in a prior petition); Adams v. Wainwright, 804 F.2d 1526, 1533-34 (11th Cir.1986) (time constraints do not excuse failure to develop facts associated with claim raised in a prior petition).

We likewise find no basis to dismiss the petition as a ‘delayed’ petition. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 Rule 9(a). Similarly, the state’s argument that Bundy’s petition presents frivolous claims and, therefore, that a finding of abuse is warranted is without merit. Rule 9 does not examine the strength of the claims. Cf. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 Rule 4.

From our predecessor circuit we have inherited two somewhat inconsistent lines of authority with respect to the standard of review we should apply to the district court’s finding that Bundy was competent to stand trial. Under one line of cases a district court’s finding of competency to stand trial is a finding of fact that can be set aside only if clearly erroneous or arbitrary. See United States v. Hayes, 589 F.2d 811, 822 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 847, 100 S.Ct. 93, 62 L.Ed.2d 60 (1979); United States v. Fratus, 530 F.2d 644, 647 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 846, 97 S.Ct. 130, 50 L.Ed.2d 118 (1976); United States v. Stone, 472 F.2d 909, 913 (5th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1020, 101 S.Ct. 586, 66 L.Ed.2d 482 (1980); United States v. Gray, 421 F.2d 316, 317 (5th Cir.1970); see also United States v. Birdsell, 775 F.2d 645, 648 (5th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1119, 106 S.Ct. 1979, 90 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986). This is consistent with the approach taken by other circuits. See, e.g., McFadden v. United States, 814 F.2d 144, 146 (3d Cir.1987); United States v. Lovelace, 683 F.2d 248, 251 (7th Cir.1982); Chavez v. United States, 656 F.2d 512, 517 (9th Cir.1981); United States v. Caldwell, 543 F.2d 1333, 1349 (D.C.Cir.1974), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1087, 96 S.Ct. 877, 47 L.Ed.2d 97 (1976) (all using the clearly erroneous standard). In another line of cases, however, the Fifth Circuit has been less deferential, reviewing historical facts under a clearly erroneous standard but taking a more stringent ‘hard look’ at the district court’s ultimate finding of competency. See Lokos v. Capps, 625 F.2d 1258, 1267 (5th Cir.1980); Bruce v. Estelle, 536 F.2d 1051, 1059-60 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1053, 97 S.Ct. 767, 50 L.Ed.2d 770 (1977); United States v. Makris, 535 F.2d 899, 907 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 954, 97 S.Ct. 1598, 51 L.Ed.2d 803 (1977); see also Wheat v. Thigpen, 793 F.2d 621, 631 (5th Cir.1986), cert. denied, — U.S. —-, 107 S.Ct. 1566, 94 L.Ed.2d 759 (1987)

Because we would uphold the district court’s finding that Bundy was competent to stand trial under either standard, we need not resolve this inconsistency. Instead, we will assume that the stricter ‘hard look’ standard applies and analyze the district court’s finding under that standard.

A bipolar mood disorder is better known as manic depressive mental illness. Bipolar mood disorders are characterized by wide changes in mood or mood swings. During the manic phase, the person can be loud, angry, violent, or grandiose. At the other extreme, the person would experience periods of extreme depression

The district court concluded: Upon reviewing the voluminous records in this case, observing the demeanor of each of the witnesses, and considering the expert testimony concerning Petitioner’s competency to stand trial for the murder of Kimberly Diane Leach, the Court accepts the testimony and opinions of Dr. Charles Mutter and Dr. U[m]esh Mha[t]re as being logical and consistent with the testimony of other witnesses, as well as the record evidence, tape recordings and video cassette recordings submitted for consideration in this cause. Accordingly, the Court finds that Petitioner, Theodore Robert Bundy, possessed sufficient present ability to consult with his attorneys with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and that Petitioner had a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceeding against him at all relevant times during the trial and pretrial proceedings in the Kimberly Diane Leach murder case.

Petitioner appreciated the charges that were pending against him and he understood and appreciated the range and nature of the possible jeopardy he faced if convicted for the murder of Kimberly Diane Leach. Petitioner clearly understood the adversary nature of the proceedings in the Leach murder case and was well informed as to the legal process. Petitioner had the ability and capacity to disclose to his attorneys pertinent facts surrounding the murder of Kimberly Leach. Petitioner also related well with his attorneys in the Leach murder case, and Petitioner, on many occasions, assisted his attorneys during the course of the Leach murder trial and pretrial proceedings. Petitioner was clearly motivated to help his case, and he was actively involved in the planning of defense strategy. Further, it is clear from the numerous depositions taken by Petitioner that Petitioner was not only motivated to present a winning defense, but he was also an effective questioner. Finally, the Court notes that Petitioner had no problem adjusting to the stress of incarceration prior to trial. Consequently, the Court finds as a matter of law that Petitioner, Theodore Robert Bundy, was at all times competent to stand trial for the murder of Kimberly Diane Leach.

Bundy also raises claims concerning ineffective assistance of counsel relating to Bundy’s competence to stand trial. In light of our conclusion that Bundy was competent to stand trial, the related ineffective assistance of counsel claims lack merit.

Dr. Tanay’s testimony was from a deposition taken on December 14, 1987.

Bundy emphasizes in his brief that only Dr. Lewis had recently interviewed him and that Drs. Mutter and Mhatre had not. We agree with the explanation of Drs. Mutter and Mhatre that a recent interview was unnecessary because the narrow issue of focus was Bundy’s competence to stand trial at the time of the trial. Similarly, we reject the suggestion in Bundy’s brief that Dr. Mhatre’s opinion is entitled to less weight because Dr. Mhatre interviewed only one of Bundy’s defense lawyers. Dr. Mhatre interviewed Victor Africano, Bundy’s lawyer during the Lake City trial.

Bundy did express (out of the presence of the jury) dissatisfaction at the selection of one of the jurors. Considerable testimony before the district court, however, suggests that either the outburst was calculated to win favor from Bundy’s peers on death row or it was legitimate in light of the juror’s statements.

These tapes were to be used to prepare a book about Bundy.

We recognize that in the decision of remand this Court focused on ‘strong indicia’ of possible incompetence to stand trial. See Bundy II, 816 F.2d at 567. This Court cautioned, however, that a final determination could be made only after a full and fair evidentiary hearing. Id. at 568. Our review of the record in light of the district court’s observations concerning these indicia convinces us that what appeared as ‘strong indicia’ prior to the hearing are happenings that are consistent with a determination that Bundy was competent to stand trial.

Bundy claims in his federal habeas corpus petition that ‘the ground for the court’s denial was a contempt citation arising from Mr. Farmer’s persistent objection, in a Georgia criminal matter, to the prosecutor referring to the black defendant by his first name rather than by his surname, as the prosecutor referred to other persons in the proceeding.’ See para. 92 (emphasis added) (citing Farmer v. Holton, 146 Ga.App. 102, 245 S.E.2d 457 (1978) (overruled by In re Crane, 253 Ga. 667, 324 S.E.2d 443, 446 (1985)), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 958, 99 S.Ct. 1499, 59 L.Ed.2d 771 (1979)). We note that the trial court did not base its denial solely on the Farmer v. Holton decision. See R:14,121-22. For reasons set forth in the text infra, we do not evaluate the trial court’s denial of the motion to appear pro hac vice.

We agree with Bundy that the district court did not address the merits of the choice of counsel claim and thus erred in its reasoning for rejecting the related ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Because Bundy presented the ineffective assistance of counsel claim as an independent claim to the Florida courts, the exhaustion doctrine is not implicated here.

Because we do not agree that Bundy has satisfied the ’cause’ requirement, we do not examine whether Bundy demonstrated actual prejudice.

We also note that immediately after the denial of the motion to appear pro hac vice in the Leon County case, Bundy filed an action in federal court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Bundy alleged that the denial violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. This Court, affirming on the basis of the district court’s opinion, concluded that Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971), precluded a federal court from examining Bundy’s claim.

Accordingly, Bundy could not rely on the novelty of his legal claim as ’cause’ for noncompliance with Florida’s rules.

Bundy cannot argue that this claim is so novel as to constitute cause. See Smith, 477 U.S. at 536-37, 106 S.Ct. at 2667-68. Nor is this ‘an extraordinary case’ where the writ should be granted even absent a showing of cause. Bundy also suggests that the use of this testimony deprived him of his right to a jury trial. This claim is without merit.

Despite the reliance on harmless-constitutional-error cases, it is difficult to ascertain whether the Court relied on federal constitutional law or state evidence law in holding that hypnotically refreshed testimony is per se inadmissible in a criminal case. As discussed in the text infra, we conclude that such testimony is not per se inadmissible as a matter of federal constitutional law.

The Court cited three general characteristics of hypnosis as bases for inaccurate memories: ‘the subject becomes ‘suggestible’ and may try to please the hypnotist with answers the subject thinks will be met with approval; the subject is likely to ‘confabulate,’ that is, to fill in details from the imagination in order to make an answer more coherent and complete; and the subject experiences ‘memory hardening,’ which gives him great confidence in both true and false memories….’ 107 S.Ct. at 2713

Anderson explained that he delayed going to the police ‘because I wasn’t sure of what day I saw the girl. I wasn’t sure at all. I didn’t want to become involved in it. I saw one picture of Mr. Bundy. I looked at the picture. It did not closely resemble the man that I saw with the girl.; R21:4146. He added that ‘the only reason that I can give for not coming forward sooner is, as I stated before, not wanting to be involved, having a lot of other things on my mind at the time, not knowing the exact date that I saw the girl, halfway afraid of creating turmoil, needlessly seeing [sic] law enforcement on a wild goose chase.’ Id. at 4148; see id. at 4074

Bundy argues that the Florida Supreme Court improperly recognized a procedural bar because he raised this issue before the trial court in his motion to limit death qualification of the jury. See R159:14,658; app. 54. This motion does not appear to be based on the same ground as the claim raised on direct appeal. Rather, the motion appears directed at the distinction between the trial and sentencing phases. Cf. Lockhart v. McCree 476 U.S. 162, 180, 106 S.Ct. 1758, 1768, 90 L.Ed.2d 137 (1986) (state has ‘entirely proper interest’ in obtaining a single jury that could impartially decide all of the issues in a capital case). In addition, it appears Bundy argued the same rationale to the trial judge. See R126:11,375-80. Bundy also suggests in his brief that he voiced timely objections at voir dire. We have examined those passages and it again appears that the objections were directed at the distinction between the trial and sentencing phases. Consequently, it does not appear that Bundy raised the present claim before the trial court. We do not determine, however, whether this claim is subject to the procedural default doctrine. Rather, we conclude that the claim is without merit.

Our review of the record indicates that eight prospective jurors were excused because their views on the death penalty precluded them from returning a guilty verdict and/or from voting for the death penalty. Our review also indicates that their exclusion accorded with the standards set forth in Witherspoon and its progeny.

Indeed, this Court has intimated that federal evidence law does not require that the Frye test be met prior to the admission of evidence. This case, not concerning a federal conviction, presents us with no opportunity to address Hope’s intimation.

As set forth above, an evidentiary ruling is a cognizable ground for federal habeas corpus relief if it deprived the state court defendant of fundamental fairness, that is, the improperly admitted evidence was crucial and highly significant.

Because 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254(d) does not accord a presumption of correctness to a state court’s determination of law, we read the district court as independently agreeing with the Florida Supreme Court’s analysis.

Although the state did agree to life sentences in this case and the Leon County case, Bundy appeared in open court at the joint plea proceeding, challenged the effectiveness of his counsel, and made a motion for replacement of counsel. At this point, the state withdrew the plea offer for fear that Bundy later would challenge his guilty pleas by claiming he had received ineffective assistance of counsel.

We do not fault the district court for its statement. Bundy erroneously stated in his habeas petition that the claim had not been raised on direct appeal.

We reject any notion that press coverage related to the evidence in the present case or related to Bundy’s activities in other states satisfies the heavy burden associated with presumed prejudice. Our review of the voir dire buttresses this conclusion; few prospective jurors had knowledge of the details of the present case or of Bundy’s out-of-state activities.

Three prospective jurors could not accord a presumption of innocence to a defendant in general. In addition to the 12 jurors and three alternates, 36 were excused on the basis of peremptory challenges, eight on the basis of Witherspoon, five for hearing improper comments of or engaging in improper discussion with other prospective jurors, four because of their reaction to the victim’s age or the planned introduction of photographs into evidence, one because of meeting the victim’s father, one because of being in Lake City at the time of the crime, and one because of believing that imposition of the death penalty was automatic upon conviction based on the facts alleged in the indictment.

The trial court rejected the defendant’s challenge for cause: ‘The Court finds that this prospective juror is competent to serve. It has not been shown that he has partiality and as shown by his total testimony, he is able to put aside anything he might have heard or any feelings he might have, and he is competent to serve.’

Q. Did you ever voice or feel that he was guilty before the verdict was handed down?
A. No. I’m one of the rare few that, without seeing or being there when the evidence was given, I really don’t think you can judge.
Q. Okay. And didn’t that ‘he must have done something,’ doesn’t that give you any tendency to feel that he must have been guilty of something?
A. No. It aroused a lot of curiosity, but I can’t judge anyone guilty just because there is a lot of publicity.
R18:3479.
Q. The feelings that you had about Mr. Bundy after the trial in Miami, which you have described as not being very good, do you still carry those feelings with you?
A. Sure.
Q. You do?
A. (Nods head affirmatively)
Q. Well, how do you feel about him as he sits there now?
A. He is a convicted murderer.
Q. Okay. Does that make you feel anything about the charges in this case?
A. Not in this case.
Q. Does the fact that the State of Florida has brought an indictment against him and prosecuting him make you feel that he is in some way guilty of that charge?
A. Not of this charge.
Q. The fact that you know he is a convicted murderer, as you put it, doesn’t make you feel any less like giving him all the presumptions of innocence that the Court has instructed you about?
A. No. The State has to prove that he is guilty in this particular case.
Q. Okay. But how are you going to take out of your mind the bad feelings you have about Mr. Bundy, the fact that you described him as a convicted murderer, and then just look at that evidence totally and completely objectively?
A. He is innocent in this case until the State of Florida proves him guilty. As a juror, I have to listen to the evidence in this case…. Whether I like him or not, what I think about him in the past has to have nothing to do with this case. I will attempt to do that.
Q. I understand you will attempt to do that, but, because I’m not going to get a chance to discuss with you later, and, once you’re passed on as a juror, it’s too late, if you don’t think that you really can do it. This is why we have this opportunity to deal with this at this point in time. And as Mr. Bundy’s lawyer, I need to know how you feel about him. Are you so opinionated about him personally that it might affect your perception about the evidence in this case?
A. Not as far as this case is concerned.
R18:3483-85.
Q. Is what you know and, as a person, feel about Mr. Bundy going to make the State’s burden any less in proving guilt beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt?
A. No.
Q. If, at the conclusion of the State’s case or all of the evidence in this case, you feel that the State hasn’t quite met its burden, but you do have a reasonable doubt, that this defense has not come forward with any evidence or Ted Bundy did not take the stand and testify and tell you he didn’t do it, is what you know about him and feel about him personally, is that going to make you resolve that reasonable doubt against him?
A. No.
Q. If you resolve in your own mind, at the conclusion of all of the evidence, that the State has not met its burden and you feel and find in your own mind that Ted Bundy is not guilty, would you hold firm in that resolve?
A. Sure.
Q. Even if you were a majority of one of twelve people?
A. (Nods head affirmatively).
R18:3488-89.

Trial Transcript: Carol Ann DaRonch, February 23, 1976.

Tiffany Jean transcribed the following testimony of Carol DaRonch under direct examination by Deputy County Attorney David Yocom and is from the transcript of Case No. 28629 in the Third District Court of SLC, The State of Utah vs. Theodore Robert Bundy.

Q. Will you state your name and address, please.

A. Carol Ann DaRonch, 5456 South Seventh West.

Q. Carol, I am going to ask you to keep your voice up–the acoustics in here are not the best in the world—so the Judge and counsel can hear. Okay?

A: Okay.

Q: How old are you, Carol?

A: Nineteen.

Q: And what is your birth date?

A: June 8th, 1956.

Q: And how old were you on the 8th day of November, 1974?

A: Eighteen.

Q: And where did you reside at that time, Carol?

A: With my parents.

Q: At the same address?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you own an automobile at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: Would you describe for the Court the type of car you owned?

A: It’s a ’74 maroon Camaro.

Q: Where did you work at that time, if you did?

A: Mountain Dell.

Q: Where is that located?

A: 205 East Second South.

Q: What did you do there?

A: Typist.

Q: Have you had an opportunity, Carol, to check the record with your employer to determine what hours you worked on the 8th day of November, on Friday, 1974?

A: Yes.

Q: And when did you work?

A: I worked from 9:00 to 6:00.

Q: And where did you go after you got off work at 6:00 p.m. that day?

A: I went straight home.

Q: Do you know how long it takes you to get home from Mountain Bell?

A: About 20 minutes.

Q: Do you recall what you did at home?

A: No.

Q: Do you recall the next thing you did?

A: I went to Fashion Place Mall.

Q: And why did you go there?

A: I just went there shopping. I was looking for a birthday present.

Q: Anyone go with you?

A: No.

Q: And not long after you got home did you park at Fashion Place Mall?

A: About 15 to 20 minutes.

Q: Do you recall when, approximately, you arrived at the mall?

A: About 7:00.

Q: Where did you go after you arrived at the Mall— the parking lot, specifically?

A: I parked in Sears’ parking lot.

Q: And where is that located in relationship to the Sears store itself?

A: On the west side of Sears.

Fashion Place Mall Salt Lake City Utah Carol DaRonch Ted Bundy

Sears west parking lot, Fashion Place Mall, 1976.

Q: What did you do after you parked your vehicle there?

A: I got out of my car, and I walked into the Sears store.

Q: Did you stay in the Sears store any length of time?

A: No. I walked through it.

Q: And where did you exit the Sears store?

A: Where it goes into the mall.

Q. You entered and exited the Sears store and proceeded along the main part of the Mall?

A: Yes.

Q: And then you went west in the Mall?

A: Yes.

Q: How far west did you go?

A: To the Castleton’s store.

Q: After you made a left-hand turn and turned down the mall, how far did you go there?

A: Almost to Auerbach’s. To Walden’s Book Store.

Q: During this period of time, did you have any period of conversation or see anyone you knew?

A: Yes.

Q: And who was that?

A: My cousin.

Q: And what is her name?

A: Joanne DaRonch.

Q: And where did that discussion take place, and conversation? About midway in the corridor?

A: Yes.

Q: Was anyone with your cousin?

A: Yes.

Q: Who was that?

A: Jolynne Turner.

Q: And how long did that conversation last?

A: Just a couple of minutes.

Q: What did you do then?

A: Walked down toward Walden’s Book Store.

Q: What did you do at Walden’s?

A: I stopped and looked in the window of the book store.

Q: Did anything happen then?

A: Yes. I turned around, and a man approached me.

Q: Approached you from which direction?

A: I’m not sure.

Q: How long had you been at the window when you first noticed this man?

A: A couple minutes. It wasn’t until I turned around that he came to me.

Q: Did you see him right in front of you, or behind you, or how?

A: Face to face.

Q: How were you dressed at that time, Carol?

A: Had Levi’s on, and a leather coat with fur around it.

Q: How long had you had that coat?

A: A couple weeks.

Q: Was it relatively new then?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. As best you recall Carol, what were the first words spoken to you by this man?

A: He asked me if I had a car parked in the Sears parking lot.

Q: Parking lot?

A: Yes.

Q: Is that man present in court today, Carol?

Q: Yes.

A: Where is he seated?

Q: Right there (indicated).

A: Will you tell me what he is wearing?

Q: A blue-gray suit.

A: You are referring to the counsel table?

A: Yes.

MR. YOCOM: May the record show the identification of Mr. Bundy?

MR. O’CONNELL: It may.

THE COURT: It will.

MR. YOCOM: Take your time, Carol. Let’s go through it slowly, okay? Now, he asked you if you had a car parked in the Sears parking lot?

A: Yes.

Q: What did you say?

A: I told him yes, I did.

Q: What did he say?

A: He said someone was seen trying to break into it.

Q: Go on, what happened then?

A: He asked me what the license plate number was, and I told him—

Q: What did you tell him the number was?

A: KTO 32.

Q: Did he respond to that?

A: He said yes, that’s the one.

Q: What happened then?

A: Then he asked me if I wanted to go out to the car with him to see if anything was missing. So we walked out the doors between Auerbach’s and Roper’s, out to my car.

Q: Let’s go back a little bit. Did he mention any official capacity that he had? What he was doing and why he was interested in your car?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Did he say anything about being a police officer at that time?

A: I think so.

Q: Did he say what police department or agency he worked for?

A: No.

Q: Then you say you proceeded away from Walden’s Book Store and went out in the parking lot, is that right?

A: Yes.

Q: As best you can recall, Carol, what were the lighting conditions inside the mall in front of the Walden’s Book Store?

A: It was well lit.

Q: And the area from Walden’s to the exit by Auerbach’s, how was the lighting there?

A: Very bright.

Q: Now, as you were walking to the car, was there any conversation between yourself and Mr. Bundy?

MR. O’CONNELL: Your Honor, I object to Mr. Yocom referring to this man as “Mr. Bundy.” I realize she has identified him, and I suppose if she wants to do it, that’s all right. All the way through these proceedings he, whenever he is talking to this lady, refers to the person as “Mr. Bundy,” and is reinforcing in her mind the identification. I object to it.

THE COURT: Alright, well the objection is sustained for the purposes that Mr. O’Connell has based the objection on.

MR. YOCOM: I don’t understand the Court’s ruling. She has so identified him, and he has admitted that is his name in this courtroom today. He is the Defendant and I think I’m entitled to refer to him by his name, your Honor.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

MR. YOCOM. Thank you.

Q: As you proceeded to the car, did you have any conversation with this man?

MR. O’CONNELL: Well, I object to that for the same reason. It’s leading, and he keeps suggesting to her, and that’s what these officers have been doing for the last six months.

MR. YOCOM: There’s no jury here, John. Let me rephrase the question.

Q: Did you have a conversation with the man?

MR. O’CONNELL: That’s why I have an objection.

THE COURT: I understand.

Q: Did you have any conversation with the man, Carol?

A: No.

Q: And do you recall who walked in front or behind, or how you walked to your car?

A: No.

Q: Where was he at this time.

A: He was walking alongside of me.

Q: Do you recall on your right or left?

A: I don’t recall.

Q: When you got to the car, what did you do?

A: I opened my side of the door and got in— I didn’t get all the way in; I just looked in to see if anything was missing.

Q: Is it a two door or a four-door automobile?

A: Two.

Q: And which door did you open?

A: The driver’s side.

Q: And was the car locked at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you notice anything unusual about the car?

A: No.

Q: And when you looked in, did you notice anything unusual?

A: No.

Q: Now, where was this individual at the time you opened the door?

A: Standing by the door.

Q: Which door?

A: The driver’s side.

Q: Across from you?

A: No. He was standing next to me by the car door that I opened.

Q: What happened then?

A: Then I told him nothing was missing, and he walked around to the passenger’s side of the car, and he tried to open the door.

Q: Go on?

A: He said— He asked me if I was sure nothing was gone, and I said no, nothing was. So I shut the door.

Q: The driver’s side door?

A: Yes.

Q: Was the passenger’s side door ever opened?

A: No.

Q: Did he say anything to you about that?

A: No.

Q: What happened then?

A: And then he said they had a man inside that was seen trying to break into my car, and they were holding him inside the mall. So he came back around the side of the car, and we walked back in towards the mall between Sears and the mall, the exit that goes between there.

Q: Did he say who “they” were?

A: No.

Q: How were the lighting conditions in the parking lot at that time?

A: There were street lights that are in the parking lot.

Q: What were the weather conditions that evening? Do you remember?

A: It was a little bit rainy.

Q: When you walked back in the mall, what entrance did you go in?

A: I went in between Sears and the mall.

Q: What happened at that point, Carol?

A: He looked up towards Sears and down towards the mall, and he said they must have taken him down to the substation.

Q: Again, did he say who “they” were?

A: I don’t recall.

Q: Had he mentioned any time up til then why he was with you?

A: I believe he said he was a police officer.

Q: Do you recall at what time he said that?

A: No.

Q: Were you aware at that time whether or not there was a substation in Fashion Place Mall?

A: No.

Q: Now, after you stopped where did he go from there?

A: Walked out the exit straight across from where we just walked in.

Q: And you walked outside?

A: Yes.

Q: What happened then?

A: We walked around the building over by Castleton’s.

Q: He did or you did?

A: We both did. And he talked to me, asked me two things: He asked me how old I was, and if I was doing anything later that night, why I wouldn’t be able to come down, go over there with him and sign a complaint against the man who was trying to break into my car.

Q: And were these conversations while you were walking?

A: Yes.

Q: Was he in front of you or you to the side of him or behind him?

A: I was a little behind him.

Q: Did you have a chance to observe him as you were walking?

A: Yes.

Q: What did you observe?

A: The way he walked.

Q: Anything else?

A: His pants.

Q: What did you notice about those?

A: They were green.

Q: Anything else?

A: No.

Q: When he talked to you, was he looking forward or at you?

A: He was looking sideways at me.

Q: How close were you to him while you were walking?

A: Right next to each other.

Q: On which side?

A: I was on the left side, and he was on the right side.

Q: Is there any lighting as you walk along there that you noticed, Carol?

A: No.

Q: Could you see his facial features as you were walking?

A: Yes.

Q: After you reentered the mall, what happened then?

A: We walked back out through the other exit on the west side.

Q: Do you know what is located in that area, what stores?

A: Farnell’s and Broadway.

Q: Farnell’s Ice Cream store?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you have any conversation with him while you were inside the mall between entering and exiting again?

A: No.

Q: What sort of pace were you walking, how fast?

A: I don’t know.

Q: Did you notice anything unusual about it?

A: No.

Q: How would you describe it as far as your normal pace of walking?

A: Fast.

Q: Fairly fast?

A: Yes.

Q: After you exited the mall, where did you go then?

A: Walked down toward Skaggs.

Q: Did you stop there?

A: No.

Q: Where did you go from there?

A: To the laundromat on the other side of the street.

Q: Okay. Now, what is that street you have indicated there?

A: 6100 South.

Q: Where did you go when you got to that laundromat?

A: To a door that was on the side of the laundromat.

Q: Where did he go?

A: He walked to the door and tried to open it, and it was locked. So he walked down the alley between this building and the laundromat.

Q: Where did you remain at that time?

A: Where I was, out in front on the sidewalk.

Q: You stayed on the sidewalk?

A: Yes.

Q: How far down the alley did he go?

A: He walked about halfway down.

Q: Then what happened?

A: Then he turned around and came back.

Q: What happened then, Carol?

A: I didn’t know what he was doing, so I asked if I could see his badge or some identification.

Q: Where did that take place?

A: Right where I was standing in front of the laundromat.

Q: Why did you ask him at that time, Carol?

A: Because I didn’t know why he walked down the alley and walked back, and why the door wouldn’t be open if it was a substation.

Q: What did he do?

A: Took a wallet out and showed me a badge that was inside the wallet he had.

Q: Did you see where he got that wallet from?

A: No.

Q: Did he have any sort of jacket or coat on?

A: He had a jacket on.

Q: Do you recall the color of that jacket?

A: No.

Q: Did he say anything to you when he produced the wallet?

A: I can’t remember.

Q: Can you describe the badge that he showed you?

A: I think it was silver.

Q: Was it in the wallet itself?

A: Yes.

Q: How large was it?

A: It wasn’t really big. It was kind of oval-shaped.

Q: Did you notice any printing on the badge?

A: No.

Q: Any further conversation take place at that time?

A: He asked me if I would come down to the station with him, because they probably had him down there, and fill out a complaint against him.

Q: Did you respond to that?

A: Yes.

Q: What did you say?

A: I said, “all right.”

Q: How were the lighting conditions at this time on the sidewalk in front of the laundromat?

A: There were street lights and there were lights from the laundromat.

Q: Could you see his facial features at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: How close were you to him?

A: He was right in front of me when he was showing me the badge.

Q: At that time did you get an impression of how tall he was?

A: Yes.

Q: And what was that impression?

A: About six feet.

Q: How did you determine that, Carol?

A: By my own height.

Q: How tall are you?

A: Five seven.

Q: Do you have occasion to be around people about six foot tall very often?

A: Yes.

Q: How about his physical build, his weight, structure? Did you get an impression as to that by then?

A: Yes.

Q: How much would you say that he weighed at that time, or how was he built?

A: He was slim.

Q: An idea or an estimate of how much he weighed?

A: 160 or so— I don’t know.

Q: Anything about his facial features that you noticed at that time?

A: The way his hair was. Greased back off his forehead.

Q: Did you notice any foreign substance on the hair?

A: Oil.

Q: Anything else about his facial features?

A: No.

Q: Did you notice whether he had any facial hair?

A: Yes. A mustache.

Q: Describe that for us.

A: Whether big or bushy?

Q: Just your impression of it.

A: I don’t know, it was just an average-looking mustache?

Q: Light or dark? Heavy?

A: It was dark.

Q: How long?

A: It came about down to here.

Q: You are indicating above the corners of the mouth?

A: Yes.

Q: After your conversation with him there on the sidewalk, what happened then?

A: We walked over to his car.

Q: Where was his car parked?

A: It was parked across the street from the lobby.

Q: How far?

A: I’m not sure of that.

Q: What direction was the car headed while it was parked there?

A: East.

Q: That would be east on 6100 South?

A: Yes.

Q: And what kind of car was it, Carol?

A: It was a Volkswagen.

Q: When you got to the car, what did you do?

A: Got in the car, and he got in the car.

Q: Where did you get in, and where did he gt in?

A: He got in on the driver’s side. I got in on the passenger’s side.

Q: Now did you notice anything unusual about the vehicle at the time you got in it?

A: Yes. It had— the top of the back seat was ripped. Before I got in it, I noticed that it had rust spots on the front. It didn’t have a license plate.

Q: Anything else?

A: No.

Q: Was there any lighting in the area where you got into the vehicle?

A: No.

Q: Were there any lights coming from the Fashion Place Mall parking lot?

A: Yes, from Skaggs.

Q: What was your impression as to the color of the car at that time, Carol?

A: It was a light color. White or beige.

Q: Did you notice anything further about the interior of the car?

A: Just that it had a ripped top of the back seat.

Q: How far did that rip go, or cover, in the back seat of the car?

A: Almost all the way across it. Not quite.

Q: After you got into the car, was there any conversation that took place between you and him at that time?

A: He put on a seat belt and told me that, you know, he would like me to put on my seat belt. I told him no, I didn’t want to. He said, “okay.”

Q: Was there any particular reason why you refused to put on the seat belt?

A: I just didn’t want to.

Q: What was your attitude toward him at this time, Carol?

A: I didn’t know what to think.

Q: What do you mean? Let me ask you this, Carol: Were you frightened at that time?

MR. O’CONNELL: I object to the leading.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Q: What was going through your mind at this time, Carol?

MR. O’CONNELL: I object now. He asked her the question, she couldn’t think of the answer. Since I objected because it’s leading now he asks the question again. I think he ought to drop the matter.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

Q: What was going through your mind at that time, Carol?

A: I wasn’t sure about it.

Q: What do you mean by that?

A: He was a stranger.

Q: Okay. After you got into the car and you had this conversation about the seat belts, what happened then?

A: He made a U-turn. The car was facing west. He made a U-turn going east?

Q: You originally said the car was facing east. Was it facing west towards State Street?

A: Yes.

Q: And he made a U-turn in the opposite direction?

A: Yes.

Q: Which would have been east, is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Where did the car go then?

A: To the end of the street, then it turned left.

Q: Were there any lights inside the car?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Could you see him at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: How close were you to him?

A: Sitting in the next seat.

Q: How far away would that be?

A: I don’t know.

Q: Have you ever been in a VW before?

A: Yes.

Q: How far away are the seats in a VW?

A: They are close. They are next to each other.

Q: Are they bucket type seats?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. When you made the U-turn and proceeded east—

A: Yes.

Q: —where did he go from there?

A: He turned left and crossed a street and pulled over by McMillan School.

Q: Did the car stop for any reason on that trip that you have described?

A: No.

Q: For any stop signs that you noticed?

A: Yes.

Q: Where were they located?

A: Right here.

Q: You are indicating here which is the intersection of 300 East and 5900 South?

A: Yes.

Q: Did the car stop here at this corner?

A: Yes.

Q: Is there a stop sign there?

A: Yes.

Q: Was there any conversation between you and him while you were in the vehicle up until the time it stopped?

A: No.

Q: Could you describe how that stop occurred?

A: He pulled up on the curb a little bit and came back down, then stopped.

Q: What do you mean, “pulled up on the curb”?

A: Two wheels went up over the curb.

Q: Which wheels? Which side of the car?

A: On the right side.

Q: After he brought the car to a stop, what happened next?

A: I started— I asked him what he was doing, this wasn’t the police station. I just wanted to know what he was doing, why he was stopping. He didn’t say anything. He grabbed my arm and put a handcuff around it.

Q: Did you see where he got the handcuff from?

A: No.

Q: Had you noticed those handcuffs prior to this time?

A: Yes. In his jacket.

Q: Where in the course of the events did you notice it? Where were you located?

A: Back at the Sears parking lot.

Q: Where did you see it at that time on his person?

A: In his jacket.

Q: Interior or exterior pocket?

A: Interior.

Q: Breast pocket, like I am indicating here?

A: Yes.

Q: How did you happen to see them back in the Sears parking?

A: When he tried to open the door, his jacket came open.

Q: Now, if you can Carol, describe how he grabbed you when he put the handcuffs on your arm.

A: He grabbed my left arm, I think it’s with his right arm, and put the handcuffs on with his left hand.

Q: Where did he have ahold of your arm?

A: By the wrist, right here.

Q: Did he say anything at that time?

A: No.

Q: What happened then?

A: Then I put my right hand on the door to open it, and he grabbed me by the arm around the neck this way.

Q: Which arm around the neck?

A: I think it was his right arm.

Q: Around your neck?

A: Yes.

Q: What were you doing at this time, Carol?

A: I think I had the door open, and my foot was out of it.

Q: Were you saying anything?

A: I just kept screaming, asking him what he was doing, and he never said anything.

Q: What happened then?

A: And then he pulled the gun out and said he was going to blow my head off.

Q: Did you see where he got the gun?

A: No.

Q: Did you see what hand he had it in?

A: No.

Q: What did you see of the gun?

A: That it was small and black.

Q: Did you see where it was pointed?

A: At me.

Q: What part of your body?

A: I’m not sure.

Q: Did he have ahold of you at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: Where?

A: By the arm.

Q: What were you doing at this time?

A: Trying to get out of the car door.

Q: Okay. What happened then?

A: I got out of the car door, and he came out after me across the seat.

Q: Did he still have ahold of you at any time you got out?

A: I think so.

Q: How did he get out of the car?

A: Came across the passenger’s side out the same door I got out of.

Q: Were you then both outside the vehicle?

A: Yes.

Q: What’s the next thing you recall happening?

A: We were facing each other. I was fighting with him. I tried to get loose. I remember grabbing hold of his arm and his hand and feeling that he had a bar in his hand.

Q: You were fighting with him?

A: Yes.

Q: What were you doing?

A: I was screaming as loud as I could. I was turning away and pulling, scratching.

Q: You have fairly long fingernails today, Carol. Were they that length then?

A: Longer.

Q: Where were you scratching?

A: His arm.

Q: Did he at any time get his arm around you?

A: No.

Q: Behind your head?

MR. O’CONNELL: I object to that. He’s leading, and counsel just motioned to her.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Q: What arm were you scratching him?

A: I’m not sure.

Q: Now, you say you felt a bar?

A: Yes.

Q: Will you describe it for us?

A: Had four sides or six sides.

Q: And where was that?

A: In his hand.

Q: What hand?

A: His right hand.

Q: Where did you feel it?

A: In his hand, around it.

Q: Would you show me how he had that?

A: He had it in his hand, and I had my hand around it, keeping it from coming down on me.

Q: Would you show me how he had it and where you were at the time?

A: He had it up in  the air, and I had my hand up like that.

Q: With one hand or two?

A: One.

Q: Did you get the impression of how large the object was?

A: No.

Q: How big around it was?

A: Yes.

Q: How big was it?

A: About this big.

MR. O’CONNELL: Indicating what, about a half inch?

THE COURT: Approximately.

MR. YOCOM: Thereabouts.

Q: Did you get an impression as to what that object was, Carol?

A: Yes.

Q: What?

A: My impression was that it was a crowbar.

Q: Why did you get that impression.

A: Because I know what they feel like.

Q: How do you know that?

A: Because my dad has one.

Q: Have you felt his crowbar before?

A: Yes.

Q: What was your impression at that time, Carol, as to what he was doing with that crowbar?

MR. O’CONNELL: I object, your Honor. In the first place, I think I should have objected when he asked about the impression and various things. I don’t know what that means. Does that mean he is asking her to guess? Now he is asking her for an opinion as to what somebody’s intent was. I think that is totally improper.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained as to that question.

Q: What was he doing with the crowbar?

A: He was trying to hit me with it.

Q: What made you believe that?

A: Because he was pushing it down on me.

Q: Did you ever have ahold of the crowbar with more than one hand?

A: No.

Q: Which hand did you have ahold of it with?

A: My left hand.

Q: What was he doing with his other hand?

A: I am not— I don’t know. I guess he just had hold of me.

Q: What happened next, Carol?

A: And then I finally broke loose and ran around the front of the car, ran out to the street.

Q: Broke loose from his hold?

A: Yes.

Q: In which direction did you run?

A: Out in front of the car.

Q: The VW?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you see anything at that point?

A: Just that a car was coming.

Q: How did you determine that?

A: I could see its lights.

Q: Did you look back at all?

A: No.

Q: What did you do?

A: I was waving and jumping up and down, and they stopped. I got in the car.

Q: Who opened the door to the car?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: What did you do when you opened the car door— when the door opened, excuse me?

A: I jumped in.

Q: Was there anyone in the car on the passenger’s side?

A: Yes.

Q: Is that the side you got into?

A: Yes.

Q: Who was that?

A: A man and a lady.

Q: What did you do after you got inside?

A: I don’t remember much.

Q: How would you describe your condition at that time?

A: I was hysterical.

Q: Where did you go in this car?

A: I remember asking them to take me to the police station.

Q: Did they?

A: Yes.

Q: What police station did they take you to?

A: Murray.

Q: Did you at any time look back for the car, the VW?

A: When we were driving off, I was in the car with the man and lady.

Q: Did you see it?

A: Yes.

Q: Where was it?

A: It was still parked in the same place, and it was— and he turned around and went back from the same direction he came, and turned left.

Q: Turned left on what street?

A: 5900 South.

Q: So it would have been a left-hand turn on 5900 South?

A: Yes.

Q: Carol, you said you had gotten in the vehicle, then you proceeded somewhere. Where did you go? Not the exact route you took. Where did you end up, I should say?

A: By McMillan School.

MR. O’CONNELL: I think she’s talking— make it clear, the police station. Go ahead, lead her.

MR. YOCOM: Thank you, Mr. O’Connell. I will make it clear.

Q: After you got into the car that stopped for you in the street, where did those people take you?

A: To the police station.

Q: Murray Police Station?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you know where that is located?

A: No, not exactly.

Q: When you arrived there, what is the first thing you recall happening?

A: They asked me what happened.

Q: Do you remember having the handcuffs removed from your arm?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you know what officer did that?

A: No.

Q: Did you give a statement to the officer at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you recall how many different Murray Police officers you talked to that evening?

A: No.

Q: Do you recall the description you gave to them of this man you were with?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you remember telling them anything further about his appearance than what you have already testified to, what he was wearing?

A: No.

Q: Do you recall during any time in walking around the mall of seeing the type of shoes he was wearing?

A: Yes.

Q: Will you describe those for us?

A: They were patent leather.

Q: And the color?

A: They were a dark color.

Q: Why do you remember the shoes, Carol?

A: Because I was watching him walk, and I noticed his shoes and his pants.

Q: Were you looking down?

A: Yes.

Q: While you were in the Murray police station that night, did you observe any photographs?

A: Yes.

Q: And what sort of photographs did you look at?

A: Ones in a book, I think one book, and just some pictures they had.

Q: And how many did you look at?

A: I’m not sure.

Q: Did you look at any other photographs after that time, the next few days following this incident?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you recall where you were at when you looked at them?

A: Yes.

Q: Where was that?

A: At work.

Q: And how many did you see then?

A: About eight or nine.

Q: Did you look at any other photographs after that time?

A: Yes.

Q: About how many times, separate times, did the officer show you photographs?

A: About three or four times.

Q: Do you recall seeing the photograph of a vehicle, a car?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you recall who showed you that photograph?

A: I think it was Jerry Thompson.

Q: Carol, do you recall when Officer Thompson showed you those photographs, the approximate date?

A: No.

Q: I show you what’s been marked for identification purposes as State’s Proposed Exhibit 20, and ask you if you have ever seen that photograph before?

A: Yes.

Q: Is that the photograph that Officer Thompson showed you?

A: Yes.

Q: Likewise with State’s Proposed Exhibit 21, did you observe that photograph at the same time?

A: Yes.

Q: About how long ago did this occur, Carol?

A: I’m not sure.

Q: A month?

A: October, November.

Q: How does Exhibit 20 with regard to content of that photograph compare with what you observed about the Defendant’s vehicle, particularly the back seat, on November 8, 1974?

A: The way it’s ripped and the way the stuffing is coming out.

Q: How does that compare with what you saw?

A: Looks exactly like it.

Q: And with regard to Exhibit 21, showing a VW automobile, how does that compare with the vehicle that you saw on November 8, 1974.

A: The dent in the door and the side.

Q: Did you observe such a dent at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: Carol, did you have an occasion to observe any other photo displays by any other officers?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you recall when or what officers showed you photo displays?

A: Jerry Thompson showed me some. The Bountiful Police showed me some.

Q: Did you ever observe what is commonly known as “mug shots” at the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Office on the ninth floor?

A: Yes.

Q: Would you give me a rough estimate of about how many photographs you were asked to look at during this period of time from November 8th, say, until around August 1st?

A: How many individual ones I have seen altogether?

Q: Yes, including those in the mug books.

A: I don’t know. A lot.

Q: Closer area than “a lot”?

A: No.

Q: Would it be more than a hundred?

A: Yes.

Q: Less than a thousand?

A: Yes.

Q: Prior to August of 1975, Carol, had you ever identified anyone in those photographs as being your assailant on November 8, 1974?

A: No.

Q: When was the first time that you saw a picture of the Defendant in this action, Mr. Bundy?

A: I think it was Jerry Thompson who showed me.

Q: Do you recall the date of that?

A: No.

Q: Now, speaking generally, when you were asked to look at these photographs, Carol, what would the officers tell you before they gave you photographs to look at?

A: Just that they had some photographs for me to look at, if I saw anything that looked anything like this man, to pick it out; if I didn’t, not to pick one out.

Q: Approximately how many photographs did they show you each time?

A: About eight or nine.

Q: When Jerry Thompson showed you the photographs which contained Mr. Bundy’s photograph, how many photographs did you look at then?

A: About nine.

Q: Do you recall what you told him on that occasion with regard to Mr. Bundy’s photograph?

A: No.

Q: Where were you when this took place?

A: At work.

Q: Do you recall generally how the conversation went? First of all, when he handed you the photographs, what did he say to you?

A: Just to look through them.

Q: Do you recall what you did when you got to Mr. Bundy’s photograph?

A: I think I put it aside and put it in my lap. On my knee.

Q: Then what happened?

A: What do you mean?

Q: After you put the photograph on your lap, did you go through the rest of the photographs?

A: Yes.

Q: And when you got through all of them, what did you do?

A: I handed him the one.

Q: The one back?

A: Yes.

Q: What was said then?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Do you remember what you told him?

A: No.

Q: Had you at any time up until that time ever seen a photograph of the man sitting at counsel table here, Mr. Theodore Bundy?

A: No.

Q: Had you ever picked out what we refer to as “look-alikes”?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you remember how many times you told the officer that a particular picture looked like the man or had a similar characteristic?

A: No.

Q: Was it a lot or a few?

A: It was a few.

Q: Just a few?

A: Yes.

Q: When is the next time you remember seeing a photograph of Mr. Bundy?

A: I’m not sure.

Q: How long after you saw the photograph that Jerry Thompson had?

A: About two weeks.

Q: Do you remember who showed you that photograph?

A: I think it was the Bountiful Police.

Q: Do these photographs differ in any way from the photographs that you saw that Officer Thompson had? Were they different kinds of photographs?

A: Yes.

Q: What kind were they?

A: Driver’s license.

Q: Do you remember how many that officer showed you?

A: No.

Q: Did you see a picture of Mr. Bundy in that photograph display?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Do you remember picking someone out?

A: I think so.

Q: Did you have an occasion on the 2nd day of October, 1975, to appear at the Metropolitan Hall of Justice at what is commonly referred to as a lineup, Carol?

A: Yes.

Q: Let me ask you this: did you see a number of participants in that lineup at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: What were you told before the lineup in regard to what was going to happen and what you were supposed to do, if anything?

A: I was supposed to watch them, what they did, not talk to anyone, if I thought— if I saw the man, if I did, to write the number down.

Q: Can you remember how the lineup was conducted, what took place?

A: They walked and they had them talk.

Q: Each one of the members of the lineup?

A: Yes.

Q: Was the Defendant in that lineup?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you have an opportunity to hear him speak at that time?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you have an opportunity to see him walk?

A: Yes.

Q: And did you pick out an individual as being the man that was— and you were in his car on November 8, 1974?

A: Yes.

Q: What number did you pick?

A: Seven.

Q: What time during the course of the lineup did you recognize that individual?

A: When he walked out.

Q: “Walked out,” what do you mean?

A: When they first walked out.

Q: Walked out onto the stage in the lineup room, you mean?

A: Yes.

Q: Were you at that time able to identify him from your recollection of him on November 8th, Carol?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you have any trouble?

A: No.

Q: Did he appear any different then than he did on November 8th?

A: Yes.

Q: In what way?

A: He looked more clean-cut. His hair was shorter. He didn’t have a mustache.

Q: Did you notice anything about his appearance that was identical to the way you observed him on November 8th?

A: The way he walked.

Q: Anything else?

A: His face.

Q: Any particular part of his face?

A: No.

Q: Do you remember any distinctive features, anything about his voice? Do you recall going back to November 8th and hearing it?

A: No.

Q: How would you describe his manner of speaking, to use that term on November 8th, Carol?

A: What do you mean?

Q: Well, was there any particular thing about his voice that stood out in your mind or the way he spoke, the words he used?

A: He was polite, sounded like he was well educated, by the way he talked.

Q: Carol, I show you now what has been marked as State’s Proposed Exhibit 23. Do you recognize that jacket?

A: Yes.

Q: And is that the jacket you were wearing on November 8, 1974?

A: Yes.

Q: After you got home that evening Carol, did you notice anything unusual about that jacket?

A: Yes.

Q: Can you explain to the Court what you noticed at that time?

A: It had blood around one of— the fur of one of the sleeves and around the collar.

Q: Would you show us on the coat where that was located?

A: Up on here. I don’t remember what sleeve it was on, which one.

Q: You are indicating which would be to the back of the jacket?

A: Yes.

Q: On the fur collar?

A: Yes.

Q: What did you do after you noticed that? Did you tell anyone about it?

A: It wasn’t until Monday— the Monday that, when the officer Joel Riet came up to show me some pictures that I told him there was some blood on my coat, and he told me to go get it for him, and I got him the coat, and he cut the fur off some of it.

Q: Cut the fur off the coat collar and the sleeve where the blood was located?

A: Yes.

MR. YOCOM: No further questions.

Part II:

CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. JOHN O’CONNELL:

Q: Miss DaRonch, did you tell the police on the evening of November 8th, 1974, when you talked to them, that there was anything in particular about the way the man walked?

A: No.

Q: Did you tell them there was anything about the way he talked that was unusual?

A: No.

Q: You said he was just average, didn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: When did you decide that he sounded like he was well educated?

A: I have told them that before.

Q: When?

A: I don’t know when exactly, but I told them that before.

Q: Before September, ’75?

A: Yes.

Q: Who did you tell?

A: I think it was someone from the Bountiful Police.

Q: Did someone from the Bountiful Police talk to you about the suspect they had up in Bountiful?

A: No.

Q: Did you testify previously about looking at a sketch and saying that it didn’t look like the person because the mustache was different?

A: What sketch?

Q: Well did you look at the sketch of any individual?

A: One.

Q: Who showed it to you?

A: A security guy at Mountain Bell.

Q: Nobody from the Bountiful Police ever showed you their sketch?

A: I don’t know if he got the sketch from Bountiful.

A direct scan of the original composite sketch in the Debra Kent case, 1974. Courtesy Bountiful Police Department.

Q: Showing you what has been marked as Defendant’s Proposed Exhibit 24, is that the sketch you were shown?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you see this brochure?

A: No.

Q: Just the sketch?

A: Yes.

Q: Did it have the description underneath it?

A: No.

Q: You didn’t think that was the man?

A: I didn’t think it looked like him.

Q: Now, you have testified in Court about this incident on two different occasions before this, haven’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: And those times Mr. Bundy was present, wasn’t he?

A: Yes.

Q: I was present?

A: Yes.

Q: Mr. Yocom?

A: Yes.

Q: And you described the incident both those times, didn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you cry during those times?

A: No.

Q: Is it the crowd here that is making you nervous?

A: Yes.

Q: And you noticed the blood on this coat you say, that night?

A: Yes.

Q: Now, the policemen looked at the coat that night. Didn’t they look to see if there was any blood on it?

A: No.

Q: Didn’t they discuss whether or not there was any blood on you?

A: No. They asked me if I was hurt. I said no.

Q: Do you want to describe the badge the man showed you again?

A: I said it was silver and oval shaped.

Q: Do you recall being asked that at the preliminary hearing?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you know what you said there?

A: Probably that it was silver or gold.

MR. O’CONNELL: I’d ask that her testimony in that regard, in fact, her testimony generally, be published at this time, of the preliminary hearing.

THE COURT: Any objection?

MR. YOCOM: No objection.

THE COURT: The testimony of the witness at the preliminary hearing will be published.

Q: I will just read it, then. Line 5 of page 24:

“Question: Could you describe the badge and where you got it from?”

“Answer: It was silver and blue, or else gold and blue. And it wasn’t a star. It was kind of round, kind of oval-shaped.”

Do you have any explanation for why you said it was blue and silver or blue and gold then?

A: Because it had a symbol on it or writing or something, but I couldn’t see what it was.

Q: Well, you were asked by the police officers on the night this occurred what color it was, weren’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: And that time you said it was all silver or all gold, didn’t you?

A: Did I?

Q: Well, did you?

A: I can’t—

Q: You don’t remember?

A: No.

Q: Was it blue? Did it have blue on it?

A: I think it had a little blue on it, whatever was on it, the symbol or the writing.

Q: Now, when the police officers were questioning you about this, they showed you their badge, didn’t they?

A: Yes.

Q: And you said it was different?

A: Yes.

Q: And how did you tell them it was different?

A: Their badges were bigger.

Q: And what else?

A: Theirs weren’t the same shape.

Q: And what else?

A: I don’t know.

Q: You told them that the badge the man used didn’t have any blue on it, didn’t you, that the badge that the man showed you was like theirs, only it was half as big, and the badge the kidnapper had didn’t have any blue on it like the Murray Police officers, right?

A: Theirs had a lot of blue on it.

Q: That’s right, and that’s what you were describing when you described it at the preliminary hearing, wasn’t it?

A: No.

Q: Well, do you think you told the police officers on November 8th that the badge that the man had had blue on it?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Now, the wallet the man had the badge in was a wallet like mine, wasn’t it?

A: Similar.

Q: I mean, what I meant was it folds so that the money folds in half?

A: Yes.

Q: Rather than folding it so the money stays straight?

A: Yes.

Q: And the badge was attached to it somehow so that he flipped it open like this, and you could see the badge, right?

A: Yes.

Q: Now, going to the car that was used on the night of November 8th that you took a ride in, what color was it?

A: I said it was a light beige, white.

Q: You said it was a light beige. Could it have been blue?

A: I could have said it was.

Q: I am asking you now, could it have been blue?

A: No.

But you have described it, in fact, on November 8th you described it as a light blue car, didn’t you?

A: I might have.

Q: When did you decide that it was beige? When Jerry Thompson showed you those photos?

A: No.

Q: When?

A: I was really shook up that night. There’s a lot of things I didn’t exactly tell them.

Q: Well, they asked you what color the car was several times, didn’t they?

A: And later on I said it could have been a white or beige, too.

Q: But now you have decided it couldn’t be blue. Why is that?

A: I don’t understand.

Q: Well, on the night it happened, you said that it was light blue or white. Now you say it couldn’t have been blue. What made you come to that conclusion that it couldn’t be blue now when on November 8th you were saying it was light blue.

A: Or beige or white.

Q: All right. When did you eliminate light blue as a possibility? Do you know?

A: No.

Q: Today you testified that when you were walking with this man over to the laundromat, you were walking on his left side. Is that your testimony now?

A: Over to the laundromat?

Q: Yes.

A: No.

Q: Where were you walking?

A: I was walking on his left side outside of the mall, not over to the laundromat.

Q: Where were you walking in relation to him when you were walking over to the laundromat?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: You have testified previously that you were walking a few feet behind him?

A: Yes.

Q: Now, when you were at the laundromat, you said that you were quite suspicious of him, he was a stranger. You indicated to Mr. Yocom that—I don’t know whether you said it or he was just implying it—that you were at that point concerned. Is that true?

A: Yes.

Q: Why did you go?

A: Because he showed me a badge. I thought it was all right.

Q: I see. You also said that you didn’t have to go, right?

A: Right.

Q: It was entirely up to you?

A: Yes.

Q: And so at that point you were reassured that it really was a policeman, or you wouldn’t have gone, right?

A: Yes.

Q: I mean, you wouldn’t have gotten into some strange man’s car and driven off with him if you didn’t think he was a policeman, would you?

A: No.

Q: Did he smell of alcohol?

A: Yes.

Q: Now, you said you saw some rust spots on the car. Where did you see the rust spots?

A: On the very front of it.

Q: Anywhere else?

A: On the side, maybe.

Q: Pardon?

A: On the side.

Q: Where on the side?

A: On the door.

Painted over rust spots on the VW door, October 1975. Courtesy Bountiful PD.

Q: On the door? Do you remember Mr. Yocom at the preliminary hearing asking you the same questions?

Line 10, page 27:

“Question: Now, when you say there were spots on the vehicle, rust spots; where were they located on the vehicle itself, Carol?”

“Answer: On the front, on the hood that opens up.”

“Question: Any other place?”

“Answer: No.”

Do you know why you said that?

A: No.

Q: Have you been looking at these photos of Mr. Bundy’s car recently?

A: No.

Q: Other than in court, have you ever looked at them?

A: No.

Q: Did Mr. Thompson show them to you? Other than Mr. Thompson showing them to you while you were on the witness stand, have you ever looked at the photos of the car with Jerry Thompson?

A: No.

Q: Did you tell Murray Police officers on November 8th about seeing rust on a door?

A: No. I don’t remember.

Q: They questioned you quite thoroughly about that automobile, didn’t they?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Well, they wanted to know if there was anything unusual about that car, didn’t they?

A: Yes.

Q: And you didn’t tell them about seeing any—in fact, you told them that you couldn’t remember any particular dents or rust spots, didn’t you?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Do you have a memory, though, of that car not having a license plate on?

A: That night I told them, I was very shook up.

Q: But no license plate would have been something unusual, wouldn’t it?

A: Yes.

Q: More unusual than rust spots on the hood, isn’t it?

A: No.

Q: Don’t practically all old Volkswagens have rusty spots in the front on the hood?

A: I don’t know. Do they?

Q: Now, when did you notice this rip in the upholstery of the car? When you climbed into the car the first time?

A: When we were walking toward the car; when I climbed in the car.

Q: You saw the rip. Now, you did tell the police about that rip, didn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: What color was the upholstery?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Did you notice anything else about the interior other than the fact that it had seat belts and it had a rip in the back seat?

A: There was stuff on the floor of the passenger’s side.

Q: Do you have any idea how many light-colored Volkswagen bugs there are with ripped seats?

A: No.

Q: There is quite a few, aren’t there?

A: Probably.

Q: In fact, most of them have ripped seats, don’t they?

A: Most old cars, very old ones.

Q: Particularly Volkswagens?

A: Yes.

Carol DaRonch

Carol DaRonch, circa 1970s. Courtesy Carol DaRonch/Amazon Studios.

Q: You already testified you are 5’7, right?

A: Yes.

Q: How much do you weigh?

A: 108.

Q: And that was roughly your size on November 8th?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you participate in any sports?

A: No.

Q: Ever had any self-defense training?

A: Once.

Q: Was that training, or someone just telling you about it?

A: Someone just telling me about it.

Q: Do you recall how you managed to get away from that man on November 8th?

A: No.

Q: It is your testimony now he was trying to hit you with that iron bar?

A: Yes.

Q: How did you keep him from doing it?

A: I don’t know.

Q: Remember talking to the police officer, I believe it was Joel Riet, about whether or not he was really trying to hurt you on November 8th, 1974?

A: No.

Q: Didn’t you have a little discussion with him where you both decided that he probably wasn’t since he was so much bigger than you were?

A: No.

Q: How tall am I? Do you want to stand up?

A: I have heels on.

Q: What were you wearing that night?

A: Loafers.

Q: Well, can you give a guess how tall I am?

A: No.

Q: Do you have any idea how much I weigh?

A: No.

Q: It is your testimony now that you did scratch this man, is that right?

A: Because my fingernails were all broken.

Q: Going to page 38 of the preliminary hearing, do you recall Mr. Yocom asking this question of you:

“Do you recall ever scratching him with your fingernails?”

And your answer: “No.”

Do you have an explanation for that?

A: No.

Q: In fact, the officers on November 8th asked you if you remembered if you hurt the man in any way, and you told them no too, didn’t you?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Okay. Let’s go to these green pants. Can you describe them further than that?

A: They were straight legs.

Q: They didn’t have any flare to them?

A: Right.

Q: Did they have a cuff on them?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Did you tell the police that they did not have a cuff on?

A: Yes.

Q: What kind of jacket?

A: A dress jacket.

Q: Did you tell the police that he had a dress jacket on?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Or did you tell them you couldn’t remember the jacket?

A: I said it was a jacket, though.

Q: You said it was a jacket. Was it Mr. Yocom who asked you if it was a suit jacket at the preliminary hearing, and you first said that it was a suit jacket, isn’t that true?

A: But it was.

Q: What color was it?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: What kind of shirt did he have on?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Was he wearing a tie?

A: No.

Q: Now, on the night of November 8th, you couldn’t answer any of these questions, you said you didn’t remember; right?

A: Right.

Q: And you say he was wearing a mustache?

A: Yes.

Q: Shortly after the incident you told Joel Riet that you thought it over and decided the man didn’t have a mustache, didn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: And sometime later you decided he did, right?

A: Yes.

Q: When did you make that decision?

A: Right after I decided that he didn’t have one.

Q: Did you tell Officer Riet right then that you had changed your mind again that he had a mustache?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Taking a photo out of what was at the earlier motion Defendant’s Exhibit 13, and it’s a mug shot with the number 63660, 11-1-73, Sheriff’s Office, Salt Lake County. Wasn’t it in regard to looking at this photo that you told Mr. Riet that you didn’t think the man had a mustache?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Didn’t you say that this looks just like the man only he wasn’t wearing a mustache?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Do you remember seeing this photo before?

A: No.

Q: You picked out several photos at different times as looking like the man—showing you again from Defendant’s Exhibit 13, which is an envelope full of photographs—and that number, Exhibit 13, is the one from the earlier motion, your Honor, rather than this—showing you Driver’s License A 664002, you said that that looked generally like the man, didn’t you, at one time?

A: The hair.

Q: The hair looked like that?

A: Sort of.

Q: If that what you mean by “greased”? Or was it shiny like that?

A: Yes.

Q: You described on the night of November 8th the man’s hair as being dark brown and black, did you not?

A: Yes.

Q: You just don’t recall all the photos that you picked out that you said looked like the man?

A: Not looked like, just things about them, the way they had their hair cut or their mustache or—

Q: Well, there was one photo that Bountiful showed you that you made an identification of and said it looked quite a bit like the man, and got him in quite a bit of trouble, didn’t you?

A: I don’t know. Did I?

Q: Well, didn’t you say it looked like him?

A: I don’t know what picture you’re talking about.

MR. O’CONNELL: Well, the problem is, I can’t find it. It was one of the photos we used in the last hearing. It was in one of those folders, your Honor, and it’s not there now. Whether it fell out or what.

Q: Now, as far as viewing photographs went, you viewed an awful lot during the first month after this incident, and then quite a period of time went by before they showed you photos again, is that true?

A: Yes.

Q: How many times before the lineup did you see Mr. Bundy’s photo?

A: Twice.

Q: You have testified previously that you saw it three or four times?

A: I might have.

Q: Were you mistaken then?

A: Yes.

Q: And since the lineup, you have seen it some more times, haven’t you? Well, you have seen it in court, for example, haven’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: And you have been reading newspaper stories about this case, haven’t you?

A: No.

Q: You haven’t?

A: No.

Q: You’ve testified at the preliminary hearing you have been reading the Deseret News stories about this case?

A: But not recently.

Q: But you were—between the lineup and the preliminary hearing you were reading the stories in the paper, though?

A: Some.

Q: And they would have had his picture in the paper, wouldn’t they?

A: One.

Q: Just had it in once?

A: I only remember seeing it once.

Q: Now, you don’t remember when Mr. Thompson showed you his picture the first time, right?

A: No.

Q: Well, do you remember him coming to your place of employment on September 1st of 1975 with the pictures of the automobile?

A: Yes.

Q: And they were just ordinary Polaroid size photos at that time, weren’t they, or were they big ones like this?

A: I don’t know.

Q: Referring to State’s Exhibits 20 and 21?

A: I don’t remember if they were big or small.

MR. O’CONNELL: Your Honor, if I may straighten up the record, the photo which I previously identified as coming from Defendant’s Exhibit 13 at the previous hearing and as having number 663660: I said Sheriff, but that is Salt Lake City Police Department and is now Defendant’s Exhibit 25; is that correct Mr. Yocom?

MR. YOCOM: That’s correct.

MR. O’CONNELL: And that’s the photograph I believe you said that you didn’t recall much about, is that correct?

MISS DARONCH: Yes.

MR. O’CONNELL: All right. I will move—I guess she didn’t identify it, so I can’t. I will have to wait on that.

Q: Defendant’s Proposed Exhibit 26 is the photo you said looks something like the man, particularly the hair?

A: Yes.

Q: All right. And you picked that out for Officer Riet? Do you know?

A: I don’t know.

Q: Now, when Officer Thompson showed you the photos of the car—you previously identified State’s Exhibits 20 and 21—he showed you four photos at that time, didn’t he?

A: Yes.

Q: And you told him that that was the car that had been used in the kidnapping, didn’t you?

A: I said it looked a lot like it.

Q: You said, “That’s the car,” right?

A: I might have.

Q: How could you tell from looking at these photos?

A: The rip’s identical to what I saw.

Q: What else?

A: It didn’t have a license plate.

Q: Now, will you please look at Defendant’s Exhibit 29. Do you see the license plate in that photo?

A: No.

Q: Can you see it in Exhibits 28, 20, or 21?

A: No.

Q: So you didn’t recognize that car and the photos because it didn’t have a license plate on it, did you?

A: I don’t know if I said that, even.

Q: Well, you just said it two minutes ago, didn’t you?

A: No. You asked me if that’s what I said.

MR. O’CONNELL: Well, can you go back and read the record, Mrs. Price?

(The record was read)

Q: And we went through the same thing at the preliminary hearing, did we not?

A: Yes.

Q: Where you said the way you told that the car in the photos was the car that you saw November 8th was because it didn’t have a license plate? You said that at the preliminary hearing too, didn’t you? Do you recall?

A: No.

Q: All right. On page 65:

“Question: Now, so you had, I take it, then looked at the car in pictures and said ‘That’s the car’; is that right?”

“Answer: Yes.”

“Question: And how could you tell it was the car?”

“Answer: It didn’t have a license plate on the front, and it was real beat up, the back seat was ripped exactly—”

“Question: But it didn’t have a license plate on the front and because the back seat was torn?”

“Answer: Yes.”

Q: Really, what you are recalling, then, was not the photos but the car you saw up on the Avenues with Officer Collard, is that right?

Ted Bundy Volkswagen VW 1975

The Volkswagen as viewed by Carol DaRonch, September 1975. Courtesy Bountiful PD

A: No.

Q: When did you ever see a car without a license plate other than your statement that you saw it on November 8th, 1974?

A: Just on November 8th.

Q: Okay. So how did you tell that these pictures were the car on November 8th, just because of the rip?

A: Yes.

Q: And the rip only appears in State’s Exhibit 20 and Defendant’s Exhibit 28, right?

A: Right.

Q: In fact, they can be any Volkswagen, couldn’t they?

A: Yes.

Q: Are you telling us that you can look at State’s Exhibit 20 and say that that is the exact same tear that you saw when you climbed into a car on whatever that street was in Murray in November of 1974? You can say that?

A: No. I said it looks a lot like it.

Q: Now, just after you looked at these car photos for Jerry Thompson, he gave you a pack of photos and asked you to look through them, didn’t he?

A: Yes.

Q: And that was the time that you picked out a photo and put it in your lap and went through the rest of the photos, then you gave the photos back to Jerry Thompson and said “He’s not in there,” didn’t you?

A: Did I?

Q: You don’t know?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: And didn’t he say, “Well, what about that photo,” referring to Mr. Bundy’s photo that was in your lap? And it was at that time you said, “I don’t know, I guess it looks more like him—or it looks closer to him than any of the other photos”; isn’t that the way that particular selection went?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: You don’t remember. Well, you remembered at the preliminary hearing, didn’t you? That was a little closer to the incident, wasn’t it? Closer to the time he showed you the photos at the preliminary hearing, wasn’t it?

A: Yes, it was.

Q: Okay. Publishing preliminary hearing, page 79, starting, I guess, at the bottom of the page, line 24:

“BY MR. O’CONNELL:

“Question: And that was when you looked through and said—exactly what happened on that occasion? Was it that you gave them back and that you had took Mr. Bundy’s photograph out from the pack and then you gave the pack back and said there wasn’t anybody there of the person, and they asked, well, why did you take that one out, and you said, ‘Well, that one looks more like him than any other picture.’ Isn’t that how it happened?”

“Answer: Yes.”

“Question: In fact, your first statement was that the man’s picture—that the man who had done it wasn’t in there, but that Mr. Bundy was closer than other people?”

“Answer: Yes.”

I don’t know whether I’m that inarticulate or whether the reporter got it wrong.

Q: Do you remember when the next time was that you saw Mr. Bundy’s photo?

A: I think it was two weeks later.

Q: Wasn’t it on September 4th when the officers from Bountiful came up to get you to go look at a car?

A: No. I don’t think it was that same day.

Q: You don’t think it was that soon after?

A: No, that same day. I don’t remember exactly what day it was.

Q: It was sometime after Officer Thompson had shown you the first pack, right?

A: Yes.

Q: You think it was a couple weeks?

A: I think.

Q: It could have been, say, three or four days?

A: No.

Q: Well, it was on a day that they came up to take you to go see if you could see the car, right?

A: No.

Q: It wasn’t?

A: It might have been.

Q: Well, in fact, you went through the pack of pictures they showed you once, and then you went through it again, and you picked out Mr. Bundy’s photo, and you said, “I think that may be the man,” or something to that effect, didn’t you?”

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Well, let’s put it this way: You never made a positive identification of a photograph, did you?

A: Right.

Q: That’s correct. Well, do you recall the Bountiful officers coming on several occasions to try to take you to see the car itself?

A: Yes.

Q: There were a couple of attempts that weren’t successful, then on September 8th Sgt. Collard took you up and showed you a car on the Avenues, didn’t he?

A: Yes.

Q: Did that car have a license plate on it?

A: No.

Q: And that’s when you remembered, isn’t it, when you were talking about how you identified the photograph because it didn’t have a license plate?

A: I was thinking of the car that night.

Q: Well, obviously, you were thinking of the car that night, because you were trying to see if the car in the photo or the car in the street matched it. But when I asked you how you could tell on two different occasions in two different court proceedings, you said it was because the car and the picture didn’t have the license plate on it. Now, my question was: Were you just confusing the car that you saw in the pictures with the car you saw on the street? You were just wrong, is that it?

A: I don’t know.

Q: Did you tell Officer Collard that the car you saw up on the Avenues was the car you were kidnapped in?

A: I might have, because it didn’t have a license plate. But it looked completely different.

Q: Well, at the preliminary hearing you said you didn’t identify it, right?

A: (No answer).

Q: What else about it made you think it was the car, other than it didn’t have a license plate? It looked completely different, but you identified it anyway, isn’t that true?

A: Because it was supposed to be the car in the pictures.

Q: That’s right, and that’s why you identified it, because it was supposed to be the car?

A: Because it didn’t have a license plate, and I knew it had been changed.

Q: That was your testimony also at the preliminary hearing, was the reason that you identified it was because it was supposed to be the car that was in the picture, and you knew the officers weren’t taking you up to see the wrong car, right?

A: Right.

Q: You pretty well identify what the law enforcement officers want you identify, don’t you?

A: No.

Q: You did at that time, didn’t you?

A: No.

Q: Let’s go to another time. Showing you Defendant’s Exhibit 28. Now, can you identify that? Have you seen that photograph before?

A: Yes.

Q: And at the preliminary hearing, didn’t you on two occasions say—identify that as a picture of the rip in the car that you saw on November 8th, 1974?

A: Yes.

Q: And then I pointed out to you that—or asked you whether or not you had ever seen the car from the back on November 8th, 1974, right?

A: Right.

Q: So how did you identify it at that time?

A: By the flap part that was sticking down.

Q: What flap part? The sponge rubber?

A: Yes.

Q: All right. This is State’s Exhibit 20. This is the way it looked from the front?

A: I could see this part from standing on the side of the car, not directly from the back.

Q: From standing on the side? You get a better shot—this picture is taken from the side, isn’t it?

A: Yes.

Q: In fact, it’s taken from the rear quarter window, isn’t it?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. Now, show me in this picture what you—you got a better view, more of a view to the back on November 8th than this picture shows?

A: No.

Q: In fact, you were more from the front, weren’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: All right. Now, show me in this picture what there is that you saw that you could remember at the preliminary hearing so that you could identify that rip as the one you saw?

A: Just this top portion.

Q: Well, you can’t see this part, can you, from the front, or even from the side?

A: But it is curving over here.

Q: Well, don’t all Volkswagens curve over?

A: I don’t know. Do they?

Q: Well, you identified that just because Mr. Yocom handed it to you and asked you if you could identify it, didn’t you?

A: And you were pushing it in my face.

Q: Well, let’s go back to when Mr. Yocom was pushing it in your face, young lady.

MR. YOCOM: Your Honor, I think counsel ought to be cautioned—

THE COURT: All right, no argumentation with the witness. On the other hand, I want the witness to just answer the questions.

MR. O’CONNELL: Page 116, this is Mr. Yocom:

“Question: With Exhibit B, do you recognize that photograph?”

“Answer: Yes.”

“Question: And what is that?”

“Answer: It’s the ripped part of the top of the back seat.”

“Question: And in what way, if any, does that resemble the vehicle you were in on November 8, 1974?”

“Answer: It had a rip just like this one.”

BY MR. O’CONNELL:

“Question: I’m showing you State’s Exhibit B. Looking at that, you can say that that’s the ripped seat you saw on November 8, 1974?”

“Answer: Yes.”

“Question: How can you tell?”

“Answer: It just looks like it.”

“Question: Well, do you remember any particular little dents or tears or pieces hanging out or anything like that?”

“Answer: Just the way it’s ripped.”

“Question: Did you ever look at that car on November 8th from the back?”

“Answer: No.”

Have you ever viewed any other Volkswagen automobile, other than the one with Officer Collard up on the Avenues, with a police officer to see if it was the car used on the night?

A: No.

Q: You never have?

A: No.

Q: Didn’t you view one with Officer Paul Forbes shortly after the incident?

A: Yes.

Q: You decided it wasn’t the car?

A: Yes.

Q: Why? What was different about it, do you remember?

A: The rip in the back seat wasn’t the same.

Q: Anything else?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Remember being taken to the University of Utah to see if you could identify somebody?

A: Yes.

Q: When did you go, do you recall?

A: No.

Q: Well, roughly when, say, in relation to being shown those pictures or the lineup or anything?

A: It was before the lineup.

Q: It was the day before the lineup, wasn’t it?

A: Was it?

Q: I don’t know.

A: I don’t know.

Q: I’m asking you.

A: I don’t know, either.

Q: Do you recall where you went up there?

A: I don’t know what building it was, exactly.

Q: Was it the law school?

A: I’m not familiar with up there.

Q: Well, who all was up there with you?

A: I don’t know their names.

Q: There were a number of police officers and a number of county attorneys, weren’t there?

A: Not a whole lot.

Q: And you hung around a little while with Jerry Thompson inside the building and didn’t see anyone, right?

A: Right.

Q: And Officer Thompson told you the man wasn’t there, right?

A: Yes.

Q: What man did you think he was talking about?

A: I don’t know. He never told me his name.

Q: You knew it was the man whose pictures you had picked and whose car you picked, right?

A: I didn’t know it was the man in the pictures I picked. They never told me anything about anything.

Q: Well, I know, but you gathered it, didn’t you? Didn’t you gather that before the lineup?

A: Well, yes.

Q: All right. Before the lineup, you knew that the man you were looking to see if you could identify was a law student, and that he had a beige Volkswagen, didn’t you.

A: I didn’t know if he was a law student.

Q: Well, you testified previously that you knew that he was a law student and had a beige Volkswagen, didn’t you?

A: (No answer.)

Q: You associated the pictures of the man you had picked with the automobile, hadn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: And you associated the trip up to the law school or up to the building at the University with the man you had picked, whose photos you had tentatively picked, hadn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: You knew that these policemen were closing in on a hot suspect, didn’t you?

A: I guess.

Q: Well, weren’t they acting that way, coming and seeing you every couple days and driving you around town and having officers out following somebody around so that you could try to find out where he was to look at him; do you recall all that?

A: Yes.

Q: It was a pretty extensive activity there during the first—or, in fact, all through September, wasn’t it? With Bountiful and with the County Sheriffs?

A: I really don’t know what they were doing.

Q: You knew they were doing something, didn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: In fact, you were quite frightened at the lineup, weren’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: Because you were pretty certain that the man who kidnapped you was going to go in that lineup and he might see you, weren’t you?

A: No.

Q: Now, in that lineup you could have recognized Mr. Bundy from seeing his pictures even if you hadn’t seen him before, couldn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: I mean, nobody else in that lineup looked like his picture, did it?

A: No.

Q: Now, do you have separate images in your mind of what the man looked like on November 8, 1974, and what each of the pictures of Mr. Bundy looked like and what Mr. Bundy looked like at the lineup and what he looks like today? Can you flick through your mind and have those images come out?

A: Yes.

Q: Have you ever seen Mr. Bundy in a mustache?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Have you ever seen his picture in a mustache or a beard?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: Showing you what has been marked Defendant’s Exhibit 27, referring to Driver’s License C 124012, have you ever seen that before?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you pick that picture out and say that that looked a lot like him–the man that abducted you—except for the hair?

A: Yes.

Q: And you said that the officer was showing you these pictures, in fact, I believe he showed you 27 and 27-A at the same time, he said, “Look through these and pick out the hair that looks the most like him,” and you picked Drivers License C 90747, didn’t you?

A: Yes.

Q: He had that kind of hair, you said?

A: Sort of.

MR. O’CONNELL: I will move the introduction of Defendant’s Exhibit 31 as being a transcript of her statement to the police officers, to Officer Joel Riet on November 8, 1974.

MR. YOCOM: No objection.

THE COURT: Exhibit 31 is received.

Q: Showing you a group of photographs 30-A through S, I will ask, you to look through there and see if any of those are photos of ripped back seats, and see if any of those are like the rip that you saw on November 8th, or for that matter, the rip you saw in Mr. Bundy’s car?

A: I really can’t see it too good in some of these pictures.

Q: Do you know if it’s in there?

A: No.

MR. O’CONNELL: That’s all.

MR. YOCOM: You mean that’s all the questions?

MR. O’CONNELL: Yes. That’s all the questions.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. YOCOM:

Q: Carol, at any time when you observed photographs shown to you by police officers, did any of them ever—let me rephrase that—what did they tell you each time you were shown photographs?

A: Just to look through them, if I saw anyone that reminded me of the man, to pick it out and show them what reminded me about it; or if I saw the man, to pick it out, or if l didn’t see anything that I liked, I didn’t have to pick out anything.

Q: And was that all that was ever said to you at any time?

A: Yes.

Q: Did anyone ever suggest to you that the suspect’s picture, or a suspect’s picture, was contained in those photographs?

A: No.

Q: Did you know on September 1st when Officer Thompson showed you a group of photographs that there would be a suspect in those photographs?

A: No.

Q: Did you know on the 4th day of September when Officer Beal from Bountiful showed you a group of photographs whether or not the man would be in those photographs?

A: No.

Q: Did you, when you went to the lineup, know that the man that assaulted you—kidnapped you on November 8th—was going to be there?

A: No.

Q: Did anyone tell you he was going to be there?

A: No.

Q: Did you know his name?

A: No.

Q: Did you know his occupation?

A: No.

Q: Did you know anything about Theodore Bundy on October 2nd at the lineup?

A: I don’t think so.

Q: Counsel asked you on cross-examination if you could have identified Mr. Bundy at the lineup without seeing his picture.

MR. O’CONNELL: No. Excuse me. I will call for the record on that. I asked her if—she might object to this even more—I asked her if she could have identified him just from his pictures without having seen him on November 8th, 1974. She said she could have.

THE COURT: Yes. That was the testimony.

MR. YOCOM: Sorry. I must have written it down wrong.

MISS DARONCH: I thought he said the other way too.

Q: What question did you think you were asked?

A: If—what you thought. I mean, I couldn’t from the picture, is what I mean, for sure.

Q: You couldn’t tell if he was the man strictly from the pictures?

A: Yes.

Q: When you saw him in the lineup, could you tell?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you associate the lineup at all with seeing pictures?

A: No.

Q: Seeing Mr. Bundy at the lineup when he first walked into the lineup room, whatdid you associate that with, Carol?

A: When he first walked in was the way he walked on that night.

Q: What night?

A: November 8th.

Q: Did you know immediately?

A: Yes.

Q: And you are positive today?

A: Yes.

MR. YOCOM: No further questions.

RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O’CONNELL:

Q: Well as to being able to pick him out just from the pictures, we. have gone through that twice, haven’t we? Once at preliminary hearing and once this afternoon? And both times, you said that you could pi.ck him out even if you hadn’t seen him, you could pick him out—and I would follow it up with the question, “Well, nobody else in the lineup looked like his pictures?” And both times, both this afternoon and at the preliminary hearing, you agreed. Is that right?

A: I thought you said the other way around.

Q: Both times you thought—

A: I don’t remember the first time.

Q: Or did you and Mr. Yocom discuss that with regard to the preliminary hearing testimony, is maybe why you made that mistake at preliminary hearing?

A: No.

Q: Now you are saying that you didn’t think the man who kidnapped you was in the lineup, is that right? You didn’t know that he was?

A: No.

Q: You didn’t even suspect that he was, strongly?

A: Yes.

Q: That’s why you testified that you were afraid, wasn’t it? You were worried that he’d see you?

A: I don’t remember.

Q: You said that you associated the man with the car and the pictures and the going to the Law school, and you testified to that two or three times, haven’t you? Haven’t you?

A: (No answer.)

Q: Well, yes or no?

A: Will you say that again?

Q: Haven’t you on two or three times now testified that you associated the man in the lineup, prior to the lineup, going in the lineup, with the pictures, with the viewing of the car, and with the law school; that you knew that the man that you were looking for was a law student and had a tan car? Haven’t you testified that that’s true several times?

A: Yes.

Q: And it is true, isn’t it?

A: Yes.

MR. O’CONNELL: That’s all.

MR. YOCOM: No further questions.

THE COURT: All right. Miss DaRonch, you may step down.

Roni the Raccoon: Adventures around Lake Placid (Part Two), July 10-14, 2026.

Introduction: For Christmas 2025 my SIL gifted my husband an incredibly clever present of an eight-inch-tall stuffed raccoon named ‘Roni’ that also happened to be the Olympics mascot for the 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics (we’re a big Adirondacks family). About a month later I started taking a creative writing class at GCC (our local community college), which is a subject that I always struggled with because with my true crime articles, everything is very structured, and black and white, and because of this I don’t often have to think outside the box. So… one night in early March, I started thinking about something I could do around our upcoming trip to Lake Placid (since most of my vacations revolve around some sort of writing project) and ‘the Adventures of Roni the Raccoon’ was born. I had a lot of fun with the first article, and it was great having my husband involved with something: he’s gone to some local true crime related places with me (think, Air BnB’s) but he never really tagged along to take pictures or investigate. It was fun doing something together. And going back to the area in the summer gave us a totally different perspective, as well as new things to explore (both activity and food-wise).

Background/History: Lake Placid is a village in Essex County, New York that is located near the southern end of the actual Lake Placid; it is inside the Adirondack Mountains and is close to the center of North Elba, and its population in the 2020 census was 2,205. Also in 2020, the average resident was 45.8 years old, 13.7% of its people were under the age of 18, and 19.7% were 65 years or older. According to the United States Census Bureau, the village is made up of a total area of 1.5 square miles, of which 1.4 square miles is land and 0.15 square miles (or 10.79%) is water. In the village, 33% of housing units are classified as ‘seasonally vacant,’ meaning they are strictly used only for ‘vacation purposes’ and are owned as second homes, vacation rentals (Air BnB/Vrbo), or seasonal properties.

According to the Köppen classification system, Lake Placid has a warm-summer, humid continental climate (or Dfb), which are warm-summer humid continental climates that feature four distinct seasons; they are characterized by long, cold winters and mild, cool summers and there is consistent precipitation all year with no dry season and the average temperatures stays below 71.6° F in the warmest month. The three-letter breakdown for this climate zone means the following: D (Continental): The region experiences significant seasonal temperature differences, featuring freezing, snowy winters. The ‘f’ stands for ‘Fully humid,’ meaning there is no significant dry season, and precipitation is relatively even throughout the year., and lastly ‘b’ refers to ‘Warm Summer,’ meaning the summer months are warm but not hot.

According to the AW Kuchler US potential natural vegetation types, Lake Placid has a dominant vegetation type of Northern Hardwoods/Spruce (108) (using the USDA Forest Service classification system) and has a dominant vegetation form of Northern Hardwoods (23). The plant hardiness zone is 4a, meaning it is a geographic region where the average annual lowest winter temperature drops to between -30°F and -25°F and it experiences long, very cold winters and a short growing season, therefore plants that grow here must be extremely cold-hardy to survive the frigid temperatures.

The actual body of water (Lake Placid itself) consists of approximately 2,170 acres and averages about fifty feet deep; it has an elevation of 1,858 feet, is around ~4 miles long/1.5 miles wide, and has a maximum depth of 151 feet. It fills a natural geologic basin, and drains the McKenzie Mountains to the west, Whiteface Mountain to the north and Mount Whitney to the east and is divided into two lobes (East Lake and West Lake) by a peninsula at the lake’s south end. It also contains three islands: Buck, Moose and Hawk; Sunset and Shelter Straits separate the cape from Buck Island and Buck from Moose.

The village of Lake Placid developed an iron ore mining operation, and by 1840, the population of ‘North Elba’ consisted of a mere six families and was located four miles southeast of the where it is today. In 1845, the philanthropist and abolitionist Gerrit Smith arrived in the area and bought a great deal of land around the village and granted large tracts to former slaves (which is a specific, continuous area of land that serves as a distinct legal unit), and helped reformed the laws related to land ownership.

John Brown heard about Smith’s reforms and in May 1849 he left his anti-slavery activities in Kansas and bought 244 acres of land in North Elba (which he bought for a whopping $244), a parcel that later became known as the ‘Freed Slave Utopian Experiment,’ Timbuctoo. Brown was a radical abolitionist who believed that armed insurrection was the only way to overthrow slavery in the US, and unlike most anti-slavery activists of his time who advocated for peaceful political reform, he often resorted to extreme violence and guerrilla warfare to get his point across. When he was executed in 1859 following the Harpers Ferry Raid, Browne’s wife buried him at their Lake Placid home, and today you can pay a visit to ‘the John Brown Farm State Historic Site’ in North Elba (which is now a National Historic Landmark). Also on the National Register in Lake Placid is the Mount Van Hoevenberg Olympic Bobsled Run, New York Central Railroad Adirondack Division Historic District, and US Post Office.

Winter Sports: Lake Placid’s deep entanglement with winter sports began with Melvil Dewey in the late 1800’s, who at the time was the director of the New York State Library (he also invented the Dewey Decimal Classification System). Dewey (along with his wife, Annie) designed what was then called the ‘Placid Park Club’ in 1895, which was a social and recreation club, which inspired the area to change its name to Lake Placid in 1900. Choosing to ignore his skeptics, Dewey brought in a large amount of sports equipment from Europe to the Lake Placid Club in the fall of 1904, so his business didn’t have to close the following winter; luckily, it worked out well for him and was a success. Along with his son (Godfrey), Dewey eventually started promoting winter sports in the area, and as a result an iconic winter resort was born. Interestingly enough, Lake Placid is one of only three places in the world to host the Winter Olympic Games twice, the other two being St. Moritz, Switzerland in 1928 and 1948 and Innsbruck, Austria in 1964 and 1976.

George White served as the first postmaster and town supervisor of the nearby settlement of Newman (now part of the Lake Placid area) starting in 1875, and he continued to serve in these leadership roles and as a businessman through the late 19th and early 20th centuries. He built the White Opera House in 1895, which still stands today on the banks of the Chubb River and at one time had seating for 500 people (today it is the home to Lisa G’s Restaurant). As the beautiful surroundings of Lake Placid became more known to people of nearby NYC, filmmakers including Harry Handworth started to use the village and its surroundings for shooting silent films around 1914; many movies, among them News Parade, Summer Bachelors, The Avalanche, and Out of the Snows, were shot in the area.

By 1921, Lake Placid boasted a ski jump, speed skating venue, and ski association and in 1929, Melvil’s son Godfrey was able to convince the International Olympic Committee that it had the best winter sports facilities in the United States. In 1932 Melvin Dewey secured the bid to host the third ever US Olympic Winter Games, and The Lake Placid Club was the headquarters for the International Olympic Committee for the 1932 and the 1980 Winter Olympics. It is also important to mention that The LPC did not allow Jews or Catholics, but there were other hotels in the area that did cater to them: especially around the time of World War Two, many cosmopolitan refugees from Hitler’s Germany and Austria spent their summers in Lake Placid. The original, historic Lake Placid Club ceased operations as a singular resort on March 30, 1980 right after it served as the headquarters for the IOC. While the original 9,600-acre resort grounds and its massive main buildings were later largely demolished or split up, the property lives on today through multiple active and separate entities (and a massive 45-hole golf course!).

Oddly enough, one Lake Placid wasn’t enough for Melvin Dewey and in 1925 he went to Lake Stearns, Florida and proposed to their local government that they change their name to his favorite place; for some reason they agreed, and in 1927 America’s second Lake Placid was officially established.

Jack Shea (who was a resident of the village at the time), became the first person to win two gold medals when he doubled in speed skating at the 1932 Winter Olympics. Lake Placid was also the site of the legendary ‘Miracle on Ice’ hockey game that took place on February 22, 1980, when Team USA (which was made up of young American college students) beat the heavily favored Soviet Union team, 4-3. It’s worth mentioning that the Soviets were all professional athletes who had won the previous four Olympic gold medals. Also during the 1980 Winter Olympics, American speed-skater Eric Heiden won five gold medals, which is a feat that has not been accomplished since.

Nicknamed ‘The Olympic Village, Lake Placid became known internationally for hosting the Winter Olympic games in both 1932 and 1980; it also hosted the 1972 and 2023 Winter World University Games as well as the 2000 Goodwill Winter Games. The Winter Empire State Games have also been held here every February since their inception in 1981, and The Lake Placid ice dance competition takes place annually in July or August in the 1980 Olympic Arena.  The Lake Placid Summit Classic Lacrosse Tournament is held every August (since 1990) and has roughly 250 teams that participate in it. The World University Games took place there on two occasions (1972 and 2023) and they also hosted the 1972 Winter Universiade, which was an international winter sports event for college students. Lake Placid was also home to the 2023 Winter World University Games and the 2000 Goodwill Winter Games.

The Happy Hour Theatre: located directly on Mirror Lake, The Happy Hour Theatre was the first movie house in Lake Placid and was in business from 1911 to 1928. The Adirondack Theatre Corporation bought it in the 1920’s (who also owned and operated the newer Palace Theatre, which opened in 1926) on the same street. Movies were also shown several times a week at the Lake Placid Club, and in 1969, The Harbor Theatre (which was at times referred to locally as ‘The Holiday Harbor Theatre’ due to its proximity to the Holiday Harbor marina area) opened on the shores of Lake Placid and showed movies until 1986. The Palace Theatre is still operating at its original vintage location on Main Street.

Golf: Lake Placid built its first golf course in 1898 with the opening of the links at The Whiteface Inn, which was one of the first ever created in the US; the area now boasts more golf courses than any other venue in the Adirondacks. The geographic features of the Adirondacks are considered reminiscent of the Scottish landscape, which is where the game originated. Mountain golf is played at high altitudes and features courses that have steep slopes, uneven lies, and scenic views; also the thin air means less resistance, so the golf ball travels much further than it does near sea level.

The sport boomed in area during the early 1900’s thanks to the Lake Placid Club, which expanded to include the Links Course in 1909 and Mountain Course the following year, which was designed by golf legends Seymour Dunn and Alister MacKenzie. As of July 2026 Lake Placid has three main golf locations offering a total of 81 holes: The Lake Placid Club, which is a massive 45-hole facility with the Links course (18 holes), Mountain course (18 holes), and Pristine short course (9 holes). There’s also The Whiteface Club & Resort, which features an 18-hole championship course designed by Walter Travis and The Craig Wood Golf Course, which is a scenic 18-hole public course owned by the Town of North Elba.

Ironman Triathlon: Since 1999 Lake Placid has been a site for the annual Ironman Lake Placid Triathlon (officially referred to as the Athletic Brewing IRONMAN Lake Placid), which is the second oldest Ironman competition in North America; is also one of ten official Ironman Triathlons held in the continental US. The Lake Placid Ironman is one of the sport’s most legendary and honest courses and it takes full advantage of the region’s historic Olympic infrastructure as well as the demanding terrain of the Adirondack Mountains.

The 2026 competition will take place on Sunday, July 19, 2026, and athletes will take on a total grueling distance of 140.6 miles that must be finished under a strict seventeen-hour timeframe. The swimming portion consists of a 2.4 mile long loop and is held in Mirror Lake; it is highly famous for its underwater cable (which lies around five to six feet deep), which athletes visually follow like a guideline to swim perfectly straight lines. The biking part is 112 miles long and is comprised of a difficult two-loop route throughout the Adirondack Park and features over 6,000 feet of total elevation gain; it includes sweeping, fast descents down into Keene and is followed by challenging, sustained climbs back up into the mountain towns. The last part is running a full marathon: 26.2 miles along a rolling double loop that winds through downtown Lake Placid, along the river, and right past the historic Lake Placid Club. The race finishes outside the iconic Olympic Speed Skating Oval, the legendary site of the 1932 and 1980 Winter Olympic Games.

Skiing: Lake Placid is well known among winter-sports enthusiasts for its skiing, both Alpine and Nordic. Alpine skiing (which is also known as downhill skiing) emphasizes speed and adrenaline and uses gravity and ski lifts at resorts to ride down steep mountains; skis are shorter and wider and have ‘locked-in heels’ for control, and boots are stiff. Nordic skiing on the other hand (which is also referred to as cross-country skiing), relies on human power and endurance to travel across flat or rolling terrain. Skis are long and narrow, and bindings only attach at the toe, which leaves the heel free to lift for a natural walking or gliding motion.\

I’m not going to go too in depth about Whiteface (as I covered it fairly in-depth for my March article), but it is 4,867 feet tall and located in nearby Wilmington; it is around thirteen miles away from Lake Placid, and offers skiing, hiking, gondola rides, and mountain biking and is the only one of the High Peaks that can be reached by roadway. It has a vertical elevation of 3,430 feet (which is the highest vertical elevation in Eastern North America) and contains one of only sixteen bobsled runs in the Western Hemisphere.

Mirror Lake: during the cold, winter months Mirror Lake is another big draw to Lake Placid, as there’s a variety of activities to partake in, including snowshoeing, pond hockey, dogsled rides, tobogganing, cross-country skiing, and recreational ice skating on the two-mile long, plowed track that surrounds it (which was first created during the winter of 2014). The toboggan chute on Mirror Lake has been rebuilt in recent years, but there’s some cool history about its predecessor, as it was made from a recycled ski jump that was moved from its original location at the Lake Placid Club in the 1960’s. Today, the thirty-foot-high slide sends toboggans down ice covered chutes onto frozen Mirror Lake and is usually open by the beginning or middle of January and usually closes early spring (in spring 2026 operations concluded on March 6th).

The Lake Placid Sinfonietta: The area is also home to the Lake Placid Sinfonietta, a professional summer chamber orchestra that was established in 1917 and is made up of twenty top musicians from across the US. Known affectionately as ‘The Orchestra of the Adirondacks,’ outside of their summer residency, these musicians perform with prominent national symphonies (such as the Rochester Philharmonic and the Alabama Symphony) and serve on elite university music faculties. Under the leadership of Music Director Stuart Malina, the Sinfonietta structures its summer seasons around three core concert series: The Park Series (which are free, family-friendly outdoor concerts held on Wednesday evenings at 7:00 PM), The Symphony Series (a ticketed series that features full masterworks, distinguished soloists, and guest artists that are hosted on Sunday evenings at 7:30 PM across elegant local venues like St. Agnes Church), and The Adirondack Series (which is designed to strengthen regional community engagement and brings special classical and pops programming out to unique alternate venues and historic sites across the Adirondacks).

Shopping: Another big draw to Lake Placid is shopping along Main Street, which is fun to do at any time of year (although I am more likely to eat ice cream while spending money in the summer versus the winter). The cheerful stretch of roadway features a variety of different local eateries, souvenir shops, and the Lake Placid Olympic Museum; the area also features a thriving local craft beer scene, like the legendary Lake Placid Pub and Brewery (home to the famous Ubu Ale) and Big Slide Brewery.

The Wild Center: one thing that my husband and I both greatly enjoyed while on our vacation (despite not having children) was The Wild Cener, which was a fifty-minute drive from our Air BnB in Saranac Lake. Formerly known as the Natural History Museum of the Adirondacks, The Wild Center is a natural history center in Tupper Lake, NY near the center of the Adirondack Park and was founded in 1998 by Elizabeth Lowe. The museum opened in 2006 and in 2015 the outdoor Wild Walk exhibit opened to the public, which consists of over a thousand feet of bridges, pathways, and platforms.

The center mixes up the indoors and outdoors and sits on a 115-acre campus; it has five primary indoor exhibit areas (along with approximately fifty species of live animals) and outdoor exhibits that take visitors into the various ecosystems that surround the center. There are canoe trips available on the river that runs through its campus, and daily guided trail walks are also offered (which are done with complimentary snowshoes in the winter).

Site of the Future Winter Olympics?? In June 2026, New York state Governor Kathy Hochul formed an exploratory committee to study a potential joint NYC/Lake Placid bid for the 2042 Winter Olympics which will spend one year evaluating the logistical, environmental, and financial feasibility of a dual-city hosting model before presenting its recommendations. The proposed model draws inspiration from the multi-site layout demonstrated during the Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics, and current concepts propose hosting outdoor snow and sliding disciplines (like bobsleigh, luge, and skeleton) in Lake Placid’s existing venues, while NYC’s high-capacity arenas like Madison Square Garden and Barclays Center would support indoor ice events. Because the 2034 games are awarded to Salt Lake City and Switzerland is the preferred bidder for 2038, 2042 is the first available opportunity for NYC to pursue a formal bid.

Interesting Facts about Lake Placid: (1) the term ‘vacation’ was coined there in the 19th century when NYC’s elite started ‘vacating’ the city in search for the cool northern woods and fresh air of the Adirondacks each summer, and ever since then Americans have ‘gone on vacation.’

(2) Lake Placid is one of the purest lakes on earth: only 2.5% of the water on earth is fresh water, and of that only 1% is suitable for drinking. Lake Placid is included in that 1% and is classified as AA-Special, the highest rating for water quality.

Some interesting facts about The Adirondack Mountains: they’re so big you could fit Glacier, Yosemite, Great Smoky Mountains, Yellowstone, and Grand Canyon National Parks inside of it. They span an incredible 6.1 million acres and cover almost 20% of New York state, and they are the largest protected natural area in the lower 48 states: more than 2.5 million acres of its mountains, streams, and woods are protected under the Forever Wild status, which was established in 1892 and added to the New York State Constitution in 1894. It prohibits the removal, sale, or destruction of timber and ensures that the forests cannot be developed, logged, or used for commercial purposes and guarantees that they remain as wild forest lands forever.

A map of the Village of Lake Placid in the Adirondacks.
Some laws and rules surrounding Lake Placid.
A map of the major roadways in Lake Placid along with its major landmarks.
A map of Lake Placid courtesy of the local Chamber of Commerce.
A 1953 US Geological Survey Map of Lake Placid.
Lake Placid in 1979. Photo: AP Archives/ADKtaste.com
New York’s Fresh Surface Water Classifications, courtesy of Google.
A guide to decipher the Köppen classification system, courtesy of Valerya Milovanova.
A graph showing plant hardiness zones.
A picture of philanthropist Gerrit Smith., who was one of 19th-century America’s most prominent social reformers, abolitionists, and philanthropists; at one point was considered to be the wealthiest landowner in New York state. He died on December 28, 1874 while visiting relatives in New York City.
A picture of John Brown, who spent much of his adult life moving across Ohio, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and New York; he attempted numerous vocations during his lifetime, and over the years found work as a tanner, sheep drover, cattle trader, surveyor, and land speculator; unfortunately, he was plagued by poor economic conditions and questionable business decisions and suffered at least fifteen failed business endeavors and was the target of dozens of lawsuits.
Melville Louis Kossuth ‘Melvil’ Dewey, an American librarian and educator who collected many accolades over the years: he created the Dewey Decimal system of library classification, was a founder of the Lake Placid Club, was a chief librarian at Columbia College, was a founder of what would later become the Columbia University School of Library Service and was a founding member of the American Library Association. Although his contributions to the modern library are widely recognized, his legacy is marred by his sexual harassment of female colleagues, as well as his racism and antisemitism; he died on December 26, 1931.
Some information about Florida’s Lake Placid.
George White. When he first settled in the area in 1875 he lived in the only house standing, and during this time the town of Newman was separate from Lake Placid.
The 1980 USA men’s hockey team.
An advertisement for a book about the ‘Miracle on Ice’ hockey game that was published in The Buffalo News on March 16, 1980.
Roni at ‘Marion’s cabin’ at the Happy Pastures Campground (which is located located between Skaneateles and Otisco Lakes in the town of Spafford), which is where we stayed the first night of our journey (it worked out that on Friday I took a half day at work and my husband’s soccer game was cancelled so we decided to roll with it and book a place somewhere mid-way). It was a pretty bare bones and didn’t even have a bathroom (I’m willing to take a walk to pee, because I’m cheap), but it did have a fire pit, a picnic table, and rustic surroundings.
The logo for Happy Pastures Campground.
An aerial shot of Happy Pastures Campground, located between Skaneateles and Otisco Lakes in the town of Spafford.
The iconic ‘Entering Adirondack Park’ sign is a beloved landmark for travelers arriving in Upstate New York. Shaped like the unique, jagged outline of the Adirondack Blue Line border, the traditional sign features a rustic wooden backing with distinct yellow or gold lettering. They are managed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and mark the boundaries of the 6-million-acre park. Photo courtesy of John Ziolkowski.
Roni in front of the iconic wooden welcome sign for the village of Lake Placid, which acknowledges its famous history as the site of the 1932 and 1980 Olympic Winter Games.
Roni at Origins Coffee Company, which is a popular, women-owned specialty shop located in the heart of Lake Placid that is known for its cozy atmosphere complete with an indoor fireplace. It serves as a favorite local hub for specialty espresso drinks, fresh bakery items, and chef-driven breakfast/lunch options.
A screen grab from the Origin’s Coffee website about the owners.
Formerly known as ‘The Lake Placid Antique Center,’ Vintage Antiques opened in the early 1980’s and is located right in the heart of downtown Lake Placid across from the Olympic Oval; it features an extensive variety of antiques, 1932 and 1980 Olympic memorabilia, vintage ice skates, and custom stained-glass lamps.
The Penalty Box Arcade in Lake Placid, which opened in March 2025. The shop has a deeply nostalgic historical concept that seamlessly blends the local heritage of hockey with a classic retro gaming experience; it was established by passionate local hockey players and fans who wanted to build an energetic, family-friendly space celebrating both the sport and retro gaming culture.
Originally constructed in 1922 to accommodate a booming student population, Lake Placid Middle and High School was expanded in the mid-1930’s (with the assistance from the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works). During the first Lake Placid Winter Olympics in 1932, the adjacent outdoor Speed Skating Oval (which was co-owned by the school district) served as the venue where local legend Jack Shea won two gold medals, and during the second Winter Olympics, the school was issued a temporary liquor license and served as a bar for visitors, standing out as the only high school in the US to ever hold one.
The James C. Sheffield Speed Skating Oval in Lake Placid, which is a world-renowned outdoor sports facility that is deeply rooted in Olympic history and is celebrated as the venue where speed skater Eric Heiden won five individual gold medals during the 1980 Olympic Games. Located in the heart of Lake Placid village, it remains one of the last outdoor, refrigerated Olympic-sized speed skating ovals still operating in the US.
The speed skating circle in front of Lake Placid Middle and High School, which adapts dynamically to the seasons: during the winter, it opens up for outdoor ice skating and continues to host long-track speed skating competitions and training sessions. In the summer months, the ice is cleared so visitors can enjoy outdoor inline skating. Skate rentals (for both ice and inline skating) are available directly at the oval. Photo courtesy of lakeplacid.com.
Skaters enjoying The James C. Sheffield Speed Skating Oval in Lake Placid, located in front of the local Middle and High School. Photo courtesy of lakeplacid.com.
An aerial shot of the village of Lake Placid. Photo courtesy of ADKplace.com
John Amos Shea (aka ‘The Chief’) was a double-gold medalist in speed skating at the 1932 Olympics and was the first American to win two gold medals at one Winter Olympics; Shea died on January 22, 2002.
Roni standing outside of the Herb Brooks Arena at the Lake Placid Olympic Center, which is famous for hosting the 1980 ‘Miracle on Ice’ hockey game (at that time it was known as the Olympic Center Ice Rink). The venue was recently renovated and features three indoor ice rinks and the outdoor speed skating oval, and the museum inside (the Lake Placid Olympic Museum) showcases artifacts and mementos from the 1932 and 1980 Winter Olympic Games.
Herb Brooks, who was an American ice hockey player and the head coach of the 1980 U.S. Men’s Olympic Ice Hockey Team and is best known as the mastermind behind the historic ‘Miracle on Ice’ game; he died on August 11, 2003.
Dr. Eric Heiden, who is an iconic American orthopedic surgeon and former long-track speed skater who is widely considered one of the greatest athletes in Olympic history: he became a household name at the 1980 games by achieving a feat that remains unmatched in winter sports when he became the only athlete to win five individual gold medals in a single Olympics. Notably, the night before his final 10,000-meter race, Heiden stayed up late cheering on the US ‘Miracle on Ice’ game and overslept the following morning, but he still went on to win gold after rushing to the track with only a few slices of bread for breakfast.
Roni in front of the Lake Placid Club Lodges, a resort property located at 30 Lake Placid Club Way. The main building features classic Adirondack-style architecture, which is recognizable by its dark brown facade, dark green window frames and trim, and prominent wooden balconies.
The Devlin (which is located at 2764 Main Street), formerly known as ‘Art Devlin’s Olympic Motor Inn.’ The property sits on the exact birthplace of Art Devlin Senior, who operated the inn for decades and was a central community figure who helped secure the 1980 Winter Olympics for Lake Placid. The distinctive Olympic rings mounted on the building’s facade were installed by Devlin before 1962, and because they predated the International Olympic Committee’s official trademarking of the symbol, the property was legally grandfathered in to display them. The main office lobby features a large, glass display case showcasing Art Devlin’s lifelong collection of international ski jumping trophies, medals, and unique Olympic memorabilia.
A picture of the original ‘Art Devlin’s Olympic Motor Inn.’ Photo courtesy of thedevlinny.com
Arthur ‘Art’ Donovan Devlin Senior, an Olympic Ski Jumper/Community Leader and a native and lifelong ambassador of Lake Placid that has a long standing legacy that spans multiple areas: during World War II he served as a B-24 bomber pilot in the US Army Air Corps, flying 50 combat missions over Europe; he went on to earn three Purple Hearts and three Distinguished Flying Crosses. He qualified for five US Olympic teams (1940, 1948, 1952, 1956, and 1960) and competed in the 1952 and 1956 Winter Games. He was inducted into the US Ski & Snowboard Hall of Fame in 1963 and for over two decades, served as a television sports commentator and color analyst for CBS and ABC Sports, frequently acting as the ‘voice of ski jumping’ during Olympic broadcasts. He was also a vice-president of the organizing committee that successfully lobbied to bring the 1980 Winter Olympic Games to Lake Placid.
Roni in front of Wildwood on the Lake, a family-owned, three-star lakeside motel located in Lake Placid. Operated by the Weber family since 1971, it functions as a relaxing ‘mini-resort’ destination and serves as a scenic, budget-friendly base camp for exploring the surrounding Adirondack region.
The Town House Lodge in Lake Placid. Over the decades, it transitioned from a mid-century, roadside motor lodge into a modern, retro-inspired boutique property. It originated during the post-WWII American travel boom and was designed as a classic roadside motel that provided affordable, straightforward lodging for families, road-trippers, and outdoor enthusiasts coming to hike the High Peaks.
The Maple Leaf Inn operates as a classic, comfortable 2-star budget-friendly motor lodge property located at 2234 Saranac Avenue. Positioned along Highway 86, the inn sits close to major landmarks like Paradox Bay, Mirror Lake, and downtown Main Street. Rather than the massive, all-inclusive luxury resort structures of the 19th century, the Maple Leaf Inn features a direct-access layout typical of mid-century motor lodges, and is engineered for independent tourists traveling via personal vehicles to nearby trailheads, ski slopes, and historic venue.
Roni posing in front of The Pines Inn, a historic three-star hotel located at 2302 Saranac Ave in Lake Placid. Built originally in 1907 by Albert Stickney, from 1923 through the mid-20th century, it was famously known as the St. Moritz Hotel and operated as a bustling luxury getaway for historical figures (like Albert Einstein). It is recognized as the tallest building in Lake Placid Village, offering multi-story alpine views of the High Peaks.
Roni outside of The Grand Adirondack Hotel is a historic, newly renovated 4-star property located at 2520 Main Street in Lake Placid. Originally built in 1927 as the Hotel Marcy, it has just a 5-minute walk from the Olympic Center and offers modern amenities, like high-speed internet and pet-friendly rooms. The hotel features the Marcy Bar for locally inspired cocktails and artisanal dishes and is most famous for the Cloudsplitter, a seasonal rooftop bar that provides panoramic views of Mirror Lake and the Adirondack High Peaks skyline.
A Facebook ad for an event for the Cloudsplitter Rooftop Bar that was posted on October 9, 2024.
Lake Placid Inn on Main Street. Situated directly on Lake Placid’s historic Main Street, these luxury apartment-style suites were designed based on direct feedback from early guests looking to stay in the heart of the village and feature full kitchens and accommodate larger groups of up to eight people.
Roni in front of Generations Restaurant, a family-owned restaurant located at the Golden Arrow Lakeside Resort. German immigrants Wini and Stefanie Holderied bought the motel in 1974 and turned the property into a resort and opened the restaurant, which is currently being run by their grandchildren. The eatery offers casual American and Bavarian food and uses fresh, local ingredients from nearby Adirondack farms.
Roni in front of Golden Arrow Lakeside Resort, a family-friendly destination located at 2559 Main Street. Situated directly in the center of the village, it sits right on the shores of Mirror Lake. It offers immediate walking access to local boutiques, dining, and the historic Lake Placid Olympic Center and guests can access a private white sand beach with complimentary summer rentals for kayaks, canoes, rowboats, and stand-up paddleboards and the property hosts Generations Restaurant, which serves meals crafted from locally sourced Adirondack ingredients
St. Agnes Catholic Church in Lake Placid, which is a prominent parish located just up the hill from Mirror Lake and one block off Main Street. It serves both the local community and visitors to the Adirondack region with a beautiful worship environment featuring artfully designed altars and stained-glass windows.
Roni in front of St. Agnes Church, which is a Neo-Gothic brick Catholic church located at 169 Hillcrest Avenue in Lake Placid, New York. Construction on the current building began in 1924 and remarkably, instead of dismantling the previous wooden building that was built in 1915, the crew literally built the new building directly over the top of the old one.
Roni in front of Saint Agnes School in Lake Placid, which is a private, Catholic early elementary center that provides a co-educational, faith-based learning community. It offers year-round childcare tailored for infants and toddlers and has academic programs ranging from pre-school through the third grade.
The contemporary Lake Placid Baptist Church that operates today has a unique origin story that is tied directly to the 1980 Winter Olympics: during the games Southern Baptists organized a massive evangelism and outreach campaign to minister to athletes, locals, and global tourists. Out of that temporary Olympic ministry, a small, dedicated group of believers saw a permanent need for a Gospel-centered community in the mountain resort town and they formally planted the modern Lake Placid Baptist Church later that same year.
The primary Jewish house of worship in the immediate area is the Lake Placid Synagogue, which serves as a historic, welcoming spiritual and cultural hub. It hosts regular Shabbat services, educational programming, community events, and seasonal High Holy Day services. The congregation also maintains the Lake Placid Synagogue Cemetery, located nearby on Old Military Road.
The Lake Placid Synagogue is the only year-round synagogue in the Adirondack Park.
One of the only things that remains of Melvin Dewey’s ‘Lake Placid Club’ is its golf course (which my husband played the last day of our trip), which is operated by the neighboring Crowne Plaza Lake Placid; it is the only 45-hole golf property in the Adirondacks.
A wide-shot of Main Street in Lake Placid. The locally owned and operated Ben & Jerry’s is located at 2423 Main Street (directly across from the local movie theatre) directly in the heart of Lake Placid. Operating as a classic franchised scoop shop, it serves up the brand’s signature euphoric flavors, freshly baked waffle cones, sundaes, and custom ice cream cakes. While the shop is a staple, it faces friendly local competition; for example, the nearby local establishment ‘Emma’s Lake Placid Creamery’ recently beat them in a community wide ‘Battle of the Cones’ contest.
The Bookstore Plus, located on the main drag in Lake Placid. It was created in 1973 and was originally opened by Nancy Beattie as a music and art shop; in 1977, she acquired an existing book shop and combined the operations to form the bookstore as it is known today.
The far end of Main Street in Lake Placid (we were standing at Stewarts).
A view of the mountains and Mirror Lake in the village of Lake Placid.
A map of Mirror Lake, featuring its characteristics and bathymetry, which is the science of measuring and mapping the depths and terrain of underwater environments.
A giant Adirondack chair sitting on the property shared by The Dack Shack restaurant and its sister deli, Simply Gourmet. The eatery was established in 2015 and before it was turned into The Dack Shack, the building famously served as a classic Howard Johnson’s restaurant.
Toni in front of The Mellow Moose Cannabis Company, which is a licensed recreational cannabis dispensary located in Lake Placid. As the first dispensary approved for off-site consumption in the village following a local referendum, and it opened in late 2025 and occupies a newly renovated retail space that previously housed CrossFit Lake Placid.
Roni posing with a (stuffed) moose at ‘The Mellow Moose Cannabis Company.’
A poster of Roni inside ‘The Mellow Moose Cannabis Company.’
Roni posing with some posters inside the ‘Locker Room 5,’ a local sporting goods and memorabilia store at 2573 Main Street. Its owners Jake and Erica opened the shop in 2017 and they named their store after the ‘Locker Room 5’ at the nearby Herb Brooks Arena, which is the famous room the U.S. Men’s Hockey Team used during the 1980 ‘Miracle on Ice.’
Roni posing with another poster inside the ‘Locker Room 5.’
Roni and the ’round building, located at 2345 Saranac Avenue is a former 1980 Winter Olympics gathering spot. The Adirondack Land Trust bought the vacant structure in 2026 for $2.1 million. They will renovate it into their new nonprofit headquarters.
The inside of the ‘tound building,’ that was originally built for the 1980 Olympics as the Austrian House for athletes and fans and was later repurposed completely as a sporting goods store then again as the Aroma Round coffee shop; it was recently purchased by the Adirondack Land Trust to become their permanent headquarters.
A b&w picture of The Palace Theatre, which opened in 1926 and was originally named ‘The Adirondack Theatre.’ The building featured vaudeville acts and silent films accompanied by a rare, 1926 Robert Morton theatre organ. The local Clark family purchased the theatrr in 1961. Reginald Clark bought it as a wedding gift for his wife, Barbara. The Clark family still operates and owns the cinema today.
A 1926 Robert Morton theatre organ much like the one originally at Palace Theatre. Located in the largest main auditorium, the instrument is valued at roughly $357,000 (in modern equivalents) and includes rare acoustic ‘toys,’ like drums and whistles that were used for silent film soundtracks.
Roni in front of The Palace Theatre, which opened on Main Street in 1926 as a single-screen venue for both movies and vaudeville shows (which is a popular form of live variety entertainment in North America from the 1880’s to the 1930’s that featured ten to fifteen unrelated acts on a single bill, ranging from comedians and acrobats to musicians, magicians, and trained animals). Bought by Reg Clark in 1961, the historic venue was later renovated into a four-screen theatre while maintaining its original 1920’s vintage charm, and to this day it retains many of its original Neo-Classical architectural features, including cast plaster chandeliers, wall sconces, and a 1926 Robert Morton pipe organ (which is one of the only remaining theatre organs in the US).
The inside of The Palace Theatre in Lake Placid. The auditorium’s ceiling originally featured painted angels watching over its patrons but they were covered over in the 1930’s with acoustic material to accommodate the transition to ‘talkies’ (which were early motion pictures that incorporated synchronized recorded dialogue, music, and sound effects).
Roni in front of Adirondack Decorative Arts & Crafts, which is three-story shop featuring Adirondack-themed items, including gifts, décor, furniture and handmade goods.
Roni in front of the Post Office in Lake Placid, which was designed and built in 1935–1936 and is one of a number of post offices in New York State designed by the Office of the Supervising Architect of the Treasury Department under Louis A. Simon. The building is in the Colonial Revival style and is a one-story, five-bay, steel-framed building on a raised foundation with a cast-stone watertable and clad in orange/buff-colored brick. The interior features a group of murals executed in 1937 by Henry Billings.
It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1988.
Roni and the Adirondack Community Church in Lake Placid, which is made of stone and was built on the shores of Mirror Lake in 1927. The facility expanded in 1958 and underwent modern renovations in the 21st century to improve accessibility; the congregation operates as a United Methodist church while maintaining a community-focused spirit.
Lake Placid Pub & Brewery, which is considered the area’s pioneer craft brewery and spans three floors overlooking Mirror Lake.
An advertisement for Ubu Ale, which is a famous flagship craft beer brewed by the Lake Placid Pub & Brewery that is highly recognizable throughout the Adirondack region. It is an English-style ale (though often noted for having distinct, hardy characteristics) and is a deep garnet red to dark brown in color and features rich flavors of dark fruit and roasted malt, hints of toasty chocolate, and a slightly bitter finish; it has an ABV of 7.0%. and a Bitterness (IBU) of 33 (which ranges from 0 to 120+).
The Lake Placid Volunteer Fire Department, which was established in 1905 and serves the community of Lake Placid and the surrounding Town of North Elba.
Roni at the A&W Restaurant in Wilmington, New York (just outside of Lake Placid), which has served the Adirondacks since 1965. This seasonal roadside stand serves traditional A&W favorites like Papa Burgers, Coney Dogs, cheese curds, and root beer made fresh daily in frosty mugs. This was the second time we stayed in the same Air BnB and I had no idea it was there until two days into our second trip.
A picture of the original A&W Restaurant in Wilmington when it was constructed in 1965.
Roni posing outside of Lake Placid’s American Legion Post 326, which dates back to 1919. The current headquarters is located at 2710 Main Street and was a former rooming house.
Roni outside of the Lake Placid Legion Post 326.
Roni at the bar at the American Legion in Lake Placid.
Wiseguy’s Bar in Lake Placid, which is described as casual dining joint that offers ‘classic pub grub,’ a variety of adult drinks, and bar games like pool & dart boards.
Roni standing in front of the Lake Placid Public Library, which overlooks Mirror Lake and features over 27,000 items, free WiFi, and public computers; it also hosts a children’s room, a local history archive, and the Guy Brewster Hughes Art Gallery.
Roni standing in front of some historic lake pictures (and Mirror Lake) at the Lake Placid Public Library.
Roni at a miniature desk at the Lake Placid Library.
Roni at a miniature Adirondack chair at the Lake Placid Library.
Roni in front of the Lake Placid Olympic and Paralympic Training Center, which opened in November 1982 following the Winter Olympics and specializes in sports like bobsled, skeleton, luge, and biathlon. The campus features a 96-bed athletic facility and is currently home to one of three US Olympic Training Centers, which caters to a variety of different sports including speed skating, boxing, canoeing, kayaking, judo, rowing, synchronized swimming, team handball, water polo, and wrestling.
Roni outside of the Lake Placid Olympic and Paralympic Training Center.
Roni at the top of Whiteface Mountain, which transforms into a premier Adirondack summer destination during the summer months and offers a variety of high-alpine activities, from scenic drives and gondola rides to guided nature hikes and disc golf.
Whiteface in the summer months. Picture courtesy of Lincoln Riddle.
Roni in front of The Lake Placid Toboggan Chute, located on Parkside Drive on Mirror Lake and adjacent to the Post Office. It has been in operation since the 1960’s and is currently being run by The North Elba Park District. Recently rebuilt from the ground up, our current structure replaced a 30′ high converted ski jump trestle.
Roni in downtown Saranac Lake, a small mountain village with a deeply unique history. Long before it became a popular year-round destination for outdoor recreation, it was recognized worldwide as a pioneer center for public health, scientific research, and fresh-air medical treatment.
Roni at Bitters & Bones, a popular craft microbrewery and rustic kitchen located in downtown Saranac Lake, just a short drive from Lake Placid (we went on the way home from The Wild Center). Known for its unpretentious, community-driven atmosphere, the venue blends the charm of a local hometown tavern with an elevated culinary and brewing experience. We really enjoyed our food and out waitress was very nice.
Roni sitting on the menu at Bitters & Bones.
Romano’s Saranac Lanes & Family Fun Center, located at 11 Bloomingdale Avenue in Saranac Lake. It was known as Mar-Mac Bowling Center from 1955 to 1976 and in 2006 retired NYC correction officer Jeffrey Romano and his wife Cathy bought and renovated the building and renamed it Romano’s Saranac Lanes.
Roni outside of The Wild Center. Original picture courtesy of The Wild Center.
An aerial shot of The Wild Center in Saranac Lake taken from their website.
A Google Maps view of The Wild Center taken from their website.
Roni standing next to a cloud and fog simulation machine located at The Wild Center. It is meant to be an interactive exhibit, and visitors are encouraged to touch, swirl, and feel the dense vapor to learn how clouds and fog form.
Roni with an interactive fruit and vegetable exhibit at The Wild Center.
Roni in front of a painting at The Wild Center titled ‘Keep an Eye on the (green) Horizon’ that was created by Akwesasne Mohawk artist David Kanietakeron Fadden; it features Lillyana Thompson-Garrow, a young Akwesasne Mohawk environmental advocate, standing with her arms wide open toward the sky under a flying bird. The mural serves as a central centerpiece for the centers ‘Climate Solutions’ exhibition.
Roni standing next to a vintage Western Electric Sculptura telephone, that is often referred to as a ‘donut phone’ due to its distinctive circular shape. Manufactured in the 1960’s/1970’s, this particular model features a push-button keypad and is considered a space-age or mod classic, reflecting the aesthetic of that era.
Roni in front of a display that is a part of the award-winning ‘Climate Solutions’ exhibition located inside The Wild Center. The interactive grid consists of rotating wooden tiles featuring inspiring quotes from climate leaders, scientists, and indigenous activists, that is beautifully paired with custom illustrations by local artists. It focuses on humanity’s deep interconnection with the natural world and how grassroots efforts can heal the planet.
Roni in front of a paper bird display at The Wild Center that features hundreds of colorful origami shapes hung like flying butterflies and birds across a prominent green backdrop.
Roni in front of an ADK Map Moss Wall located at The Wild Center, which is a ‘collage’ of the outline of Adirondack Park (often referred to as the Blue Line) and made out of real, sustainably harvested moss specimens and other natural materials.
Roni in front of a display at The Wild Center that highlights how unique flora adapts to acidic, nutrient-poor wetland environments. The interpretive text details a special adaptation called ‘layering,’ where the lower, former branches of an old tree touch the surrounding peat, take root, and eventually grow into entirely new, independent trees.
Roni in front of an indoor bog habitat exhibit at The Wild Center, which replicates a classic northern wetland ecosystem that largely consists of living sphagnum moss, which acts as a dense sponge holding moisture and maintaining the acidic environment needed for flora.
Another picture of Roni in front of an indoor bog habitat exhibit at The Wild Center; a bog is a soft, spongy wetland ecosystem that is characterized by acidic, nutrient-poor water as well as the accumulation of decaying plant matter, primarily sphagnum moss and peat.
Roni in front of a grassy exhibit at The Wild Cener.
Roni with some Painted Turtles, a common domestic species that are also often found on the trails of The Wild Center and as well as Greenleaf Pond.
A painted turtle, which is the most widespread native turtle in North America and is known for its strikingly bright markings. It lives in slow-moving waters from southern Canada to northern Mexico and features a smooth, relatively flat upper shell that is dark green or black, and its edges boast distinct red and yellow pattern. Their skin is dark and has vivid yellow and red stripes running down the head, neck, and limbs; they also have characteristic yellow spots right behind their eyes. Adult females reach four to ten inches in length, while males are notably smaller and usually top out at around seven inches.
Roni in front of a common garter snake, a frequent resident and native ambassador animal at The Wild Center.
Roni with some Wood Ducks at The Wild Center, which are colorful perching ducks that live in wooded swamps and marshes. They are cavity nesters, meaning they lay eggs inside tree holes rather than on the ground, and females are the only North American waterfowl that raise two broods per year. Male Wood Ducks have bold, iridescent feathers, a crested head, and bright red eyes where female ones have gray-brown bodies and white teardrop shapes around their eyes. Adult ducks mainly eat seeds, nuts, and aquatic plants, where ducklings eat insects and spiders.
A female (l) and male (r) Wood Duck.
It’s hard to tell, but if you look super close there’s an otter in the top of this picture. The Wild Center is home to four North American River Otters, who are named Scarlett, Rohsnore, Tawine, and Gary.
Three of the four otters that are currently at The Wild Center (this must have been taken before Gary joined their crew).
A North American River Otter.
Roni in front of a cross-section model of a carnivorous pitcher plant, which is found within The Naturalist’s Cabinet in the main indoor exhibit hall as part of an exhibit that highlights the Adirondack bog ecosystem. Bogs have highly acidic, nutrient-poor soil, forcing plants like pitchers (Sarracenia purpurea) and sundews to supplement their nutrition by capturing and digesting insects.
Roni in front of a cross-section of earth showcasing distinct geological and soil layers, which is featured as part of a subterranean educational display at The Wild Center.
Roni in front of an interactive display or model from The Wild Center, which showcases a macro view of two soil-dwelling invertebrates, specifically a segmented arthropod with pairs of legs on each body segment (which is commonly found breaking down organic matter in the forest floor) as well as the larval stage of a large beetle (like the stag or scarab beetle).
Roni in front of a taxidermized mount of an Eastern Coyote inside the Dermestid Beetle Exhibit at The Wild Center, which is often referred to as a coywolf due to historical hybridization, which is a term for a genetic hybrid of coyotes, wolves, and domestic dogs. The exhibit is meant to give visitors a unique look at how natural history museums sometimes utilize flesh-eating dermestid beetles to clean tissue off of animal bones, which helps prepare skeletal specimens for study and display.
Roni posing with a gray wolf skull replica, which has a pronounced sagittal crest along the top, a long snout, and distinctly large canine and carnassial teeth that were adapted for a carnivorous diet.
Roni in front of a topographical terrain model of the Adirondack Mountains featured at The Wild Center; the scale model represents the regional peaks and valleys of the six-million-acres of the Adirondack Parks.
Roni in front of an interactive, high-tech globe that displays real-time satellite views from space, including live storms, airplanes, and climate data that is located in the Planet Adirondack wing of The Wild Center.
Roni at an area at The Wild Center where you can view the natural wildlife in its natural setting.
Roni on Fen Trail, the primary, one mile, fully outdoor loop trail that winds through the forest and leads to a wetland area near Raquette River.
A picture of part of the Raquette River Roll, which is a ball run experience on Fen Trail.
Roni perched on a large-scale stickwork sculpture titled ‘Hopscotch’ that was created by artist Patrick Dougherty; the immersive piece of artwork was created using locally sourced saplings that were woven together by the creator as well as a team of volunteers.
A full view of Hopscotch. picture courtesy of The Wild Center Instagram’s page.
Roni posing on the banks of Raquette River, which connects to the larger Tupper Lake.
The giant spider at The Wild Center, which is a massive, oversized art sculpture on the outdoor Wild Walk treetop trail that hovers over a giant, human-sized rope spider web that guests can climb and safely stand on.
Roni in the interactive treehouse outside at The Wild Center, which covers more than 1,000 feet of bridges and platforms, which allows visitors to walk forty feet above the ground, and experience the Adirondack forest from a completely different perspective.
Roni posing with a trail marker at The Wild Center that serves as a visual gateway and helps to guide hundreds of thousands of visitors as they set out to explore the property’s forested paths.
Sofus Lotus, who is also known as the ‘Listening Troll.’ One of his favorite things to do is lie down with his ear pressed against the earth and listen to its rhythm, and by being quiet and listening carefully he is able to hear all the crackle, thud, and buzz happening right beneath his feet.
Roni posing with Rosa Sunfinger, who is a shy, introverted troll who loves to care for plants and other green creatures. Her face is as gentle as her personality, and she always has a sweet, sunny smile on her cheeks.
Roni and Rosa Sunfinger; despite being a tad introverted, Sunfinger is not afraid of speaking up if she has to, however when she does, she chooses her words carefully and finds that the best way of expressing herself is through nature and plants.
Roni posing with Basse Buller, who is known as ‘The Painting Troll.’ This troll tends to be all over the place and likes to spread his message in mud paint on every available surface, and is a wild child at heart.
Another picture of Basse Buller, who is widely recognized as the artistic ‘wild child’ of the group and is known for using mud paint, stones, leaves, and sticks to paint on every available surface in nature.
Ronja Redeye, who is the known as the ‘Speaker Troll’ and is the official leader of the group (despite being the smallest); Ronja’s mission is to save humans and reconnect them with nature, and her eyes turn red when she is passionate and she has a mighty voice.
Roni with the Kamma Cam troll; known as the ‘Treasure Troll,’ she has a unique personality, and finds human trash beautiful and wonders why people throw so many things away.
Toni with Ibbi Pip, a troll that is known as the ‘Birdhouse Troll’ that hangs colorful birdhouses around the forest to remind humans to care for nature.
The birdhouses leading to the troll, Ibbi Pip. She likes to hang colorful birdhouses around the forest to teach people to care for nature.