- Feb 20, 2014
- Reaction score
The de-escalation is a oddity and certainly not common in serial killers. However, it was generally never believed that they were married men living "normal" lives when they weren't committing murders either, except BTK and Gary Ridgeway shot that theory all to heck.
I just fail to see how DNA is not conclusive evidence that DeSalvo was the killer. I haven't gotten to the Mary Sullivan chapter yet, but I assume the prime suspect was known to her on some level? But DeSalvo was not. So, how on earth was his DNA there?
That is just a bit too much coincidence for me. The DNA of the guy who confessed to 13 murders, including Mary Sullivan, is found at the murder scene. He did not know her socially. What other possible explanation is there?
He has to be the killer of Mary. Given that, and given the various profiles of his victims in the sex crimes, that do not seem to be disputed, it stands to reason he was the Boston Strangler.
Prior to the DNA, for years and years, I was convinced he was not the strangler. I hate it when my theories get shot to heck. This is the second big theory I held onto for as long as I could, and finally had to give up but I really don't see any other conclusion on this one. At least I was right on Sam Sheppard.
Of course, that doesn't mean he killed all of them, although I am also leaning to him being the killer of Sophie Clark. I realize he described her shoes incorrectly but the high heels could have been part of his fantasy. Obviously he really was nuts. I had previously held her death as one of the ones that really made no sense with her being African American and, of course, the first young viticm. But I really don't think that is relevent in this particular case.
In spite of what the OJ jury tought, IMO, DNA does not lie.
Again, good questions. It's true DNA doesn't lie. But it doesn't always prove culpability or innocence. A sample of DNA not belonging to DeSalvo was taken from Ms. Sullivan's body. It DID match that of the prime suspect in the case. (He had been introduced to her a day or so before the murder; but told police he had heard of her while she lived on the Cape.) Foreign DNA not belonging to the suspect and also not belonging to DeSalvo was also found on her underwear. So that's two DNAs independent of DeSalvo's that have to be factored into the equation.
The young women living in the apartment had numerous male visitors, day and night, so DNA belonging to those guys would have been present on the premises. And it doesn't mean they're guilty...or innocent.
Another factor is that there was never any other physical evidence nor eyewitness testimony to link DeSalvo to any of the crimes.
If DeSalvo's DNA had been found on Mary's body, I'd agree with you. I am not altogether sure how it got on the blanket. Ten years ago, the state crime lab said the blanket was untestable for DNA.