OH OH - Jerry, 28, Linda, 23, & Debbie Bricca, 4, Bridgetown, 25 Sept 1966

I just lost my entire message...POOF! Isn't it lovely when that happens after spending a half hour on it? I'm working on an Amazon Fire tablet and have no idea how to copy/paste url's. I listened to two different podcasts....one at True Crime Garage which can be found at the Itunes store for free. Just use Google and type in true crime garage bricca murders ITunes and it will pop up for you. The other podcast was from the Bill Cunningham radio show and if you type in the same info at Google it will show you a link to that show. Warning: Bill C. loves to hear himself talk and he jumps around quite a bit. Just fast forward to get to the Bricca murders.
What I wanted to mention is that one of these podcasts claims that there were problems in the Bricca marriage, and I would have to agree if indeed the blood type of the semen obtained at autopsy did not belong to her husband. The coroner refused to say whether she was raped during the attack but would only say there was evidence she had intercourse up to 48 hrs. prior to the crime. I'm just wondering why the semen sample hasn't been compared to their lead suspect. Of course, you may need his family's permission for an exhumation so maybe the family refused?
Let me know your thoughts.
 
One of the podcasts was the Bill Cunningham radio show...just go to Google and type in Bill Cunningham Bricca murders and a link will pop up for you. The other podcast was True Crime Garage which I found for free at the ITunes store. Go to Google and type in true crime garage bricca murder and it will show you a link. Bill C. Loves to hear himself talk so you will need to do a lot of fast forwarding. I think this podcast was the one that reported there were problems in the marriage and that Linda was two months pregnant when they got married. They also discussed that the semen obtained during autopsy was B+ and that it did not belong to Jerry. The coroner refused to say whether Linda was raped during the attack. He would only say that she had had intercourse up to two days prior to the murders.
 
d0deb2a4-5dee-461f-bf9b-06c9b24824cb-Debbie-Bricca.jpg
5bb0c549-8f87-41d5-8f81-f48b8fb0bbe6-Linda-Bricca.jpg
deb8eb84-b75a-41c0-9c16-f1e9710bc679-Gerald-Bricca.jpg



Debbie Bricca, age 4, Linda Bricca, 23, and Jerry Bricca, 28
Murdered 25 September 1966

-----------------------------------------------
Bill Cunningham on 700WLW
Bill Cunningham talks Bricca Murders 2/20/20

LINK:
Bill Cunningham talks Bricca Murders 2/20/20 - Bill Cunningham on 700WLW (podcast)

--------------------------------------------------
Author dives deep into city's most enduring murder mystery: The Bricca family massacre

LINK:
Cincinnati author examines Bricca family massacre in new book

 
In his book about this case, "Summer's Almost Gone, author J. T. Townsend writes three people could have entered the Bricca home on the night of the murder - two adult males and an adult woman. Apparently, the men were there to deal with the husband and wife while the woman was to stay with the child.
 
Last edited:
Anyone in the Cincy area?

Think you’re an ace amateur sleuth or a crack private eye? Then match wits with local crime historian and Queen City Gothic author JT Townsend as he exhumes Cincinnati’s most infamous murder mystery in this riveting 4-week class. Based on his upcoming book Summer’s Almost Gone, this interactive class will focus on the 1966 Bricca family murders.

Townsend was given unprecedented access to the Bricca case file – laden with information that never saw the light of print. And as an armchair detective stalking a legendary mystery, Townsend is not shackled by the presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt. All evidence is admissible – hearsay, rumors, gossip, and undertones.


University of Cincinnati | Communiversity


Some photos here on Townsend's FB:

JT Townsend, True Crime Detective


I am curious if anyone considered the wife as a possible killer, or at least the catalyst to the murder, which might have been committed by her husband. This was running through my mind during the last couple chapters of the book. Try as I might to find reasons it might not make sense - surely after all the research it was considered and dismissed with other evidence - it was never mentioned as a possible theory.

There are several reasons I considered Fred’s wife was intimately involved, starting with Linda herself.

Linda’s Maternal Change of Heart: I found it curious how Linda was quite vocal about not wanting more children, her detachment from both Jerry and Debbie reflected in her words and actions. Then suddenly she goes to San Francisco, and observed lovingly admiring her abdomen in the mirror with affection as if she knows she is already pregnant. During the same trip she is quite outspoken about her desire to have more children and her marriage in general, to which Jerry acts surprised but happy, optimistic. But we know her feelings about her marriage, Jerry and Debbie, which were to tolerate them, at best. The only other explanation therefore, is she believes she is pregnant by someone other than Jerry and is quite happy about it. Why would she be happy? No other reason than she believes or has been led to believe the father would be with her, which she clearly wanted. In order for that to happen, however, to give her lover time to reorganize his life, her only option would be to convince Jerry the baby is his in the meantime. Since she never appears to mention the fact that she already believes she may be pregnant as she did in the mirror, this discrepancy between present and future only makes sense if she and Jerry had not had sex and she needed to seduce him quickly and viola, she’s pregnant, no questions asked.

The Thursday Night Call: We don’t know when she began to suspect the potential pregnancy, but it likely wasn’t a long time prior to the murders, maybe a week or two, maybe within a week of her temporary work assignment at the clinic. It’s very clear her confidence that Fred would respond favorably to “the news” - particularly if they had been having an affair for awhile. It’s reflected in her change in behavior, the boldness of showing up at the club in public without a second thought about who would see or talk. This tells me she fully expected to be with Fred, that he would leave his wife for her and the baby; soon they would be a couple so why pretend?

I believe that the Thursday night “emergency” call - that Fred claimed not to remember - could have been related to the pregnancy: (1) to reveal the pregnancy in some act of desperation, possibly Fred attempted to end the relationship, or (2) she had told Fred about the pregnancy prior to the call and he left angry. Desperate to reach him, she called the clinic. Since he didn’t work at the clinic those evenings, the call could not have been for professional reasons. Why call unless she was in distress, possibly due to his unexpected rejection.

Her Temporary turned Permanent Wednesday Position at the Clinic: They clearly spent time together in the interim of the call and Saturday at the club. I’m not sure exactly when the position was offered to her, but it was sudden, possibly during the same week. Since her hours away from home to “work” on nights the clinic wasn’t even open, there was a feeling that something was coming to a head. Where she had gone to Florida, then to the circus, all to get away from Jerry and her life with him, her increased reliance on Fred and their relationship has an air of desperation to it, of instability in the frequency and boldness of her desire to be with him without much concern of scrutiny. The position may have been a way for Fred to pacify her, but it may not have been enough. Then the phone call...things are coming to a head.

Saturday Visit to the Club: I believe at this time Fred knew about her supposed pregnancy. His dismissive attitude in front of his friend likely angered her, as she felt it was her place to be there, they were soon going to be together. Jerry would be leaving for San Francisco and his new job, and she was going to stay with Fred. But October was fast approaching and Fred needed to act. So why hadn’t he? He probably rejected her again and she may have taken matters into her own hands because she was becoming increasingly more desperate for something to happen. If she thought she was pregnant, Jerry would expect her to move: she couldn’t support herself on her own and she couldn’t stand the thought of leaving with Jerry. She needed a man, and surely she gave Fred an ultimatum. If he rejected her, it’s not beyond the realm of possibilities to force it upon him by telling his wife, and she likely did so after he left her at the club. I don’t believe it was Fred who was desperate to keep and possess Linda. I believe it was the other way around.

Fred’s Call from the Store: I believe it was said that Fred entered the store around 10:30 looking disheveled and on edge, calling twice (I think) and failing to connect with whom he was calling. It’s possible he called either Linda (to warn her) or his wife (to talk her out of going to Linda’s house to confront her, and then the other for the same reasons in reverse. Something happened, and he was concerned enough to stop in the rain and make urgent calls that went unanswered, causing him great distress. When he couldn’t connect with either one, he likely went straight to Linda’s house, parking down the street, intending to use the dogs as a reason for his visit if necessary. But there is one more scenario that might explain the call: Fred could have been calling for “back up” and couldn’t call from Linda’s home. The only problem with this scenario is, the store owner didn’t see any blood, only that he looked disheveled.

I suspect he discovered his wife was there already confronting Linda. Seeing Linda in her lingerie, a determined Linda likely confirmed her pregnancy and callously assured Fred’s wife her marriage was over and Fred loved her, not his wife, probably sent his wife into a rage. His wife grabbed the knife from the Buffet (the one from Linda’s childhood on display), because it was the only thing within reach. She may have stabbed Linda; maybe she just threatened her. But surely Linda would’ve threatened to call the police since pressing charges would surely aid Linda in her pursuit to get the wife out of the way sooner rather than later.

The “wife” scenario also explains why no one hears the dogs. They liked women; surely they liked Fred. I think the bump heard by the neighbors were either the wife confronting Linda. We know it wasn’t Fred, because he hadn’t yet made the call from the store. I think the “thump” occurred around 9:30 or 10, I believe after Jerry took out the trash and before Fred made the call. Maybe it was Linda and Fred’s wife fighting over the knife, maybe Linda was stabbed or fell. I think I read she had superficial or defensive wounds, but I’m not sure. Jerry probably walked in, was shocked by what he had walked into. He wouldn’t have fought a woman, which would explain why he hadn’t defended himself as vigorously as people would have expected. He thought he could reason with Fred’s wife.

At some point Fred arrives. It’s doubtful he would’ve parked in front of their home. How is wife got there I don’t know, but I believe her car was either at the house and might have been one of the many reportedly seen by neighbors in the heavy downpour, parked or moved elsewhere. I think Fred probably watched what was happening unnoticed from the back door or window before dining into the house. Debbie was probably up and in the room witnessing all of this, another reason Jerry kept his composure. Fred shows up, and again the dogs don’t bark and Debbie recognized Fred, probably calling him affectionately by name. It’s possible that Fred decided then and there to murder all of them.

At this point, something besides not wanting Debbie to witness a fight, Linda was stabbed and her life was being used to subdue Jerry with promises to get her help if he kept calm. Whatever it was it scared Jerry enough he allowed himself to be tied with tape and not put up a fight. That or he was tied with tape while incapacitated (the thump?) He must have believed there was still a way out of this. But my guess is, Fred’s wife had the knife and had stabbed Linda, who was still alive when Jerry walked in but before Fred arrived after making the call.

Once Fred had everyone secured, he called a friend, one of the other vets with shady backgrounds, and had them come get his wife and take her out of there. I believe these were the people seen by the two witnesses driving by, who claimed to see a frightened woman (or man) getting into a car with another man. When Fred was sure they had gone, he killed Jerry, then Linda, then Debbie. He had compartmentalized his emotions and her death became “secondary to the incident,” like animals do when he is hunting.

Finally, it is said in the final chapters that Fred’s wife didn’t supply him an alibi. But if I remember correctly, that’s not completely true. They only discovered Fred had “lawyered up” when they knocked on her door to interview her. She never confirmed or denied his whereabouts because they never had the chance to ask. I believe Fred hired a lawyer and had him intervene when he did, not just to protect himself from making incriminating statements, but also his wife. It is pondered in the book how she could have continued to live the remainder of her life with Fred among all the suspicion without questioning him.

It makes perfect sense if she knew what he had done from day one as an accomplice. It’s also telling that they committed suicide together all those years later. It’s quite possible he talked her into it, afraid she might talk once he was gone and ruin his reputation. He likely convinced her by reminding her he did it for her. His narcissistic, self serving personality trait is exemplified by the fact that his final request to buried in the suit hanging on the rack is his and his only. There was no such request for his wife, no dress for her.
 
I am curious if anyone considered the wife as a possible killer, or at least the catalyst to the murder, which might have been committed by her husband. This was running through my mind during the last couple chapters of the book. Try as I might to find reasons it might not make sense - surely after all the research it was considered and dismissed with other evidence - it was never mentioned as a possible theory.

There are several reasons I considered Fred’s wife was intimately involved, starting with Linda herself.

Linda’s Maternal Change of Heart: I found it curious how Linda was quite vocal about not wanting more children, her detachment from both Jerry and Debbie reflected in her words and actions. Then suddenly she goes to San Francisco, and observed lovingly admiring her abdomen in the mirror with affection as if she knows she is already pregnant. During the same trip she is quite outspoken about her desire to have more children and her marriage in general, to which Jerry acts surprised but happy, optimistic. But we know her feelings about her marriage, Jerry and Debbie, which were to tolerate them, at best. The only other explanation therefore, is she believes she is pregnant by someone other than Jerry and is quite happy about it. Why would she be happy? No other reason than she believes or has been led to believe the father would be with her, which she clearly wanted. In order for that to happen, however, to give her lover time to reorganize his life, her only option would be to convince Jerry the baby is his in the meantime. Since she never appears to mention the fact that she already believes she may be pregnant as she did in the mirror, this discrepancy between present and future only makes sense if she and Jerry had not had sex and she needed to seduce him quickly and viola, she’s pregnant, no questions asked.

The Thursday Night Call: We don’t know when she began to suspect the potential pregnancy, but it likely wasn’t a long time prior to the murders, maybe a week or two, maybe within a week of her temporary work assignment at the clinic. It’s very clear her confidence that Fred would respond favorably to “the news” - particularly if they had been having an affair for awhile. It’s reflected in her change in behavior, the boldness of showing up at the club in public without a second thought about who would see or talk. This tells me she fully expected to be with Fred, that he would leave his wife for her and the baby; soon they would be a couple so why pretend?

I believe that the Thursday night “emergency” call - that Fred claimed not to remember - could have been related to the pregnancy: (1) to reveal the pregnancy in some act of desperation, possibly Fred attempted to end the relationship, or (2) she had told Fred about the pregnancy prior to the call and he left angry. Desperate to reach him, she called the clinic. Since he didn’t work at the clinic those evenings, the call could not have been for professional reasons. Why call unless she was in distress, possibly due to his unexpected rejection.

Her Temporary turned Permanent Wednesday Position at the Clinic: They clearly spent time together in the interim of the call and Saturday at the club. I’m not sure exactly when the position was offered to her, but it was sudden, possibly during the same week. Since her hours away from home to “work” on nights the clinic wasn’t even open, there was a feeling that something was coming to a head. Where she had gone to Florida, then to the circus, all to get away from Jerry and her life with him, her increased reliance on Fred and their relationship has an air of desperation to it, of instability in the frequency and boldness of her desire to be with him without much concern of scrutiny. The position may have been a way for Fred to pacify her, but it may not have been enough. Then the phone call...things are coming to a head.

Saturday Visit to the Club: I believe at this time Fred knew about her supposed pregnancy. His dismissive attitude in front of his friend likely angered her, as she felt it was her place to be there, they were soon going to be together. Jerry would be leaving for San Francisco and his new job, and she was going to stay with Fred. But October was fast approaching and Fred needed to act. So why hadn’t he? He probably rejected her again and she may have taken matters into her own hands because she was becoming increasingly more desperate for something to happen. If she thought she was pregnant, Jerry would expect her to move: she couldn’t support herself on her own and she couldn’t stand the thought of leaving with Jerry. She needed a man, and surely she gave Fred an ultimatum. If he rejected her, it’s not beyond the realm of possibilities to force it upon him by telling his wife, and she likely did so after he left her at the club. I don’t believe it was Fred who was desperate to keep and possess Linda. I believe it was the other way around.

Fred’s Call from the Store: I believe it was said that Fred entered the store around 10:30 looking disheveled and on edge, calling twice (I think) and failing to connect with whom he was calling. It’s possible he called either Linda (to warn her) or his wife (to talk her out of going to Linda’s house to confront her, and then the other for the same reasons in reverse. Something happened, and he was concerned enough to stop in the rain and make urgent calls that went unanswered, causing him great distress. When he couldn’t connect with either one, he likely went straight to Linda’s house, parking down the street, intending to use the dogs as a reason for his visit if necessary. But there is one more scenario that might explain the call: Fred could have been calling for “back up” and couldn’t call from Linda’s home. The only problem with this scenario is, the store owner didn’t see any blood, only that he looked disheveled.

I suspect he discovered his wife was there already confronting Linda. Seeing Linda in her lingerie, a determined Linda likely confirmed her pregnancy and callously assured Fred’s wife her marriage was over and Fred loved her, not his wife, probably sent his wife into a rage. His wife grabbed the knife from the Buffet (the one from Linda’s childhood on display), because it was the only thing within reach. She may have stabbed Linda; maybe she just threatened her. But surely Linda would’ve threatened to call the police since pressing charges would surely aid Linda in her pursuit to get the wife out of the way sooner rather than later.

The “wife” scenario also explains why no one hears the dogs. They liked women; surely they liked Fred. I think the bump heard by the neighbors were either the wife confronting Linda. We know it wasn’t Fred, because he hadn’t yet made the call from the store. I think the “thump” occurred around 9:30 or 10, I believe after Jerry took out the trash and before Fred made the call. Maybe it was Linda and Fred’s wife fighting over the knife, maybe Linda was stabbed or fell. I think I read she had superficial or defensive wounds, but I’m not sure. Jerry probably walked in, was shocked by what he had walked into. He wouldn’t have fought a woman, which would explain why he hadn’t defended himself as vigorously as people would have expected. He thought he could reason with Fred’s wife.

At some point Fred arrives. It’s doubtful he would’ve parked in front of their home. How is wife got there I don’t know, but I believe her car was either at the house and might have been one of the many reportedly seen by neighbors in the heavy downpour, parked or moved elsewhere. I think Fred probably watched what was happening unnoticed from the back door or window before dining into the house. Debbie was probably up and in the room witnessing all of this, another reason Jerry kept his composure. Fred shows up, and again the dogs don’t bark and Debbie recognized Fred, probably calling him affectionately by name. It’s possible that Fred decided then and there to murder all of them.

At this point, something besides not wanting Debbie to witness a fight, Linda was stabbed and her life was being used to subdue Jerry with promises to get her help if he kept calm. Whatever it was it scared Jerry enough he allowed himself to be tied with tape and not put up a fight. That or he was tied with tape while incapacitated (the thump?) He must have believed there was still a way out of this. But my guess is, Fred’s wife had the knife and had stabbed Linda, who was still alive when Jerry walked in but before Fred arrived after making the call.

Once Fred had everyone secured, he called a friend, one of the other vets with shady backgrounds, and had them come get his wife and take her out of there. I believe these were the people seen by the two witnesses driving by, who claimed to see a frightened woman (or man) getting into a car with another man. When Fred was sure they had gone, he killed Jerry, then Linda, then Debbie. He had compartmentalized his emotions and her death became “secondary to the incident,” like animals do when he is hunting.

Finally, it is said in the final chapters that Fred’s wife didn’t supply him an alibi. But if I remember correctly, that’s not completely true. They only discovered Fred had “lawyered up” when they knocked on her door to interview her. She never confirmed or denied his whereabouts because they never had the chance to ask. I believe Fred hired a lawyer and had him intervene when he did, not just to protect himself from making incriminating statements, but also his wife. It is pondered in the book how she could have continued to live the remainder of her life with Fred among all the suspicion without questioning him.

It makes perfect sense if she knew what he had done from day one as an accomplice. It’s also telling that they committed suicide together all those years later. It’s quite possible he talked her into it, afraid she might talk once he was gone and ruin his reputation. He likely convinced her by reminding her he did it for her. His narcissistic, self serving personality trait is exemplified by the fact that his final request to buried in the suit hanging on the rack is his and his only. There was no such request for his wife, no dress for her.
Welcome to Ws 2cents, thanks for your well- thought out post, it was like 2 thousand cents !
 
It was about two years after the Bricca murders that Robert Lamb (Illinois State Police and lead investigator on the Valerie Percy case) traveled to Cincinnati to speak with police about this case and its similarities to the Percy case, which occurred one week to the day earlier.

Lamb didn't mention specifics, telling the press only that there were similarities between the two cases. Of course, both were home invasions that occurred in the Midwest with victims who were stabbed to death with a large knife.

The expanded edition (newly out) of my second book reveals that both cases were linked to a red sports car. In both cases witnesses were unable to name the make or the model of the car (the reason for this is explained.) In the case of the Bricca murders the car was seen near the victim's home at the same hour that Percy was murdered (then and now, it is an unlikely time of day for homicides to occur.)

Witnesses in both cases saw a man staring at the victim's house the night before the murders. (In the Percy case the witness was a Northwestern University student. In the Bricca case the witness was an off duty cop. It is explained why both witnesses saw the same man and he was the killer.)

In the Bricca case police kept an extremely tight lid on the autopsy results and publicly speculated about an unlikely murder weapon (reasons for these things are explained.)

Best of all, a suspect is named for these cases as well as for four murders he committed the following month.
 
I don’t think they do; however, they do mention a family heirloom that included a unique “dagger-type” knife had been displayed on the buffet in Linda and Jerry’s home prior to the murders, but was missing after. The book mentions a conversation between Linda and her brother, which also happened to be the last time they spoke. During their reminiscing they talk about how they used to sneak the knife out of this set, or whatever it was, and play with it without their parent’s knowledge, pretending it was some sort of sword - I can’t really remember the details but I remember the discussion. The brother asked if she had it and she said she did and in fact was on display in her home. The babysitter confirmed seeing the knife on Linda’s buffet, because after the murders it was missing. As far as I know, it was never found. The missing knife was just one of the many reasons I believe the Bricca murder was an isolated, personal attack on the family by someone they knew and not a random, stranger attack.

There are only so many scenarios where a person enters a home without a weapon and ends up murdering an entire family: 1) the murderer went there not intending to murder anyone; 2) but the fact that things escalated so quickly would indicate the murderer was already angry when they arrived and was likely the reason they were there at all; 3) if anger - not murder - was the driving force behind the visit, the original intent was to confront the situation (and person) causing it; and finally 4) this level of anger, an emotion so intense it escalated into murder within minutes, was the killer’s biological response to one thing: a perceived threat.

This threat was so critical in the killer’s mind it created a life or death situation. It’s the only explanation for how a confrontation could result in murder in such a short period of time. It was critical enough it drove the killer there to confront it. Things quickly spiraled out of control when this person realized how critical a threat Linda perceived them to be to her life as well. If this person was the wife, Linda was a threat to her livelihood, her children’s lives, her marriage and her future; the wife was a threat to Linda’s perceived happiness, a future with a man who made her miserable in a life she never wanted, or a future with a man she does want but can’t have.

The confrontation became a battle of wills between the women, each representing a perceived critical life or death threat to the other. It became apparent to both early on that it would take more than a simple confrontation to make the other go away. Someone had to make a move, and I believe it was Fred’s wife, who obviously had much more to lose, and driven by a level of anger, desperation and fear much greater than anything Linda must’ve felt.

I believe Fred’s wife marched right into the home while Jerry was out running errands intent on confronting Linda as soon as she opened the door, and upon seeing the younger more beautiful Linda, prancing confidently around the house in her lingerie, the image of her husband with her, turned her anger into rage. She realized there was no way for her to compete with this woman. She was older, her body somewhat ravaged from giving birth to Fred’s five children. Who would want her? I believe this confrontation happened in the living room with all of these images and thoughts flashing through her mind, overwhelming her sensibilities. A split second decision to eliminate the threat completely and permanently was made impulsively right where she stood, right next to the buffet, the family heirloom and the dagger.

This is where things get muddled up for me. I read the book on my kindle so it’s not as easy to flip through the chapters to find certain dates and times, so I’m mostly drawing from memory and I’ve only read the book once (I’ve already read three other books since this one).

I believe Jerry was last seen around 9:30 taking out the trash, which he did after returning home from the store (and I believe before he went inside, which makes the most sense). I know he spoke to his coworker about picking him up to go to the airport around 6:30ish, during which the friend said everything seemed fine. I believe the neighbor heard a “thump” around 9:15ish. If that’s true, then the confrontation occurred after Jerry left to run errands but before he got home and took out the trash. If he only ran to the store, that would support my belief things escalated very quickly after Fred’s wife barged in to confront Linda and all hell broke loose, literally within 30 minutes or so assuming Jerry didn’t go into the house before taking out the trash at 9:30 and the neighbors heard the first thump at 9:15.

I think (and I’m not at all sure), that it was around 10:30 or close to 11 that a wet, disheveled and exasperated Fred was seen by the store owner making two back to back calls from the pay phone that went unanswered, then quickly left without acknowledging the owner - which was unusual according to him, as Fred was a frequent and friendly patron. It was also around this time, maybe a little earlier, that the same neighbor who heard the thump peered out her window and noticed the Bricca’s back door wide open with the TV on (the back door was not open when the bodies were found).

This more than anything supports the theory that there was more than one killer. If the back door was seen wide open with the TV on, where were the dogs? Wouldn’t they have run out into the yard? And if the killer’s were strangers, wouldn’t they have run out the door barking hysterically if the killer left the door open as he ran from the house? But they didn’t. They noticed the back door open at 10:15, no dogs barked or ran from the house, and Fred was seen shortly after making calls from the pay phone by the store owner. To me, this means someone left the house in a hurry for some reason (to make a call?) while another person was still in the house, someone the dogs trusted, and that the Bricca’s were likely still alive.

And all of this is based on the assumption that the first thump heard at 9:15 had anything to do with anything. The thump could have just been Jerry closing his car door after getting home from the store. If that’s all it was then the whole thing likely started around 10. Still, whether it happened before or after Jerry took out the trash, it doesn’t change things much, it just pushes the time it began back an hour.

But for the sake of argument, let’s just assume I’m right and the thump was part of the murder timeline. If it started before Jerry got home, then the thump was a confrontation with Linda. Jerry would’ve walked into the house to discover Linda and the killer (or accomplice), and Debbie, who probably witnessed all of this because the purpose of the visit was to have a confrontation, not commit a premeditated murder. So Debbie was probably there when it all unfolded, and it happened so quickly and unexpectedly no one thought to send Debbie to her room.

And somewhere between Jerry taking out the trash and the neighbors seeing the back door open, Jerry was subdued. The wife couldn’t have done that, obviously. There is really only one thing that could have stopped Jerry in his tracks and prevented him from defending himself and family from being murdered, and that’s Debbie. It’s possible that Fred arrived at the house shortly after his wife, walked in through the back door (as he had likely done many many times before), saw his stunned wife with the dagger and a bleeding Linda on the floor. Then Jerry drives up.

How and through which door Jerry normally entered the house I’m not sure. Most people don’t enter their homes through the front door. He didn’t park in the garage. Linda did. Did he take the trash cans out of the garage and go into the house from there, shutting the garage door behind him? Did he enter through the back door?

However he did, like Fred, he likely walked into a scene that shocked him. He probably didn’t even have time to process what he saw before he was somehow subdued or confronted with a situation that for forced him into immediate compliance. Linda was hurt and bloody, someone has Debbie, the same person who clearly was not above violence. Jerry, a rational and logical thinker, reacted as any parent would. He was either knocked out as soon as he walked in and tied up, or allowed himself to be tied up to save Debbie. If Fred’s wife was there, I can see how Jerry might agree to this, the presence of a woman giving him a false sense of security that ultimately things would be ok. Surely Fred’s wife wouldn’t hurt a child or allow Fred to actually kill them. But Jerry also likely didn’t know that it was Fred’s wife who stabbed Linda.

There are only so many things that could occur for all of these things to be true. Assumptions and timelines aside, we know these things are fact:

1) Jerry was seen taking out the trash at 9:30 and everything appeared normal, waving to the neighbor before going inside

2) A preoccupied and exasperated Fred was seen making two phone calls in succession from the pay phone at a store near the Bricca’s home right before the owner closed the store at 11. He did not have any blood on him.

3) Around the same time neighbors saw the back door wide open before they went to bed. They even rationalized later how they know it was open because they saw the TV, and the TV cannot be seen when the door is closed. What they didn’t see (or hear) were the dogs. The door was not open and the dogs were alive when the bodies were discovered. Why didn’t they bark or run out of the noise when the back door was open?

4) We know at some point Linda and Jerry were tied with tape. Jerry was still gagged when the family was discovered two days later, residue from the tape still on his hands. The width of the tape was not standard and, according to 3M, was used by veterinarians. The killer took the time to remove the tape before leaving. Why?

5) There was a dagger-type knife displayed on the Bricca’s buffet prior to the murders that was missing after the murders; like the tape, it was never found

6) Two separate witnesses reported seeing a car parked outside of the Bricca’s home around midnight. Either two or three people were seen in the car: two men (or one) and a woman. The woman appeared frightened. Some believe this woman was there to watch the daughter. This makes no sense to me.

First, why would any woman agree to tag along with two men intent on roughing up a family just to watch their kid unless she had a stake in the game? But what? Wouldn’t she be afraid the little girl could identify her after all was said and done? Second, for them to know there was a little girl at all, they would have to know the family. This means the family was targeted for some reason. If it wasn’t money or Linda, was it a hit? If it was a hit, wouldn’t they bring a weapon? Would hitmen really bring a babysitter to witness a murder an entire family, including the kid? And who besides Fred would hire hitmen? Doesn’t it seem more likely that this was never intended to be a murder, and that the woman became a part of it by accident? Wouldn’t the dogs have gone crazy?

7) The house had been moderately ransacked. The police assumed it was to stage the scene.

I’m not so sure about this. I think the killer was actually looking to dispose of evidence of his/her existence: letters, maybe results from a pregnancy test. Perhaps Linda threatened to write a letter to Fred’s wife. Fred’s wife may have written a letter to Linda. I don’t think it was staged. What would be the point of staging a scene unless the killer felt he would one day be in a position to present a stranger theory of the crime? If the crime was committed by a stranger, wouldn’t he be inclined to present a theory that it wasn’t a stranger? If Fred was the killer and staged the scene to throw the cops off his trail, how would he explain he knew the house was ransacked without putting himself at the crime scene? The only thing that makes sense is the scene wasn’t staged at all.

Like I said, I’ve gone over these things over and over trying to come up with something that could tie all of these things we know are facts together. The only thing that makes any sense to me is someone went there NOT intent on murder or they would’ve brought a weapon. So that eliminates a hit. We know more than one person was involved because the dogs didn’t bark or run out of the back door when it was open. We also know one of the intruders was a woman. The likelihood the person who showed up for a confrontation without a weapon was not the person who committed the murder. If we know one was a woman and one was a man, I think it’s safe to assume the woman was probably not the murderer. It’s also safe to assume that the man did not go there expecting to murder anyone for the same reason the woman didn’t: he also didn’t bring a weapon. What he DID have, however, is tape, tape used by vets. We know he had this long before the witnesses saw the woman being taken away because Jerry would’ve had to be restrained between 9:30 and midnight, when the witnesses saw them.

It’s most likely the man showed up not to murder but to stop the confrontation from happening at all, a confrontation that would have never occurred but through his own selfish actions. But by the time he got there, it was too late. I think he realized almost immediately what needed to be done when he saw Linda already hurt and bleeding. Why would he not call the police or try to save Linda’s life unless losing the person who did her harm was worse to him than losing Linda herself, worse than killing Debbie? This murder was a desperate act committed by a desperate man, who recognized the only way to save his own family was to completely eliminate another.
 
The story about the missing "oriental carving" knife is as cockamamie as they come. And they never, ever mentioned it again after initially peddling it (probably because they wanted people to forget about it because it's ridiculous.) Also they buried the autopsy report to the extent that the author of a 500-page book on the case recreates the scene where it arrives in the hands of the lead investigator but its clear, almost a half century later, it was still buried. Why?

He describes the crime scene, but nothing about what was in the report. He does talk about a gaping wound (most certainly that appears in the photos), which is reason to believe the knife was like the one used to kill Percy and made for an off the wall unusual scenario in the murder of a civilian.

Investigators from IL did not travel to meet their peers in Ohio about this case unless there were very good reasons to and then only mention "similarities" if there was reason to keep a tight lid on them— like they suspected the same type of rare and unusual weapon was involved, the suspect matched witnesses' descriptions at both scenes and a vehicle was tied to both cases.

There's a lot more to it, the timing of when info was released during the early days of the Percy investigation, which was only a week old when this happened and a national news story. You better believe the Bricca investigators were aware of it as it was on the front pages of their morning papers. They only found major pieces of evidence in the Percy case three days before this happened.

Then there's the case that followed both. The similarities to these cases and in the third one, where they did describe the weapon and it was most certainly the type used in the first crime. Then there's the location of the third crime and well look at a map and see where it started in Illinois, then a week later in Ohio and then...another senseless, brutal home invasion with the Bricca case smack dab between the two on the map. After that he headed west.
 
The story about the missing "oriental carving" knife is as cockamamie as they come. And they never, ever mentioned it again after initially peddling it (probably because they wanted people to forget about it because it's ridiculous.) Also they buried the autopsy report to the extent that the author of a 500-page book on the case recreates the scene where it arrives in the hands of the lead investigator but its clear, almost a half century later, it was still buried. Why?

He describes the crime scene, but nothing about what was in the report. He does talk about a gaping wound (most certainly that appears in the photos), which is reason to believe the knife was like the one used to kill Percy and made for an off the wall unusual scenario in the murder of a civilian.

Investigators from IL did not travel to meet their peers in Ohio about this case unless there were very good reasons to and then only mention "similarities" if there was reason to keep a tight lid on them— like they suspected the same type of rare and unusual weapon was involved, the suspect matched witnesses' descriptions at both scenes and a vehicle was tied to both cases.

There's a lot more to it, the timing of when info was released during the early days of the Percy investigation, which was only a week old when this happened and a national news story. You better believe the Bricca investigators were aware of it as it was on the front pages of their morning papers. They only found major pieces of evidence in the Percy case three days before this happened.

Then there's the case that followed both. The similarities to these cases and in the third one, where they did describe the weapon and it was most certainly the type used in the first crime. Then there's the location of the third crime and well look at a map and see where it started in Illinois, then a week later in Ohio and then...another senseless, brutal home invasion with the Bricca case smack dab between the two on the map. After that he headed west.
No reason to get upset my friend. Actually I was replying to the question about the murder weapon and whether it was found. I am not getting upset or calling your theories ridiculous because you believe it’s related to the Percy case and I do not (I’m also not claiming to be an expert on either case...these were just my thoughts reading the book), so please show me the same courtesy. I’m not really sure why the carving knife is ridiculous. Even if it is, the knife was not the crux of my total argument against the lone killer in the car...the dogs not barking or running out when the back door was open was. Anyway, I chose my username for a reason, as I am just giving my two cents. These things made sense to me, and I hadn’t heard any theory about the wife. I thought I would propose it the group to ponder.
 
No reason to get upset my friend. Actually I was replying to the question about the murder weapon and whether it was found. I am not getting upset or calling your theories ridiculous because you believe it’s related to the Percy case and I do not (I’m also not claiming to be an expert on either case...these were just my thoughts reading the book), so please show me the same courtesy. I’m not really sure why the carving knife is ridiculous. Even if it is, the knife was not the crux of my total argument against the lone killer in the car...the dogs not barking or running out when the back door was open was. Anyway, I chose my username for a reason, as I am just giving my two cents. These things made sense to me, and I hadn’t heard any theory about the wife. I thought I would propose it the group to ponder.
Also, I should point out the author never pretended to be the ultimate authority on the case, nor did he claim to refrain from injecting his own opinions and possible theories on the case. I thought it was an excellent, well written and informative book. It certainly got my brain churning.
 
Ok I just read a quick, very brief synopsis of the Valerie Percy case. I’m being honest when I say I don’t see the connection at all. Valerie was beaten to a pulp about the head and then stabbed almost as an afterthought while her parents slept, then ran. No one in the Bricca family was beaten in such a way. The killer of Percy didn’t even attempt to attack anyone else in the home, while the Bricca killer slaughtered the entire family over probably several hours without a care in the world. I just don’t see the same MO or anything except that there were two unsolved murders that occurred within a week of each other and involved a knife and maybe a red car.
 
Ok I just read a quick, very brief synopsis of the Valerie Percy case. I’m being honest when I say I don’t see the connection at all. Valerie was beaten to a pulp about the head and then stabbed almost as an afterthought while her parents slept, then ran. No one in the Bricca family was beaten in such a way. The killer of Percy didn’t even attempt to attack anyone else in the home, while the Bricca killer slaughtered the entire family over probably several hours without a care in the world. I just don’t see the same MO or anything except that there were two unsolved murders that occurred within a week of each other and involved a knife and maybe a red car.

I was not upset. Thanks. I didn't mean any ill will, either.

I see no connection between the cases except:

1. Police investigating the fist case said there were similarities, enough to travel to Ohio and meet with Bricca investigators.

2. Witnesses at both crime scenes saw a suspect staring at both houses the night before the murders (a second witness in Bricca's neighborhood saw a man dressed in the same clothing as the first witness described his suspect to be wearing. The suspect was peaking into the window of a house a few blocks away around 1 a.m. This would tend to cast doubt on theories that a vet's jealous wife killed the family and was somehow able to get away with it.)

3. A red sports car was linked by witnesses to both cases. Neither witness was able to name the make or model of the car. I have explained why in long form elsewhere.

4. The red sports car near the Bricca's house was seen at the same hour Percy was killed, which is an unlikely hour for homicides to occur (as most people are sleeping at that time.)

5. The car in the Bricca case was seen, and Percy killed on Sundays, which are not known for activity re: major crimes.

6. Both crimes were home invasions.

7. Both crimes lacked common motives.

8. Police in both cases have been unusually secretive regarding details of the crimes. In the case of the Briccas they have never commented on nor released results of the autopsies, which is highly unusual. In the case of Percy, fifty years later not only did they fight to keep even the oldest police reports hidden, they redacted memos written by the various agencies about the FOIA suit that was filed to unseal them:

Attorney Says Facts Reported in 50-Year-Old Valerie Percy Murder Case ‘Are Wrong'

9. The Bricca witness who saw the suspect staring at the house engaged him in a brief conversation and commented on the suspect's unusual way of speaking. So unusual it was that the witness recalled it almost 50 years later. The FBI's prime suspect for Percy's murder struggled with a severe stuttering issue and had received speech therapy. He had a history of violence and his parents were Percy's neighbors.

10. There are no fewer connections between the FBI's Percy suspect and the murders of Robert Domingos and Linda Edwards near Santa Barbara in 1963, a case in which it is believed the victims were tied up, or the perpetrator sought to tie them up as was the case with Linda and Jerry Bricca. For good reasons it is also believed their killer emerged in San Francisco in 1968 and called himself Zodiac.

11. In the case of Percy he sought to go from room to room, killing everyone in the house. However, he didn't count on two things; waking up a witness who saw him at the scene of the crime and getting punched in the mouth by a victim who nearly removed a few of his teeth. So a week later he resorted to his old MO of beguiling people into believing they were going to be robbed in order to tie them up and kill them.
 
Last edited:
Of course, I forgot a few similarities:

12. Both cases were stabbings.

13. Both took place in suburbs where murder is uncommon.

14. Victims in both cases were slain in bedrooms.

15. After exhaustive investigations, police could find no one who both knew the victims and meant to cause them harm.

16. Linda Bricca, Percy and the FBIs prime suspect in the Percy case were all from suburban Chicago.
 
I haven’t read Townsend’s book but I have gleamed through the material available online and can’t any indication that Linda Bricca was pregnant. From what I have read in these posting, that seems to be a critical “fact” that Townsend incorporates in his narrative. The autopsy would reveal her pregnancy but I can understand that it might not have been disclosed. A pregnant mistress represents a serious threat to a married man who wishes to stay married and is certainly a motive for murder. Invading a home and then restraining and murdering three members of a family including a young, fit and fairly large husband is a pretty high risk method of dealing with this problem. Dealing with her when they were alone would be the expected method.

Anyone who has read Townsend: does he have access to the full autopsy and was the pregnancy verified?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
3,906
Total visitors
4,071

Forum statistics

Threads
592,597
Messages
17,971,589
Members
228,839
Latest member
Shimona
Back
Top