by Mark Hewitt
The investigation also turned up a discarded cigarette butt near the site of the murder. Law enforcement never determined whether it was related to Bates’s death, or was deposited by someone totally unconnected to the case. The police soon realized that they did not have much concrete evidence from the site of the murder, but would have to somehow move the case forward nevertheless.
***
A murder investigation usually begins with a careful evaluation of the crime scene. It proceeds with a comprehensive study of the victim, and then continues outward in ever-expanding concentric circles of the victim’s social relationships. A crime scene analysis, an integral part of any investigation, makes two important assumptions stemming from what is known in criminology as the Locard Transfer Principle, articulated by Dr. Edmund Locard: “every contact leaves a trace.” The first assumption is that when anyone commits a crime, he or she will inevitably leave something of him- or herself behind at the scene, such as a head hair, fingerprint, or trace fiber. It is not possible for someone to inhabit a place without leaving some evidence of the visit, however small. The question is whether scientific investigative means are available to record and document the evidence before it is destroyed or contaminated.
The second assumption is a corollary: every perpetrator of a crime takes something with him or her from a crime scene, whether it be microscopic traces of the environment, such as soil, vegetation, or water samples; some portion of the victim, such as bodily fluids, a hair, or clothing fibers; or something brought to the scene by the victim or someone else. If a suspect can be identified soon enough, evidence of his or her presence can be preserved and presented in a court of law.
In an investigation, the crime scene evidence may aid investigators in developing the rudimentary beginnings of a profile. The police want to know what type of person might feel comfortable operating in such an environment, and what about the scene itself may have led to the crime. Since the scene can reveal what is likely or possible for the criminal behavior, a good investigator will linger, attempting to understand as much about it as possible.
While the investigators in 1966 lacked many modern investigative techniques, they were able to develop a rough profile of their suspect.
Criminal profiling is as old as investigation. It is an attempt to describe as accurately as possible what is known or can be inferred about an unknown offender. It will incorporate eyewitness reports and any details of the perpetrator’s known physical properties in an effort to eliminate suspects so that law enforcement can focus its attention on a smaller set of likely candidates. Psychological profiling—the activity that attempts to describe the psychological makeup of the offender from the crime-scene evidence—dates back to the 1950s. It was unavailable to the investigation at the time of the murder, however, and would not gain widespread acceptance until published papers on the subject began appearing in reputable journals in the 1970s.
The investigators dutifully took a close look at Bates’s life. Victimology, the study of the victim of a crime, often provides clues as to what happened, but why it happened. If the victim is present in some high-risk category—such as a drug-using prostitute or a known member of a violent gang—an analysis of the risks may suggest a motive for the killing. A victimology may also indicate who was responsible, or at least the type of person who should be considered. A low-risk victim, such as a well-liked member of the community who does not engage in unlawful behavior, may suggest that the killer may be closer to home—an intimate friend or a spouse.
The police were confident in their assessment that Cheri Jo was very low risk in her actions and lifestyle. She did not move in violent crowds, break the law, or use drugs. Her victimology did not suggest a motive for death. In only one respect was she at an elevated risk at all: she was young and attractive. Eyesome females run an increased chance of violent death at the hands of lovers, ex-lovers, and wannabe lovers in all-too-frequently-played-out scenarios of fatal revenge, spite, or misdirected passion.
The Riverside police were well aware that most murder victims are known to their killers. Frequently, the perpetrator is a friend or family member. It is an early step in any investigation to examine and, if possible, clear all close associates. Murder is a deliberate and hostile act, usually having at its root a soured friendship, a broken family tie, a failed business partnership, or love affair gone wrong. The overwhelming majority of murders of young women are committed by boyfriends, husbands, or men who once filled these roles.
Cheri Jo was dating at the time of her death. According to newspaper reports, her exclusive partner, Dennis Highland, had left the area to attend San Francisco State College after studying at RCC. The weekend prior to her death, Cheri Jo had joined Highland’s parents on a trip to visit him at the Northern California campus. The trip went well by all accounts. Cheri Jo and Dennis were very much in love. Highland was questioned and cleared quite quickly. He was far away from Riverside at the time of the murder, and had no apparent motive to kill his girlfriend even if he had been in the area.
Early on, in the initial fog of the murder, two friends of Cheri Jo’s told police that their friend had gone to the library to meet her boyfriend. Further investigation eliminated this possibility. Captain Cross reported on Thursday that the information was based on hearsay, and was incorrect. By this time nearly 200 people had been questioned.
The Tiger Times, the RCC newspaper, in a story published five days after the attack—“Police Still Lack Clues in the Murder”—noted that the police had no suspects. The tentatively held theory was that the killer disabled Bates’s car, then waited for her in one of the driveways on Terracina Drive. The paper indicated that Bates “put up a tremendous struggle” in her valiant, but ultimately unsuccessful, attempt to survive. It also reported that there was an increase in students who dropped night classes—but added that, according to John Matulich, the Dean of Admissions, this may have been prompted by other factors, including a drop-class deadline.
Exactly two weeks after the murder, according to several sources, the police staged a reenactment of sorts. They invited everyone who had been at the library on the night that Bates was killed to reassemble. Participants were told to wear the same clothes they had worn, park in the same space in which they had parked, and sit at the same desk they had occupied that night. Each of the 65 participants was questioned and asked to give a statement as to what they had seen and done a fortnight earlier. Further, the men were fingerprinted and asked for a lock of their hair. (The color of the hair found on Bates’s thumb was initially withheld from the public.) Everyone willingly agreed to the requests to help locate Bates’s killer.
Through the reenactment, it was concluded that Bates, or a woman who looked like her, had arrived at the library at 5:40 p.m. and waited until it opened at 6:00 p.m. Captain Cross announced that the police sought a 1947 to 1952 Studebaker with light-colored oxidized paint. One had been seen by students at 7:00 p.m. on the night of the murder, but it had not been present for the reenactment two weeks later. Also, police were looking for a heavyset man with a beard. He too had been observed at the library, but had failed to return.
By December 1, no strong suspect or suspects had been developed. Many people brought to the attention of law enforcement had been investigated. One man moved south immediately following the murder. Further investigation eliminated him from suspicion. A mental patient at a nearby State Hospital reported that he might have killed the petite beauty. He was found to be subject to delusions and hallucinations—and not responsible for the murder. Because the attack closely resembled an April 1965 stabbing of another coed in a spot not far from where Bates was found, investigators moved quickly to find the assailant of the earlier violence. The 19-year-old was cleared as soon as he was located. He was still serving time for that attempted murder when Bates was stabbed, and therefore could not have been responsible.
Investigators carefully analyzed the evidence. Drops of dried blood found in a driveway sug
gested that the killer had returned to Terracina Drive after completing the injuries to Bates. It was also possible that Bates was stabbed at or near her car, and then shed these drops as she fled for her life to the promise of safety among the abandoned homes. Captain Cross initially speculated that the victim had sprinted from the library, noting that scuff marks were found in the gravel along the driveway. His suspicions were revised with the discovery of footprints leading to the crime scene that suggested instead that Bates had gone willingly, unaware of what awaited her, as a lamb to the slaughter. The right window of Bates car was partially open, leading investigators to wonder whether she had been approached at some point in the ordeal from the passenger side of her vehicle.
The odd condition of her car puzzled investigators. Through interviews, they learned that she loved her vehicle, and worked very hard to pay for it. She never left it, they were told, until it had been carefully locked and its windows dutifully rolled up. They could not account for the unlocked doors, the unrolled windows, and the key thoughtlessly abandoned in the ignition. They speculated that she knew her attacker and was comfortable enough to let her guard down and leave with him.
This was reinforced by the knowledge that Bates was afraid of the dark. Because that Sunday was the first day of the return to Pacific Standard Time, the city was dark at 6:15 p.m. Investigators believed that she would only have ventured between the two dilapidated campus homes with someone she highly trusted.
***
As the Riverside Police Department strove to understand what had happened to Bates and locate a perpetrator, the idea of a serial killer was never considered. This was a single murder, unconnected to any other crime at this point. Additionally, the term “serial killer” would not be coined and in common use for another decade or so. Only traditional motives for the killing were explored because those were all the categories that existed in the minds and training of investigators. In 1966, they had no other arrows in their investigative quivers.
Murder for financial gain was quickly eliminated when Bates’s purse was located under her body, its contents including cash completely undisturbed. Investigators also ruled out a sexual attack, because the girl’s clothing was unmolested and no semen or other evidence was present to suggest such a motive. They considered and rejected other common motives, and were left wondering whether it was a drug-related murder, a revenge killing, or a spur of the moment attack committed by a perpetrator in a psychotic fit of rage. Further investigation failed to reveal any known enemies, or any hint of a drug or organized crime connection in Bates’s life.
A few fingerprints were collected and sent to CII in Sacramento on November 4, specifically the Latent Fingerprint Section. The file became latent case #73096. Further analysis would eliminate all but four fingerprints and three partial palm prints, which were never matched to anyone. On November 9, a preliminary report was filed with the Riverside County District Attorney’s office, and nail scrapings, vaginal smears, and hairs from the base of Bates’s right thumb were processed for analysis. Despite the physical evidence, the investigation soon sputtered for a lack of motive, any real suspects, or a single eyewitness. The police were left to scratch their heads at this most mysterious, senseless killing.
One fact regarding the murder seemed clear. If Bates’s attacker planned to kill her, he was a novitiate in murdering with a knife. The three and a half inch by half inch blade was not nearly sufficient for a clean and efficient kill, and it allowed his victim to put up a noble struggle. If he were to murder again with a knife, he would know to bring something larger—much larger. If the attack was unplanned—perhaps an intended sexual assault that got out of hand, or the perpetrator impulsively reacted with violence to some unexpected psychological trigger—and knowing what we now know, perhaps the killer enjoyed his first taste of blood and made the decision that this would not be his last.
The murder investigation, case #352-481, would eventually go as cold as Bates’s lifeless body. No one could be found who had a reason to kill the young coed, and Bates did not engage in any high-risk behaviors that would suggest a motive. Friends and family members were questioned and cleared. Not only were the members of her closest circle not responsible, no one seemed to know by whom or for what purpose their much-loved Cheri Jo was murdered.
***
The Confession letters
The investigation reignited one month after the killing with the arrival of two letters. On November 29, an unstamped envelope addressed to the Homicide Division in Riverside was removed from the collection box in the main post office at 5:00 p.m. The block lettering, done in heavy felt pen, was likely a disguise of the true handwriting of its author. Inside, the RPD found their copy of the Confession letter. The very next day, a Riverside newspaper, The Daily Enterprise (today publishing as The Press-Enterprise), received an unstamped envelope with a separate copy of the Confession letter.
Efforts to locate the identity of the typewriter used in the creation of the letters proved negative. The two letters were carbon copies revealing a common original that was typed, single spaced, and used short sentences and minimal punctuation (only periods and commas). The letter type most closely resembled a font coming from a portable Royal typewriter, likely a Merit Pica 508, its specific font-type an elite Canterbury shaded. The original from which the copies were made never surfaced. There may have been two originals. Whoever had killed Bates wanted the police and the press to know details of the attack, he wanted them to know it was he who had placed a phone call, and he wanted others to know that he would kill again.
Either that, or some hoaxer wanted to claim credit for an unsolved murder. The police had to consider every possibility. Whatever their source, the letters had to be investigated. In detail and tone, they sounded like authentic communications from Cheri Jo’s killer. If the claims were sincere, whether the letters came from Bates’s killer or not was immaterial. Someone had sent terrorist-like threats and used the federal postal system to communicate these, both of which were felonious activities. The writer had underscored his message by providing it in duplicate.
Typed in all capital letters, the Confession letter read as follows:
THE CONFESSION
BY__________________
SHE WAS YOUNG AND BEAUTIFUL. BUT NOW SHE IS BATTERED AND DEAD. SHE IS NOT THE FIRST AND SHE WILL NOT BE THE LAST. I LAY AWAKE NIGHTS THINKING ABOUT MY NEXT VICTIM. MAYBE SHE WILL BE THE BEAUTIFUL BLOND THAT BABYSITS NEAR THE LITTLE STORE AND WALKS DOWN THE DARK ALLEY EACH EVENING ABOUT SEVEN. OR MAYBE SHE WILL BE THE SHAPELY BLUE EYED BROWNETT THAT SAID NO WHEN I ASKED HER FOR A DATE IN HIGH SCHOOL. BUT MAYBE IT WILL NOT BE EITHER. BUT I SHALL CUT OFF HER FEMALE PARTS AND DEPOSIT THEM FOR THE WHOLE CITY TO SEE. SO DON’T MAKE IT TO EASY FOR ME. KEEP YOUR SISTERS, DAUGHTERS, AND WIVES OFF THE STREETS AND ALLEYS. MISS BATES WAS STUPID. SHE WENT TO THE SLAUGHTER LIKE A LAMB.SHE DID NOT PUT UP A STRUGGLE. BUT I DID. IT WAS A BALL. I FIRST PULLED THE MIDDLE WIRE FROM THE DISTRIBUTOR. THEN I WAITED FOR HER IN THE LIBRARY AND FOLLOWED HER OUT AFTER ABOUT TWO MINUTS. THE BATTERY MUST HAVE BEEN ABOUT DEAD BY THEN I THEN OFFERED TO HELP. SHE WAS THEN VERY WILLING TO TALK WITH ME. I TOLD HER THAT MY CAR WAS DOWN THE STREET AND THAT I WOULD GIVE HER A LIFT HOME. WHEN WE WERE AWAY FROM THE LIBRARY WALKING, I SAID IT WAS ABOUT TIME. SHE ASKED ME “ABOUT TIME FOR WHAT”. I SAID IT WAS ABOUT TIME FOR HER TO DIE. I GRABBED HER AROUND THE NECK WITH MY HAND OVER HER MOUTH AND MY OTHER HAND WITH A SMALL KNIFE AT HER THROAT. SHE WENT VERY WILLINGLY. HER BREAST FELT VERY WARM AND FIRM UNDER MY HANDS, BUT ONLY ONE THING WAS ON MY MIND. MAKING HER PAY FOR THE BRUSH OFFS THAT SHE HAD GIVEN ME DURING THE YEARS PRIOR. SHE DIED HARD. SHE SQUIRMED AND SHOOK AS I CHOAKED HER, AND HER LIPS TWICHED, SHE LET OUT A SCREAM ONCE AND I KICKED HER HEAD TO SHUT HER UP. I PLUNGED THE KNIFE INTO HER AND IT BROKE. I THEN FINISHED THE JOB BY CUTTING HER THROAT. I AM NOT SICK. I AM INSANE. BUT THAT WILL NOT STOP THE GAME. THIS LETTER SHOULD BE PUBLISHED FOR ALL TO READ IT. IT JUST MIGHT SAVE THAT GIRL IN THE ALLEY. BUT THAT’S UP TO YOU. IT WILL BE ON YOU
R CONSCIENCE, NOT MINE. YES I DID MAKE THAT CALL TO YOU ALSO. IT WAS JUST A WARNING. BEWARE…I AM STALKING YOUR GIRLS NOW.
CC. CHIEF OF POLICE
ENTERPRISE
The Confession letter’s unusual use of the word “that” to describe Bates—rather than the grammatically correct “who”—would much later suggest that its writer may also have penned a strange follow-up letter that repeatedly made this same grammatical error. It is not out of character for a callous murderer to describe his victim as an inanimate object.
If the Riverside police believed the letter writer and anticipated additional killings by the same perpetrator, they still did not suspect that they were up against a serial killer because the phrase did not yet exist. The only qualifier of the word “murderer” for investigators in 1966 was that of “mass murderer,” used to describe anyone who kills more than one person in a single incident, for any reason and under whatever circumstances. But the killer would kill again, and write more letters, and make more telephone calls. Finally, years later, he would cease his campaign of terror. All this would be completed before Bob Ressler, of the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit (BSU), would coin the term“serial killer” in the 1980s to distinguish those who kill repeatedly (three or more instances) across expanses of time (often called a “cooling-off period”) from other types of murderers.
The phrase “serial killer” would in time have to be further qualified to differentiate organized serial killers (those who premeditate and bring tools and instruments of their trade to the murder) from disorganized serial killers (those who utilize whatever is available at the scene). There are other kinds of “serial” killers as well, such as paid assassins, gang killers, spree killers, and other types who repeatedly commit murders. Investigators attempt to discern two things about a serial killer: how they physically conduct the murder, and what mentally drives them to commit the murders including the psychological effects of the act of murder on the serial killer themselves. With this information, investigators can begin to unravel the killer’s modus operandi, and with luck identify them before they kill again, or at least use their analysis in prosecuting the alleged killer.
