He was an Ex Law Officer, knowing 'too much time has elapsed to be charged for the rapes'.
So admits to these.
Murders, he won't admit because there is NO TIME LIMIT.
He will, and is, being outsmarted, by today's technology.
Yippee. Karma is at work. :jail:
Great, if he can be charged for the Rapes he has admitted to have committed.
I was getting worried.
https://www.mtdemocrat.com/news/golden-state-killer-arrest-prompts-look-at-40-year-old-local-murder/
Golden State Killer arrest prompts look at 40-year-old local murder
May 18, 2018
**********
families looking for inclusion through dna
Great, if he can be charged for the Rapes he has admitted to have committed.
I was getting worried.
That would be great - so why don't they charge him ? They have 11 months left and should get on with it.
That would be great - so why don't they charge him ? They have 11 months left and should get on with it.
The problem is that the 1986 change in the SOL is not retroactive. In the US, its unconstitutional to make laws retroactive (ex post facto). It would not apply to any rapes he committed prior to 1986. Im sure if they can find a way to charge him, they will. But they cant use a 1986 law to charge him for crimes committed prior to that law.
MOO
If he has admitted them, does that make a difference?There is no DNA evidence for most of the rapes. There is only DNA evidence for the 3 rapes in Contra Costa County. The Sacramento County Sheriffs Department and other jurisdictions threw away the physical evidence once the statute of limitations for the rapes passed which happened years ago which is why they have only indicted him on the murder charges.
I misunderstood the OP. I thought they said it depended when they got the DNA match?. As they only got a match recently they could not have charged him before, I thought. Do you have a link showing the situation that you have outlined?
Thanks.
If he has admitted them, does that make a difference?
Have you got a link showing they don't have the DNA anymore from pre CCCounty cases.
I misunderstood the OP. I thought they said it depended when they got the DNA match?. As they only got a match recently they could not have charged him before, I thought. Do you have a link showing the situation that you have outlined?
Thanks.
Eta I am going by Tadpole's link upthread ATM.
More...
Golden State Killer may go unpunished for 50 alleged rapes
https://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/s...50-alleged-rapes-may-go-unpunished/617714002/
Accused Golden State Killer may not serve time for rape due to statute of limitations
http://www.wwlp.com/world/accused-g...rape-due-to-statute-of-limitations/1148918224
Alleged Golden State Killer may not serve time for sexual assaults due to statute of limitations
http://www.crimeonline.com/2018/04/...exual-assaults-due-to-statute-of-limitations/
California ended its statute of limitations on rape after Bill Cosby. It may not apply to the Golden State Killer
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/26/us/golden-state-killer-statute-limitations-trnd/index.html
MOO
I dont think admitting it makes a difference as he will most likely plead not guilty. Theres also no official statement from LE that he admitted to being EAR or the VR. That statement is hearsay that has been published by blogs and mentioned in podcasts. I havent seen anyone from LE confirm that he admitted it but maybe I missed it. It would be pretty silly to admit to being EAR/VR but deny being ONS when EAR and ONS are linked via DNA (through the aforementioned CCC rape kits).
As to the rape evidence, Michelle McNamara stated that the Sacramentos physical evidence and much of the case files were destroyed at p. 158 of her book Ill be Gone in the Dark.
Is there a MSM or LE link re the physical evidence and case files being destroyed) to back up that book extract ( which I haven't seen )?
https://soundcloud.com/12-26-75/ep-16-sgt-joe-deangelo-exeter-pd
@ 1:42 mins
"law enforcement has publically stated
that he admitted to being the VR and EAR
but has denied all homicides in all jurisdictions
including the ones tied to him by dna"
I am so confused as to the reports of confession.
Hmmm "may" is used a lot-it doesn't sound definite imo.