CA - Malibu Creek State Park Shooting, Tristan Beaudette, 35, 22 June 2018 *Arrest* #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
FWIW I agree totally both in my sense that this murder does not belong with the other shootings, and with the sense tat "linked shootings" speculation dominates the thread now, and counter-theorists are getting drowned out.
IMO, we should be taking at face value LE's position that there's no evidence to link this shooting with the others and go from there.

Actually, it looks like more people in the thread feel it was targeted. And we are all vigorously discussing that possibility. In fact, the conversation seems to be predominately about that possibility right now.

Terrain, backlighting, calls or messages to wake him, rifle distance, thermal lighting, competition and murders among researchers, a major change in their life at the time of the shooting, te probability of a random shooter actually making a kill, whether the shooter entered the tent, the sound of a zipper, and on and on.
 
BBM. I agree. What did it for me was seeing her bite a reader's head off when they asked that someone pick up a flyer. When you're a one-person outfit, you lose credibility via that behavior.



This is what I think was used. Ex-military (who also liked guns and tech) or a hunter would be someone that would have these. Or an absolute lunatic just looking for people (I'd say that is rare though).

It is not a one person outfit. See the link below for more information. Fwiw, I have asked Tricia if we can link to it but I have not received a response yet. We sometimes allow publications like that to give a local perspective but use your discretion whether it is credible or not.

The Local Malibu - The Voices of Malibu

Regarding your second paragraph- would the person have to be a sharp shooter?
 
OT: I love your name...I’m familiar with the tool!
I'm finding the media reports a bit confusing and have a few basic questions I can't find clarification on.

FWIW, I'm quite familiar with Malibu Creek SP, although it's been a few years since I've been out there. I've traversed even some of the more remote parts on foot and on horseback. While much of the terrain is difficult and remote, the campsites are not at all and attract IME mostly the recreational/family camping crowd. Weekends are very busy, lots of kids, lots of city people.

1. Who made the initial 911 call about the gunshots?

2. Was it one gunshot or multiple?

3. Is it correct that the BIL entered the victim's tent and found him bleeding?

4. Was the discovery of the victim before or after the 911 call? Were the police there (on the property) when the body was discovered?

5. From Malibu campground where father fatally shot is closed down as safety precaution:
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Lt. Rodney Moore said investigators are sifting through evidence from the scene and that the firearm has not been found. Detectives have begun reviewing other shootings in the area but have no evidence yet that ties any prior incidents to the killing, he said.

“The theory we are working with is he was shot inside the tent,” Moore said. “The children were inside the tent too.”

What does this mean? Is the sheriff just ruling out that he was shot outside the tent and then returned, bleeding, to the tent. Or is the theory that someone entered the tent and shot him?

6. Why did early reports state that the victim died from a shot to the 'upper torso' and only later, per the coroner, identify the fatal injury as a shot to the head (and the coroner said there were not multiple gunshots)?

Reports say the victim was pronounced dead at the scene. There are certain specific circumstances in which a person can be pronounced dead on scene in California. (I was licensed as an EMT in LA County so know this well.) Lividity, rigor, evisceration, exposed brain matter, decapitation - the whole list for LA County is here. So this victim fit the criteria somehow by the time EMS arrived.

But how do you declare someone dead from a gunshot wound to the torso - which apparently didn't exist - and entirely miss the fatal head wound?

I will much appreciate any answers or links to more accurate reports. I'm struggling to fit this in with what I know of the park and the campgrounds. I'm not sure where a random shooter would shoot randomly from, for example. And I'm not sure that a single gunshot would rouse much suspicion among LA residents - odd gunfire (especially at holidays) is not so uncommon in many parts of LA and once you get used to it, you sleep through it.

I do hope they find who's responsible.
 
I'm finding the media reports a bit confusing and have a few basic questions I can't find clarification on.

FWIW, I'm quite familiar with Malibu Creek SP, although it's been a few years since I've been out there. I've traversed even some of the more remote parts on foot and on horseback. While much of the terrain is difficult and remote, the campsites are not at all and attract IME mostly the recreational/family camping crowd. Weekends are very busy, lots of kids, lots of city people.

1. Who made the initial 911 call about the gunshots?

2. Was it one gunshot or multiple?

3. Is it correct that the BIL entered the victim's tent and found him bleeding?

4. Was the discovery of the victim before or after the 911 call? Were the police there (on the property) when the body was discovered?

5. From Malibu campground where father fatally shot is closed down as safety precaution:
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Lt. Rodney Moore said investigators are sifting through evidence from the scene and that the firearm has not been found. Detectives have begun reviewing other shootings in the area but have no evidence yet that ties any prior incidents to the killing, he said.

“The theory we are working with is he was shot inside the tent,” Moore said. “The children were inside the tent too.”

What does this mean? Is the sheriff just ruling out that he was shot outside the tent and then returned, bleeding, to the tent. Or is the theory that someone entered the tent and shot him?

6. Why did early reports state that the victim died from a shot to the 'upper torso' and only later, per the coroner, identify the fatal injury as a shot to the head (and the coroner said there were not multiple gunshots)?

Reports say the victim was pronounced dead at the scene. There are certain specific circumstances in which a person can be pronounced dead on scene in California. (I was licensed as an EMT in LA County so know this well.) Lividity, rigor, evisceration, exposed brain matter, decapitation - the whole list for LA County is here. So this victim fit the criteria somehow by the time EMS arrived.

But how do you declare someone dead from a gunshot wound to the torso - which apparently didn't exist - and entirely miss the fatal head wound?

I will much appreciate any answers or links to more accurate reports. I'm struggling to fit this in with what I know of the park and the campgrounds. I'm not sure where a random shooter would shoot randomly from, for example. And I'm not sure that a single gunshot would rouse much suspicion among LA residents - odd gunfire (especially at holidays) is not so uncommon in many parts of LA and once you get used to it, you sleep through it.

I do hope they find who's responsible.

Great questions. And that's illuminating about being declared dead at the scene. Ugh.
 
I don't think I've really made up my mind either way, but that's nothing new. I dislike conflict, don't care for arguing, but I love to debate. Because of that, when someone states their opinion that something has to be a certain way, more likely than not, I'll point out reasons why it could be another way - many times even when I agree with the original opinion. I really have no idea what happened to TB (other than that he died from a gunshot to the head), but I can come up with "evidence" for or against any theory I (and maybe anyone else) can come up with. Sometimes I think I'm so open minded that nothing ever stays put in my brain. MOO
 
I don't think I've really made up my mind either way, but that's nothing new. I dislike conflict, don't care for arguing, but I love to debate. Because of that, when someone states their opinion that something has to be a certain way, more likely than not, I'll point out reasons why it could be another way - many times even when I agree with the original opinion. I really have no idea what happened to TB (other than that he died from a gunshot to the head), but I can come up with "evidence" for or against any theory I (and maybe anyone else) can come up with. Sometimes I think I'm so open minded that nothing ever stays put in my brain. MOO

I like that. And I'd love to hear your points for or against the various theories.
 
Let me preface this by saying I am not an expert marksman, and my hunting skills are both minimal and very rusty.

No, I don't think a shooter from a distance would need to be a sharpshooter. There appear to be several places where the shooter could lurk with a clean line of sight. It wouldn't be an easy shot, but with a good long-range rifle and a thermal image scope, probably any trained marksman or good hunter could hit the target.

If it really was a clean head shot, though--that seems to me that it would require a lot more skill.

And it would have to be somebody who wasn't too concerned about whether other people in the tent would be hurt.
 
FWIW I agree totally both in my sense that this murder does not belong with the other shootings, and with the sense tat "linked shootings" speculation dominates the thread now, and counter-theorists are getting drowned out.
IMO, we should be taking at face value LE's position that there's no evidence to link this shooting with the others and go from there.
Yes. From day one when a crime occurs, LE looks at family then branches off, that is protocol. Tristan wrote many awesome research papers for his occupation and perhaps not everyone liked what he wrote. But we have no idea what LE is doing at the moment. they are allowing ppl to hike in the areas, so I am assuming a mad sniper is not running around so different theories need to be explored. JMO
 
Is it correct that the shooter could have been very close to TB's tent -- like standing over it or in it -- when the shot(s) was fired?
I don't think any of us really know that yet. It would help if we knew what kind of weapon was used and the extent of his head injury. I have a feeling that the confusion about where he was shot was based on his position when he was shot.
 
Oh, and about the zipper noise --

We don't know whether anybody heard the tent zipper; LE hasn't said. But even if they did, zipper noise is really common in a campground. People get up to go to the bathroom or whatever at all hours. By 4a, there would have been people stirring, getting ready to pack up and head out, or head out for a day of hiking. Is there fishing nearby? Fisherfolk are always up early so they can get to their favorite spot by dawn.
 
Oh, and about the zipper noise --

We don't know whether anybody heard the tent zipper; LE hasn't said. But even if they did, zipper noise is really common in a campground. People get up to go to the bathroom or whatever at all hours. By 4a, there would have been people stirring, getting ready to pack up and head out, or head out for a day of hiking. Is there fishing nearby? Fisherfolk are always up early so they can get to their favorite spot by dawn.
I honestly never heard any zipper noises when we use to go camping. Perhaps because of the snoring that buffered everything else out. The only drawback to my theory is if it was a hit, how did the person leave the area with out being noticed if it was close up? Was T observed earlier in the day then the sp shot from a further range? Or was it some one in the camp itself? So many questions.......
 
As he slept, an unknown gunman entered Beaudette’s tent, pulled the trigger and sent the beloved scientist to the hereafter with a bullet in the head.

Sleeping peacefully beside him, unaware their dad was dead, were his two precious daughters.

CRIME HUNTER: Terror in the tent

Interesting quote from an article.... It could be their interpretation of the events. It is a publication from Canada. And yes I love Canada!
 
Yes. From day one when a crime occurs, LE looks at family then branches off, that is protocol. Tristan wrote many awesome research papers for his occupation and perhaps not everyone liked what he wrote. But we have no idea what LE is doing at the moment. they are allowing ppl to hike in the areas, so I am assuming a mad sniper is not running around so different theories need to be explored. JMO

At least not during the day. None of the shooting incidents occurred during the day that we know of.
 
Oh, and about the zipper noise --

We don't know whether anybody heard the tent zipper; LE hasn't said. But even if they did, zipper noise is really common in a campground. People get up to go to the bathroom or whatever at all hours. By 4a, there would have been people stirring, getting ready to pack up and head out, or head out for a day of hiking. Is there fishing nearby? Fisherfolk are always up early so they can get to their favorite spot by dawn.

 
As he slept, an unknown gunman entered Beaudette’s tent, pulled the trigger and sent the beloved scientist to the hereafter with a bullet in the head.

Sleeping peacefully beside him, unaware their dad was dead, were his two precious daughters.

CRIME HUNTER: Terror in the tent

Interesting quote from an article.... It could be their interpretation of the events. It is a publication from Canada. And yes I love Canada!
If my bolded part is correct of the events, would that mean a silencer was used. I am not a gun person . I still think deep down this article was a bit fabricated with those facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
1,817
Total visitors
1,949

Forum statistics

Threads
602,029
Messages
18,133,529
Members
231,213
Latest member
kellieshoes
Back
Top