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

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
It does seem more believable that these shootings are linked IMO. The pattern with the dates could also be a clue. It seems the killer is getting more bold and unfortunately has escalated to an up close and personal shot to the head. One thing all these shootings do have in common is nobody has seen the shooter.
 
Wonder if anyone heard a car engine running/starting after the shots. A heat seeking helicopter could have weeded out someone on foot, unless he had a tent pitched at the site as a place to run back to and hide out and carry himself off as a camper until everyone was told to vacate.
 
Tapia Park is a portal into Malibu Creek State Park. They touch each other. Trails connect both sites. This is another shooting of someone sleeping within a two mile radius or so.

I don't think we know whether this man was shot with shotgun pellets, a bullet, or what. Did the autopsy say?

Regardless, to discount another nighttime shooting that occurred within the same area, of a camper, who was shot at close range, for no apparent reason, while he slept, makes little sense to me.

These are big coincidences.

Spray of shotgun pellets. Evidently random. He had several removed from his legs.

See my inputs upthread about how impossible it is to see people stealth camping in the dark and how easy it is to mistakenly shoot them. They are pretty much invisible.

The wildlife biologist was presumably on a job, not out there for fun. He was not in a campground. IIRC he walked out.

He might have been shot from a trail, I dunno. Anyway, people get jittery in the dark and think they're being attacked by wild animals. This has even happened to me at altitude (evidently from too little oxygen in the brain); I thought I had been attacked by a bear in my tent. If I'd had a gun, I might have been tempted to shoot randomly...

People get jittery about wild animals in full daylight, let alone in pitch black darkness.
 
The angle does work I don’t think for the deer slug although no knowing if the car was parked on incline, still seems doubtful to me.

I'm not sure exactly what this means, but if you're curious about whether the car was parked on a flat or an incline, it was flat. That campground is very flat in general, but State Parks also cater to RV owners and they need flat parking pads.
 
Perhaps the previous shootings in the area was a key factor for TB being targeted at the campground, JMO.

Seems quite farfetched. That would mean someone had to set up or know that the wife was taking a test, then encourage or ask TB to go camping with his daughters, then suggest or request that he go to that specific campground and have known about all the previous shootings (I get the LA Times and none of that was well known and there have been no mentions of multiple shootings until now. Someone would've had to research or have a lot of knowledge about three, other, seemingly unconnected shootings).

Then they would've had to know exactly what space he's in and then risk being seen coming into the park (vehicle being spotted), recognized in the park or tent, and seen fleeing the park, and risk shooting the two children known to be in the tent.

At present that doesn't make much sense to me.
 
Last edited:
Spray of shotgun pellets. Evidently random. He had several removed from his legs.

See my inputs upthread about how impossible it is to see people stealth camping in the dark and how easy it is to mistakenly shoot them. They are pretty much invisible.

The wildlife biologist was presumably on a job, not out there for fun. He was not in a campground. IIRC he walked out.

He might have been shot from a trail, I dunno. Anyway, people get jittery in the dark and think they're being attacked by wild animals. This has even happened to me at altitude (evidently from too little oxygen in the brain); I thought I had been attacked by a bear in my tent. If I'd had a gun, I might have been tempted to shoot randomly...

People get jittery about wild animals in full daylight, let alone in pitch black darkness.

There is no hunting in that area. This is not a high altitude place. He was sleeping in a hammock and shot at close range. Not mistaken for an attacking animal under such conditions.

This isn't hunting country. And no hunting is allowed anywhere nearby. I entertained the possibility of a hunting accident until I read about the area.
 
It does seem more believable that these shootings are linked IMO. The pattern with the dates could also be a clue. It seems the killer is getting more bold and unfortunately has escalated to an up close and personal shot to the head. One thing all these shootings do have in common is nobody has seen the shooter.

The one to the wildlife biologist at the adjoining park was upclose and personal and to the head. His arms that was hit was slung across his head when he was shot at close range.
 
The one to the wildlife biologist at the adjoining park was upclose and personal and to the head. His arms that was hit was slung across his head when he was shot at close range.

Since LE said as of now they have no evidence that these shootings are linked, I'm wondering if the shooter (if these are all related) used a handgun this time. Also it would be hard to miss someone walking around with a shotgun as opposed to a handgun. He could easily hide that in his pants. The only gun I've read about so far is a shotgun, but I'm not sure if that is what was used in all the other random shootings. I keep picturing him walking off like nothing happened verses taking off in a vehicle. I think the vehicle would be too noticeable and it seems this guy gets off on being invisible.

ETA: Also the man in the hammock said after he was shot he looked around at his surroundings and didn't see anyone, then he checked his injury. The shooter was close, but far enough away that the victim couldn't see him. Probably hiding behind a large tree.
 
Last edited:
Can you link where he was shot in the leg? I haven't heard that before.

Spray of shotgun pellets. Evidently random. He had several removed from his legs.

See my inputs upthread about how impossible it is to see people stealth camping in the dark and how easy it is to mistakenly shoot them. They are pretty much invisible.

The wildlife biologist was presumably on a job, not out there for fun. He was not in a campground. IIRC he walked out.

He might have been shot from a trail, I dunno. Anyway, people get jittery in the dark and think they're being attacked by wild animals. This has even happened to me at altitude (evidently from too little oxygen in the brain); I thought I had been attacked by a bear in my tent. If I'd had a gun, I might have been tempted to shoot randomly...

People get jittery about wild animals in full daylight, let alone in pitch black darkness.
 
Investigators were focusing on 2 campsites, #49 and 51, according to this video.


Great video, thanks for posting. Shows the terrain well.
Really, really sad for this man's family and his little girls....
Interesting to see reporters actually speculate at the end. Usually they report the news, not interpret the news.
 
and yet others WERE shot with a shotgun. So obviously someone has been walking around with a shotgun that no one saw. And how many people are awake at 4-5am to see this? Could be why the time is chosen.

Since LE said as of now they have no evidence that these shootings are linked, I'm wondering if the shooter (if these are all related) used a handgun this time. Also it would be hard to miss someone walking around with a shotgun as opposed to a handgun. He could easily hide that in his pants. The only gun I've read about so far is a shotgun, but I'm not sure if that is what was used in all the other random shootings. I keep picturing him walking off like nothing happened verses taking off in a vehicle. I think the vehicle would be too noticeable and it seems this guy gets off on being invisible.

ETA: Also the man in the hammock said after he was shot he looked around at his surroundings and didn't see anyone, then he checked his injury. The shooter was close, but far enough away that the victim couldn't see him. Probably hiding behind a large tree.
 
There is no hunting in that area. This is not a high altitude place. He was sleeping in a hammock and shot at close range. Not mistaken for an attacking animal under such conditions.

This isn't hunting country. And no hunting is allowed anywhere nearby. I entertained the possibility of a hunting accident until I read about the area.

It sounds like you're misunderstanding a few things I'm trying to point out.

1. People carry guns. For whatever reason, not just for hunting.
2. People are extremely afraid of wild animals, even in daylight.
3. People get very jumpy thinking there's an animal near them.
4. The sleeper in the hammock would have been invisible in darkness; that's kinda the point of stealth camping and/or "leave no trace".
5. In the dark, it's easy to mistake a crunch in the bushes with a major threat. True, even in daylight.
6. Many people think it's "smart" to take a gun when they go hiking (or whatever) to protect themselves from "wild animals". Even where shooting is banned.
7. The animal wouldn't have had to appear to a shooter as being in "attack mode". People go nuts in the dark when they hear a squirrel, for goodness sake, even a caterpillar landing on their tent roof.
8. Off the beaten track, your ears are hyped up and sounds seem very loud and dramatic because there's no competition from other noises, as in inhabited areas.
9. All that wildlife biologist would have had to do is to turn over or sigh and he could have been shot by a jittery gun-toter who happened by.
10. This wouldn't have had to be an area with bears in it for someone to think they were at risk of a bear attack. Same with coyotes, deer, mountain lions....

10. Go down a trail in the woods in the pitch dark and notice how jumpy you get at every little sound. Then imagine you had a gun and could act on your alarm.
11. Go down a trail in the woods in broad daylight in an area where bear sightings are normal (e.g. Shenandoah National Park); notice how jumpy people are about even the possibility of coming across a bear. Then imagine how jumpy they'd be at night, and if they had a weapon.

Moral of this story?
a) some people should not be in the woods or on the trail at night
b) some people should not be in the woods or on the trail even in daylight....
c) if you happen to be in the woods and hear a sound, there are low odds that it's an animal interested in messing with you
d) someone can easily get hurt if you're trigger happy and don't know what you're shooting at
 
Last edited:
The one to the wildlife biologist at the adjoining park was upclose and personal and to the head. His arms that was hit was slung across his head when he was shot at close range.
Reference?
 
I'm not sure exactly what this means, but if you're curious about whether the car was parked on a flat or an incline, it was flat. That campground is very flat in general, but State Parks also cater to RV owners and they need flat parking pads.
Pretty much that. I figured sleeping in your car on a flat surface would be more comfortable than on an incline.
Looking at that up thread video of the slug that went into her car it looks a bit like the hole angles down, not straight but that could just be the camera angle.
 
and yet others WERE shot with a shotgun. So obviously someone has been walking around with a shotgun that no one saw. And how many people are awake at 4-5am to see this? Could be why the time is chosen.
Correct, but for LE to say as of now, they have no evidence that this was linked to the other shootings. If he was shot with a shotgun that could be linking evidence right there.
 
Pretty much that. I figured sleeping in your car on a flat surface would be more comfortable than on an incline.
Looking at that up thread video of the slug that went into her car it looks a bit like the hole angles down, not straight but that could just be the camera angle.
Interesting. I didn't realize you were referring to the young woman with a shot-up rear fender, but that's a great observation.
 
Since LE said as of now they have no evidence that these shootings are linked, I'm wondering if the shooter (if these are all related) used a handgun this time. Also it would be hard to miss someone walking around with a shotgun as opposed to a handgun. He could easily hide that in his pants. The only gun I've read about so far is a shotgun, but I'm not sure if that is what was used in all the other random shootings. I keep picturing him walking off like nothing happened verses taking off in a vehicle. I think the vehicle would be too noticeable and it seems this guy gets off on being invisible.

ETA: Also the man in the hammock said after he was shot he looked around at his surroundings and didn't see anyone, then he checked his injury. The shooter was close, but far enough away that the victim couldn't see him. Probably hiding behind a large tree.

Malibu Canyon road is close to where the wildlife biologist was sleeping. (Probably in the Tapia Park parking lot). If there is a serial shooter he knows the area well and likely does park away from where he shoots. But maybe this time he came upon the biologist near where he himself had parked. Maybe he parks at the adjoining park and then hikes to his "hunting grounds".

He could have night vision googles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
140
Guests online
558
Total visitors
698

Forum statistics

Threads
605,493
Messages
18,187,775
Members
233,393
Latest member
MaryWant
Back
Top