RickshawFan
Verified Outdoor Recreation Specialist
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2013
- Messages
- 11,078
- Reaction score
- 54,927
Can you link where he was shot in the leg? I haven't heard that before.
I now see it was his arms.
Can you link where he was shot in the leg? I haven't heard that before.
Yes. This is exactly what I'm picturing. He parks somewhere then walks a little ways towards his target. It's easier for him to hide when he doesn't have to hide his escape car. That way there is no vehicle description for anyone to give to LE.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.
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.
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.
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.
Until LE gives more answers then anything can be fair game...we are entitled to our own opinions and with all the cases we have seen these days, if someone wants another killed then they can do all the planning they want too. JMOSeems 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.
So if he's coming into the grounds especially for this I think it would be helpful to isolate possible exit routes...someone could very easily pull up to there it seems. Highway proximity, etc? Still catching up on the earlier posts so I've missed it, my apologies.
I was just wondering. Is it possible there is a ranger gone wrong? A park ranger?
There were five shootings at and near a Malibu park over two years. Why didn't authorities alert the public until father was killed?
"Nishida did not provide details about the other incidents. But Malibu community activist Cece Woods said she is aware of one incident just days before Beaudette was killed in which someone fired a shot at a Tesla being driven along Malibu Canyon Road. She said the bullet hit the car but no one was injured."
This, and the bullet hole in the vehicle last year (BIG Hole it looked like from the video upstream) is similar to the "window shatterings" in NOCO around the same time of the killings, which were never linked to the killings.
I want to describe the demographic of this area and of people who camp and hike around here.
This is Malibu. The people who camp and hike the region (these types of parks in the area), are usually upper middle class, very yuppie. Overwhelmingly liberal, anti-gun type of people. Many involved in the entertainment indisutry in some capacity. High LGBTQ population. Tons of health nuts. Hippies. Hipsters.
That changes dramatically when you get into high desert areas or campgrounds/sporting areas near where Bryce Laspisa disappeared. We often call the latter general area, around Castaic, "the grapevine" even though Grapevine is in Kern County to the north. But I think it's because of the winding 5 freeway through the mountain range intersecting LA and Kern Counties.
But this area? It isn't gun country. It's super liberal, Bernie Sanders country. By which I mean you'll find vastly more anti-gun Bernie supporters in parks like this than gun owners.
If it was father east or north then the numbers of campers carrying would skyrocket.
So if he's coming into the grounds especially for this I think it would be helpful to isolate possible exit routes...someone could very easily pull up to there it seems. Highway proximity, etc? Still catching up on the earlier posts so I've missed it, my apologies.