Here's my question, though: you would think that the area where such a violent, horrific crime took place would be a total mess (sorry). Blood everywhere, and lots of it. But the park was open for a festival not long after, and I don't remember reading that the spot where she was found was closed off -- it really couldn't have been, right? Does anyone remember reading a description of the spot where she was found? I don't. Is it possible that she was killed elsewhere and dumped in the park?
I had this same thought last night when I was thinking about the case. I remember seeing pictures in the following days of law enforcement collecting evidence, but I don't remember seeing any blood stains. I did consider that maybe the attack happened off the concrete path and therefore you wouldn't see any blood, but you would think the killer would have left a trail themselves as they fled the scene?
My thinking is that this is either someone who had a lot of anger toward the victim for some reason and targeted her or someone who is very deranged or sick and would be inclined to do this again. A very violent serial killer.
[snipped]
Agreed. To me the autopsy report indicates that one of two things must be true:
a) The killer was known to Katie and committed the crime in a fit of pure rage
b) The killer was someone deep in the throes of psychosis and completely divorced from reality
This was clearly not a "crime of opportunity" -- a person walking a pit bull is not a soft target, and the location was public enough that the killer was at great risk of being discovered, especially considering the extensiveness of the attack. That tells me that it must have either been someone so blind with hatred that they weren't really considering/caring about the risks at the time, or that they were not in a mental state to even understand the concept of crime/consequence (e.g. psychosis). If the latter, though, it would seem that the perpetrator would have been quickly apprehended, lacking the frame of mind to try to flee the scene, hide evidence, etc. (I'm remembering some cases where people were, for example, on hallucinogenic drugs and would commit some horrific act and be immediately apprehended because they stayed on the scene.)
If the police have any suspicion whatsoever that this was an attack by a stranger or a potential serial killer, IMO the lack of strong warning to the general public to be on the alert would border on negligence. There was some "go in groups" talk and etc. at the beginning of the investigation, but I haven't heard any of that lately. That tells me that they don't have reason to believe that the public is at risk. It also makes me very hopeful that they are homing in on a suspect.
The final thing that makes me hopeful that this case is progressing towards an arrest is the release of the autopsy report. I don't know a ton about crime, but I can think of at least a few major unsolved "no suspects, no person of interest" cases where they won't even release the cause of death. I feel like they would have kept the details sealed if they were still searching for a suspect at this point.