BigBangCombo
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2018
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 9
In James Renner's book The Serial Killer's Apprentice, there is a chapter about Beverly Jarosz. It was such a provocative story that it left me with lots of questions:
--- Why would Bev, as well as her mother, feel a dark foreboding of death and danger coming at them in the weeks before Bev was murdered? Had the family had some kind of trauma that we don't know about? That made them feel "what next?" (We all have had that kind of PTSD when we suffer several great losses in a row...)
--- Was the gift box or the anonymous gifts (of the silver bracelet and ring) available for forensic testing?
--- Why did the apparently nice young man, James M, living next door to Bev's grandmother go home and change his clothes after his stated 15-minute trip driving Bev home? He said he did that and then had something for lunch.
--- Bev made a habit of locking all the doors all the time, so... who did she let in between her 1:00-ish phone call to her mom and the 1:20 arrival of her friend Barb? The window of opportunity might have been smaller, depending on how long she spoke with her mom. Was the murderer already in the house? If so, how?
--- Was there some stress between Bev and Barb, with Bev hurrying to be ready for Barb's 1PM arrival, and Barb stating she thought Bev might not be answering the doorbell because Bev was irritated Barb was late? It just didn't sound like an easygoing relationship.
--- Same as above.... why did Barb leave when there was no answer at the door, yet she heard loud music and a crashing like a dresser drawer closing inside? Did she really think Bev was angry at her? Wouldn't she have have gone to a house next door and called Bev? It sounded like there was tension in that relationship. Or, they were more casual friends where you give the other person "more space"?
--- It didn't seem like Bev recognized the voice of the man, "Stephen Stackowicz" (who called maybe to find out if Bev was home alone)? If she recognized the voice as a boyfriend or a guy she knew, she wouldn't have left her father that written message.
--- Bev was strangled with a rope tied in a square knot. Who typically uses that kind of knot? Per Wiki, it's used for sailing, tying bandages, macrame, sashes, obis, and belts, as well as in Boy (or Girl) Scouts.
--- What happened to the 19-year-old boy, John P who was home the day of the murder and admitted to watching Bev sunbathe previously?
--- Bev's current boyfriend, Roger M didn't have a good alibi, just that he was home sick... Detective Horrigan felt there were questionable things in his story, even though Roger passed a lie detector test. Remember that forensics showed that Bev had never had sex... a current boyfriend might be a likely guy to put the pressure on for that and then get enraged at a refusal.
--- Besides James Renner's book, I've read posters' comments about the middle-aged, on-strike/off-from-work neighbor, James k, who often stood at his window and looked at Bev's house. At first he said he saw the killer running away, but later changed his story to say that he lied to get attention. Posters wondered if he was paid off by the murderer's family....
I'd love to hear comments or corrections!
Roger's polygraph results were inconclusive. That's not quite the same as passing. His alibi of being home sick was contingent on his own word. First, an inconclusive polygraph result isn't enough to prove guilt. He was the 22-year old boyfriend, so after learning of Beverly's death, one could assume he was upset. Being upset can throw off a polygraph's result. And there's a thin line between passing the test, and getting an inconclusive result that leans towards a passing result. Still... Why was Horrigan convinced Roger was the guilty party? Did he have any tell tale signs, like cuts on his hands, often the case when you've stabbed someone 42 frigging times, rope burns on his fingers, from strangling Beverly? Signs of scratches on his face, from the obvious fight Beverly put up before dying? Much of the evidence, as in any homicide case, has been withheld from the public, so the answers to those three questions remain a mystery. Has Roger made his DNA available to test against the DNA examined in 2017? Apparently not. While that doesn't provide proof of guilt, one would think he would be interested in clearing his name even at this late date. Horrigan was convinced, within 24-hours of the crime, that Roger was the guilty party. True, cops aren't always right, but this guy's behavior over the years give even more reason to pause when looking at him. Unless it was a complete stranger who somehow got into the house, destroying the assumption that Beverly let her killer inside... In theory, someone could have been lurking upstairs, even though there was no sign of a forced entry... Then the number of male suspects an already paranoid Beverly would have willingly let inside the house, can be counted on less than one hand! Tick-tock on this one folks. Horrigan was probably right! Current investigators should be sweating old Rog. If he's innocent, s-o-r-r-y! If not...