PA PA - Betsy Aardsma, 22, murdered in Pattee Library, Penn State, 29 Nov 1969

[cbcrime]

milopedes - our posts crossed - I totally agree with your post.

 

[littlehorn]

Thanks for the description of the area and about the knife and hunting. I had gone back and the article I read said about 4 inch knife. Which would not preclude a pocket knife. The width of the knife was a question I had - so thanks for answering that.

I agree with your statement about planning:
"I believe planning was evident in the aspect of probably knowing the layout of the library, etc., but this may just be from familiarity with the surroundings. Not necessarily that it was an ideal place, just that knowing the surroundings increased the chances for success in getting away with murder."

This murder seems to be more about the killers uncontrolled emotions rather than a killer killing out of preservation.

So did the killer go to the library that day with the intent to harm someone? Did he know what area he wanted to prowl? Did he want his victim to be from the English class? Was a specific group targeted? Because if this group was a target - then I would think more organized planning took place. Derek - do you know would all of the English group being doing their research in the same area?

The English group would not necessarily all have been in the same area, as they would have had different projects -- approximately half the class had Brit Lit projects under assistant professor Joukovsky, and the other half had American Lit projects under Meserole, is my understanding.

It's also unclear from my research if this was a planned research period (I don't think it was). I believe it was just planned office hours with the availability of the library being an additional perk for anyone who came to the office hours. So some portion of her English class as a whole was milling around the library at this time.

To me it almost seems like someone who, while they may have had the sanity to escape the scene, etc., "lost it" and didn't care when they decided to make that fatal mistake WHO was around. Too many wildcards to make it seem like someone who planned it to be in the library.

Just the fact that the assistant stacks supervisor walked past while Betsy was still alive (he was a fairly tall, bald guy who had been a laborer and was somewhat well-built) would give most people pause, as it's such a wildcard.

Can we say that he planned it for shift change at 5:00? Possible, but again, that's speculation on my part. Maybe giving too much credit.

 

[milopedes]

I can shed some light on this issue. The killer's planning may have extended to picking a secluded area and time -- but at the same time, the library was host that day to Betsy's entire English class -- in the sense that anyone who signed up for office hours was there. In a 50-60 student class many had come in to work on the papers and were roaming the library after meeting with the professor, Harrison Meserole, in his basement office in the library..

Yes, but the killer(s) may not know this beforehand. If planning occurred, once on the site, the killer(s) may not have been able to resist after so much "build-up" had occurred. By this I mean thinking about it, or fantasizing if you will, about how it would all take place until he (or they) could not resist doing it once in that place, at that time, with a victim in mind.

Again, this is speculation which leads us away from factual information. Sorry about that, but I am only trying to make a counter-point here.

Plus, the library is huge. And, if I recall correctly, I've read quotes that the library - while frequented by many students - was far from overpopulated on that day. This is particularly so for the area in which the crime occurred.

 

[milopedes]

The blade width on the knife as estimated by the coroner was @ 1 1/4", and length about 3 3/4". Not a "hunting knife" as I know them. This is more representative of the pocketknife I carry every day to open boxes and cut banding at work.

I agree with your assessment of the type of knife. I'm not exactly sure where the whole "hunting knife" idea originally got inserted - probably by the media - but it makes more sense to think it was a pocket knife.

Despite what you've written, and I've considered those things myself, and the pocket knife IMO is again an illustration of planning to some degree. If I am going to kill someone, and I know it is going to be with a knife, it would be my preference to use the biggest one possible. But, if I do not wish to get caught or attract attention then I would take one that would be effective, but one I was able to conceal.

 

[littlehorn]

Yes, but the killer(s) may not know this beforehand. If planning occurred, once on the site, the killer(s) may not have been able to resist after so much "build-up" had occurred. By this I mean thinking about it, or fantasizing if you will, about how it would all take place until he (or they) could not resist doing it once in that place, at that time, with a victim in mind.

Again, this is speculation which leads us away from factual information. Sorry about that, but I am only trying to make a counter-point here.

Plus, the library is huge. And, if I recall correctly, I've read quotes that the library - while frequented by many students - was far from overpopulated on that day. This is particularly so for the area in which the crime occurred.

Yes, this is correct for the area in which the crime occurred. The library was definitely underpopulated that day, although I don't have stats on an "average" day at the library.

400-500 people entered and/or left the building between 4:45-5:30 according to foot counters at the doors...Police only ever spoke with a fraction of them. Reports have indicated that, outside the area in which the murder took place, other students in the library in different areas were unaware that anything was going on at all until the core was sealed off.

 

[milopedes]

My only issue with the planning idea is that there was no way to guarantee that the single stab wound would be fatal. As the police said in one of the original reports -- they felt the killer did NOT know Betsy.

This is an important fact we should focus upon, but I do not think it should alter your perception of whether planning did or did not occur. All the planning in the world cannot take into account each and every scenario. Let me give you a couple of "what ifs" to illustrate my point:

1. The killer(s) panicked since it was the first time stabbing someone.
2. The killer(s) heard someone approaching and fled, or played it off as if there was some legitimate concern for Betsy.
3. Betsy, being small, fell quickly and hard convincing the killer(s) that one stab was effective.

Each of the above instances, while speculative, could still be the case with planning having occured prior to the crime. The killer(s) could have planned to do more, but simply abandoned those plans due to any of those reasons.

But the "single stab" fact is an important one IMO. Here is what it tells me:

1. Not a crime of passion as there was no "over kill".
2. Not someone she knew. If the risk of recognition existed, the killer(s) would need to ensure she died by doing more.

Now, on point #2, it makes sense to discuss the concept of frontal versus rear attack. What does the evidence tell us here? I think the direction her head was lying should clear all the up, but I still do not have a good grasp on the lay-out of the crime scene. If her head is facing a dead-end of an aisle, then there is no way she was attacked from behind - where would they have come from? If her head is facing the open end, then it is possible, but we would then need to consider other facts.

 

[littlehorn]

I agree with your assessment of the type of knife. I'm not exactly sure where the whole "hunting knife" idea originally got inserted - probably by the media - but it makes more sense to think it was a pocket knife.

Despite what you've written, and I've considered those things myself, and the pocket knife IMO is again an illustration of planning to some degree. If I am going to kill someone, and I know it is going to be with a knife, it would be my preference to use the biggest one possible. But, if I do not wish to get caught or attract attention then I would take one that would be effective, but one I was able to conceal.

I guess the argument could be made that ANY knife would be indicative of some degree of planning. Like you say, you'd want to use the biggest one possible but one that could be concealable -- especially once it had been bloodied, you'd want one that you could stuff back into a pocket or sheath at least until you were able to wash it off or clean it.

I guess I am somewhat old-school in my thoughts but I carry a pocketknife all the time and have since I graduated high school (when trying to remember when you could/could not have one was more of a liability in case you accidentally took it to school). Mine is large enough to be a defensive weapon (or even an offensive weapon) and is a quick-opening "assisted" style knife because it has helped me in many jobs I've had where opening a knife with both hands was not practical or safe (such as being on a ladder).

So in my case it wouldn't have any planning at all behind it -- it would simply be something that I had with me, a weapon of opportunity.

There was a lot of speculation at the time that she was stabbed purposely in a way that would not bleed, perhaps with an icepick. But the coroner's report does not bear out the idea that she was stabbed with such a low-profile device.

It's also possible, although less likely, that the weapon was one available on-hand -- bookbinding knives, scissors, etc. Again, all speculation, and the pocketknife or a small sheathed skinning knife seems more likely.

 

[cbcrime]

The hunting knife came from the article with the doctor who performed the autopsy.

 

[milopedes]

Well, the other issue with that becomes, if the person who did this planned it at all, that makes it premeditated. If it was premeditated, doesn't that indicate a predisposition to murder which would likely manifest itself again later in life?

I guess what I'm asking is, if you're inclined to plan and commit a murder, will you be completely happy and satisfied with yourself after only doing it once? And you never go on to commit another crime after this which would lead to your prints being taken and possibly matched with partials from the scene?

Maybe, maybe not. I think we have no way of knowing, so we'd be wasting our time speculating. While criminal patterns exist, which allows for profiling and such, there are always outliers.

If I had to put money on it, I'd bet the killer(s) went on to other crimes. But in my experience, captive criminals boast about their crimes, so I'd think at some point someone would have come forward. So, if the killer(s) did commit more murders, maybe they were never caught or maybe the died before being caught or confessing to this one.

It would seem to me that the true perpetrator would not be able to resist boasting about this one, since here we are 40 years later still scratching our heads. Too good to pass up that opportunity to brag.

 

[milopedes]

It's useful to note that not even a month and a half after the incident, a male fitting the description tried to break into a girl's apartment on Allen St. not far from the college. A couple of other incidents took place shortly after where a knife-wielding would-be rapist approached women (unsuccessfully) in public. This man was never caught, either.

The description was always the same -- 5'8-6'0 tall, sandy brown hair, etc.

Yes, I agree. And this is something to consider. I doubt, but could be wrong, that the media attention stirred up a bunch of copy-cat sickos. But that is plausible. But less so, IMO, than the fact this could be Betsy's killer.

 

[littlehorn]

This is an important fact we should focus upon, but I do not think it should alter your perception of whether planning did or did not occur. All the planning in the world cannot take into account each and every scenario. Let me give you a couple of "what ifs" to illustrate my point:

1. The killer(s) panicked since it was the first time stabbing someone.
2. The killer(s) heard someone approaching and fled, or played it off as if there was some legitimate concern for Betsy.
3. Betsy, being small, fell quickly and hard convincing the killer(s) that one stab was effective.

Each of the above instances, while speculative, could still be the case with planning having occured prior to the crime. The killer(s) could have planned to do more, but simply abandoned those plans due to any of those reasons.

But the "single stab" fact is an important one IMO. Here is what it tells me:

1. Not a crime of passion as there was no "over kill".
2. Not someone she knew. If the risk of recognition existed, the killer(s) would need to ensure she died by doing more.

Now, on point #2, it makes sense to discuss the concept of frontal versus rear attack. What does the evidence tell us here? I think the direction her head was lying should clear all the up, but I still do not have a good grasp on the lay-out of the crime scene. If her head is facing a dead-end of an aisle, then there is no way she was attacked from behind - where would they have come from? If her head is facing the open end, then it is possible, but we would then need to consider other facts.

Good points, all good points. I have tried to consider the issue of a front or rear attack (FWIW, the coroner felt she was attacked from the front by a right-handed person). I actually did a mock-up of the autopsy report on a mannequin, with everything to scale. I can send you a link to that if you would like to see it. I no longer have it up actively on the site out of concern for the family -- wouldn't want them to stumble across it looking at the site and be offended.

I made some conclusions based on that which seemed that it was more plausible that she was stabbed from the front, by a left-handed person, from the direction of her left side -- as though she were facing the westerly set of shelves, and someone came down the aisle and addressed her. As she turned slightly to see who it was or to acknowledge them, she was stabbed. This is my theory from what I discovered making those pictures.

 

[littlehorn]

The hunting knife came from the article with the doctor who performed the autopsy.

I felt that was one of the parts of that article where the author mis-spoke. From talking to him, he's since changed his mind about the fixed-blade hunting knife. I educated him a bit on different types of knives which he was unfamiliar with.

 

[littlehorn]

Maybe, maybe not. I think we have no way of knowing, so we'd be wasting our time speculating. While criminal patterns exist, which allows for profiling and such, there are always outliers.

If I had to put money on it, I'd bet the killer(s) went on to other crimes. But in my experience, captive criminals boast about their crimes, so I'd think at some point someone would have come forward. So, if the killer(s) did commit more murders, maybe they were never caught or maybe the died before being caught or confessing to this one.

It would seem to me that the true perpetrator would not be able to resist boasting about this one, since here we are 40 years later still scratching our heads. Too good to pass up that opportunity to brag.

Agreed. That's what makes the shrine interesting, and also the postcard that was received by police in April of 1979, stating only that "you never caught the guy who killed that c*nt in the library."

 

[littlehorn]

Yes, I agree. And this is something to consider. I doubt, but could be wrong, that the media attention stirred up a bunch of copy-cat sickos. But that is plausible. But less so, IMO, than the fact this could be Betsy's killer.

It's possible that there were copycats, but again, media attention was limited, details were few, and the attempted rapes, etc., started so rapidly after the killing (first attack was January 1970) that it seems more possible that the guy, emboldened by his success at killing in the library, felt he could go on to do more.

I wonder if the intent was not to kill her, but to expose himself, attempt rape, etc., but the plans changed at the last minute, or a mistake happened. She obviously didn't try to fight back, according to the coroner's report, but perhaps he changed his mind at the last minute or felt the situation was going south.

 

[milopedes]

So did the killer go to the library that day with the intent to harm someone? Did he know what area he wanted to prowl? Did he want his victim to be from the English class? Was a specific group targeted? Because if this group was a target - then I would think more organized planning took place.

I agree with you that had a specific group been targeted, that even more planning would have taken place. But I don't think a specific group, or person, was targeted by the killer(s) in this crime.

Yet, I still stand by my position that some planning took place. Planning, no matter how little, is a key element for me. If the killer(s) planned the crime then it tells me the desire to escape was high.

Some people have questioned, "Well, if they didn't wish to get caught, why commit the crime in the library?" Who knows? We'll never know that unless the killer(s) get caught. But think of all the high-profile killings that have occurred in our society, many of which took place in a very risky setting. I think at the end of the day the risk, or thrill, played a huge role in the setting chosen. Had the killer(s) simply attacked a student off campus, at night, walking by herself the "high" wouldn't have been the same. Sure, still some risk, but not nearly as much.

To commit a crime in a semi-highly populated library on a major university in the mid-afternoon is quite brazen, regardless of the fact it was on a holiday break in a secluded area of the library. I just cannot fathom a first-time killer had the bravado to commit this crime. But again, I am speculating.

 

[milopedes]

I can send you a link to that if you would like to see it. I no longer have it up actively on the site out of concern for the family -- wouldn't want them to stumble across it looking at the site and be offended.

Perfectly understandable. And yes, I'd love to see it. In fact, if you have pictures, a map, or drawing of the aisles in that area it would help clarify in my mind the setting. It would also help me understand how, if the killer was not one of the two men seen by multiple witnesses, he eluded them after killing Betsy (i.e., other exits, or aisles he could have used after the stab).

 

[milopedes]

I wonder if the intent was not to kill her, but to expose himself, attempt rape, etc., but the plans changed at the last minute, or a mistake happened. She obviously didn't try to fight back, according to the coroner's report, but perhaps he changed his mind at the last minute or felt the situation was going south.

I have a problem with this scenario. Unless he had already done something, why simply change his mind and decide "Instead of flashing, I'll stab her in the chest!" Just doesn't make sense to me.

And, I do not think the timeline allows for too much else to have occurred.

Not to mention, no one really heard much other than the books falling. Some have claimed to hear a muffled sound, which I think is possible, but that's it. I don't buy the girl who said she heard a scream or cry out for various reasons.

 

[littlehorn]

Perfectly understandable. And yes, I'd love to see it. In fact, if you have pictures, a map, or drawing of the aisles in that area it would help clarify in my mind the setting. It would also help me understand how, if the killer was not one of the two men seen by multiple witnesses, he eluded them after killing Betsy (i.e., other exits, or aisles he could have used after the stab).

Check out a map at the State College Magazine article "The Last Reason," linked from my site. Should be a map at the bottom of the general layout of the core.

 

[littlehorn]

I have a problem with this scenario. Unless he had already done something, why simply change his mind and decide "Instead of flashing, I'll stab her in the chest!" Just doesn't make sense to me.

And, I do not think the timeline allows for too much else to have occurred.

I'm just wondering if he walked up, went to flash her, heard a sound elsewhere in the core or something, then realized he might have made a mistake, and stabbed her...Just thinking out loud.

 

[littlehorn]

Yet, I still stand by my position that some planning took place. Planning, no matter how little, is a key element for me. If the killer(s) planned the crime then it tells me the desire to escape was high.

Some people have questioned, "Well, if they didn't wish to get caught, why commit the crime in the library?" Who knows? We'll never know that unless the killer(s) get caught. But think of all the high-profile killings that have occurred in our society, many of which took place in a very risky setting. I think at the end of the day the risk, or thrill, played a huge role in the setting chosen. Had the killer(s) simply attacked a student off campus, at night, walking by herself the "high" wouldn't have been the same. Sure, still some risk, but not nearly as much.

To commit a crime in a semi-highly populated library on a major university in the mid-afternoon is quite brazen, regardless of the fact it was on a holiday break in a secluded area of the library. I just cannot fathom a first-time killer had the bravado to commit this crime. But again, I am speculating.

This is a good point. It seems like an unusually high level of adrenaline which would indicate typically someone who was jaded with "normal" murders and felt like they wanted to up the ante a bit.

For a first time killer it would have been much easier to do it pretty much anywhere else in the world. Especially because even serial killers often report physical reactions to their first crimes like vomiting, guilt, etc.