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

[cbcrime]

True the biggest was pot. But there were other drugs. Such as LSD, speed quaaludes, seconal etc. Heroin was around also.

I agree, definitely the drug of choice was pot. However, pills both uppers and downers and psychedlics also were used. Though I really don't think that a buy or arrangements to buy caused someone to kill Betsy.

See I just don't see someone who killed to protect themselves from exposure ( whatever that was) keeping clippings and then setting up a shrine to the crime 25 years later. Someone killing for protection wants it to go away. They don't want to chance being connected to the crime. The shrine is more about a serial killer type personality. Someone reveling in what they had done. Of course I could be wrong. Have been before and will be again.

 

[Talisman]

cbcrime,


Those original clippings left at the shrine - my mind always goes back to that!!
The only reason I can think that , if Betsy was a random killing, the killer kept the clippings and made the shrine would be because of a feeling of remorse.
Those clippings seem like a key point in this case. Every scenerio that enters my mind about Betsy's murder ends with me thinking to myself ... 'yeah, but what about the newspaper clippings that were 25 years old?'

I really wonder what the Vidoqc Society will make of them?

 

[kline]

Here's the link to the story on Cheri Jo Bates. There are other sites but this one seems to be the best. A passage follows the link. This site also includes the original newspaper story, crime scene photo, and a picture of the desk-top poem.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/Bates.html

“Zodiac was first considered a suspect in the Bates murder in October 1969, when the Riverside Police Department noted similarities between the Bates case and Napa County's Zodiac killing of Sept. 27, 1969. By November 1970, the news media had gotten wind of the possible Zodiac-Bates connection and both the San Francisco Chronicle and Los Angeles Times published lengthly stories. Zodiac sent a letter to the Los Angeles Times postmarked March 13, 1971, accepting responsibility for the Bates crime. However, he might have been falsely taking credit. As in the known Zodiac attacks, the Bates case saw police-taunting letters written to the newspapers. A confession letter was mailed anonymously from Riverside on Nov. 29, 1966 (Tuesday) to both the Riverside Police Department and the Riverside Press-Enterprise newspaper. However, it wasn't necessarily written by her killer. Although this confession did contain details of the crime that weren't widely known, it's quite possible that the letter was simply the work of a hoaxster. In December 1966, a desk with a morbid poem scratched into the surface was discovered in the college library. The writing was eventually attributed to the Zodiac killer. Additionally, three other letters sent anonymously from Riverside on April 30, 1967 to the above recipients, as well as to the victim's father Joseph, have been attributed to the Zodiac. (In November 1967, yet another suspicious letter was received by the local newspaper, however its origin is unknown.)”

Gosh I hadnt thought of Cheri Jo Bates,amazing since Ive read so much about the Zodiac case.
(Im up in the air about whether or not Zodiac was the killer though he said he was in so many words)
There are alot of simularities though,Pretty college girl studying in the Library,its been awhile since Ive read the case file but I think the killer disabled her car then when she came out engaged her in conversation then brutally stabbed her to death after a considerable struggle.
Yeah definately check out the file on zodiackiller.com I think there's even a photo of her studying at the library that was taken by a school photographer in context of some story. Another heartbreakingly beautiful girl butchered for no damn reason.
Graphic crime scene photo.That was in Riverside Ca, 1966 three years before Betsy but who knows?
Derek,I like your scenario about the fleeing guy who was pursued outside the library,if there was that kind of activity going on there he may very well have had a good reason to get out of there that had nothing to do with being the killer.Alot of folks may have got in the wind in a hurry.
I agree with you I cant get my head around two killers.I would have a hard time beleiving that.It just doesnt feel right for a lot of reasons most of which you have more than adequetly outlined.
Cant wait to hear what the Society has to say!

 

[littlehorn]

Quite honestly I have a hard time thinking of anything that she could have witnessed in the library that someone felt they had to kill her.

I think sometimes my mind runs all over about how and why this happened.

I know how you feel, I feel exactly the same way. I don't know how police arrived at the conclusion that a drug deal or homosexual/exhibitionist was to blame, but I think they probably put the pieces together from what was going on in the library/society at that time, after hitting the same walls we have.

That's why I keep going back to "maybe it had no reason which we as sane people can understand?"

 

[littlehorn]

Drugs were different in 1969. To college kids it was beer and marijuana. Coke just hadn't made the college scene yet. To murder someone because of pot just wouldn't be worth it, since it was so easily obtained.

I've been thinking the same thing; reading the newspaper reports, there were massive pot busts all through the late 1960's resulting mainly in a slap on the wrist. Why kill someone over the remote possibility that she would turn you in?

 

[littlehorn]

See I just don't see someone who killed to protect themselves from exposure ( whatever that was) keeping clippings and then setting up a shrine to the crime 25 years later. Someone killing for protection wants it to go away. They don't want to chance being connected to the crime. The shrine is more about a serial killer type personality. Someone reveling in what they had done. Of course I could be wrong. Have been before and will be again.

The only thing I can think that might support the theory of a silencing murderer making the shrine would be that perhaps, with age and maturity, he felt some remorse for what he had done. It's a long shot but it's a thought. What if his own daughter was approaching the age that Betsy died at, and he started to think about what he'd done.

 

[littlehorn]

I really wonder what the Vidoqc Society will make of them?

Sad thing is, we will likely never know, as it sounds as though my involvement with them will be limited to "Thanks for handing us the case."

I understand, but...I question that as well.

 

[littlehorn]

Gosh I hadnt thought of Cheri Jo Bates,amazing since Ive read so much about the Zodiac case.

Derek,I like your scenario about the fleeing guy who was pursued outside the library,if there was that kind of activity going on there he may very well have had a good reason to get out of there that had nothing to do with being the killer.Alot of folks may have got in the wind in a hurry.

I agree with you I cant get my head around two killers.I would have a hard time beleiving that.It just doesnt feel right for a lot of reasons most of which you have more than adequetly outlined.
Cant wait to hear what the Society has to say!

Thanks, that's the only reason I can come up with why this guy would not have come forward -- either he felt he barely escaped a bad situation, or he was doing something completely unrelated, but skeezy, and didn't want to be questioned as to his involvement or whereabouts. Those were the days of sodium pentothal and heat-lamp lie detector tests...

 

[Trino]

I was just thinking about the dates. If we assume the killer was around age 20 in 1969, this would mean his age would be around 60 now. His 1994 message was, "I'm back." His age then would have been around 45. Could this have been a professor? A newly arrived member of the community? Maybe just a review of ages would mean something.

 

[MaryLiz]

I don't really believe the 2 killer theory either..I only mentioned it because of that article I read in the Daily Collegian about an alleged witness stating he saw 2 people huddled together (2 men, not a man and a woman as stated in another article). He gave a statement about it, even going so far as to say that he was convinced they were the murderers. I can't find that article ANYWHERE now...I read it last weekend and should have posted it then or at least I should have written down the date the article appeared so I could refer to it later. The statement probably had no credence then but I thought it was strange that he said that. I only read it once, too, which I'm sure means the investigators quickly dismissed this guy as a valid witness.

I don't think drugs had anything to do with it either. As I stated earlier pot was THE big drug back then, along with speed and LSD. Heroin was around but not to the degree that it was in the 70s and cocaine wasn't big then at all. I just can't believe that Betsy "saw something" regarding drugs that would have made her a target for murder.

There is something I thought about with regard to the obsessed stalker scenario. When I first read about this case, I was convinced that was what happened. But after reading other posts with explanations why it probably wasn't someone obsessed with Betsy, I don't believe in it as strongly as I did. But the idea I had was that I do think it would be easier for someone to be stalked on a college campus, more so than anywhere else. There are thousands of people around and seeing the same person around you, especially going to a building where one of your classes is or to the library at the same time would arouse very little suspicion. Stalkers weren't as prevalent then as they are now and people were probably not very watchful in regards to that. So even though I have for the most part dismissed that theory, I did want to point out that it would be somewhat easier to follow someone around on a college campus (back then) and go virtually unnoticed.

 

[littlehorn]

I was just thinking about the dates. If we assume the killer was around age 20 in 1969, this would mean his age would be around 60 now. His 1994 message was, "I'm back." His age then would have been around 45. Could this have been a professor? A newly arrived member of the community? Maybe just a review of ages would mean something.

That's a good thought. I haven't made any sense of the ages myself, despite looking at them in a cursory manner.

It's like, taken out of the killer's "context," they mean nothing at all.

That's why I've always come back to the "25-year anniversary," as opposed to some significance of the killer's age, because that's the only way I've been able to make heads or tails of it. I am sure it would make more sense if the guy was caught and we could look at the whole picture of his life and travels...

 

[littlehorn]

I don't really believe the 2 killer theory either..I only mentioned it because of that article I read in the Daily Collegian about an alleged witness stating he saw 2 people huddled together (2 men, not a man and a woman as stated in another article). He gave a statement about it, even going so far as to say that he was convinced they were the murderers. I can't find that article ANYWHERE now...I read it last weekend and should have posted it then or at least I should have written down the date the article appeared so I could refer to it later. The statement probably had no credence then but I thought it was strange that he said that. I only read it once, too, which I'm sure means the investigators quickly dismissed this guy as a valid witness.

There is something I thought about with regard to the obsessed stalker scenario. When I first read about this case, I was convinced that was what happened. But after reading other posts with explanations why it probably wasn't someone obsessed with Betsy, I don't believe in it as strongly as I did. But the idea I had was that I do think it would be easier for someone to be stalked on a college campus, more so than anywhere else. There are thousands of people around and seeing the same person around you, especially going to a building where one of your classes is or to the library at the same time would arouse very little suspicion. Stalkers weren't as prevalent then as they are now and people were probably not very watchful in regards to that. So even though I have for the most part dismissed that theory, I did want to point out that it would be somewhat easier to follow someone around on a college campus (back then) and go virtually unnoticed.

That article you're looking for is the 1987 Collegian article on my site. "Murder Conjures Memories of Pattee Stabbing," or something to that effect. Like you say, not sure HOW someone could be "sure" that these two guys were the killers, but I assume police checked all that out and found it to be valid witness material.

You're probably right that someone could have unilaterally stalked Betsy without being noticed...It just seems like nowadays it would be easier with so many more students. I get the impression things were more closely-knit 40 years ago.

 

[cbcrime]

I suppose that the shrine could be about remorse. Except for one thing. The I'm back. That statement to me doesn't express remorse.

A college campus is a little easier to hide as a stalker - I think. Especially because so much of the time a student is concentrating on something other than their surroundings. Though there usually is a pattern of increasing insertion into the victims life. But the other case - I'll have to check - she said she felt she had been watched and followed. I wonder how long she had felt that way. Was that a typical stalker case? Did the person think there was a relationship there? Did they start to insert themselves? Did they make any kind of contact? Doesn't that type of stalker usually feel rejected before they kill?

What about a different kind of stalking? What if it was a predator stalking a victim until they took their opportunity? Could that happen? Even though I have been told that I don't pay enough attention to my surroundings. It seems we do have some survival instincts left - and you would think we'd get that funny feeling like someone was watching us.

I like what you described Littlehorn. Betsy in the library crossing the path of someone. Either by who she was - or something said or done - it triggers this person. Or maybe the mere fact she was there alone and he could. The reason we wouldn't understand.

I wonder what is in the file that with profiling and advancements in investigation Vidoqc might be able to find.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

I suppose that the shrine could be about remorse. Except for one thing. The I'm back. That statement to me doesn't express remorse....

What about a different kind of stalking? What if it was a predator stalking a victim until they took their opportunity? Could that happen? Even though I have been told that I don't pay enough attention to my surroundings. It seems we do have some survival instincts left - and you would think we'd get that funny feeling like someone was watching us.

I like what you described Littlehorn. Betsy in the library crossing the path of someone. Either by who she was - or something said or done - it triggers this person. Or maybe the mere fact she was there alone and he could. The reason we wouldn't understand.

That kind of stalking would make a lot of sense. It could have even have started as late as the morning of her death. He might have come armed with a knife with no particular victim in mind, and then saw her on campus or in the library itself that day.

I went to school at a small college and in 1970-71 was stalked by another student that I didn't know. He kept leaving me messages in my mailbox. Some friends on the football team discouraged his behavior. But that just goes to show that even in very "safe" places female students can become the objects of attention of people that they don't know. Maybe Betsy caught the eye of someone not interested in sending her a note.

 

[littlehorn]

I suppose that the shrine could be about remorse. Except for one thing. The I'm back. That statement to me doesn't express remorse.

I like what you described Littlehorn. Betsy in the library crossing the path of someone. Either by who she was - or something said or done - it triggers this person. Or maybe the mere fact she was there alone and he could. The reason we wouldn't understand.

I wonder what is in the file that with profiling and advancements in investigation Vidoqc might be able to find.

Keep in mind one thing -- the shrine was unconfirmed by library officials. Police have confirmed the EXISTENCE of the shrine, but not the details -- so the shrine is technically a third-hand account, and I'm not 100% sure how accurate it is. And the library people aren't talking.

I think you might be right that it was a predator stalking a victim, in the sense that, like a hunter, they don't necessarily "follow" the deer through the woods, but they might stake out a place where they are likely to see deer, and then wait for the first one to come by that they have a clear shot at. That would explain how she would not have been followed per se...But she walked through the wrong clearing in the woods at the wrong time.

I would also love to know what is in the file that might be used to further the case...And I do hope something breaks soon. In 5-10 more years it will be a moot point to talk about this case except as a curiosity, because most of the people involved as well as the culprit will likely be dead.

It is my understanding that in 36 years the case file will be archived, since no one from that time period will likely be living and since the case will basically be unlikely to ever be prosecuted. Perhaps then, in 2044, the public or researchers will have access to it.

 

[MaryLiz]

I would also love to know what is in the file that might be used to further the case...And I do hope something breaks soon. In 5-10 more years it will be a moot point to talk about this case except as a curiosity, because most of the people involved as well as the culprit will likely be dead.

It is my understanding that in 36 years the case file will be archived, since no one from that time period will likely be living and since the case will basically be unlikely to ever be prosecuted. Perhaps then, in 2044, the public or researchers will have access to it.

Are the police not letting ANYONE see this file? Do you know if maybe a licensed private investigator would be allowed to view it, even one that was licensed in another state other than PA?

 

[cbcrime]

Littlehorn - the article by Sasha Skucek - The Last Reason - he didn't talk directly to Tom Whalen? That will teach me - the way it is written - I felt he had interviewed him. And that is the problem - I made an assumption. If he didn't talk to Whalen - where did he get the information. Who was his source(s)? How reliable are those sources?

 

[littlehorn]

That kind of stalking would make a lot of sense. It could have even have started as late as the morning of her death. He might have come armed with a knife with no particular victim in mind, and then saw her on campus or in the library itself that day.

I went to school at a small college and in 1970-71 was stalked by another student that I didn't know. He kept leaving me messages in my mailbox. Some friends on the football team discouraged his behavior. But that just goes to show that even in very "safe" places female students can become the objects of attention of people that they don't know. Maybe Betsy caught the eye of someone not interested in sending her a note.

That's entirely possible...Especially as studious as she was, maybe someone who frequented the library had taken a liking to her or even just noticed her existence. She was a very pretty girl. And depending on stresses in his life at the time, maybe something completely unrelated made him decide that SHE had to die so he could blow off some steam.

 

[littlehorn]

Are the police not letting ANYONE see this file? Do you know if maybe a licensed private investigator would be allowed to view it, even one that was licensed in another state other than PA?

According to the Trooper in charge, the file is not even allowed to leave the barracks. He related to me that he was struggling with how he would/could present the case to Vidocq. It's also 1700 pages which would mean you'd need a dedicated guy like the one who wrote the book about Zodiac -- someone who could go there every night for hours just to look at it.

I don't know about PIs, but to be a PI in PA (hah!) you have to have had five years of police/sheriff/etc. LE experience, so it would basically be like showing it to another cop at that point. I looked into getting my PI's license. It's a catch-22 since PA law requires 20/40 vision in the strong eye UNCORRECTED to be any kind of police officer. So I was screwed there.

There is one possible way to view it as a private citizen -- petition the PA State Police Commissioner for permission to view the file. I know someone who tried that in 1987 and was told "no friggin' way!"

Of course, another 20 years have passed. I don't want to go over anyone's head if possible, I'd like to have the PSP as an ally on this.

 

[littlehorn]

Littlehorn - the article by Sasha Skucek - The Last Reason - he didn't talk directly to Tom Whalen? That will teach me - the way it is written - I felt he had interviewed him. And that is the problem - I made an assumption. If he didn't talk to Whalen - where did he get the information. Who was his source(s)? How reliable are those sources?

Tom Whalen, Wayne Baumgardner, none of those guys will talk to anyone about anything regarding this case. The source is a reliable one, I can't reveal his connection to it, but I believe him to be reliable.

I did confirm that the shrine existed when I talked to the PSP Trooper in charge. No details but it DID happen, so it's not a fabrication. But neither Sascha, the source, or I have ever seen the shrine or pictures of it (which are in the PSP file as I understand it.)