Zodiackiller.com Message Board: Possible Zodiac Victim Cheri Jo Bates: Where was Cheri Jo Bates?

A remaining question is:
Where was Cheri Jo Bates between leaving her home and being seen at the library when it reopened at 6 pm?
It was suggested in the past that she went out for diner or something like that.

I just found something interesting...
I found a statement in the Inside Detective Magazine from October 1968 (page 5):

…"It was revealed that Cheri Jo had cooked roasted beef Sunday afternoon and had eaten before leaving her home.
The autopsy showed that the meal had been digested for two to 4 hours at the time she was killed".

This clearly shows she hadn’t eaten anything after eating at home. So the change of her getting out for diner is almost zero (possible a drink?).

Eduard Versluijs

First of all, how do we know she ate roast beef Sunday afternoon? Did her father see her eat it or something?

Second, if she had beef at dinner (in the late evening), this could account for the beef being in the stomach (I'm assuming here we're talking about stomach contents and not intestinal contents?).

Muskogee,

Probably she didn't washed her plate before going to the library? I do not know who this statement made but it looks a statement from the police.

But you are correct it could very well that this statement is not correct.
Why?

She was killed around 10:30 p.m. and the autopsy showed that the meal had been digested for two to 4 hours at the time she was killed.

10:30 p.m. minus 4 hours = 6:30 p.m.
But she was seen around 6 p.m. at the library by that Mexican-American student.

10:30 p.m. minus 2 hours = 8:30 p.m.
In this option she got her books from the library went out for diner around 8:30 (roasted beef) but left her books in the car. She went back to the library and was killed there.
Nobody saw her have diner? Why did she had to go back to the library when she had already her books?

Both options raise more questions...

Thanks for your reply,

Eduard
"the Cheri jo Bates Murder website"

Everything I have seen indicates that the library closed at 9:00. This is stated on Jake's site: http://members.aol.com/Jakewark/riverside.html

This is the first I have heard of the library closing for a dinner break and reopening.

I was under the impression we all knew she ate dinner that was prepared at home.

Regardless, there are several different claims regarding when the library closed the night of the murder. Until a definite answer is established, I don't see how speculating can possibly lead anywhere positive.

The library closed at 5:00PM for dinner and opened at 6:00PM.I guess this thread is closed?

I have accounts that claim the library closed at 6, 8, 9, 9:30 and 10.

I'm suprised it closed. They were booked solid.

The autopsy report stated that there were pieces of what appeared to be beef in the stomach, along with what appeared to be a curd-like substance such as milk or cottage cheese, and vegetable matter consisting of celery and/or onion. Intestinal contents weren't mentioned, which leads me to think that there was nothing remarkable in that regard.

Douglas wrote:
"...there was nothing remarkable in that regard".

If you talked about what she ate, you are completely right.

I forgot...

Tom wrote:
"Until a definite answer is established, I don't see how speculating can possibly lead anywhere positive".

It would be really silent on this MB if nobody was speculating anymore. LOL

But seriously....
Even Einstein speculated about physics. He based theories on his speculations, tried to validate them and when the validation worked a new Law in physics was born.

As you can see sometimes speculation CAN lead to positive things. Doing nothing leads to nowhere.
Than I would choose to speculate (but with validation afterwards of course).

Eduard Versluijs

Eduard, "nothing remarkable" referred to the intestinal contents. The stomach contents, however, would have been remarkable because they were identifiable, and perhaps helped establish parameters for determining the time of death.

Doug, they usually don't examine the intestinal contents unless they suspect they'll find something interesting. I was just asking Eduard so I could make sure we WERE talking about the stomach, and they WEREN'T examining the intestines for whatever reason. It would change the time-frame significantly if the beef had been found in the intestines.

If it has been established that Cheri ate at home,that had to be before 5pm (her father arrived home shortly afterward and she had already left).The autopsy apparently shows that the meal had been digested two to four hours before her death. Therefore the time of death had to be between 7 and 9pm.But the same autopsy puts the time of death at 10.30pm!

Based on whatever I have gained through osmosis regarding forensic pathology (as a lay person working closely with board-certified forensic pathologists, along with voracious reading on the subject, over many years, it's surprising how much one can learn), there is one point I wanted to make regarding the digestion of stomach contents in homicide victims.

While it is almost certainly not a significant factor in the Bates killing, given what is known about the time line and other circumstances that evening, it is interesting to note that when a person is subjected to a life-threatening situation over an extended period of time (as in cases where there is an abduction with a persistent threat of death staring them in the face), the digestive process is retarded, if not halted altogether, while the system prioritizes and rechannels its emphasis to the flight-or-fight areas of the body.

This has been the case when such murder victims are found to have undigested food in their stomachs, even beyond the 4-6 hours that it normally takes to empty after they ingested their last known meal. Again, there's no indication that Bates was subjected to any more than a blitz-style attack, unexpected and sudden, with no appreciable period of time for this digestive retardation to come into play. But I thought I'd mention it.

Bill, this may sound overly simplistic, but am I to assume by your comments that you feel Cheri Jo Bates knew her attacker?

I have not looked through it in a while, but I believe most medical school libraries carry "The Journal of Forensic Medicine" a multi volume collection of treatises on things like gunshot wounds, paint splatters, stomach contents, powder wounds, etc. Many prosecutors and defense attorneys have used it for its excellent studies.

Scott, no. Merely commenting on how the appearance of undigested food in the stomach of a homicide victim can be misleading with respect to determining when they last ate. I'm not sure how you derived that conclusion from what I said, but it wasn't at all an intended element of my post.

This is where I think the investigate work in the Bates case may have been a bit shoddy. We see from the autopsy report that Cheri ate what might have been a restaurant-type meal just hours before her death, yet apparently no one bothered to find out what restaurants she frequented and whether she was seen in any of them on the evening of her death, alone or in the company of another person. We know from her father's account where she had breakfast, and there's no reason why we couldn't have known where she was likely to have had dinner, assuming it was someplace other than home.

Bill, in addition to your observations describing the effects of fear on the cholinergic system, I might add that digestion time is highly variable between different individuals.

And you are hardly a "lay person" when it comes to forensic pathology! Half of what I've learned (and I'm still a novice) has been from the docs and the other half has been from the homicide investigators.

And digestion of certain types of food varies within the same individual. That's why I gave the 4-6 hour range, in an effort to approximate an average without regard to individuals or food content.

"I'm not sure how you derived that conclusion from what I said, but it wasn't at all an intended element of my post."

What I was thinking was, since CJB was murdered an hour and a half or so after the library closed, and there was seemingly no signs of retarded digestion due to the "flight-or-fight" scenario you suggested, that maybe this indicates she knew her killer. Just a thought.

I wrote, there (were) seemingly no signs of retarded digestion due to the "flight-or-fight" scenario...

Or was there?

If Cheri Jo Bates ate dinner before 5pm and was murdered at approximately 10:30pm, then why does the autopsy report say that she’d ingested her last meal 2 – 4 hours before her murder when it was closer to 6 hours? Did Cheri Jo eat something after leaving the library and, if so, was she alone? Or, was she abducted after leaving the library and the retarded digestion set in because she feared for her life? Then again, if the latter were true, why would her killer bring her back to the library?

Sorry Bill, but your post about retarded digestion is making me conjure all kinds of possible scenarios. I’m not trying to beat the subject to death, just trying to come to terms with the known facts based on the evidence that is available, and I found your information to be interesting and potentially meaningful to this particular discussion. I’m not deliberately trying to sound like an idiot, honest.

The autopsy report states, "The stomach contains at least 100 ml of thick fluid with particulate food particles in which are easily recognized large pieces of apparently beef along with vegetable particles being either and/or celery and onion and white curd like particles floating in the gastric contents that appear to be either milk or cottage cheese." I'm not pretending to be an expert on the process of digestion, but I can't see where in this description one finds the means to speculate about retarded digestion due to stress. Vegetable matter such as celery and onions digests slowly (if at all) and, depending on how well it's masticated, beef might take some time as well. And if I've got my conversions right, 100 milliliters is less than four ounces--hardly a dinner-sized meal if one takes into account servings consisting of beef, milk or cheese, salad-like vegetables, along with the inevitable gastric juices. I think one has to conclude that the bulk of whatever she ate had already passed out of her stomach by the time she was murdered. Based on this report, I would expect that RPD would have thoroughly checked out any restaurant where she might have dined.

Douglas, an excellent appraisal, as usual. I tried to frame my original comments regarding retarded digestion to indicate that it was merely a subject of interest, and not supported in the Bates killing by physical evidence or even common sense. From my experience, the digestive process as a means of establishing a time-line is probably more inexact than fixing a time of death through post-mortem changes in the body. It could be helpful, however, in determining what was eaten, and where, as you pointed out.

Scott: "I’m not deliberately trying to sound like an idiot, honest."

You could never accomplish that, in my book. I value your mind and your common sense higher than most.

This is an interesting case even outside of any possible connection to Zodiac.

Additionally, consider these two articles; the first from the Riverside Press of 12/7/66 and the second from the Vallejo Times-Herald of 12/24/68. I happened across these articles while searching for Zodiac-related materials pertaining to the times in question, but they've intrigued me all along, for a variety of reasons. First, and most obvious, is their proximity to the Riverside and BRS events. Second, however, (and drawing on a kind of synergy with the first) is the astonishingly close similarity in the way in which the events played out. First, I think we can deduce that a certain amount of stalking, or canvassing, occurred prior to the event. Second, the perpetrator commits an act of illegal entry, catching his victim by surprise. Third, a very feeble, half-hearted attempt at sexual assault occurs, which is repulsed when the victim offers resistance.

Assuming for the sake of argument that these incidents are related, I perceive the perpetrator as someone so socially and sexually pathological that not only can he not consummate an intended rape, but appears to derive a perverse form of sexual gratification simply by having a female under his control. Further extrapolating, I believe this was probably how events in the Bates murder played out. While we can't say exactly what happened, I think it likely that she was at some point forcefully abducted by her killer, who controlled her for some period of time before coercing her into the alley, where he attempted a sexual assault. She resisted; there was a struggle, and the struggle ended in her death. Had circumstances been different; i.e., had the time been earlier, the place less isolated, or a weapon not available, she might well have survived. The killer was already sexually aroused, and when she offered physical resistance, his excitement boiled over into a blind rage, as evidenced by the nature of her injuries.

What we appear to have here is a "rapist" who can't consummate the act of rape, but who seems to derive some kind of gratification from proximity to the victim. We also have, I believe, an individual so sexually exasperated that I have little difficulty in perceiving him as the type who would murder couples in lonely places in order to assuage the hostility arising from that exasperation.

Hmm... maybe CJB took a sandwich with her and ate at the library???

Or went out and got a cheeseburger. If only the furtive and quark-like sesame seed had been noted.

Doug wrote: "I'm not pretending to be an expert on the process of digestion, but I can't see where in this description one finds the means to speculate about retarded digestion due to stress."

You're right, it seems that Cheri's meal had been sufficiently digested which, I think, goes back to my original point. If CJB left the library at 9pm but wasn't murdered until 10:30pm -- granted, I'm not accounting for certain variables here -- and there doesn't appear to be any evidence that she was stressed or had been abused prior to her murder, then why can't we assume, or at least entertain the idea, that she was with someone she knew for approximately an hour and a half prior to being murdered and that this person was likely her killer?

Granted, perhaps the attack that led to her death was sudden and took very little time from start to finish, but I have a hard time getting around the idea that she didn't know who her killer was, or at least was comfortable enough in their presence so as not to suspect that she was going to be attacked. Otherwise, what accounts for the hour and a half from the time she left the library until she was murdered? I seriously doubt she was out gallivanting with some stranger.

If there is something that I'm missing about the timeline here, somebody please tell me, because I can no longer pretend to know everything about this case. In fact, much like life itself, the longer I live the more I realize that I really know far less than I thought I knew 5 or 10 years ago. At any rate, I'm not as familiar with the Cheri Jo Bates case as I try to be with the others because for the longest time I didn't think it was related to the Zodiac. Now, I'm not so certain; as Doug mentioned, it's a fascinating case either way, and very tragic too.

I suppose the long and short of my concept is this: Did Cheri Jo Bates know -- or feel comfortable in the presence of -- her attacker, and can the answer to this question be confidently derived from the evidence that is known?

Bill: I appreciate the kind words, but I won't be offended if you say, "Scott, you're completely off base on this." Also, email me sometime soon, okay? There's lots I want to know...

Again, it really needs to be established exactly when the library closed that night. If it was 10 p.m., there's no controversy. If it was 9 or earlier...forget about it.

How about this one? The missing man with the beard,and woman who the police said they would like to talk with. Lets say they pretended to help Cheri jo with her car with the ploy of getting some tools, then took her for a ride stopped for a bite to eat, so they could "kill time" in order to get the time closer to Holloween. Cheri could have felt more comfortable with a female along, even though they were both strangers. If it is true that Darlene saw someone she was scared of kill someone,then this could be the stabbibg she saw. She and Jim phillips both lived a few miles from Riverside in 66. Jim did have a beard about that time according to what she said in her divorce papers, they were both into the Satanic cult stuff. I don't believe Darlene was a part of the killing.I think she was afraid of the killer and couldn't do anything to stop him. She left him shortly after.

Tom, according to the Riverside Press, the library closed at 9 p.m. on Sundays. Also reported by the Press-Enterprise was her father's assertion that he called her at 5:00 p.m. and at 5:15 p.m., but each time the line was busy. He drove home and arrived at 5:30 p.m., but by that time she was gone. Can we deduce that she left the house between 5:00 and 5:15? Bates also told the papers that Cheri would be studying at home, unless she went to the library "to get books." That might imply that she had no intention of staying at the library.

What I'd really like to know is whether her house keys were found in the car along with the car keys found in the ignition. She might very well have gone off without her car keys, but without her house keys? I think not. House and car keys left in the car, along with the library books and the doors to the car unlocked would literally scream out to me that she had been abducted and forced away from the car.

Some people do put both house and car keys on the same key ring...

And this took place in a time when many people routinely left their cars unlocked. It was a very naive time.

People who knew Cheri apparently insisted that she was very proud of her little VW and would never have left it with the doors unlocked and the windows down, just as they insisted that she would never have gone off into a dark place--she was supposedly terrified of the dark.

I'm leaning strongly toward the idea that the killer forced her into the alley and then tried to make a move on her. A fiesty girl by all accounts, she responded unexpectedly and violently--perhaps kneeing him in the codpiece or something equally drastic--and that set him off.

Here's a rundown of the knife wounds:

2 cm non-gapping (gaping?) laceration of upper lip.

Inline series of three lacerations of left cheek, 2 cm, 0.3 cm and 2 cm resp., extending into superficial subcutaneous tissue but "do not gape."

anterior neck skin extensively and irregularly lacerated with marked gapping.

a deep cut in the thyroid cartilage on both sides with right common carotid completely transected as well as the right superficial jugular vein.

a gapping 1.5 cm oblique laceration in the skin of the right anterior axillary fold, probed into the subcutaneous tissue about 1 cm

a 1.4 cm vertical gapping sharp edge laceration in upper medial quadrant of the left breast

a 1.9 cm gapping sharp edge laceration of the lower medial quadrant of the right breast

a 1.7 cm mainly transverse laceration of the skin of the left chest over the 5th rib and centered about 2 cm medial to the left vertical nipple line

a 4 cm gaping [sic] sharp edge mainly horizontal laceration of the upper right arm that extends through the fat and into the muscle

a curved and interrupted moderately deep laceration (2 cm overall) in the skin of the base of the lateral aspect of the right index finger

two somewhat abraded lacerations of the skin of the left forearm, more or less in the mid portion. Longer is 4 cm and shorter is 3.5 cm. These extend into the subcutaneous tissue.

a more-or-less Y shape laceration in the skin of the dorsum of the left hand medially and at the junction of the wrist and hand.

an irregular laceration of the skin of the dorsum of the left hand in line with the middle finger and in about the mid area.

a 3.5 cm laceration in the skin of the back on the left side that has sharp edges and gaps.

It's a bit hard to visualize, but the impression I get from this is that, with the exception of the injuries to the neck, none of these wounds would have been fatal in and of themselves. They look like slashing-type injuries made with a very sharp knife by someone standing at a little less than arm's length away, facing the victim, along with injuries that occurred when the victim used her arms (notably the left) in self-defense. I'm counting at most 15 wounds, with the exception of those to the neck.

I see a perpetrator who is fairly upset, to the point of rage, but whose primarily purpose wasn't murder. The instrument itself was just barely up to the task, and I believe he wasn't in a position to cut her throat until she had been thoroughly worn down by shock, and the physical effort of the struggle. The knife was intended as a coercive instrument, or perhaps, as in the Gillinger case I posted above, the victim was threatened with a non-existent gun. Whatever the case, I think the criminal had something other than murder on his mind.

Douglas: "I think the criminal had something other than murder on his mind.

I tend to agree, based in large part on what you have described. However vicious the attack might have been, ultimately, the rage shown here is more consistent with a sexual advance gone awry. That's not to say that her attacker hadn't planned on killing her anyway, even if the sexual assault had been successful for him, but if that was his intent, he certainly seemed to have been ill-prepared for it.

I tend to think that it was not someone she knew well. The disabling of her car was a ploy he needed to make his initial contact with her non-threatening, which indicates to me he wasn't looking for a date, but for a sexual victim. Moreover, the disabling of her car suggests that he had some semblance of a plan as to the sexual assault, and an intention not to be identified as the attacker (or the car disabler). Which goes back to why I don't think she knew him, or would have readily recognized him. He strikes me as an anonymous and invisible stalker with rape on his mind. And a disorganized offender, at that. Not characteristic of our friend Z.

And the size of the knife would be more consistent with a come-along, rather than a murder weapon, but it happened to be in his hand when the situation went south. A weapon, such as a knife or firearm is often used not only to ensure compliance, but to make sure the victim knows better than to cry out for help. It might also reflect his body size and strength, in that he didn't simply strangle her instead of using the knife in a frenzied way that allowed her to scream and continue to struggle for some time before being subdued into silence.

The wounds seem to indicate to me that he was behind her, had her hair in his left hand and made jabbing and cutting motions with his right hand, at least at some point of the attack.

Bill, I agree with all your points, with the possible exception of his relationship with Zodiac. I still can't make up my mind on that one. What would you say to the notion that this individual wasn't a classical rapist, in the sense that he was actually looking for a sexual experience that he couldn't otherwise get?

Doug said,

"by someone standing at a little less than arm's length away, facing the victim"

Warren said,

"The wounds seem to indicate to me that he was behind her, had her hair in his left hand and made jabbing and cutting motions with his right hand, at least at some point of the attack."

If we could actually see the wounds, I think we'd have more room for speculation. I think all bets are off, as far as perpetrator position, based only on this description.

As far as the term "gapping" goes, doctors don't have grate speling.

Doug, rapists are often sexually inadequate with impotence and other dysfunction, which is compatible with the premise that rape is not a sex crime so much as a crime of violence. It is this rage born of sexual frustration that drives the rapist to commit his crimes, and overt violence is often the result. In this case, with CJB, IMO, it's a good possibility that he fantasized about establishing a "normal" sexual relationship with her, but when she spurned his overtures and destroyed his dreams, he responded in a psychotic fashion. If he wasn't a rapist prior to that night, it would seem that he had all of the requisite qualities. A man with romance in his heart doesn't disable a woman's car and use a knife to win her heart.

I suppose that once the rapist discovers that the violence, in and of itself, is more stimulating and satisfying than conventional sex acts, the overall motivation could become blurred, with the violence eventually becoming the dominant theme, with the sexual gratification still present, but sublimated. There have been rapists by trade, who have gone on to become serial killers, with a diminution of out-and-out sexual assaults as the killings progressed.

I don't know. You've way ahead of me with respect to sheepskins adorning your vanity wall, so your take on this is undoubtedly better than mine. It seems that any serial killer, including Z, has, as the genesis of his sociopathic disorder, some manner of sexual hangup that has dogged him most of his life.

Bill, you're giving me way too much credit in the sheepskin department. I've got three years of co-majoring in history and biology at a third-rate college, but alas, no sheepskin to prove to a potential employer than I can read and write. Fortunately I'm in a field where that doesn't seem to matter--yet.

Based on everything I've seen on the subject, I would tend to classify the conventional rapist right along with the sociopathic killer. In fact, murder probably isn't the primary motivation in crimes of that sort, but simply a means whereby the perpetrator eliminates a potential witness. I think it's what he does both before and after the event that's telling. I look upon the conventional rapist as someone who achieves stimulation by violating and outraging the sensibilities of his victim. He uses sex because that's the one vehicle whereby he can achieve the maximum in outrage and violation--probably akin to the modern propensity for using vulgar language when one wants to make a particularly forceful point. So when we have a criminal who seems to be trying to commit rape for the sake of the sex alone, or (even more telling) for the sake of gratifying what appears to be an infantile form of sexual curiosity, I think that tends to stand out, at least to my mind. I can't seem to get away from that episode about the kissing kidnapper, or the idea that the perpetrator in that case was Cheri Bates's killer. The Vallejo housewife incident, too, just sticks in my mind, because there, as well, we have a would-be rapist who just can't seem to consummate the act. I'd love to know if those cases were ever resolved.

As a point of interest when you examine the Jack Bokin case and his Northern CA past we find,according to his relative,that in December of 1964,he disabled a car belonging to a female student and when she later failed to start the car,he came up to offer help.
He STAYED in the car for some "TWO HOURS" molesting her!He was later caught and sent to Atascardero for two years.Like I said time can fly in any situation.
Read about his career of crimes against women in Crime Magazine.Just click Google and Crime Magazine.Great site for true crime buffs!See True Crime section for Bokins story.Lora Lusher wrote the story.
She mentions Jack Bokin was very secretive.One wonders how many crimes and possibly murders, did he commit.I think she may have underestimated him and just when he really began his attacks on females.We go back as far as '64 at S.F. State college with the rigged car incident!Hope someone like Ed can look this up for greater details in the S.F. papers.It does resemble Bates to a degree.Did young Z read about this case?Did it inspire him?
I am going to e the author of Bokins life.
I think of the Berkeley VW deal and the two young ladies in '68.Still see Z as a possible there.See posts.And then,since we know of at least one female he bagged and threw into water(she- thank God escaped)one wonders about Santa Rosa,and other S.F. area unsolves,etc.,etc.
Right now I am just looking at him.Very interesting,but that's it for now.