Vicious Beatings

In this post I'm going to try to address the problem of motive by answering two other questions:  What does the empirical evidence tell us about the behaviors of the person who killed Mary and Greg?  And what do those behaviors say about the person as they committed the crime?  I'll look at what the offender did prior to the shooting, at the shooting, and after the shooting. 

Just prior to the shooting, both Mary and Greg were brutally beaten.  Multiple bruises and contusions showed that Mary suffered blunt trauma to her body.  Some of the bruising may have been caused by the muzzle and/or butt of a rifle. Cuts and bruises were found on Greg's face, neck, an arm (which arm is not specified in People v. Thomas), and over each knee.  There was evidence he'd been struck by a gun barrel.  A bruise found on Greg's throat suggested he'd been put in a choke hold, so someone may have struggled with him.  His back showed scratches that may have been caused by a fall or that may have been caused from being dragged.

We know that some of the wounds Mary and Greg received before being shot were inflicted by a firearm, probably a rifle or shot-gun, so assuming that only one weapon was used, the murderer used it in two ways, both as a stick/club and as a firearm.  The killer probably brought it to the scene of the attacks.  The bruising around Greg's beard line suggests a close, manual attack (i.e. choke-hold), so at least one wound to Greg's body may have been caused manually.

At the shooting, someone held the muzzle of a high caliber firearm up to the right side of Mary's face (her right cheek) and pulled the trigger.  A dried pool of blood, five teeth, a fragment of upper jaw, and blood spatter on a road grader to the west of a sandpile, indicated that Mary almost certainly was shot in this spot.  Someone held the same high caliber firearm to the left side of Greg's neck and pulled the trigger.  Reading the documents, it's fairly likely Greg was also shot next to the road grader.

In his dissenting opinion, Justice Mosk described the evidence as pointing to killings that were committed, "spontaneously and impulsively in unchecked and undiscriminating fury." (People v. Thomas, p. 29)  Does the evidence indicate fury?  It indicates acts committed in anger, but (to me) an anger that doesn't rise to the level of fury because the anger remained in check.  So the attacks might better be characterized as being done out of vicious anger. 

Two sets of drag marks in the sand, plus the scratches on the victims' backs indicated that after the shooting both bodies were dragged from the area of the grader to rocks on the edge of the lagoon, where bloodstains indicated they were pulled or carried into the water.  That their backs were scratched seems to indicate that they were dragged by their ankles, probably to avoid the blood and gore from the head wounds.  A watch given to Greg as a gift from another Deadhead, and found near the scene, was probably separated from his body as it was dragged to the water.  A corncob pipe that belonged to Ralph Thomas may have been separated from Greg's or Mary's body in a similar way.  Or it may have been dropped by the killer.  A poncho or serape that Greg wore that night may have been separated as his body was being dragged to the water, and his shoes may have been pulled from his feet. Alternatively, the poncho or serape may have been removed from Greg's body before he was shot. It was never found, nor were his shoes.

We know that after the shootings the killer took steps to hide evidence, and that there may have been a rush to do so.  The bodies were dragged to and pulled into the water, probably with the expectation that they'd sink and not be found right away.  Greg's body was found 10 yards from the shore, in 10 feet of water, so it sank.  Mary's may have sunk and then resurfaced.  Prior to, or after, dragging the bodies to the lagoon, someone may have covered the pool of blood found near the grader.*  The firearm used in the murder was disposed of in a way that it could not be found by the police or a K-9 unit.  It's not clear what happened to  Greg's poncho/serape and his shoes.

It seems to me that the evidence belonged to what Salfati and Cantera call a "mixed crime scene"--one that pointed toward disorganized and organized behavior on the part of killer.  The distribution of the wounds and the location of the fatal wounds indicate that the behavior of the killer was expressive/impulsive (i.e. disorganized).  But the actions taken after the shootings indicate that the killer's behavior was instrumental/cognitive (i.e. organized) because he attempted to, "hide their crime by [...] disposing of the [bodies] outside where [they're] not only harder to find but where it is harder to relate them back to a crime scene and thus the evidence that may lead directly back to the offender, transporting the [bodies] and hiding [them] from view making it harder to find and stealing non-identifiable property which again is more difficult to trace back to the victim and thus to the offender." (Salfati and Canter 1999, pp. 401-2)

Overall the attempt to hide the bodies and evidence was a bit disorganized.  In the darkness, it was probably difficult to see the blood spatter on the grader, the drag marks in the sand, the silver watch and corncob pipe left behind, and maybe the blood stains left on the rocks.  The firearm would be easy to get rid of by throwing it into the Bay instead of the lagoon, although this might have been risky, as the killer may have had to pass by the Village to do so. The killer probably wouldn't have taken and kept the poncho/serape and the shoes, as they would be identifiable property--unless they were already his property.

*Update:  I just found this in Patricia Gioia's The Berkeley Marina Murders: "Blood had been discovered near a tractor there.  But the area had already been paved over because the site was a landfill.  Precious evidence may have been lost." (10.3.2021)