Call me crazy, but I've always thought the composites from both the I-70 killer and the NH killer cases were really similar. I wonder if they could be the same person.

So - what information is out there that would lend itself to prove or disprove this idea? What do y'all think?

Hmm interesting suggestion. I suppose it is possible but I consider it to be unlikely. Different M.O.'s for one, New Hampshire serial killer used a knife while I-70 killer used a gun. However there were certain similarities too, it seemed both killers target women. The I-70 killer did kill one man but the man had a ponytail and it was dark out and so he probably approached thinking it was a woman and then when he got closer realized a man but he had basically already decided he wanted to kill someone anyway, so he went ahead with it. The composites are somewhat similar but an interesting suggestion that the cases might be related. What else makes the cases similar in your opinion? I know that the I-70 killer, how they linked his cases was through the use of the same handgun. I believe they said he killed at least 9 people in at least 4 different states.

So - what information is out there that would lend itself to prove or disprove this idea? What do y'all think?

The I-70 killer was a thrill killer. The NH killer is your basic serial killer.

I'm not sure if there is an example of one type morphing into the another type. Can anyone think of one?

The mindset of the thrill killer and serial killer are so radically different, I can't imagine them being the same prson.

Which case came first? I-70 killings or NH killings.

so guys, was the I-70 killer ever definitively proven who he was? or was it just a speculation that he might be in jail now.

I know there was a man they suspected in the NH murders. I don't think there was a strong suspect in the I 70 murders.

Was anyone else murdered in NH after Jane survived the attack?

I believe the NH murders were before the I 70 murders. I don't think the timing of the murders overlap.

I believe the NH murders were before the I 70 murders. I don't think the timing of the murders overlap.

So he if they are the same person, he would be someone that started as a serial killer than he just decided to "hell with it, I'll quicken up the pace and kill whoever I find! Only this time I'll use a firearm instead of a knife.

I guess that's possible. But from what most criminal psychologists would say is that such a rapid change in MO would be unlikely.

so guys, was the I-70 killer ever definitively proven who he was? or was it just a speculation that he might be in jail now

Most thrill killers are either caught, commit suicide, or killed after their spree. It's very possible that he was jailed for another crime or murder that was not connected to the 1-70 killings.

Personally I feel he committed suicide shortly after.

Well one has to remember, the NH serial killings went from 1978 to at least 1988. The I-70 killings I believe went on from the late 1980's to the early to mid 1990's.

So he if they are the same person, he would be someone that started as a serial killer than he just decided to "hell with it, I'll quicken up the pace and kill whoever I find! Only this time I'll use a firearm instead of a knife.

I guess that's possible. But from what most criminal psychologists would say is that such a rapid change in MO would be unlikely.



Most thrill killers are either caught, commit suicide, or killed after their spree. It's very possible that he was jailed for another crime or murder that was not connected to the 1-70 killings.

Personally I feel he committed suicide shortly after.

Here's a possible theory I've tossed around.
Perhaps Jane was the last victim of the NH killer. He knows he didn't finish the job because he saw her drive to her friend's house. The thought that a woman escaped alive infuriated him. He is determined not to let that happen again. He then proceeds to change his MO to ensure this will not happen again. The I 70 killer was a brisk, efficient killer.

It's just a thought. Really, the only thing that put the idea in my head in the first place was the similarities in composites. (That, and I've been watching waaaaaay too much Law and Order these days.) I wonder if someone could post all of them in this thread so we could compare them.

BTW Mastermind, I always appreciate your responses. You always make me think a little deeper about these cases and provide good information.

Here's a possible theory I've tossed around.
Perhaps Jane was the last victim of the NH killer. He knows he didn't finish the job because he saw her drive to her friend's house. The thought that a woman escaped alive infuriated him. He is determined not to let that happen again. He then proceeds to change his MO to ensure this will not happen again. The I 70 killer was a brisk, efficient killer.

It's just a thought. Really, the only thing that put the idea in my head in the first place was the similarities in composites. (That, and I've been watching waaaaaay too much Law and Order these days.) I wonder if someone could post all of them in this thread so we could compare them.

BTW Mastermind, I always appreciate your responses. You always make me think a little deeper about these cases and provide good information.

I don't think there is a connection at all - two different areas, two different times, and two different motives of killing.

I thought these two might be connected but yes they are from different areas.

Unless there is a timeline issue, I wouldn't rule it out. The human brain is complicated, I don't think its impossible at all for a killer to change his MO. I've always thought it was naive to think otherwise.

Unlikely? Yes. Impossible? Few things are impossible in my experience. It goes back to the old adage truth is often stranger than fiction.

The I-70 killer was a thrill killer. The NH killer is your basic serial killer.

Agreed. It's hard in some ways to think of the I-70 killer as being a "serial killer." I think he falls more under the definition of a spree killer. There seemed to be no sexual motive to his crimes and the fact that he killed both sexes. Most "serial killers" have sexual/torture motives and kill only one sex. Bundy and Ridgeway killed only women while Gacey and Dahmer (both gay) killed only men.

The Connecticut River Valley Killer (New Hampshire/Vermont killer) used a knife to kill his victims which were all women. They were all stabbed over 20 times and almost all of their bodies were dumped off a dirt road in remote areas. It was easy for this killer to get away because he kidnapped his victims at night for the most part. The rest of the victims were hitchhiking and he picked them up.

Like others have pointed out, the I-70 killer was a thrill killer. He used a gun and killed in broad daylight with many witnesses nearby that could easily spot him. He was quick. He'd walk in a store, kill his victims and walk away in a matter of minutes. The Connecticut River Valley killer liked to see his victims suffer a longer and more painful death with all the stabbing. Then there was the process of driving off and dumping the body. There was a ton of more "work" that had to go into his style of killing.

I don't think they're the same guy. Their styles are just too different.

I respect your opinion on creating the post, BUT i do NOT see a connection. the New Hampshire serial killer used a knife on his victims and tried to kidnap them too. The I70 Killer just walked in a store, took them to the back room, shot them and walked out as if nothing happened. Two different guys in my book, one of them is trigger happy while the other is knife happy.

Agreed. It's hard in some ways to think of the I-70 killer as being a "serial killer." I think he falls more under the definition of a spree killer. There seemed to be no sexual motive to his crimes and the fact that he killed both sexes. Most "serial killers" have sexual/torture motives and kill only one sex. Bundy and Ridgeway killed only women while Gacey and Dahmer (both gay) killed only men.

While I totally agree that the I-70 Killer wasn't motivated by abnormal sexual urges, it is assumed that he mistook Michael McCown, his only male victim, for a woman because he wore long hair and at least one earring at the time. I could accept a theory that perhaps I-70 was acting on grossly misogynistic feelings. He seemed to prefer establishments at which only a single woman was working (or at least thought there was). Perhaps like some killers of women (and many rapists), he felt they were "asking for it" by being alone and vulnerable--which is, at its core, a misogynistic sentiment. It may also explain why he let his male eyewitness go unharmed in Wichita.

The aspects of the crimes do have many indicators that they may have been the work of a thrill killer, however. I'm still ultimately unsure on what to think in this case, but I definitely think the murders attributed to the Connecticut River Valley Killer were sexually motivated.

While I totally agree that the I-70 Killer wasn't motivated by abnormal sexual urges, it is assumed that he mistook Michael McCown, his only male victim, for a woman because he wore long hair and at least one earring at the time. I could accept a theory that perhaps I-70 was acting on grossly misogynistic feelings. He seemed to prefer establishments at which only a single woman was working (or at least thought there was). Perhaps like some killers of women (and many rapists), he felt they were "asking for it" by being alone and vulnerable--which is, at its core, a misogynistic sentiment. It may also explain why he let his male eyewitness go unharmed in Wichita.
Well, you dont know what the killer though of Michael, BUT i agree. he DID target female workers who were by themselves, BUT i think if anyone showed up then they could be shot too. the black guy got off lucky and i am surprised that he allowed him to walk off.

Well, you dont know what the killer though of Michael, BUT i agree. he DID target female workers who were by themselves, BUT i think if anyone showed up then they could be shot too. the black guy got off lucky and i am surprised that he allowed him to walk off.

Remember he did originally try to get him to go into the back room, but I think the black man probably sensed he was dead if he did it and he refused. So he did originally intend to kill him when he saw him

My only guess is the killer at the spur of the moment thought it would be more dangerous to shoot the witness out in the front of the store then to let him go. Its entirely possible he didn't live in the immediate area and thought he could risk leaving behind an eyewitness, since the guy didn't actually see the woman killed.

But if he shot the man out in the front part of the store, it would have been more likely to attract attention, someone could have been outside and saw the murder. Not only that, if the black guy decided to turn around and bolt there is no guarantee he could have hit him. Remember all this serial killer's murders had been execution style murders where he shot someone who was lying on the floor, its not as easy to hit a man running away, and I'm betting the guy probably wasn't all that good a shot. If he missed, and the witness made it outside, then he would have to have tried to gun him down outside which was more likely to attract attention.

That would be my humble opinion. I don't think it had anything to do with an aversion to killing men instead of women, I have no doubt if the witness had complied and went in the bck of the store he'd be dead to. He undoubtedly saved his life by refusing.

http://www.unsolved.com/images/thumb/wan_i70_serial_killer.jpg

i70 serial killer

http://www.musicspotproductions.com/RP/CRV_Murders/Michael_Nicholaou_Sketch&Pic.jpg

New Hampshire Killer

Best composite of New Hampshire killer I could find, disregard the photo comparison.

Remember he did originally try to get him to go into the back room, but I think the black man probably sensed he was dead if he did it and he refused. So he did originally intend to kill him when he saw him. My only guess is the killer at the spur of the moment thought it would be more dangerous to shoot the witness out in the front of the store then to let him go. Its entirely possible he didn't live in the immediate area and thought he could risk leaving behind an eyewitness, since the guy didn't actually see the woman killed. But if he shot the man out in the front part of the store, it would have been more likely to attract attention, someone could have been outside and saw the murder. Not only that, if the black guy decided to turn around and bolt there is no guarantee he could have hit him. Remember all this serial killer's murders had been execution style murders where he shot someone who was lying on the floor, its not as easy to hit a man running away. I don't think it had anything to do with an aversion to killing men instead of women.
Wow, sorry for the long reply and you wrote alot and i put up the intersting stuff. i DO remember the segment and the point of the killer wanting him in the back room and i agree. the witness (in my book) KNEW if he went back there he was dead, BUT in a way he was lucky because the killer did let him go even if it was a spur of the moment thing or the killer feared of attracting more attention than he had, plus he was lucky in the sense that he was closer to the door.

Did anyone see last night "Dark Minds" show on I.D.?

http://www.thewrap.com/tv/column-post/real-life-silence-lambs-new-id-series-dark-minds-tries-solve-serial-killer-cold-cases-34

It was very good, at the end they had a man who thought his father was the killer. They said they will test DNA if there was any to see if it was him. Have no idea if it's the Nicolau guy they are testing for or someone else. Don't want to ruin the show for anyone by givng away too much info. They kept the identity of the suspect secret.

I think the I-70 killer looks a little bit like the man who shot "Carol" in CT on that country road.

http://unsolved.com/images/cases/wan_point_blank_shooting2.jpg

Did anyone see last night "Dark Minds" show on I.D.?

I recorded the episode last night. I'd gladly upload it to the site that shall remain nameless but I think it might get blocked. That site can tell instantly now if you upload current shows and it immediately blocks them from being viewed because of copyright.

It was good to see Jane again. This is just my opinion and I could be completely wrong but she seemed more at ease than in her previous interviews (Unsolved Mysteries, the E Special and Doctor Phil.) The only time she started to get a little emotional was when she mentioned seeing her baby attached to a ventilator when she was first born. Otherwise, she related the stories again of that horrible night pretty calmly. An attack like that is obviously something that never goes away but I got the impression that she's made her peace with it. Again, that's just a guess.

Parts of Jane's interview were done at the very parking lot of her attack. Everything still looks exactly the same as it did in 1988.

Those who have read the book about the Valley killer know that the beginning of Jane's attack was slightly different than what was reenacted in the UM segment. The initial struggle in the car was longer and it involved her breaking her driver’s side window with her foot. When she was forced out of the car at knife point, the guy asked her if this was a Massachusetts car. When she said that it was a New Hampshire car, he turns to walk away. The book said at this point that Jane says, "Hey! What about my window?" Then the guy turns around, charges at her and starts stabbing her. On ‘Dark Minds,’ Jane mentions that when she asked about her window, she called him an a**hole and she obviously regrets that to this day.

There was a short interview with Eva Morse's daughter, Jenny. She was 10 when her mother was stabbed to death by the killer in 1985. The current detective went to the general location in the woods in Newport by the Sugar River where Ellen Fried and Bernice Courtenmache’s remains were found. There was little else about the rest of the victims other than quick glances of their pictures. And other than Jenny Morse, there were no other family members of the victims interviewed.

The Molly Bish murder in 2000 was brought up in theory as another possible victim of the killer. I guess mainly because she was left in the woods and Massachusetts borders New Hampshire and Vermont. But I don’t ever recall if Molly was stabbed like the other victims.

A man came forward, who wished to be anonymous, who claimed he thought his father might be the Valley killer. He drove a jeep wagoneer in the 80’s. When his picture was shown to Jane, she said it looks very much like her attacker. She also mentioned that the hairs stood on the back of her neck when she saw the photo. There was never any mention of Michael Nicolaou. If Jane doesn’t consider him the attacker anymore, then I guess that very emotional episode of Doctor Phil she did with Michael’s son Nick was all for nothing.

I recorded the episode last night. I'd gladly upload it to the site that shall remain nameless but I think it might get blocked. That site can tell instantly now if you upload current shows and it immediately blocks them from being viewed because of copyright.

It was good to see Jane again. This is just my opinion and I could be completely wrong but she seemed more at ease than in her previous interviews (Unsolved Mysteries, the E Special and Doctor Phil.) The only time she started to get a little emotional was when she mentioned seeing her baby attached to a ventilator when she was first born. Otherwise, she related the stories again of that horrible night pretty calmly. An attack like that is obviously something that never goes away but I got the impression that she's made her peace with it. Again, that's just a guess.

Parts of Jane's interview were done at the very parking lot of her attack. Everything still looks exactly the same as it did in 1988.

Those who have read the book about the Valley killer know that the beginning of Jane's attack was slightly different than what was reenacted in the UM segment. The initial struggle in the car was longer and it involved her breaking her driver’s side window with her foot. When she was forced out of the car at knife point, the guy asked her if this was a Massachusetts car. When she said that it was a New Hampshire car, he turns to walk away. The book said at this point that Jane says, "Hey! What about my window?" Then the guy turns around, charges at her and starts stabbing her. On ‘Dark Minds,’ Jane mentions that when she asked about her window, she called him an a**hole and she obviously regrets that to this day.

There was a short interview with Eva Morse's daughter, Jenny. She was 10 when her mother was stabbed to death by the killer in 1985. The current detective went to the general location in the woods in Newport by the Sugar River where Ellen Fried and Bernice Courtenmache’s remains were found. There was little else about the rest of the victims other than quick glances of their pictures. And other than Jenny Morse, there were no other family members of the victims interviewed.

The Molly Bish murder in 2000 was brought up in theory as another possible victim of the killer. I guess mainly because she was left in the woods and Massachusetts borders New Hampshire and Vermont. But I don’t ever recall if Molly was stabbed like the other victims.

A man came forward, who wished to be anonymous, who claimed he thought his father might be the Valley killer. He drove a jeep wagoneer in the 80’s. When his picture was shown to Jane, she said it looks very much like her attacker. She also mentioned that the hairs stood on the back of her neck when she saw the photo. There was never any mention of Michael Nicolaou. If Jane doesn’t consider him the attacker anymore, then I guess that very emotional episode of Doctor Phil she did with Michael’s son Nick was all for nothing.


Hard to say I guess - Jane always struck me as a woman who needed that peace of mind of knowing who had done it to her, not saying it wasn't Nicholau (actually, in all likely hood it was).

Call me crazy, but I've always thought the composites from both the I-70 killer and the NH killer cases were really similar. I wonder if they could be the same person.

So - what information is out there that would lend itself to prove or disprove this idea? What do y'all think?
Anything is possible. Makes me also wonder about the possibility that depending on age, if the current case of the Long Island women killed may also be connected. Serial killers do move around and the intelligent ones simply change their style or manner of killing, but it's rare. Remember that there are people who are still out there and think that Ted Kazinski was the Zodiac Kller as well as the Unabomber.

Anything is possible. Makes me also wonder about the possibility that depending on age, if the current case of the Long Island women killed may also be connected. Serial killers do move around and the intelligent ones simply change their style or manner of killing, but it's rare. Remember that there are people who are still out there and think that Ted Kazinski was the Zodiac Kller as well as the Unabomber.

I've even heard theories that Kazinski is the East Area Rapist, as well as others that Zodiac and EAR are the same as well. Mostly because TK was known to live in California at the time of both crime sprees.

Pretty sure however, that they are all three different people for one simple reason that I'm frankly shocked is overlooked: I know for a fact that EAR's DNA is on file, and I'm pretty sure Zodiac's is as well though I'm not certain. So if it were Ted, he would have been linked to both cases by now.

However I'm not sure Zodiac's DNA is on file, so Ted could possibly be Zodiac but not EAR. And Zodiac in turn could be EAR but I doubt it, because there are more similarities between Ted and the Zodiac than EAR and the Zodiac.

So its at least two different people being the Unabomber, Zodiac, and EAR, probably three.

As to the I-70 killer and the New Hampshire killer, chances are they are two different ppl as well.

Okay, so here's my question about Jane on the Dark Minds episode. I've followed this case ever since it was profiled on UM, a few years ago E! THS Investigates profiled it as well.

A couple of years ago Jane was seemingly convinced that Nicholau was her attacker. However, Dark Minds made no mention of Nicholau.

By this, can I assume that LE has investigated the Nicholau angle is a dead end?

Okay, so here's my question about Jane on the Dark Minds episode. I've followed this case ever since it was profiled on UM, a few years ago E! THS Investigates profiled it as well.

A couple of years ago Jane was seemingly convinced that Nicholau was her attacker. However, Dark Minds made no mention of Nicholau.

By this, can I assume that LE has investigated the Nicholau angle is a dead end?

It might be a dead end, I'm not exactly sure. Nicholau has been a main person of interest since 2006 but no other information about the investigation in to him has been made public. None that I know of anyway. Maybe the producers of Dark Minds wanted to center on the man's father in question since he recently came forward. Or they might of edited out any mention of Nicholau when they interviewed Jane. Unless she comes back to post here again, we'll never know.

Okay, so here's my question about Jane on the Dark Minds episode. I've followed this case ever since it was profiled on UM, a few years ago E! THS Investigates profiled it as well.

A couple of years ago Jane was seemingly convinced that Nicholau was her attacker. However, Dark Minds made no mention of Nicholau.

By this, can I assume that LE has investigated the Nicholau angle is a dead end?


The show didn't give any clue to who the "new suspect" was (unless you happened to recognize the pictures of his wife they showed). I don't trust reality t.v. or some of this investigative t.v. much, so it could've been Nicholau or someone else.

The show didn't give any clue to who the "new suspect" was (unless you happened to recognize the pictures of his wife they showed). I don't trust reality t.v. or some of this investigative t.v. much, so it could've been Nicholau or someone else.

I doubt it was Nick Nicholau who came forward because he already appeared on national TV (on Doctor Phil) in 2009 to say he wouldn't be surprised if his father was the Valley killer. On that show, he tearfully hugged Jane Boroski and apologized for what his father might have done to her. It wouldn't make much sense 2 years later to come forward on Dark Minds to hide your identity and have your voice altered on camera. Also, Michael Nicholau killed himself on New Year's Eve 2005. The man on Dark Minds said his father died in 2008.

But I basically agree with you about the whole reality TV issue. There is nothing real about reality TV. In fact, I was pretty skeptical every time they made phone calls to "13," during the episode. Especially since all the questions they asked "13" seemed fairly obvious. Why did the Valley killer stop in 1988? Obviously because his last victim Jane, survived her attack and could identity him. Why did the killer always stab his victims 20+ times but never sexually assault them? Because he got off on stabbing them so many times. He didn't need to rape them. The stabbing represented the power he had over his victims. You don't need to interview a serial killer to figure that out.