Rhonda Hinson Killed by Unknown Sniper

[n8riley]

http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=2832,3663097
The most famous of Sniper Killers The D.C. Snipers John Allen Mohammad and Lee Boyd Malvo were a team and operated in the Washington D.C. area which raised their profile but by no mean are they the first.In 2003 West Virginia had a number of similar sniper murder which remain unsolved. I must admit the showers at night because she felt dirty and the "Is it ever okay to go with a married man" make me think that it was not random and I think the cars on the side of the road could have been the sniper or the man the raped her or she willing had an affair and felt bad about. I'd like to know what you guy think I know their are some long threads about this an one discounts the sniper thesis but it maybe Rhonda was the first and the only kill.

[MissFit29]

I don't think it was random. Why would the man have stopped to take Rhonda out of her car? I think it was meant to scare her, but not kill her. Her murder was an accident, IMO.

[MegtheEgg86]

I don't think it was random, either. I think Rhonda was targeted, and I think the intent was to merely frighten, not kill her, for three reasons:

1. The rifle was a high-power weapon, capable of piercing straight through the exterior of a vehicle. While this weapon was certainly capable of killing her had the aim been deliberate, it would in any case leave a definite "bullet hole", leaving Rhonda with little doubt as to what would happen to her if she did not comply with whatever demands were being made of her.

2. The shot was fired from a less-than-advantageous position (I have personally been to this site, and I believe another poster here, Thinman, lives or used to live in or near the vicinity). The area underneath the I-40 bridge is at the bottom of a steep hill. Rhonda entered Mineral Springs Mountain Road via the westbound I-40 exit coming from Hickory, into the lower of aforementioned hill. The impact occured at the top of this hill, where I believe the shooter thought he/she had little chance of hitting Rhonda herself, but definitely pierce her back bumper. If the shooter had wanted to kill her, he/she could've easily used the top of the bridge, the hill alongside the westbound exit (there are multiple trees to easily hide behind in this particular area), or even the hill alongside the westbound entrance ramp (again, a lot of concealment here as well).

3. She was pulled out of her vehicle and merely left alongside her car. Whomever killed her likely panicked when they saw her vehicle roll down the hill and stop. He/she rushed to assess whether she was alive or not, and once he/she confirmed she was dead, the individual fled. If the shooter had intended to kill her, he/she would have likely left her and her vehicle just as it was.


The third point also strongly leads me to believe the shooter was definitely not a professional hitman. I highly doubt someone who did this sort of thing on a regular basis would risk the chance--however slight, given the hour--of being identified (as we know, he WAS seen by at least one witness), or leaving behind possible forensic evidence.

[n8riley]

MissFit29 my gut tells me the same thing and I think she knew someone was after her maybe even knew the method having her father drive with her! I hust thought it adds to our knowledge of the case even if it is not what i believe the two may not be related Rhonda was unlucky to say the least...if she were raped at work and killed by a sniper.

[Thinman]

Yes Meg, I have been by the crime scene a few times. I agree that if the express intent was to kill Rhonda, that could have more easily been accomplished when she was stopped at the stop sign at the top of the exit ramp. This would have provided a clear head shot and no moving target. The shot that killed Rhonda was freakish in how it finally got to her.

I still have not discounted the possibility that a couple of drunken, hillbilly teenagers were out playing around with a high powered hunting rifle and thought it would be a brilliant idea to use a car as target practice. They could have been out spotlighting deer or something similar.

[Drakken]

I don't discount it being an intentional murder, either. It might be a sloppy job, either from a hitman or personally committed by someone who had a beef with Rhonda.

The argument "the killer would have had an easier time if he had waited until she was so and so, and with no chance of him being seen" presumes that the killer is some sort of omniscient super-criminal with a topographical knowledge of the crime scene. 99.9% of murderers are base human beings. There are plenty of imponderables and limitations around that leave doors open to making a costly mistake : pressure; next to no experience in, well, committing murder; low to medium intelligence; impulsiveness; etc.

Yet, still most people kill in less perfect circumstances, leave behind clues and witnesses, and end up being caught. The problem here is that, while the murder was in itself was made under sub-par conditions and the killer was allegedly seen, no one was caught.

And even if it were done by a hitman... A very rare minority of contract killers are professional pros, and even those can do a bad job once in a while. Most "hitmen" outside of the underworld are hobos or jacks "recruited" in bar and given 1000$ to get rid of someone. In average, these tend to be drunk at the commission of the crime (to dull the senses) AND not the brightest lightbulb in the room anyway.

[lamont74]

I live close to the area and would love to see this episode again.....only saw it one time 10+ years ago.

If anyone has any of the original episodes recorded I would love to trade some....email me.

[Mastermind]

And even if it were done by a hitman... A very rare minority of contract killers are professional pros, and even those can do a bad job once in a while. Most "hitmen" outside of the underworld are hobos or jacks "recruited" in bar and given 1000$ to get rid of someone. In average, these tend to be drunk at the commission of the crime (to dull the senses) AND not the brightest lightbulb in the room anyway

A lot of the quality of the hitman depends on:
1. The type of person the client is (rich, criminal, regular joe)
2. The motive for the killing. (how desparate and important the killing is)
3. How much access the client has to the criminal element. ( a drug dealer in New York is going to have a larger pool of options than a store shop owner in Chloride, AZ) A regular houswife is not going to know where to look for a hitman and will hire whomever she can find(usually a relative)...as opposed to a longshoreman who will now where to ask for a hired gun.


It;s difficult for me to believe that Rhonda;s strange behavior is not connected to her murder.

Has this guy she was seeing ever been identified. I would need to find an clear this person before going on to the random murder theory.

[Mastermind]

A very rare minority of contract killers are professional pros, and even those can do a bad job once in a while. Most "hitmen" outside of the underworld are hobos or jacks "recruited" in bar and given 1000$ to get rid of someone.

This is a very difficult thing to determine. Any data would be slanted to the lower end of hitmen.

Most of the statistics you would use would be from closed cases were it was determined a hitman was hired and the details were known. So your getting your data from situations were the hitman was discovered.

The data is based on the known..the problem is the unknown data.

1. How many missing people were victims of hitmen?
2. How many convicted killers were actually hired hitman. In those cases the police never knew that the killer was hired by somenone else.
3. There have to be countless unsolved murders that were sucessfully done by professional hitman.

[n8riley]

"Warning or Poorly executed murder" as I wrote that in as the title I thought Poorly executed murder it has so far been the "perfect crime" I consider not getting caught the perfect crime. Weather murder or a warning it does not matter it is MURDER in the eyes of the law. A thought I had about the Christmas party was could it be Rhonda had an affair with a man or maybe she was raped an lets say the creep saw Rhonda talking with another young employee he becomes enraged and goes home gets the gun and then lays in wait for Rhonda at what he sees as the best place maybe drunk from the party and kills her. But then again she begged her father to drive her into town to protect her or at least thats the way it seems . At the very least I think the party gave the killer where she would be he knew she had to go to the exit . I think the police are holding on to something.

[Mastermind]

"Warning or Poorly executed murder" as I wrote that in as the title I thought Poorly executed murder it has so far been the "perfect crime" I consider not getting caught the perfect crime

I dunno if I would call this a perfect crime. I think it;s more blind luck on the killer's part that he's avoided being listed as a suspect.

A thought I had about the Christmas party was could it be Rhonda had an affair with a man or maybe she was raped an lets say the creep saw Rhonda talking with another young employee he becomes enraged and goes home gets the gun and then lays in wait for Rhonda at what he sees as the best place maybe drunk from the party and kills her. But then again she begged her father to drive her into town to protect her or at least thats the way it seems

Sounds good.

'Course that would mean that there is a direct connection between Rhonda and her killer. The killer should be an employee or someone connected to the company.

[wiseguy182]

I definitely think Rhonda was targeted and that the intent was to kill. Her behavior in the weeks leading up to this make me think that, plus these things to consider:

1. Actually, I think if the guilty person's intent was to kill, he/she is more likely to go over to the victim to "make sure the job is done", whereas if the killer's intent was just to scare her, he/she's more likely to flee as if he goes over to the victim, they run a huge risk of being indentified if Rhonda survived. Additionally, since it is very difficult to get a precise shot on somebody that is driving presumably 55mph, a person has to figure if they shoot a gun in the general direction of that person, there is a fair chance they are going to end up killing her, which is NOT what they intended.

2. I definitely don't think this was a random act. Now theoretically, the murderer could have followed Rhonda home from work or some other time during the day, but they waited until a time when they knew Rhonda would be out late (The Christmas Party), and sure enough, she was driving home at 1 a.m., when there's very likely to not be too many cars on the road. They purposefully waited until this night I strongly believe. Additionally, if they had followed her home from the Christmas party (I think this may have been done by an employee), then Rhonda may have caught on before she was shot and tried to avoid it somehow (speeding up or what have you). But they hid out part way through her journey, so that it wouldn't seem as suspicious, and I definitely think they used a different car so Rhonda wouldn't recognize it (I think the witness said he believed as many as 3 cars other than Rhonda's were at the scene.)

[peachysquirt21]

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

I definitely think Rhonda was targeted and that the intent was to kill. Her behavior in the weeks leading up to this make me think that, plus these things to consider:

1. Actually, I think if the guilty person's intent was to kill, he/she is more likely to go over to the victim to "make sure the job is done", whereas if the killer's intent was just to scare her, he/she's more likely to flee as if he goes over to the victim, they run a huge risk of being indentified if Rhonda survived. Additionally, since it is very difficult to get a precise shot on somebody that is driving presumably 55mph, a person has to figure if they shoot a gun in the general direction of that person, there is a fair chance they are going to end up killing her, which is NOT what they intended.

2. I definitely don't think this was a random act. Now theoretically, the murderer could have followed Rhonda home from work or some other time during the day, but they waited until a time when they knew Rhonda would be out late (The Christmas Party), and sure enough, she was driving home at 1 a.m., when there's very likely to not be too many cars on the road. They purposefully waited until this night I strongly believe. Additionally, if they had followed her home from the Christmas party (I think this may have been done by an employee), then Rhonda may have caught on before she was shot and tried to avoid it somehow (speeding up or what have you). But they hid out part way through her journey, so that it wouldn't seem as suspicious, and I definitely think they used a different car so Rhonda wouldn't recognize it (I think the witness said he believed as many as 3 cars other than Rhonda's were at the scene.)

I agree

[cocytus]

To me, this case reads as an accident or an intentional murder but one where the the killer probably didn't know the victim.

1) The shooter shot through trunk of the car. Nobody that's trying to execute someone would attempt to hit them by shooting the metal of a car when the window makes for a better shot.

2) If this was an intentional murder (as in a hit) why didn't the killer fire a kill shot after removing the body from the car? There's no way a "pro" would" expect that a single wound in the chest (especially into a moving vehicle) would have killed his/her target. They would have a fired a second shot or used a knife to ensure that the target had been neutralized.

3) Why kill the woman along a relatively busy road when there are certainly spots along her route that would have provided more concealment than where they chose the hit?

4) If she was having an affair (a fact that seemingly was never determined) how was a 19 year old able to conceal that effectively? While a more mature woman would have been to conceal an affair,it's very doubtful that a naive teenager could have done as such.

5) Chevelle and Trans Am's (the vehicles seen by witnesses) are pretty rare vehicles, even when they were sold. And each of these vehicles would tires that were distinct to the individual cars. If plaster cast were made of nearby tire treads couldn't they have been matched them to cars that they researched for this case?

6) If it was a "hit", who would have paid for it? The most likely suspect would the "married man" that she was having a potential affair w/...but how would he have paid for the killing and then hide that fact?

Too many things point to this being a random killing or an accident,IMHO, I think that UM conflated details from varying narratives to make this appear to be a mystery in the manner of it being a hit.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by cocytus

5) Chevelle and Trans Am's (the vehicles seen by witnesses) are pretty rare vehicles, even when they were sold. And each of these vehicles would tires that were distinct to the individual cars. If plaster cast were made of nearby tire treads couldn't they have been matched them to cars that they researched for this case?

Are you freaking kidding me? This is 1981 we're talking about. There are Chevelles and Trans Ams everywhere! Both were well-sold, common, and readily available vehicles. I have no idea why you would deem them rare, especially considering the time period.