Son of Sam - conspiracy or lone gunman?

[Truth Sleuth]

This has been nagging at me lately and I want to get some input. For a time I was a true believer that there were conspiracies to kill both John F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy. Then I read Gerald Posner's excellent book Case Closed and decided that there wasn't a conspiracy in the JFK case after all. Shortly thereafter I read Dan Moldea's The Killing of Robert F. Kennedy and decided there wasn't a conspiracy in that case either. And please don't try to convince me otherwise, because 1) that's not the purpose of this thread and 2) I have firmly decided to focus on reading about how both men lived, rather than how they died.

However, one case where I can't seem to get past the conspiracy thing is Son of Sam. If you've seen the UM segment or read the book that inspired it, Maury Terry's The Ultimate Evil, it just doesn't make sense that David Berkowitz did all the killings himself. For one, only two of the five composite sketches even resemble him. Second, two of the people Terry believes were in on it with Berkowitz, brothers John and Michael Carr, died in suspicious deaths.

What does everyone else think?

[Guardian]

I am uncertain of this case as well. I tend to believe he acted alone. But, that being said, it is odd that while only two of the composite sketches resemble David, that at least one of the sketches resembles, very strongly, John Carr.

As we know witness descriptions and memories are not always reliable. But having a sketch not only not look like the killer, but also closely resemble a close associate of his, that seems more than coincidence.

Profiler John Douglas has interviewed David and he seems confident that he acted alone, so in the end I tend to feel the same way. Then again, IMO Douglas has been wrong in the past. He feels that Lee Oswald acted alone (not to bring up the other part of your topic) but I couldn't disagree with that more. So while I agree with Douglas that David likely acted alone, I still feel that as a profiler, he is not infallible.

And just because I did touch on it slightly, I won't try to sway your opinion as you are entitled to it. Gerald Posner gets way too much credibility given to him for his book. His conclusions are selective and he ignores anything at all that could contradict his findings. I will not say anything more on the JFK part of this per your request other than as I said, you are entitled to your opinion, but at least don't make Posner's book the final word you read on the subject.

[MegtheEgg86]

I think Oswald acted alone, but I definitely don't think Berkowitz did. I don't buy into a lot of the speculation in Terry's book, but I do think the Carr brothers (and at least one other person) were also responsible for the shootings. That 'John Wheaties' reference in the Breslin letter almost certainly could not refer to anyone other than John Carr. It was a nickname he'd had for years, and John and Mike's sister's actual first name was Wheat.

[Spark Of Spirit]

Originally Posted by MegtheEgg86

I think Oswald acted alone, but I definitely don't think Berkowitz did. I don't buy into a lot of the speculation in Terry's book, but I do think the Carr brothers (and at least one other person) were also responsible for the shootings. That 'John Wheaties' reference in the Breslin letter almost certainly could not refer to anyone other than John Carr. It was a nickname he'd had for years, and John and Mike's sister's actual first name was Wheat.

I agree. One of the shootings is fairly obvious in it being another perpetrator, and those sketches are pretty off from Berkowitz.

I'm not really a conspiracy guy, but I do think this involved more than one shooter.

[Corkys-Place]

This looks nothing like Berkowitz. More like that John Carr or whatever his name was.

[elg0rd0]

More than one killer. Way to many things don't add up on the surface.

As for Robert Kennedy, you don't need much convincing that there is a conspiracy. Way to many things don't add up.

[UMFaninMD]

I'm not one to always assume conspiracy theory but after multiple viewings of the UM segment, some of the things do point to Son of Sam being more like Sons of Sam.

[justins5256]

I just watched the infamous Son of Sam episodes again. There is an aspect of it that I would like to discuss that I actually don't think has been touched on before. I did a forum search for "Berkowitz" and this is the most recent thread that came up.

Anyway...

what did you guys think of the anonymous witness who said that he and his cousin witnessed a meeting of the Satanic cult in (I assume) Untermeyer Park as late as 1986-1987? Of course, the segment would have us believe that this is the same cult that was responsible for the Son of Sam murders.

The more I mull the whole thing over, the more I find it difficult to believe. If such a cult existed, and engaged in the ritualistic sacrifice of animals, blood drinking, urine drinking, etc. (all alleged in the segment) why would they do this in a public park? And we're to believe this was an organized group of 22 people (the "22 Disciples of Hell" from the Jimmy Breslin letter)?

The actions being alleged here certainly seem uhhh..."high risk" to me, to say the least.

Thoughts?

[elg0rd0]

Originally Posted by justins5256

I just watched the infamous Son of Sam episodes again. There is an aspect of it that I would like to discuss that I actually don't think has been touched on before. I did a forum search for "Berkowitz" and this is the most recent thread that came up.

Anyway...

what did you guys think of the anonymous witness who said that he and his cousin witnessed a meeting of the Satanic cult in (I assume) Untermeyer Park as late as 1986-1987? Of course, the segment would have us believe that this is the same cult that was responsible for the Son of Sam murders.

The more I mull the whole thing over, the more I find it difficult to believe. If such a cult existed, and engaged in the ritualistic sacrifice of animals, blood drinking, urine drinking, etc. (all alleged in the segment) why would they do this in a public park? And we're to believe this was an organized group of 22 people (the "22 Disciples of Hell" from the Jimmy Breslin letter)?

The actions being alleged here certainly seem uhhh..."high risk" to me, to say the least.

Thoughts?

I take that segment with a grain of salt to be honest. No satanic occult is going to perform rituals in public, unless it's a small town and everyone is in the occult. Cults of this nature tend to perform rituals and the other more private affairs away from large cities. If Berkowitz was in fact in an occult, I find it difficult to believe that this is the same one. With investigators already looking at the Carr brothers and Berkowitz's own claims. The occult would have been completely driven underground and probably would have stayed there long after Berkowitz was dead or it broke up altogether.

[SPD Yellow]

Yeah, I don't buy the cult in the public park story either. The segment showed German Shepherds and anybody whose been around one will tell you that they're noisy dogs. I imagine when they're in pain, they make even more noise which makes me wonder just how this cult can convene in a public park, sacrifice a large animal, and no one hear a thing.

Also, I think Berkowitz acted alone. If there was more than one Son of Sam, what's the explanation for why the killings stopped when he was arrested? Or is this all part of the conspiracy? Woo...

[WishfulDreamer]

I think if there was any devil-worshipping at all involved, it would have been in private, like when that witness said he walked in on an animal sacrifice in his own kitchen. I doubt any murdering cult would practice in a public park, regardless of it being in a wooded spot.

Originally Posted by SPD Yellow

If there was more than one Son of Sam, what's the explanation for why the killings stopped when he was arrested? Or is this all part of the conspiracy? Woo...

If the Carr brothers were indeed responsible, their deaths would account for why the murders stopped. I think they were probably involved and doubt that Berkowitz acted alone.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by justins5256

I just watched the infamous Son of Sam episodes again. There is an aspect of it that I would like to discuss that I actually don't think has been touched on before. I did a forum search for "Berkowitz" and this is the most recent thread that came up.

Anyway...

what did you guys think of the anonymous witness who said that he and his cousin witnessed a meeting of the Satanic cult in (I assume) Untermeyer Park as late as 1986-1987? Of course, the segment would have us believe that this is the same cult that was responsible for the Son of Sam murders.

The more I mull the whole thing over, the more I find it difficult to believe. If such a cult existed, and engaged in the ritualistic sacrifice of animals, blood drinking, urine drinking, etc. (all alleged in the segment) why would they do this in a public park? And we're to believe this was an organized group of 22 people (the "22 Disciples of Hell" from the Jimmy Breslin letter)?

The actions being alleged here certainly seem uhhh..."high risk" to me, to say the least.

Thoughts?

Wasn't Untermeyer Park a little unkempt at the time? Maybe someone from the area can shed some light, but I was always under the impression the park wasn't extensively maintained at the time--thereby rendering itself an attractive spot for people who maybe want to do secretive things while deterring the average schmoe who wants to visit a park.

In any event, I actually don't get the impression the kid is lying, per se. I think there could exist some exaggerations or embellishments here and there, but I generally believe his story. I do not, however, think it is at all likely that group is related to the Son of Sam shootings.

[SageSlowdive]

Not sure if it's a conspiracy, but what does Berkowitz say?

Does he actually acknowledge a third party?

[isotope]

Originally Posted by SageSlowdive

Not sure if it's a conspiracy, but what does Berkowitz say?

Does he actually acknowledge a third party?

As I understand, Berkowitz initially claimed sole responsibility - but in the mid 90s started claiming there were co-conspirators.

His claims on this topic are worthless though - he's clearly crazy.

[elg0rd0]

Originally Posted by isotope

As I understand, Berkowitz initially claimed sole responsibility - but in the mid 90s started claiming there were co-conspirators.

His claims on this topic are worthless though - he's clearly crazy.

Berkowitz is clearly trying to pass the buck for his transgressions in this crime. The fact he tried to say a talking dog drove him to kill is a sign that he's trying to wash his hands of his part in the crime. The fact he keeps coming up with scenario after scenario of his "small" part in the crime spree is a dead give away. With that being said if "he's clearly crazy" as you put it, why in the 30+ years of his incarceration he has never been moved to a state mental ward, diagnosed with some form of dementia, or some kind of psychological disorder?

Was he part of it? Yes. The evidence in his apartment and the fact he had possession of the firearm in question, means he is culpible for at least being a part of the crime.