Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From a link from one of the above articles, "One veteran officer told the Los Angeles Times, "Never in my wildest imagination would I ever think she could do something like this."
She had been described as "bubbly" and "vivacious" in a story about her private investigation firm, Unique Investigations, in the Ventura County Star in 2000.
I think more people are capable of this than many realize. Prison life and the effects of being labeled a criminal independent of a prison term discourages people from doing bad things. Based on what I heard/read, I'd rather be convicted of a misdemeanor and do jail time than be convicted of a felony and not do jail time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LillyLillyLilly
One of the shows said several people urged the police to look at Lazarus when it happened because she was stalking the couple. She had shown up at the victim's workplace at least once. It was probably because she was police that they didn't investigate her as deeply as they should have.
She has a sort of wild eyed look now, I wonder if she had the crazy eyes back then?
That leads one to ask, did they not investigate her deeply enough because they really doubted she had anything to do with it due to her being a police officer? Or, did they not investigate her deeply enough because they wouldn't want a fellow police officer to be indicted and tried? A third possibility is the police thought she may have committed the crime but thought they would not have enough evidence to convict her if she was indicted/tried.
I think that look with her eyes is just a quirk having nothing to do with aggression or malice. I saw it in an unrelated interview with her.
That leads one to ask, did they not investigate her deeply enough because they really doubted she had anything to do with it due to her being a police officer? Or, did they not investigate her deeply enough because they wouldn't want a fellow police officer to be indicted and tried? A third possibility is the police thought she may have committed the crime but thought they would not have enough evidence to convict her if she was indicted/tried.
I think that look with her eyes is just a quirk having nothing to do with aggression or malice. I saw it in an unrelated interview with her.
I've read a few more articles since I posted that. One at Wiki sounds like LAPD was overworked at the time, and maybe a bit lazy. Someone else was carjacked in that same area so it was easy for them to just assume that it was the same guys that murdered Sherri in a burglary gone awry.
The first time it came out of the cold case files, a lab tech discovered the DNA pointed to a female assailant and asked the det about Stephanie and he said oh she's a detective she had nothing to do with it and refused to work the case so it went back cold for another FIVE years. Sheesh.
I think more people are capable of this than many realize.
Possibly. This brings to mind the NASA astronaut who drove all those miles (in a diaper, so she wouldn't have to stop) with the intent to attack her former boyfriend's girlfriend.
To kill so brutally, then go on with one's life (in law enforcement, no less) leads one to assume that she was a fairly disturbed individual, though. Sounds like someone with no conscience.
The first time it came out of the cold case files, a lab tech discovered the DNA pointed to a female assailant and asked the det about Stephanie and he said oh she's a detective she had nothing to do with it and refused to work the case so it went back cold for another FIVE years. Sheesh.
Perhaps that detective knew Stephanie was "bubbly and vivacious" and couldn't imagine her doing something like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
Possibly. This brings to mind the NASA astronaut who drove all those miles (in a diaper, so she wouldn't have to stop) with the intent to attack her former boyfriend's girlfriend.
To kill so brutally, then go on with one's life (in law enforcement, no less) leads one to assume that she was a fairly disturbed individual, though. Sounds like someone with no conscience.
My take is different. I think the love she had towards the man she dated and the rage towards the woman he married was unbearably intense. She was certainly disturbed when she was stalking and carrying out the crime but after all that she went back to being a regular person/officer.
I remember the astronaut. I don't think she was contemplating serious harm. I had the impression she was looking to scare the hell out of the other woman. IIRC, the astronaut was armed with a BB gun and pepper spray.
I think the love she had towards the man she dated and the rage towards the woman he married was unbearably intense...after all that she went back to being a regular person/officer.
Could a normal person brutally kill like that, though? We're not talking about a single gunshot.
Quote:
the astronaut was armed with a BB gun and pepper spray.
To kill so brutally, then go on with one's life (in law enforcement, no less) leads one to assume that she was a fairly disturbed individual, though. Sounds like someone with no conscience.
I would agree.
Did you know that she was on Family Feud in 1995... 9 years after the murder?
No conscience for sure.
Best youtube comment...
We surveyed 100 people... top 5 answers on the board. Name a way you can murder someone and almost get away with it...
Become a cop!
Last edited by ChloeC; 05-26-2016 at 08:16 AM..
Reason: ... typo
on a side note- Anytime I listen to an authority say: He/She would have gotten away with it ...
I always think in my head, Hey! The Scooby Doo cartoon always had the villian say this:
"I would have gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling kids!"
DNA testing was actually utilized as far back as 1983 in the UK. As proficient as it is now, back then it was a stepping stone for finger prints and skin, hair and body fluids. Narrowing down the field as opposed to simply zoning in on a suspect simply because they were in the area...or had motive. In the US- 1987 was the first year where a conviction was rendered based on the DNA evidence.
My take is different. I think the love she had towards the man she dated and the rage towards the woman he married was unbearably intense. She was certainly disturbed when she was stalking and carrying out the crime but after all that she went back to being a regular person/officer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
Could a normal person brutally kill like that, though? We're not talking about a single gunshot.
Excellent point. No, she wasn't normal when she committed the crime. It would be interesting to know if she became a normal person/officer after the crime. I'm trying to recall if she became a born again Christian later on. The man in this triangle was a jerk.
The victim knew she was being stalked. Her nightmare came true. She was also beaten. It must have been an awful experience.
The man in this triangle spent a night with the perpetrator after he was engaged to the victim. He also did maintenance work on the perpetrator's skis while living with his fiance/wife (I don't recall their status at that point in time). Not good, husband. Perhaps this whole thing would not have happened had the man not behaved as he did.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
