Police In Southern California Identify Suspected Serial Killer

[News_Editor]

Police in Southern California identify suspected serial killer < br />

2012-08-05 08:34:01 GMT+7 (ICT)

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (BNO NEWS) -- Police in Southern California believe they have identified a serial killer who may have killed at least four women, and possibly more, between 1980 and 2000, investigators announced on Friday. The suspect died in police custody in January 2008.

The first known killing happened on August 19, 1980, when 25-year-old Sonia Smith was bound, raped, strangled with a cord and her body dumped in an abandoned field in Los Angeles. Another 25-year-old woman, Phyllis McClinton, was killed on November 4, 1980, in an almost identical case, with her body also dumped in an abandoned field in Los Angeles.

Two decades later, on August 11, 2000, 45-year-old Vanessa Williams was found naked and strangled to death in a vacant field in Pomona, about 28 miles (45 kilometers) east of Los Angeles. Two months later, 27-year-old Christine Fields was found strangled to death in a field in Riverside County, although she lived in Pomona and investigators believe she was not killed in the field.

In July 2007, investigators linked the murders of Smith, Williams, and Fields based on DNA evidence. They also found a person of interest when they discovered the case of a woman who was assaulted and bound in a similar manner as Smith and McClinton. The woman survived the November 1980 attack and identified Los Angeles resident Larry D. Hubbard as the attacker. He was arrested at the time and charged with false imprisonment.

Just two months before the new developments in 2007, Hubbard was arrested by police in Ontario, California, for an outstanding Florida escape warrant, stemming from a 1974 robbery conviction. Hubbard had escaped the Florida prison in 1977 and then moved to California, where he lived in Los Angeles and Pomona until he was arrested while at work in San Bernardino.

But before investigators identified Hubbard as a person of interest in the serial murders, he attempted to hang himself on June 23, 2007, while being extradited to Florida. He initially survived the suicide attempt but died of complications from his self-inflicted injuries on January 13, 2008.

Before he died, detectives requested and used a biological sample from Hubbard to compare it to evidence from the Smith case. Detectives were notified on June 22, 2012, that Hubbard's DNA profile matched a partial DNA profile which was developed from a sexual assault kit in Smith's case.

Investigators believe Hubbard may be responsible for more murders that have gone undetected over the three decades and are asking the public for help. Anyone with possible information is being asked to contact Detectives Luis Rivera and Elizabeth Estupinian at the Robbery-Homicide Division of LAPD's Cold Case Special Section at (213) 486-6810.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-08-05

[BookMan]

Hubbard was not likely to have been inactive fro 20 years, so it seems likely he would have committed more murders.

I am personally for taking the DNA of all people convicted of crimes, serous and minor. Some jurisdictions only take DNA from serious offenders, which seems crazy, given that most serious offenders have a history of criminal behaviour for years before being arrested for the 'big one'.

[slapout]

Have to agree with bookman on this. With todays computer profiling, DNA matching/elimanition, etc, it could be a requirement for all law enforcement and government employees/contractors, immigrants, etc to have their DNA on record, as a matter of record.

Not being a fan of cradle to grave, Big brother government, nor personal privacey infringement, the data base could/would be avaliable to cut down on the number of casualities left behind by the sick people of the world.

.

[kiniyow]

A gap of 20 years with no killings? Wonder how many unresolved deaths were near this area in those 20 years?

[kimbathewhitelion]

Too large of a gap between killings, the similarities are easily just a coincidence given the large amount of violent crimes or killings in LA; the DNA match taking 4 years to confirm. Doesn't fit. What does is our (my) mayor wants this city to appear safer than it is & it always helps to close out unsolved cases, especially when gang violence is at a high. Phuket would be safer given 100 fold.

Too large of a gap between killings, the similarities are easily just a coincidence given the large amount of violent crimes or killings in LA; the DNA match taking 4 years to confirm. Doesn't fit. What does is our (my) mayor wants this city to appear safer than it is & it always helps to close out unsolved cases, especially when gang violence is at a high. Phuket would be safer given 100 fold.

DNA samplings of convicted criminals would never be passed, that would be a violation of their civil rights. Unfortunately, convicts have the same rights as all citizens, within their release guidelines.

Edited August 5, 2012 by oz893

[saroq]

Have to agree with bookman on this. With todays computer profiling, DNA matching/elimanition, etc, it could be a requirement for all law enforcement and government employees/contractors, immigrants, etc to have their DNA on record, as a matter of record.

Not being a fan of cradle to grave, Big brother government, nor personal privacey infringement, the data base could/would be avaliable to cut down on the number of casualities left behind by the sick people of the world.

.

Why just law enforcement and government employees/contractors, immigrants? Are they the only people who commit crimes in the US? If you're going to introduce these measure then they have to be applied to the whole population and then, fan or not, you do have a big brother situation. And we know how responsibly governments, corporations etc. use our personal information, don't we?

[transam]

Hubbard was not likely to have been inactive fro 20 years, so it seems likely he would have committed more murders.

I am personally for taking the DNA of all people convicted of crimes, serous and minor. Some jurisdictions only take DNA from serious offenders, which seems crazy, given that most serious offenders have a history of criminal behaviour for years before being arrested for the 'big one'.

I think everyone should supply their DNA, why not, we give our blood type for our safety, so why not give DNA for every body else's safety.

[BookMan]

Hubbard was not likely to have been inactive fro 20 years, so it seems likely he would have committed more murders.

I am personally for taking the DNA of all people convicted of crimes, serous and minor. Some jurisdictions only take DNA from serious offenders, which seems crazy, given that most serious offenders have a history of criminal behaviour for years before being arrested for the 'big one'.

I think everyone should supply their DNA, why not, we give our blood type for our safety, so why not give DNA for every body else's safety.

yeah , I am not sure how i stand with everyone giving their DNA, but what you say makes sense, from a community safety POV.

I can see it happening in some western societies in my life time. Might take a war or something, but it will happen

[djvolak]

Too large of a gap between killings, the similarities are easily just a coincidence given the large amount of violent crimes or killings in LA; the DNA match taking 4 years to confirm. Doesn't fit. What does is our (my) mayor wants this city to appear safer than it is & it always helps to close out unsolved cases, especially when gang violence is at a high. Phuket would be safer given 100 fold.

Too large of a gap between killings, the similarities are easily just a coincidence given the large amount of violent crimes or killings in LA; the DNA match taking 4 years to confirm. Doesn't fit. What does is our (my) mayor wants this city to appear safer than it is & it always helps to close out unsolved cases, especially when gang violence is at a high. Phuket would be safer given 100 fold.

DNA samplings of convicted criminals would never be passed, that would be a violation of their civil rights. Unfortunately, convicts have the same rights as all citizens, within their release guidelines.

Tell that to the state of Arizona. They started making every one inside give one before they get released. You want to get out you are giving a DNA sample. I think that is part of the release guidelines so your information is not correct. And if you think convicts have the same rights as everyone else you live in a fantasy world my friend. I have been turned down for jobs I have not been able to vote for many years now. I did not give up and go back to being stupid. I just thanked those who would not hire me for their time and went about rebuilding my life. It seems to be working so far. I will be out 9 years this sept with only one traffic ticket. I think I may have beat the odds but it has not been all fun and games. I did not mind giving the DNA sample but there was a lot that did not want to for sure. Peace all.

Edited August 5, 2012 by djvolak

[ttelise]

Too large of a gap between killings, the similarities are easily just a coincidence given the large amount of violent crimes or killings in LA; the DNA match taking 4 years to confirm. Doesn't fit. What does is our (my) mayor wants this city to appear safer than it is & it always helps to close out unsolved cases, especially when gang violence is at a high. Phuket would be safer given 100 fold.

Too large of a gap between killings, the similarities are easily just a coincidence given the large amount of violent crimes or killings in LA; the DNA match taking 4 years to confirm. Doesn't fit. What does is our (my) mayor wants this city to appear safer than it is & it always helps to close out unsolved cases, especially when gang violence is at a high. Phuket would be safer given 100 fold.

DNA samplings of convicted criminals would never be passed, that would be a violation of their civil rights. Unfortunately, convicts have the same rights as all citizens, within their release guidelines.

Tell that to the state of Arizona. They started making every one inside give one before they get released. You want to get out you are giving a DNA sample. I think that is part of the release guidelines so your information is not correct. And if you think convicts have the same rights as everyone else you live in a fantasy world my friend. I have been turned down for jobs I have not been able to vote for many years now. I did not give up and go back to being stupid. I just thanked those who would not hire me for their time and went about rebuilding my life. It seems to be working so far. I will be out 9 years this sept with only one traffic ticket. I think I may have beat the odds but it has not been all fun and games. I did not mind giving the DNA sample but there was a lot that did not want to for sure. Peace all.

Yeah, props to you man for staying the course.

No doubt about so many idiots on the net spouting off bs as fact. Haha, they read it off Wiki or, better yet, some politically spun website and spew their regurgitation of bad, biased or incomplete information as true all over the net. Haha, and they believe it which is the sad part about it.

I swear I think the net is making everyone stupider because now they are both ignorant and misinformed. Dangerous combination.

Edited August 5, 2012 by ttelise

[bendejo]

A gap of 20 years with no killings? Wonder how many unresolved deaths were near this area in those 20 years?

Weekends in Tijuana?

[canman]

Hubbard was not likely to have been inactive fro 20 years, so it seems likely he would have committed more murders.

I am personally for taking the DNA of all people convicted of crimes, serous and minor. Some jurisdictions only take DNA from serious offenders, which seems crazy, given that most serious offenders have a history of criminal behaviour for years before being arrested for the 'big one'.

I think everyone should supply their DNA, why not, we give our blood type for our safety, so why not give DNA for every body else's safety.

In principle it is a good idea. My concern however is that it is alot easier to plant foreign DNA evidence at a crime scene than say a fingerprint.

Edited August 7, 2012 by canman

[BookMan]

Hubbard was not likely to have been inactive fro 20 years, so it seems likely he would have committed more murders.

I am personally for taking the DNA of all people convicted of crimes, serous and minor. Some jurisdictions only take DNA from serious offenders, which seems crazy, given that most serious offenders have a history of criminal behaviour for years before being arrested for the 'big one'.

I think everyone should supply their DNA, why not, we give our blood type for our safety, so why not give DNA for every body else's safety.

In principle it is a good idea. My concern however is that it is alot easier to plant foreign DNA evidence at a crime scene than say a fingerprint.

There would be a number of issues involved with a complete DNA profiling of a population, not least of which would be safeguards to stop the abuse and misuse of DNA data banks. Governments have been shown that they are not to be trusted with most things.

Still , in theory, crime clear up rates would improve dramatically.

[Credo]

DNA is helpful, but it is not a silver bullet. The DNA of someone can come from a variety of places and doesn't necessarily mean that someone's DNA at a crime scenes means they are the criminal. DNA is only one tool.

It's a little like CCTV in Thailand. The police cannot just sit around watching TV all day and stop crime or catch criminals.

[moonbarman]

A gap of 20 years with no killings? Wonder how many unresolved deaths were near this area in those 20 years?

Weekends in Tijuana?

probably in prison on a seperate manslaughter/murder charge.