01 / Remembering Bob
The Bob we knew
If you knew Bob, you probably remember the dirt bikes, the music or whatever vehicle he was working on. Robert “Bob” Hardesty was born on Halloween, October 31, 1954. He grew up with his family on Cricklewood Street in Walteria, in Torrance, California, and graduated from South High School in 1972.
At his family’s house, friends gathered around the pool table. You might find Bob alongside the house working on his dirt bikes. Or you might find him outside his high school sweetheart’s house, leaning on his bike and spending time with her.
My family lived just around the block. I was at home with my parents on Newton Street, near where Tandem Way turns into Cricklewood Street north of Newton Street. If you remember my dad’s car collection, you may remember the house. I was the eldest of five daughters. Bob became close to all of us.
He and my dad could work on cars together, and they worked on the house, too. Bob helped turn our little two-bedroom house into a five-bedroom home. There was even the time he slipped through during the roof work and landed straddling a joist. They shared that love of cars and working on them, and Bob became part of our family life.
He had a second family with us, and he was loved.
Kim and Bob had been together before Bob and I were. Our life together began in the mid-1970s. Think back to roughly 1975 through 1980: Bob’s yellow 1975 Chevy LUV, my yellow 1960 VW Baja Bug, and then my white 1976 Chevy Chevette. Do any of those ring a bell? That’s often how I place a memory, by the car, the house or where we were working. I may not remember the exact date, but those details bring back the time.
Bob and I married on June 16, 1978, in Long Beach, California.
Read our privacy-redacted marriage certificate →When Jamie was born, we lived in a tiny house Bob owned on Newton Street in Walteria, a neighborhood of Torrance in Southern California. I put up a privacy fence and changed the bathroom to fit two closets and a vanity. At our small desk, I painted dolphins on a table base Bob and I gave Edee for Christmas. I made Bob a dirtbike-rider lamp, too, with “HARDESTY” painted on the rider’s clothes. Little things, but I remember them.
Jamie’s first birthday was in December 1979.
Bob sold that tiny house so we could buy a larger home, also on Newton Street, right across from my parents. If you came looking for him there, you’d probably head out back to the garage off the alley. Neighbors would come over and visit while he tinkered.
The house changed, but there was Bob, working on something, with people stopping by. If you were one of them, or if any of these places bring back a memory, I hope you’ll share it.
Bob and I separated in April 1980 and were getting a divorce. He returned to Kim, who continued to live with Bob’s mom a few blocks away.
On October 31, 1980, Kim and Bob celebrated his 26th birthday. Halloween was his day.
Then there was Easter in 1981. Bob and Kim came to pick up Jamie in the two-seat Lotus he had rebuilt for his brother Dick. Two seats, both taken, and no seat for Jamie. That was okay. I took her over to his mom’s house myself. They were having Easter dinner there.
Nine days later, Bob was dead. He was killed on April 28, 1981, in the home he had newly rented on Avenue A in Redondo Beach, California. Not either of our Newton Street houses. This was a different home.
Read the death certificate →He was 26. A father, a son, a brother, a husband, Kim’s partner, a son-in-law and a brother-in-law. My parents and my sisters loved him. They lost him, too.
Decades passed. Then messages and public posts about his death reached our family. They sent me back to the photographs, back to the papers I had kept, and looking for more information.
The relationship dates in the different accounts
I remember our separation in April 1980 and Bob returning to Kim then. In her September 28, 2021 account, Kim wrote that she and Bob had parted for only one year. In a separate comment, she described involvement through April 1978 and a reunion at the very beginning of 1980. The one-year description does not fit neatly with the April 1978 and early-1980 dates, and her reunion date differs from my recollection. I have kept the different dates with the accounts that supply them.
The separate comment retains the annotation visible in the archived capture; it is not a complete surrounding discussion.
Read Kim’s relationship account →
Read the separate comment →
In separately preserved comments, Kim described a confrontation and removal of belongings. I disputed that account. The captures preserve both statements; they are not court or police findings.
Read the disputed belongings account and my response →
02 / The accounts that followed
“Did you ask your mom?”
“Did you ask your mom?”
That was the question in Edee’s email to Jamie, decades after Bob’s death. With it came photographs and a question about whether Jamie or I recognized the people in them. I did.
The first image, now redacted, showed Leo’s Facebook page and his photograph. The second included his brother, Mike. Leo was the man I was living with when Bob was killed.
Her email said: “Those are the [surname redacted] brothers: Leo (apparently with sons?) and Mike, who very probably played an integral part in your dad’s death.😡 Did you ask your mom?”
Their connection to Bob was through me. So when I read “Did you ask your mom?” I understood the suggestion. My answer is unequivocal: I had no involvement in Bob’s murder.
Correspondence — readable exchange and original pages
The November 7–10, 2020 exchange is preserved in messages forwarded in October 2021. The eight-page printout retains its original page layout, with privacy redactions. The four-page reading copy presents the distinct messages once, then a separately dated November 28, 2023 letter from Sherri. These are separate sources, not one continuous conversation.
The reading copy includes available quoted history rather than treating repeated forwards as new messages. It covers this exchange and the separate letter, not all correspondence. Photographs and identifying private material remain withheld.
Edee’s correspondence and Kim’s posts are separate sources. Similar wording led me to compare them, but does not establish coordination. In a later email, Edee denied responsibility for other people’s posts and said she did not use Facebook.
The messages contain attributed allegations and responses, not findings of responsibility for Bob’s death. The original wording and emojis are preserved in the retained passages.
An offer to help
In a separate preserved comment, I offered Kim my support in seeking justice for Bob. I also raised the possibility that I could help with legal matters because Bob and I had not yet divorced.
Read my preserved offer of help →
Then there were Kim’s public posts. In 2021, one about the Robert Durst verdict turned to her demands concerning Bob’s death. She said she would request the death penalty and then “request to personally push the button.”
Why I was concerned for my family
In a separate comment, Kim described “three conspirators” and offered help seeking a plea deal. Kim referred to “the 3 of you” and said she and the Hardesty family would ask for the death penalty “against each of you.” Her comment also referred to refusing to come forward and remaining silent. It ends with repeated “TIC TOC” and coffin and house emojis.
Edee had named Leo and his brother. I understood Kim’s accusations to involve those same two men. But she was talking about three conspirators. I read that as pointing to me as the third.
Read Kim’s preserved comment — both captures →
Kim also described someone as “totally obsessed.” I understood her to mean me. If she meant determined to find out who killed Bob, then yes. He died tragically at 26. I am still looking for answers and justice.
Read the separate personal-comment capture →
Putting accusations I know are untrue in front of more people isn’t easy. I’m willing to face that discussion if it keeps Bob’s murder in the conversation and helps us find out who killed him.
A separate Facebook discussion
In a separate exchange on Ronnie’s post, Richie wrote, “This jerkoff who killed Bob has to go bro.” Ronnie said Bob’s friends should continue searching for “the hitman,” and Kim replied to Ronnie, “Absolutely!”
Read the preserved Ronnie/Richie/Kim exchange and edit history →
Kim’s death-penalty passage was about punishment through the courts. But reading it alongside these exchanges, and the allegations involving my partner and his brother, I worried about where that anger might lead. Could it be directed toward me or my family?
Jamie’s response
Jamie also called on everyone—including me—to stop the argument. Her reply appears in a separate preserved capture from Ronnie’s post. She expressed sympathy for Kim and urged people not to pursue someone themselves.
Not a single one of you are going to go out, with your walkers and bad hips, and catch the big bad wolf. More than likely, they are no longer with us. And if they are, I doubt any of us want anything to do with them.
Moving forward and living well is the best revenge. It is also the best way to honor our dear friend and loved one.
Taking information to investigators
“I may know something about the case that could be important.” One of Bob’s friends told me that publicly and asked me to message him privately.
In my preserved message, I urged him to give any information directly to the authorities. I wanted his own account to reach investigators, rather than rely on someone else saying they had already passed it along.
He replied, “Firstly, you should have never given my name to the police.” He said his information had already been given to police years earlier and asked to be left out of the loop. My attempted response explained that I had passed on that he said he might know something. The screenshot shows “Couldn’t send.” I remember that he blocked me then; the screenshot records the failed send, not its cause.
Read the public invitation and two preserved Messenger excerpts →
On October 18, 2021, I wrote cease-and-desist letters to Kim and to Sheri, addressed in the letter as Sharon Lee Jones.
How I responded in writing
These letters explain what I believed the posts were implying and why I wanted them to stop.
These letters state my objections; they are not court or police findings.
Read my notice to Kim →Read my notice to Sheri →
In my public response, I denied the accusations and explained why I was worried about my family. I asked anyone with information to take it to investigators.
Read my October 7 public response →03 / Returning to April 28
Back to April 28, 1981
Before we go back to that night, I want to be clear about Kim. Jamie and I have always had compassion for what she endured. She was there and saw Bob afterward. She loved him and continues to love him. Losing him so violently was horrific. The questions I have about her account do not diminish that grief.
Kim’s account of April 28, 1981, begins at the courthouse. She wrote that she went with Bob while he gathered documents. Then they went to his attorney’s office. She said Bob wanted her in the room for the discussion. What they discussed, she did not disclose.
Afterward, she said, they went to Bob’s mother’s house. Kim cooked dinner. They watched television. Around 10 p.m., Bob asked her to get Randy, who was asleep. Then he told her to leave Randy there until morning. They drove to Bob’s rented home in Redondo Beach without him.
Kim wrote that a man was already inside when they arrived and that Bob was shot. In a message to Jamie, she described what she said happened at the bathroom door.
She said she had been getting into the shower, got out of the tub and was going toward Bob when she opened the door. A man was trying to get into the bathroom. She said they struggled with the door and she managed to shut it, fearing she would be killed. In the same message, she wrote: “I want you to know I had nothing to do with his death. I could never hurt him.”
She said a woman next door heard her screams and called out that they were coming. According to Kim, the woman’s husband ran past the man in the front yard and saw him run to a truck across the street, where a driver was waiting.
A waiting truck. In her longer public account, Kim placed it on Prospect. The preserved passage does not tell us who owned it or who was driving.
Read Kim’s account of the truck on Prospect →
I remember being told about a truck that resembled my former partner’s. His was a distinctive custom conversion. But the company had made that style for many owners; it was not one of a kind. I remember him being home with me all night. We did not go anywhere. The truck in that account was not his.
The courthouse visit and the divorce claim
And there is still that courthouse visit. What had Bob gone there to do? I went back to the papers I kept from our separation.
Kim said our divorce had been delayed “to straighten out finances” and would have been final two days after Bob died. The court files I obtained do not confirm that date. Bob and I were not divorced when he died.
Our court records already included a May 1, 1980 order setting child support at $200 a month and dividing responsibility for community obligations equally. A May 9 court sheet records “Amicable Settlement.” The pages available here document child support and community obligations.
My understanding was that Bob and I had resolved our divorce-related arrangements amicably.
After Bob died, his employer told me about a workplace matter. I’ve wondered whether that was what took him to the attorney’s office that day. It is only a possibility. I do not know what he discussed with his attorney.
What evidence might still speak?
In a preserved comment, Kim wrote:
“The fact that they left a palm print and fingerprints is just a matter of time for the technology to put them away.”
Kim Ford, preserved comment
Open Kim’s preserved comment →This is Kim’s claim, not an investigative finding I can independently confirm.
Supporting accounts and context
The courthouse visit and the divorce claim
Kim wrote: “Once he retrieved what was necessary, we went to his attorneys office.” What documents Bob gathered and what business he addressed remain questions. Earlier court records showing Bob and me appearing without lawyers do not rule out his consulting an attorney later.
Kim says she attended the discussion at Bob’s request. Her account leaves her role in that meeting unexplained. A third person’s presence can affect attorney–client privilege, depending on the circumstances.
California law allows some third persons to participate without destroying confidentiality—for example, when they further the client’s interest in the consultation or disclosure is reasonably necessary to its purpose. Without knowing the circumstances, her presence alone does not establish a loss of privilege or show that the meeting did not occur.
The May 1 minute order records particular support and community-obligation terms. The May 9 sheet preserves the typed entry “Amicable Settlement”; it is not the complete settlement agreement. Neither page is a final divorce decree. The financial papers do not establish a motive or connect money to the murder.
Kim’s later account and her message to Jamie
Kim’s longer public account opens with a September 28, 2021 date. The associated continuation describes the courthouse, attorney’s office, evening and shooting. The two preserved captures are not a verified complete platform thread. In the opening, she describes Bob as her partner and best friend, recalls his love for Randy and says they planned to marry and have children together.
The message to Jamie is preserved in eleven related captures. Its opening displays August 31, 2012, at 2:34 a.m. Several joins are cut or hidden, so the available captures are not described as a complete continuous conversation. The reading copy masks a private contact detail; it replaces the edited quotation image as the source readers can open.
The bathroom-door description and the neighbors’ response appear in that message. The neighbor’s observation is reported by Kim, not presented here as an independent witness statement.
“He and I struggled with the door. I was able to shut it, but I thought I was going to be killed.” This is a separate excerpt from the same message as her denial, not a continuation of that quoted sentence.
The clothing description and school-group questions
In another post, Kim described the person she said she saw and shared examples of clothing she said resembled what he wore. Her description is preserved here alongside the other accounts of that night.
Read the clothing-description post →
When the account was shared in a South High school group, Brenda asked about the shooter, the neighbors and a composite drawing. Kim’s reply described what she said she had seen and what she believed investigators knew.
Read the school-group questions and reply →
The clothing illustrations are examples Kim supplied, not recovered evidence or a police composite. The question-and-reply captures come from the South High School Torrance California group, not a verified copy of the In Remembrance thread.
Questions for the Sheriff’s Homicide Investigation
The original witness statements and investigative records could help clarify the entry into the house, the sequence at the bathroom door and the physical evidence. Kim’s description of what the neighbors saw is not a substitute for their own statements.
The longer account also alleges a planned killing and reports what Kim says detectives told her about the danger to her. Those are claims in her account, not findings independently established here. Her statements about what would have happened had Randy been there are hypothetical; I have not turned them into events.
Differences between accounts are reasons to look more closely, not proof of who killed Bob. A later retelling or an explanation that seems logical cannot fill the gaps in the records.
Read the partial comment about alleged evidence →Read Kim’s separate comment about motive →
04 / What the records can tell us
The papers I kept
I kept following the paperwork, from our separation to what happened after Bob died. I administered his estate. I requested, paid for and obtained the complete files the court supplied for both our divorce proceedings and the probate of his estate. That means the files the court provided. It does not mean every historical document still survives in the courthouse record.
One entry keeps bringing me back. The probate inventory lists a savings account valued at $19,892.67 on April 24, 1981, roughly $75,000 in 2026 purchasing power. That was four days before Bob died. Those funds were not proceeds from drugs. The balance was what remained of his half of the money from selling our house. I have not found an accounting in the records I have that shows where it went.
The Paper Trail
Court Documents and Official Records
Open a source below to read it, then close it to return to this spot. Privacy-redacted copies retain the preserved pages; reading copies and summaries are labeled separately.
| Document | Date | What it shows | Source type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marriage certificate → | June 16, 1978 ceremony | Marriage of Bob and Sherri in Long Beach, California; later copy-certification stamp May 7, 1981. | Full preserved registry page, privacy redacted; not a newly certified copy |
| Order to show cause and supporting declaration → | April 15, 1980 | Procedural order and Sherri’s supporting declaration; allegations are not court findings. | Two preserved court pages, privacy redacted |
| Court minute order → | May 1, 1980 | Child support and equal responsibility for community obligations. | Full preserved court page, privacy redacted |
| Conciliation court sheet → | May 9, 1980 | The typed entry “Amicable Settlement”; not the complete settlement terms. | Full preserved court page, case identifier masked |
| Bob’s death certificate → | Death recorded April 28, 1981 | Recorded death, marital status and surviving spouse. | Full photographed certificate page, privacy redacted; not certified |
| Inventory and appraisement attachment → | Savings balance as of April 24, 1981 | The listed savings-account value and tax refunds; not a record of distribution. | One preserved estate-inventory attachment, identifiers masked |
| Letters of Administration and related probate pages → | June–July 1981 | Sherri’s July 31 appointment as administrator, with the preserved petition and related pages. | Four selected court pages, privacy redacted; this reader is not the entire file supplied to me |
| PRA 24-1222RE — request and LASD responses → | May 10–28, 2024 | The request, withholding decisions, reconsideration and final referral—not the homicide investigation file. | 12-page privacy-redacted request/response packet |
| July 1980 attorney–client privilege opinion → | July 30, 1980 | The court’s discussion of third-person confidentiality and its exceptions; not a ruling on Bob’s meeting. | Complete re-typeset annotated opinion, not an official scan |
The links below open the reviewed, privacy-redacted records displayed on this website. They are selections from the court files I obtained, not a statement that I have yet to obtain those files. The withheld homicide investigation records are separate.
Marriage, separation and the estate
One fact is straightforward: Bob and I were still married when he died. His death certificate records him as married and names me as his surviving spouse. Probate papers also identify me as his spouse, and the July 31, 1981 Letters of Administration appoint me administrator of his estate.
The papers in my archive include an April 15, 1980 Order to Show Cause and a May 1 minute order recording child support of $200 a month.
The May 1, 1980 minute order also records that each party was responsible for half of the community obligations. These entries address particular obligations; they do not establish that every financial question had been resolved.
His death certificate identifies the area at the time as “Redondo Beach Uninc.” and records the injury at 10:15 p.m. and his death at 10:41 p.m.
The full photographed certificate page is available with privacy redactions. Its original layout is retained; this is not a certified copy.
That legal status is distinct from the fact that our relationship had ended.
Return to the death certificate →Read the preserved probate pages →
The savings-account figure — and what it does not establish
The financial papers need equal care. One page that I previously described as a bank record is an attachment to an estate inventory and appraisement. It lists $19,892.67 in a savings account as of April 24, 1981, four days before Bob died.
The purchasing-power comparison uses the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ all-items CPI-U, U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted: $19,892.67 × 336.940 ÷ 89.1 = about $75,226, rounded to $75,000. The comparison is April 1981 to September 2026, the latest available month when this note was prepared; monthly CPI does not measure a particular day. This is an inflation comparison, not interest or evidence of what happened to the account.
BLS historical CPI-U table, page 3 → · September 2026 CPI-U, Table 1 → · BLS purchasing-power method →
The inventory entry records the amount as of the date shown. I obtained the complete divorce and probate files supplied by the court. The unanswered question is what those records show about where this money went.
05 / Seeking the missing accounts
The records I still could not see
The court papers could only take me so far. What had witnesses told investigators back then? What had investigators found? On May 10, 2024, I asked the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for the records of Bob’s murder investigation under the California Public Records Act. My request was assigned PRA number 24-1222RE.
The department withheld the records, citing exemptions and describing an ongoing and active criminal investigation. I asked it to reconsider. The answer stayed the same. The final response, dated May 28, 2024, closed the records request and directed questions to Lieutenant Modica of the Homicide Bureau.
That was the department’s position in May 2024. The letters do not tell us where the investigation stands today. I still do not have the witness accounts and findings I was hoping to read.
The May 2024 request and responses
I emailed the request on May 10. The signed request itself bears an April 10 date, but the email and the department’s letters establish May 10 as the submission and receipt date. The department assigned it PRA number 24-1222RE.
LASD acknowledged the request on May 13 and issued an extension letter dated May 14. On May 23, it withheld the requested records, citing exemptions and describing an ongoing and active criminal investigation. I asked for reconsideration the following day.
The final response, dated May 28, maintained that decision and concluded the records request. It directed questions to Lieutenant Modica of the Homicide Bureau.
Read the redacted request and response packet →06 / Questions about priorities
Forty-five years, and still waiting
Sheri Hardesty Jones celebrated Betty’s 102nd birthday in a post that Kim shared. Bob’s mother had reached a remarkable age, yet the questions surrounding her son’s murder remained unanswered. Read the preserved birthday tribute →
Trying to reach someone who can help
We have each tried to bring Bob’s story to more people. I’ve done my best to gather those efforts here, so they can reach even more people who may care, share, or help bring answers.
Betty’s 102nd-birthday tribute
Kim Ford’s post
Sheri Hardesty Jones’s post
In my own preserved comment, I wrote:
“On a positive note, this is shining a bright light on Bob’s unsolved murder.
With all the renewed chatter on here, I hope the detectives will see this and take an interest.”
Recreational drug use was part of the world around Bob then. I want to be honest about that. I also don’t want it to swallow up everything else about him, or stop anyone from sharing what they remember.
I’ve wondered for years whether his involvement with drugs made it easier to overlook him and give his murder less urgency. I cannot know how investigators weighed his case. But I worry about what happens when “drug dealer” becomes the whole story of a person. Bob’s life was no less valuable. His family deserves answers as much as anyone else’s.
“Ongoing and active.” Those were the words in LASD’s May 28, 2024 response. But what was actually being done? The letter did not describe the investigative work or say who or what resources were assigned to Bob’s case. I still want to know what is being done to move it forward.
Read LASD’s May 28 response — pages 10–12 →Records on responsibility and resources
LASD’s October 21, 2020 release documents the unit’s furlough and reinstatement. A March 10, 2005 County Auditor-Controller report describes Homicide Bureau’s countywide role, including services to independent cities. These sources provide context, not evidence of a staffing or funding decision about Bob’s case.
LASD’s 2020 account of the Unsolved Case Unit’s funding → · County Auditor-Controller report, PDF pages 6–7 →
07 / The remembrance-page exchange
A photograph with her father
Bob’s senior year at South High School, 1972.
View Bob’s post in South High School In Remembrance on Facebook →A photograph with her father
Jamie has very few photographs of herself with her father. She put one of them on Bob’s South High remembrance page. Kim replied with memories of beach drives, birthdays and the time they had spent together.
“He brought you into mine and Randy’s life just as you turned one,” Kim wrote. She described Jamie “being one to two and a half when we were a family.” Her comment ended: “Your dad placed you in my arms and I was overwhelmed with love. I truly felt blessed.”
Here is where I stopped. Jamie turned one in December 1979. Bob and I were still together then. We separated in April 1980, about four months later. In Kim’s description, her family life with Jamie begins during those months. The family life Jamie already had with us disappears from the telling. That is why the dates matter to me.
Jamie began her response with compassion for what Kim had endured the night her father was killed. Then she challenged the timeline, writing, “unless you were seeing him while he was seeing my mother, who eventually became his wife.” She also answered the image of being placed in another woman’s arms: “I have and always have had my own mother, who loved and cared for me.”
And Jamie’s concern went beyond childhood memories. What upset her most, she said, was Kim’s claim to know the “three murderers.” If there was information about her father’s death, she wanted it given to investigators. Then she came back to her photograph: “Why not allow me to have one moment that you don’t take and make yours?”
Kim’s reply began: “To answer your one question the answer would be yes, but in the true contexts is in reverse.” After Jamie’s question about the timeline, I understand why that reads as turning the challenge back on me. But Kim did not spell out which question she meant. She also said, “I am not responsible for what others conclude,” and that arresting the wrong people would not serve justice.
Read Kim’s comment, Jamie’s response and Kim’s reply →
Making room for remembrance
In a separate preserved moderation exchange, Brenda, the page’s administrator, put it simply: “The family comes first.” She offered to remove material Jamie did not want on her father’s memorial. Kim defended her memories and her reasons for posting, saying, “It is not my intention to ever upset her.”
Read the moderation exchange →
In my public response, I answered the accusations. I also said this to Kim: “I acknowledge your love for him, and won’t compare the two relationships.” There was room for both of us in Bob’s story. And there should have been room for Jamie to remember her father.
View my Facebook response
My public Facebook response, preserved in a separate screenshot. Tap the image to open the larger source reader.
Open larger source reader →How these sources fit together
The three-capture reader presents Kim’s original remembrance comment, Jamie’s response and Kim’s reply in that order. Separate overlapping screenshots confirm the sequence. The captures do not show every comment in the surrounding thread, and Kim does not identify which particular question she meant by “in reverse.”
The moderation exchange is a separate group of preserved captures. Kim defended her account and said she did not intend to upset Jamie. She also alleged that someone other than Jamie was interfering with the effort to obtain justice. That allegation is not an established finding. Its position in this chapter does not establish when it occurred relative to every other comment.
Kim’s October 22, 2021 post and my public response are separate items, not additional installments of the verified three-part exchange. The October 22 post is preserved with its visible comments and a thumbnail of the account she attached; that account is available separately.
Read Kim’s October 22 post and visible comments →
The relationship dates in Kim’s other accounts are compared in the earlier life-story section. The four-month point here compares Jamie’s December 1979 first birthday with my recollection of our April 1980 separation. Kim’s remembrance comment does not itself give a date for our separation.
Related context: the relationship dates in the earlier accounts →08 / Someone may still remember
Someone may still remember
After all the posts, the letters and the paperwork, I still come back to that young man from Walteria. The music. The dirt bikes. Whatever he was working on. Jamie has photographs of the brief time she had with him. He never got to watch her grow up. On October 31, 2026, Bob would have turned 72. In his short life, three women loved him deeply: his high-school sweetheart, Kim and me.
Perhaps no investigation moves quickly enough when someone you love has been killed. But 45 years have passed. We are still waiting for answers.
Even after all these years, what you remember could help. Please share it with investigators.
Maybe you knew something then. Maybe you learned something years later. You do not need every date or the whole story for what you remember to be worth sharing.
If you feel ready to share what you know, you can speak with investigators or ask someone you trust to help pass it on. There is also a way to report anonymously.
Contact investigators or report anonymously →
A friend’s contribution
I’m grateful to Bob’s friends who have kept caring and looking for answers. Richie has already been part of that effort. In a preserved exchange about Bob, he wrote that he had spoken with Kim and said, “I had some ideas on how to narrow things down.”
Richie has also described his investigative training in his own posts: graduating from the American College of Forensics in Hollywood in 2005, taking a P.I. course that year, and sharing a portrait he called his “P.I. Badge Photo ID.” I welcome his contribution and the continued help of everyone who wants answers for Bob.
Richie’s posts about his training and badge photograph
Open Richie’s preserved posts →The direct and anonymous reporting options are below.
