Crime Waves

[GUT]

G'Day PC Fitzroy-Toye

Personally I'd say who ever dunit was "one sick puppy dog".

[GUT]

Nor do the list of locations of organ locations in the room.

[PC Fitzroy-Toye]

Thanks GUT , I will consider MJK more closely......So we have the possibility of two uterus one kidney and maybe a heart as keepsakes, The human mind can contain a truly dark will,who ever penned the "from hell" struck a chord there.

[GUT]

G'Day Lynn

Yes I agree but I still find it puzzling that the inquest doesn't mention it.

[lynn cates]

accounted for

Hello PCFT, GUT. I believe there is one news account which claims all organs are accounted for.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Creo que no.

Hello Mike. Thanks.

"There are the deep double cuts to Kate's throat, and the double cuts on Mary's too"

Don't think so.

Cheers.
LC

[GUT]

G'Day PC

It is described as absent, but it does not appear in the list of organs found in the room and it is not mentioned in the inquest reports as having been examined. I am really not convinced f the absent meant absent from the body or absent from the room. However we do have detailed accounts of where parts of the body were located in the room.

Purely of the top of my head one breast near the feet and one under the head, other organs on the table, more under the head, from memory something else between the feet. BUT as I said no mention of the heart.

In my experience with both Postmortems, inquests and murder trials involving violent death, one of the primary organs of interest is the heart. And at a time when death was taken to be breathing stopped or heart stopped, I would expect at least the same level of interest.

And thus find it puzzling that it is not mentioned as having been examined. An inquest is about cause of death, the heart being punctured was a common cause of death, hence the interest.

So I am certainly not ready to say that the killer didn't take the heart.

[PC Fitzroy-Toye]

Michael, can not killing be a motive in its own right? Its a great taboo yet can be euphoric to those that cross that line, we are emotive creatures and if an ultimate feeling is found by death and butchery would that not be seeked and the opportunity taken if given?

[PC Fitzroy-Toye]

G'Day PCFT



Why is it untrue?

Personally I'm not persuaded one way or the other, but on balance I think it was more likely gone than not.

Truly GUT? I thought that the papers made a thing of it being missing but at inquest was not found to be the case?

[PC Fitzroy-Toye]

Hello PCFT. Thanks.

A bit. Never happened before. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

Are killer or killers if you like, is/are not perdictable but we are! well thats something about this case thats consistent!

[GUT]

G'Day PCFT

I guess the thing about the heart being missing is untrue?

Why is it untrue?

Personally I'm not persuaded one way or the other, but on balance I think it was more likely gone than not.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Mike. Yes, indeed. Wonder how rare THAT was?

Cheers.
LC

Well I can tell you Lynn that just within the Canonical Group there are only 2 murders which appear to mirror the same signatures and profile with respect to victimology...(which was Unfortunates actively approaching strange men to sell sex for money in the early morning hours)... along with the attack and wound patterns...well, you already know that dont you?

There are the deep double cuts to Kates throat, and the double cuts on Marys too...and the abdominal mutilations, but the question of whether they were killed by someone unknown to them while they solicited isnt anywhere near as obvious as it is in C1 and C2. In fact in Marys case its highly unlikely, since she is undressed in her own bed when attacked.

People assume motive with all these murders, something extremely detrimental to a dispassionate assessing of the data, since physical actions taken by killer can be duplicated or mirrored quite easily, and in these cases, all the things done to the victims were common knowledge via the press and the Inquests. Like for example Marys stomach flaps. Or the abdomen as the targeted area for mutilation. The reason they were killed is really the most significant issue here, isnt it? Motive is everything, even superseding signatures or profiles...and when it isnt obvious, it shouldnt be assumed anyway.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again......killing strangers to satisfy whatever psychological demons the killer has are rare types of murders, there are many, many more mundane and pedestrian reasons for killing that make up the majority of any years murder statistics.

We have some very recently separated women, a known love triangle, and a woman who behaved in a unusual manner in her last 24 hours.... based on those who knew her best. These are likely important clues....their value is as yet undetermined, but the reason the women were killed, for me, is of greater importance than the cutting.

People who kill do so for a reason, if they kill again, its almost certainly based on the same reason that they first did so....an example would be that the second kill is a witness to the first kill, or that he/she poses some kind of threat based on knowledge of the killer.

Jealousy, rage, greed, power seeking, religious differences, property disputes, ....there are so many common themes I for one dont assume a Unicorn when a Horse fits the bill just as well.

Cheers Lynn

[lynn cates]

off

Hello PCFT. Thanks.

A bit. Never happened before. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

rare

Hello Mike. Yes, indeed. Wonder how rare THAT was?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

parallel

Hello CD. Thanks.

If the language bothers you, by all means.

But those parallel cuts tied the first two together.

Cheers.
LC