Hate

[Abby Normal]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;398731]

thank you just checking my facts

I'm almost afraid to ask, but who the hell is Helen?

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;398726]

Hi Steve,

She was, as I wrote, a girl. So she was not over 16.

Regards, Pierre

thank you just checking my facts

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;398720]

understood.


is "Helen" a girl or a woman, different thread i know, but somehow i think not really off topic

in this case lets define a woman as being over 16.

steve

Hi Steve,

She was, as I wrote, a girl. So she was not over 16.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;398717]

Is your hypothesis:




That is right. A specific hatred but not a personal one.


Not in general.



That is also right, Steve.

Regards, Pierre

understood.


is "Helen" a girl or a woman, different thread i know, but somehow i think not really off topic

in this case lets define a woman as being over 16.


steve

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Robert St Devil;398674]

Does the cessation of the murders coincide with Monro,s resignation?

Hi Robert,

What do you mean by "coincide"?

Is the police,s chief financial officer, the Receiver, involved?

No.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;398656]Is your hypothesis:

1. That the killer had specific hatred of those he killed?

or

That is right. A specific hatred but not a personal one.

2. He had hatred of women in general?

Not in general.

or

3. He hated this class of woman and how he perceived they lived.

That is also right, Steve.

Regards, Pierre

[Robert St Devil]

In your hypothesis

Does the cessation of the murders coincide with Monro,s resignation? Is the police,s chief financial officer, the Receiver, involved?

Signed, 20 Questions

[Elamarna]

what can be more serious than murder, for which the penalty was death, only treason would rate more highly.

Of course plenty of others also carried harsh punishments too.

one can only assume this was done to in the hope that evidence would go away?

your hypothesis i assume is it did?


s

Is your hypothesis:


1. That the killer had specific hatred of those he killed?

or

2. He had hatred of women in general?


or

3. He hated this class of woman and how he perceived they lived.




or something else?


Steve

[Elamarna]

QUOTE=Elamarna;398648



There was a very serious crime committed.

Pierre

what can be more serious than murder, for which the penalty was death, only treason would rate more highly.

Of course plenty of others also carried harsh punishments too.

one can only assume this was done to in the hope that evidence would go away?

your hypothesis i assume is it did?


s

[Pierre]

QUOTE=Elamarna;398648

One must assume that if this were the case the hate or the need to act on it is removed in 89/90.

again several options:

the threat is dropped. example, say it was legal, it is decided to proceed no further

The person or persons behind the threat change, maybe they move. or are no more, they die.

sure there are others?

steve

There was a very serious crime committed.

Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;398647][QUOTE=Pierre;398643]

Pierre

The next question would be, how would killing the women reduce or stop this threat?

It did temporarily stop it at first and when the threat was taking over again, it started again. When the threat was over, it was all over. The murders ceased.

I do not of course expect an answer.

I am honestly doing the very best I can now, Steve.

However one could conjecture several options:

1. The women are the threat, this of course is the old royal theory, I reject that.

I strongly reject it too.

2. He is trying to make a point, but who too?

That is correct.

A. You have suggested he was sending a message, well several, to a particular Police official but have not said who?

There is a set of coherent sources giving the ID of the murderer.

I would suggest Monro, with Warren also in the know.

However I can take that line no further at present having nothing to use in an hypothesis as regards motive and intent.

I am honestly very sorry for that. I wish I could discuss the whole matter with you.

B. you have also hinted, as David has also said, that a women is involved, birthdays and witness at Millers court.

What relationship existed between her and your man is not known.

However he could have been trying to convince her of something?

While both options may be linked, neither give an answer to the motive or anything else.

The problem was a very complex one. That is also the reason why the sources must be interpreted the way they are interpreted.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Hi,

No. There was an interaction with the real world and that world was threatening to destroy everything. And "everything" was not to be built up again.

So there was real hate. Hate was the core element.

Regards, Pierre

One must assume that if this were the case the hate or the need to act on it is removed in 89/90.

again several options:

the threat is dropped. example, say it was legal, it is decided to proceed no further

The person or persons behind the threat change, maybe they move. or are no more, they die.

sure there are others?


steve

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;398643]

Hi Steve,

The second definition is correct.

And one can say that if the threat would result in certain consequences it could have caused a problem making it almost impossible to actually go on living physically.



It was a real physical threat.



It was also percieved of as a physical threat.



It had a lot of substance.



It is easy to answer since it is easy to see from the sources that the threat had a lot of substance. Anyone who sees the sources can easily see that.

Best wishes, Pierre

Pierre

The next question would be, how would killing the women reduce or stop this threat?

I do not of course expect an answer.

However one could conjecture several options:


1. The women are the threat, this of course is the old royal theory, I reject that.

2. He is trying to make a point, but who too?

A. You have suggested he was sending a message, well several, to a particular Police official but have not said who?

I would suggest Monro, with Warren also in the know.

However I can take that line no further at present having nothing to use in an hypothesis as regards motive and intent.

B. you have also hinted, as David has also said, that a women is involved, birthdays and witness at Millers court.

What relationship existed between her and your man is not known.

However he could have been trying to convince her of something?

While both options may be linked, neither give an answer to the motive or anything else.



steve

[Pierre]

Your statement, Pierre, made me think of Richard Chase, who believed that he had to kill and drink his victim's blood to prevent his own blood from turning to dust.

Is that what you mean?

Hi,

No. There was an interaction with the real world and that world was threatening to destroy everything. And "everything" was not to be built up again.

So there was real hate. Hate was the core element.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;398637]

Pierre,

That is an interesting observation.

Do you use survival in the sense of continuing to actually live, or continuing to live the life he had?

Hi Steve,

The second definition is correct.

And one can say that if the threat would result in certain consequences it could have caused a problem making it almost impossible to actually go on living physically.

Do you think that this was a real physical threat to his continued survival?

It was a real physical threat.

Or was it something he perceived to be a threat?

It was also percieved of as a physical threat.

In your opinion did the threat have any substance?

It had a lot of substance.

I understand the last question may be difficult to answer.

It is easy to answer since it is easy to see from the sources that the threat had a lot of substance. Anyone who sees the sources can easily see that.

Best wishes, Pierre