Same motive = same killer

[Trevor Marriott]

From my post to Harry, it should be obvious that I think that following the historically accepted version can never be called twisting, Trevor.

Doing it the other way around, though...

I´m almost sure you can see what I mean.

Can I ask you a small favour? If you ever should agree with me about something relating to these cases, can you please not let everybody know?

We are never likely to agree, you have created a fantasy in your own mind, and as has been seen no matter what is put before you to negate that fantasy you are never going to accept that you could be wrong, and that there is a more simple explanation.

You continually choose to ignore and dismiss Dr Biggs comments with regards to similarities, which you seek to rely on to prove a signature as part of your misguided theory.

You and others on here should stop trying to be medical experts by giving you own medical opinions. You were not there at the time, there are no photographs of the bodies, so what has been said back then by the doctors is nothing more than opinion, and as has been pointed out modern day medical knowledge has shown that many of those opinions now do not stand up to close scrutiny.

As I have said there are other simple and obvious explanations for these torsos.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

We are never likely to agree, you have created a fantasy in your own mind, and as has been seen no matter what is put before you to negate that fantasy you are never going to accept that you could be wrong, and that there is a more simple explanation.

You continually choose to ignore and dismiss Dr Biggs comments with regards to similarities, which you seek to rely on to prove a signature as part of your misguided theory.

You and others on here should stop trying to be medical experts by giving you own medical opinions. You were not there at the time, there are no photographs of the bodies, so what has been said back then by the doctors is nothing more than opinion, and as has been pointed out modern day medical knowledge has shown that many of those opinions now do not stand up to close scrutiny.

As I have said there are other simple and obvious explanations for these torsos.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, thanks for the reassuring words about how we will likely never agree!

As for Biggs and his work, I fear that you do not understand him OR me to the full, so it´s probably best left lying. You seem to think that I do not hold Biggs high in regard, and that´s wrong. I think he is quite knowledgeable and my understanding is that he knows what he is talking about.

The problem seems to be that you don´t.

[harry]

Fisherman,
What police sources? More misrepresentation.There were none as regarding theft of rings from the bodies,simply because there were no witnesses reported as being in the company of victims at death.Nor were police themselves witnesses.
The habits you write of,being in the past,are just that ,habits of the victims past.Useless in PROVING the situation prevailing at time of death.
Why the reference to Kelly?Did she have rings stolen too?Did any of the other victims? One could speculate they too,at one time,had a habit of wearing rings.It proves nothing.
If you want to be logical,then stick to realities.Stop as Trevor remarks,from indulging in fantasies.
By the way,what school in Banbury?

[Fisherman]

Here´s a healthy exercise!

On a Swedish website, I found a guy asking "Now that they´ve apprehended the Golden State killer, is it not time to say that he is probably the Zodiac too? Two serial killers in roughly the same area, both of them looking fairly alike on police sketches, both using a gun - I mean, what are the odds?"

He´s got a fair point - the odds are in favour of a similar identity. On account of the similarities.

But! In THESE two cases - and this one´s for Herlock - the dissimilarities outweigh the similarities!

The Zodiac case played out in 1968-69. Joseph James DeAngelo was born in 45, making him 23-24 years old in 68-69, so he fits the bill in that respect.

But what tells the cases apart is that DeAngelo was driven by an urge to have sex forced out of his victims, whereas the Zodiac never engaged in sexual activity with his. DeAngelo was always in close physical contact with his victims, whereas the Zodiac seemingly avoided this to a major degree.

To me, that very clearly speaks for two killers. The time does not overlap, but is consistent with the idea of one killer, the area allows for it with ease and to a degree, both killers shared the gun aspect. But on closer inspection, it seems that DeAngelo may have used a gun only in situations where he needed to act quickly. The police reasoned that one of the male victims may have freed himself of the shoelaces he was bound with and lunged at DeAngelo, and on another occasion, a couple that was shot seems to have come upon DeAngelo as he was trying to enter a house he had staked out.

So here, we can see a clear difference in relation to how the victims were approached and what was the reason for the attacks, and taken together, it points to two very different mindsets.

In "our" cases, the exact opposite applies. The cases as such both involve mutilation and organ taking, something that is incredibly much rarer that sexual assaults and/or shootings, so that alone tells us that we are dealing with a high level of credibility of just the one killer.
And then we know that there are lots and lots of similarities that seem to be of a signature character, the opening of the abdomen, the taking out of organs and taking away of the abdominal wall etcetera.

The dismemberments may be about getting damning evidence out of a bolthole tied to the killer, a problem the Ripper cases didn´t have to deal with (personally, I think that the dismemberments were also about satisfying the killer, but that is another discussion).

This is how different suggestions of a shared identity are sometimes virtually baseless, while at other times they are instead almost certain to be correct.

But the guy from the Swedish website go it right from the beginning: It MUST be suggested that a common identity may have existed when two serial killing cases are so close in time and space. Once we look closer at the details, however, we can easily see that the suggestion does not hold much water in the EAR/ONS-Zodiac comparison.

But for Herlocks sake, I´m glad I found it!

[Fisherman]

Fisherman,
What police sources? More misrepresentation.There were none as regarding theft of rings from the bodies,simply because there were no witnesses reported as being in the company of victims at death.Nor were police themselves witnesses.
The habits you write of,being in the past,are just that ,habits of the victims past.Useless in PROVING the situation prevailing at time of death.
Why the reference to Kelly?Did she have rings stolen too?Did any of the other victims? One could speculate they too,at one time,had a habit of wearing rings.It proves nothing.
If you want to be logical,then stick to realities.Stop as Trevor remarks,from indulging in fantasies.
By the way,what school in Banbury?

I thought I had already told you two things:

1. There is nobody saying it is a proven case that the rings were taken by the killer - it is only a historically accepted thing, and something that cannot be called twisting unless you have a twisted agenda.

2. Go away.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I see that there’s a JTR documentary on my TV tonight at 10pm called Missing Evidence with some bloke called Christer Holmgren. Anyone know who he is?

[Sam Flynn]

I see that there’s a JTR documentary on my TV tonight at 10pm called Missing Evidence

...surely that should be Lacking Evidence?

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, thanks for the reassuring words about how we will likely never agree!

As for Biggs and his work, I fear that you do not understand him OR me to the full, so it´s probably best left lying. You seem to think that I do not hold Biggs high in regard, and that´s wrong. I think he is quite knowledgeable and my understanding is that he knows what he is talking about.

The problem seems to be that you don´t.

I fully understand him but for you to accept what he says kicks the arse out of your theory and I quote what he says

"I don't think (from what I have read) that there are sufficient similarities between the cases to conclude that the same 'killer' dismembered the bodies"

Maybe its time for you to withdraw?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

I fully understand him but for you to accept what he says kicks the arse out of your theory and I quote what he says

"I don't think (from what I have read) that there are sufficient similarities between the cases to conclude that the same 'killer' dismembered the bodies"

Maybe its time for you to withdraw?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Or for you to provide him with a list, compiled by me, to judge from?

[Fisherman]

...surely that should be Lacking Evidence?

Jealousy.

Always so unbecoming.

[Elamarna]

I see that there’s a JTR documentary on my TV tonight at 10pm called Missing Evidence with some bloke called Christer Holmgren. Anyone know who he is?

Its on so often Herlock
Result is i spend 3 days on facebook pointing out the mistakes and the misleading information it gives.


Steve

[Sam Flynn]

Jealousy.

Why should I be jealous of a documentary that stitches up an innocent man on the flimsiest grounds?

[Fisherman]

Why should I be jealous of a documentary that stitches up an innocent man on the flimsiest grounds?

Ignorance.

Always so unbecoming.

[Fisherman]

Its on so often Herlock
Result is i spend 3 days on facebook pointing out the mistakes and the misleading information it gives.


Steve

It takes THREE DAYS to list the mistakes and misleadings? And you do it on Facebook?

Poor, poor you.

[Elamarna]

It takes THREE DAYS to list the mistakes and misleadings? And you do it on Facebook?

Poor, poor you.

No it takes 3 days for the poor public, mislead by a superbly made but factually bankrupt production to stop quoting the "non fscts" they have been fed.

It was you who informed me all the public beleived the documentary and they said so on Facebook which lead me there Christer, i thank you for that information.

It means untruths can be easily pointed out to casual observers


Steve