Serial Killers, A pattern???

[mklhawley]

Archaic's 1888 Letter

Greetings all,

Notice what Archaic’s October 13,1888 Letter to Medical News states and how it pertains to Cory123's thread:

“Sexual perverts of this character never begin by the commission of crimes of such frightful atrocity, but yielding to impulses to do slight injury to their victims, find, as time goes on, that it is necessary to practice greater and greater cruelties, to arouse their desires and gratify passion, until a stage like the present is reached. Such has with probablility been the history of the present murderer [JTR].”

This certainly sounds like Corey123’s learn-as-you-go killer, and seems to fit today’s theory of aggressive narcissism.

Sincerely,

Mike

[lynn cates]

Hello Corey.

"I however do not connect any of the torso murders with my six victims."

Right. And I am asking, "Why not?"

The best.
LC

[corey123]

Im sorry

Lynn,

Im not quiet understanding your question, please explain.

thank you

[corey123]

Lynn,

I believe you missed my victimology, he tried various methods, which includes trying alternate weapons. I however do not connect any of the torso murders with my six victims.

yours truly

p.s I am pretty sure the other four C5 were killed with a surgical knife. Not a meat cleaver.

[lynn cates]

I get the point

Hello Corey. But why NOT 2 different weapons? For just as "Jack" forgot his pointed knife with Liz, why could he not forget his cleaver with Polly and Annie?

The best.
LC

[corey123]

Cut

No i am not saying they are different knives, just that one killer thought to cut through the soft tissues while the other(Jack) tried to saw throught the bone. Showing two different mind sets.

yours truly

[lynn cates]

weapon

Hello Corey.

"1) In the C5 it seems that Jack tried to decapititate, but was not succesful. He tried not to cut throught the soft tissue inbetween the vertebres of the neck but rather tried to saw through the bone.
2) In the torso murders, the head was cut throught the soft tissues, showing at least knowledge enough to cut the head and other appendages from the body."

Is it impossible that, just as the knife in the Stride case was not the one used in the Chapman case, that this could merely depend on 2 different weapons? Say, a meat cleaver in the case of the torso killings?

The best.
LC

[corey123]

Lynn

We are assuming, please dont change the thread topic, and no I dont, I believe the six murders I classified are from the man we call "Jack the Ripper" and emma smith to be the victim of gang violence. I believe "fairy fay" to be fictional, I believe Coles and Mckenzies killer to be the same, and I also believe the Torso murders to be the work of one man(who isnt Jack).

The reason this is, is because the torso murders started way befor Jacks spree and occured within Jacks spree. I dont believe it is possible that a killer would continue with two different killing sprees at the same time using different M.Os. Its just not likely whatso ever, but as you said it is possible.
And to you question of disposition, I think Jack tried to decapitate the victims, but was unsuccesfull. In my mind Jack the Ripper doesnt have any anatomical knowledge, but maybe a little butchering experiance. I see a main difference in the throat cuts in the torso killings and the C5.

1) In the C5 it seems that Jack tried to decapititate, but was not succesful. He tried not to cut throught the soft tissue inbetween the vertebres of the neck but rather tried to saw through the bone.
2) In the torso murders, the head was cut throught the soft tissues, showing at least knowledge enough to cut the head and other appendages from the body.

yours truly

p.s. Perrymason, today we still have unorganized serial killers. Your notion that they "Must be organized" is false, it depends on the killer. And Jack shows signs of organization.

[lynn cates]

assumption

Hello Corey.

"I feel it safe to assume that the torso murders were the act of one man."

Why is that? If 2 men each kill a woman, why is it hard to imagine both wish to dismember for easy disposal?

Actually, they may well have been the same one. But let's not be guilty of a hasty generalization.

Do you think 1 man perpetrated ALL the other unsolved murders, including MacKenzie and Coles?

The best.
LC

[corey123]

Lynn

For one, I said that JACK wasnt any different from modern day serial killers. And two I know there will be differences because I previously stated that all serial killers are different.
Ok to name more than one.

I feel it safe to assume that the torso murders were the act of one man.

Ok so we have UNSUB #1 and #2.
#1 is Jack the Ripper
#2 is torso killer

Simularitys:
1) both killed by knife
2) both were never caught(as far as we know of)
3) they both picked women victims.
4) (assuming) they both show the homcidal triad(similar in most ever serial murderer)arson(as a child) unrinitus(wetting the bed) and harming animals.
Differences:
1) M.O
2) UNSUB 2 killed the victims, then probally disembowled them indoors, later disposing of the body parts in various locations.
3)UNSUB 1 cut the throat then mutilating their abdomens and faces, leaving them where they were murdered.
4) UNSUB 1 attracted WAY more attention than UNSUB 2, resulting in UNSUB 2 being practically ignored(by people at least, again I am assuming).

There are two different LVP serial murderers.

Yours truly

Corey,

Jack the Ripper could get away killing in public access venues and leave hairs, pieces of lint, bloodstains, fibers from his home or his business, bloody bootprints, or his own blood.....and they would have no way of determining anything about him or his whereabouts from that data.

With publicly mounted surveillance and modern forensic tools, police can now trace a single rug fiber to its manufacturer, isolate killers blood when mixed with the victims, measure and identify shoe sizes and types by bloody footprints, they can witness activties that happened in set locations via video tape, they can take a partial fingerprint and match it with known full prints on national databases, ........

Todays serial killer has to be Organized to have a hope of escaping detection. Not back then.

Best regards

[lynn cates]

circle

Hello Corey.

"We have our model, Jack the [R]ipper."

Well, do you see any circularity here? Notice:

1. Jack must evince behaviour like other LVP serial killers.

(OK, and those were . . . ?)

2. Jack the Ripper.

(So Jack had to behave like Jack?)

But perhaps we can compare him to the modern SK's? Very well. But proceed judiciously. I don't doubt similarities, but expect differences as well.

The best.
LC

[lynn cates]

dictionary

Hello CD. But the dictionary is your friend.

The best.
LC

[corey123]

lynn

We have our model, Jack the ripper.
No matter how many victims you think to be attributed to him we view him the same way we view present day killer(to a point)

[c.d.]

Hello Corey. They may well be the same, for what little I know. I have not met any LVP serial killers, although I am almost old enough. I HOPE I have not met any 21st c ones, for if I find out otherwise, I may not sleep well for awhile.

Notice that in a logical disputation (or dialectic, if you will), the onus is always on the one who asserts the positive. The naysayer need not do that. So if LVP SK's must behave a certain way, it is good to come forward with a model.

The best.
LC

"disputation", "dialectic", "onus" - give me a break here. I haven't bought that German-English dictionary yet.

c.d.