Examination of a Motive

[Abby Normal]

I think so Dave. Particularly in M2, M4, and M5. I do not see systematic action or a coherent unifying valuation schema or method in either in trophy taking or wound placement. Dave

Hi Proto
He is targeting the womb but also pludering? I am confused now Dave. But then again I confuse easily. : )

coherent unifying valuation schema

laymens terms please.

[Errata]

Dave, I do not believe attribution of the trophy to the specific victim is a factor. I think trophy valuation was based on something internal to the killer, or perhaps something interacting with his psychopathology. Dave

I agree. The question still remains, why is a uterus important to the killer? It does not seem to be a common trophy. So what is there to love or hate about a uterus, but not a vagina or breasts. Or a heart even. I know Kelly's was missing, but I still have doubts about her being JtR's victim. We know why Stride's wasn't taken.. Do we know why Nichol's wasn't? Still sort of thinking aloud.

[protohistorian]

Abby I think targeting is too strong of a word. I see the womb as a preferred trophy type, and the kidney as an experimental trophy type. If we use targeting as meaning goal, his target was the killing itself. I suspect however that the need for an additional trophy type (other than womb) is a function of an environmental factor. Dave

[protohistorian]

Here is a tip to understanding me, because sometimes I am unclear. Trophy valuation fluctuates with the crimes as you move through the Macnaghten sequence. I do not see a coherent unifying theme for the entire sequence, I see changes in valuations based each crime within the sequence. Dave

[Errata]

Abby I think targeting is too strong of a word. I see the womb as a preferred trophy type, and the kidney as an experimental trophy type. If we use targeting as meaning goal, his target was the killing itself. I suspect however that the need for an additional trophy type (other than womb) is a function of an environmental factor. Dave

If the target is the killing, and there is no extension or apparent pleasure from the act of killing (death wasn't drawn out), then the goal would be simple extermination correct? Or is there another motivating factor within these parameters?

[protohistorian]

I think so Errata, I think the act of killing itself was of critical importance to the killer, while the trophies filled some a second purpose for him. Dave

[Abby Normal]

Here is a tip to understanding me, because sometimes I am unclear. Trophy valuation fluctuates with the crimes as you move through the Macnaghten sequence. I do not see a coherent unifying theme for the entire sequence, I see changes in valuations based each crime within the sequence. Dave

Hi Proto
Thanks- got it. I agree. It does not seem to be the same thing everytime.
Although I do see an evolution.

[protohistorian]

Abby it is not an evolution in the sense of linear progression. It is alot like evolution in that some things work for him, and some don't. Like evolution, those wound types the killer percieves as effective survive, others do not. Also like evolution, there is no "goal" per se, just a change in gene frequencies that results in different animals over time. Evolution did not set out to create a zebra, rather striped horses have differential surviveability and fertility, hence zebras. As the killers valuations change, the wounds change, the trophies change, the crime scenes change in character, and even the inter crime time changes

[Errata]

I think so Errata, I think the act of killing itself was of critical importance to the killer, while the trophies filled some a second purpose for him. Dave

Okay, so according to trusty wikipedia (which for this purpose works adequately) there are four types of motives, often with overlap.
Visionary, Mission-oriented, Hedonistic (lust, thrill, etc.), Power/Control.

Visionary means psychotic. Son of Sam. Mission oriented means either terrorism, or extermination. Ted Kaczynski is the example used. Hedonistic is lust thrill or comfort. Jeffrey Dahmer, the Zodiac. Black Widows go here too. Power/Control is pretty self explanatory. Ted Bundy, Robert Hansen maybe.

Maybe if we can try and nail him down into a type, or category we can get more specific. Personally, I am going Mission-Oriented with some Power issues. An exterminator who has a need to overcome some struggle. Someone who needs power, or lacks control elsewhere. Mostly because the sexual elements don't add up for me, and the timing seems off for a thrill killer. There is also nothing that speaks to psychosis. Anyone got something else? Another way to look at this? another theory?

[protohistorian]

Errata, those are broad typologies that do not allow for fluctuation . Say our boy starts at M1 with the goal of killing. He then fantasies about ways to improve the effect of killing for him, lets say he settles on the idea of a trophy. He has now shifted category, but is the same offender. He has a different psycho-pathology (category) as the result of his shift in valuation of his actions at the scene. I suspect this is so because the the act of killing changes to the act of trophy harvesting. Dave

[Errata]

Errata, those are broad typologies that do not allow for fluctuation . Say our boy starts at M1 with the goal of killing. He then fantasies about ways to improve the effect of killing for him, lets say he settles on the idea of a trophy. He has now shifted category, but is the same offender. He has a different psycho-pathology (category) as the result of his shift in valuation of his actions at the scene. I suspect this is so because the the act of killing changes to the act of trophy harvesting. Dave

I can see that, on the other hand, I could make the argument another way. The reason a man grabs a knife and heads out into the night doesn't change. Let's say for example he hates prostitutes and wants them all dead. That doesn't change. How he kills, and what he gets out of it might change. Simple extermination may no longer be enough, now he needs trophies. Now he needs more than trophies, now he has to obliterate them. What makes the act satisfying to him may change, but not the reason.

Does that make sense, or am I making stuff up?

[protohistorian]

Errata, what if the trophy was a method of prolonging whatever feeling the M1 killing gave him. It is not fulfilling the same need, it is prolonging the effect of the killing for the killer? The change is due to his fantasyies about the event and the feeling it rendered. Dave

[Errata]

Errata, what if the trophy was a method of prolonging whatever feeling the M1 killing gave him. It is not fulfilling the same need, it is prolonging the effect of the killing for the killer? Dave

I think it is likely. Certainly I think it fulfills some need the killer has. It seems like quite a bit of work to not have some special significance. Ears are easier for example. But does he kill them for the uterus? Does he kill them to kill them, and the uterus is secondary, or bonus? I think it is two separate questions. Why does he kill them? Why does he take the uterus? The answer might be the same for both questions, but if not then we need to sort that out.
What makes him cut up the first victim? (whoever that is)
What does he get from the killing?
What does he get from the trophy?

The first question is really a useful one for sort of tracking changes. Why did he kill his first victim? Did his neighbor's dog tell him to? Does he hate prostitutes? Does he hate women? Was the first one an accident? What made him pick up a knife and go after a prostitute? Anger? Lust? Psychosis? This is where I think the four categories are useful. The feeling he got out of killing, or mutilating, or trophy taking may be secondary. They may be the whole point of the exercise. I don't know. But if the evidence doesn't point to lust, what does it point to? And then how do the specific acts or injuries either fuel or negate that initial reason. How does taking a uterus fit with rage? If it doesn't at all, then maybe not rage. If it is intended as a very personal mutilation, then maybe rage does fit. That's all I meant with the categories. They are useful for an initial sort.

[protohistorian]

Errata, I suspect killing calms him in some way or relieves some anguish. I imagine the first mutilations are a product of his fantasy life. I think (at least between M2 and M4 the trophies calm him in the way killing did initially. I base this on event timing. Dave

[mklhawley]

I agree Errata, the sexual element is way overplayed. Dave

I'll second that Dave.

Mike