Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Example of a serial killer

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Michael W Richards
    started a topic Example of a serial killer

    Example of a serial killer

    Hello,

    After debating here ad nauseum about which kills within the list of Unsolved Murders file belong together under one killer, I have an example of a serial killer that has been killing in Toronto for over 10 years. This monster recently pled guilty to 8 murders, with more likely.

    The relevance to our discussions are;

    1. His MO remained consistent
    2. His Victimology was consistent
    3. His manner of acquisition remained consistent
    4. His manner of disposal remained consistent
    5. His hunting ground remained consistent
    6. His lack of remorse or guilt is consistent
    7. Almost all the victims were of a different race/ethnicity
    8. There is no evidence that race or ethnicity was a motivating factor in his choices

    There are a number of additional facts in these cases that would be very instructive to those who believe serial killers change who they kill, why they kill, and what they kill with. The Ripper murders, for me, are the murders that have Unfortunates or Prostitutes who were actively soliciting strangers outdoors at the time, who were killed by double throat cuts, and who had post mortem mutilations, involving the abdominal area. They were left where he killed them.

    That's a very short list within that Unsolved File, and perhaps a more logical list to be using.

  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by seanr View Post
    I may be in the minority but by the nature of the injuries to the torso, I'm fairly convinced Kate Eddowes and Alice MacKenzie were killed by the same killer, but with a different knife.
    It is interesting to see how they respond to Alice Mackenzies murder Sean, recall of extra police, Bonds observations, ..I would agree that this murder and Kates could be paired by killer. As I believe Polly and Annies killer almost certainly was. Once the leap has been made, that which offers a perspective that allows for a number of murderers to be responsible for the Unsolved Files, you can then look for similarities with an unbiased approach. Like one that demands any solution fit within the broadly accepted Canonical Group theory.

    Possible Motives. That's what we need to look for, more than the physical injuries, because with the murders that show lesser degrees of skill we have many more potential people who could have done these things. Doing it skillfully limits the number of possibles, no skill means anyone with a knife and the will could have killed these women.

    The mutilations are part of an MO, they are not the defining characteristic that proves beyond doubt that one murder is linked by killer, with another. the circumstantial evidence is also very telling...how does law enforcement solve crimes where the body and most if not all of the physical evidence isn't available? Well, they do. Not with scientific forensics...when there is no physical evidence to test. They look into every aspect of the victims life, speak with people that knew her, and sometimes they uncover a circumstantial lead which eventually solves a crime. Not by comparing wounds or blade types, but by finding out why someone wanted the victim dead.

    Kate may have been blackmailing someone, Liz just dumped her ex and seems to be in date mode by her dress and demeanor, and she is on anarchists ground...Mary was in a love triangle by her own admission to a friend. Plus she has the supposed Irish background, and a fairly recent history of being a consort in Paris, a city which was the meeting point for many Irish self rule figures and plots during those years. Its also where Anderson flew home from.

    Loose strings. Some might lead somewhere.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Just came across an" interesting press piece from The Morning Advertiser on the 20th of October:

    "The Western Mail says the greatest excitement prevailed at Pontardawe, near Swansea, on Sunday morning, on its becoming known that a child named John Harper, aged five years, the son-of an annealed at the Pantardawe Tinplate Works, had been foully murdered on Saturday evening in a wood near All Saints' Church. The child was missing by his parents in the afternoon of Saturday, and as night drew on a search was instituted, the neighbours joining in, but as their endeavours proved futile, information was given to Inspector Giddings at the police-station, and he said Police-constables Harris and Hopkins were soon on the alert. Inquiries were at once made by them as to when and where the little boy had last been seen, and it proved that with another child, who is still younger, he had been during the afternoon on a bridge crossing the river, which at this spot divides Pontardawe from the wood in question, in company with a lad named Thomas Lott, who is about eighteen years of age, and is frequently employed by a butcher in the town. The search was continued, and about twelve o'clock Police-constable Hopkins came upon the body of the little child, which presented a terrible spectacle, the throat being cut from ear to ear, and the abdomen ripped open. The police ascertained that the other little fellow, who had been on the bridge with Lott and the deceased, had arrived home in a great state of fright, saying that Lott had wished to undress him in the wood. This cottage where Lott lived with his mother was next visited, and he was taken into custody on suspicion, and has since admitted that he did the deed with a butcher's knife taken from the slaughterhouse. No motive can be assigned for the crime. Lott was brought before the magistrate yesterday morning and remanded."

    Granted this was a child victim, and granted, this was Wales, but it does illustrate one thing pretty well...there were more killers than just JtR roaming about during that period that did atrocious acts. I believe the child found in Bradford.. was it?, was around the same time. I find this killer living with his mother a viable solution for where the/a killer would go after a murder. I think the evidence suggests someone who wasn't on the streets for long after any of the killings, so local man/men, maybe someone who tells his Mother he works at night.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by seanr View Post
    I may be in the minority but by the nature of the injuries to the torso, I'm fairly convinced Kate Eddowes and Alice MacKenzie were killed by the same killer, but with a different knife.
    bingo. or he didn't have it sharp enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • seanr
    replied
    I may be in the minority but by the nature of the injuries to the torso, I'm fairly convinced Kate Eddowes and Alice MacKenzie were killed by the same killer, but with a different knife.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    I think Kate would still be an on the fence matter. Look at the navel tracing, the severed colon section, the facial cuts.
    At least Eddowes' killer left her bladder intact. Chapman's killer sliced through part of her bladder, and her colon suffered collateral damage. She also needed two cuts to the throat, whereas Eddowes only needed one. Not that this points to two separate killers; on the contrary, it's entirely congruent with one killer making things up as he went along.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    I think that broadly the same level of skills were demonstrated in Chapman's, Eddowes' and Kelly's murder, and that a horse-slaughterer could have committed either or all three. I don't buy Baxter's "no mere horse slaughterer" assertion at all.
    I would say that the contemporary professional who examined 4 of the Five Canonicals would be the best go-to guy when assessing that Sam. Which would then lead to a C Group excluding Stride, for sure. I think Kate would still be an on the fence matter. Look at the navel tracing, the severed colon section, the facial cuts. Sloppy.

    Had the investigators thought that all the three you mentioned were similarly un-skilled, they would have been seeking slaughterhouse men in September. But they weren't, were they?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    I think that broadly the same level of skills were demonstrated in Chapman's, Eddowes' and Kelly's murder, and that a horse-slaughterer could have committed either or all three. I don't buy Baxter's "no mere horse slaughterer" assertion at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Well, yes, but Baxter over-eggs it, viz "considerable anatomical skill". At times, Baxter even invented stuff that flew in the face of what Phillips said. For one example, "no meaningless cuts", when there were plenty of those; the wasteful cutting of three flaps of flesh to open the abdomen, the cut out piece of navel, two-thirds of the bladder being cut through, the damage to the large intestine. To cap it all, the assertion that the killer was "no mere slaughterer of animals" who "must have been [...] accustomed to the post-mortem room" are Baxter's inventions.
    I think its important to establish this point Sam. There are the comments by Phillips himself, and there are enhancements shall we say from Baxter...but the facts are that the Police immediately focused their search for potential suspects on medically trained people. I don't believe that an Investigation pursued leads that only Baxter suggested in his own theory, they must have felt compelled to do so based on the seemingly competent murder of Annie Chapman.

    The reason I see this as critical is for use in comparatives. Mary Kelly could have been killed by a mere slaughterhouse worker, for example, and it would be a much different Canonical Group if we can see lesser skill sets. I think Kates murder is a threshold murder, it so mirrors the first 2 murders that its hard to set aside. But I also think lesser skills than the ones shown with Annie were evident there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
    Sam, the quote I posted indicated that Phillips believed that the killer cut where he did, and how he did, so as to obtain what was taken. .
    Well, yes, but Baxter over-eggs it, viz "considerable anatomical skill". At times, Baxter even invented stuff that flew in the face of what Phillips said. For one example, "no meaningless cuts", when there were plenty of those; the wasteful cutting of three flaps of flesh to open the abdomen, the cut out piece of navel, two-thirds of the bladder being cut through, the damage to the large intestine. To cap it all, the assertion that the killer was "no mere slaughterer of animals" who "must have been [...] accustomed to the post-mortem room" are Baxter's inventions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Phillips spoke specifically about "anatomical knowledge", sure, but not "considerable anatomical skill", which came from Baxter. Ditto "it was done by someone who knew what he wanted", "no meaningless cuts", "no unskilled person could have known where to find it", "no mere slaughterer of animals", "it must have been someone accustomed to the post-mortem room", and "the desire to possess the missing part seems overwhelming". Methinks the coroner did protest too much.
    Sam, the quote I posted indicated that Phillips believed that the killer cut where he did, and how he did, so as to obtain what was taken. He also said, assuming Phillips himself was skillful with a knife, that he couldn't have done what was done in less than 15 minutes. Lets say Cadosche heard Annies attack at around 5:15 and " no" a few minutes later...as he states, then Annie is alive at around 5:20 and discovered by Davis just before 6am. That leaves us with just over 1/2 hour to do all he did to Annie...the overpowering, the throat cuts, the removal of intestines, the apparent checking of her skirt pockets, the abdominal mutilations and leaving the scene unseen..all in 1/2 hour.

    That speaks volumes, there is no need to rely on the embellishments to try and make Phillips appear less convinced the person had knife and anatomy knowledge/skills. Again, the police sought medically trained people after this murder, its clear they agreed with what Im suggesting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Phillips spoke specifically about "anatomical knowledge", sure, but not "considerable anatomical skill", which came from Baxter. Ditto "it was done by someone who knew what he wanted", "no meaningless cuts", "no unskilled person could have known where to find it", "no mere slaughterer of animals", "it must have been someone accustomed to the post-mortem room", and "the desire to possess the missing part seems overwhelming". Methinks the coroner did protest too much.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
    Hello Michael

    Whatever the validity of the "organs for sale" theory, my main point is that it, along with the above-mentioned pronouncements on the killer's skill, came from Wynne Baxter, a non-medic.
    From the East London Observer, Sept 22..."On Wednesday the Coroner resumed his inquest respecting the death of Annie Chapman, who was found murdered in a yard in Hanbury-street, Whitechapel, on the 8th inst. Dr. Phillips, the divisional surgeon, who made the post-mortem examination, was recalled, and entered into detailed particulars as to the nature of the mutilations inflicted upon the victim. A portion of the body had been removed, and he inferred that it was to obtain possession of this that the operation had been performed. The manner in which the incision had been made indicated a certain amount of anatomical knowledge, and the witness could not himself have effected it, even if there had been no struggle, in less than a quarter of an hour."

    That seems to have used Phillips own words, and it implies not only did the killer know what he was looking for, but also that he accomplished what he sought to do in what would take Phillips at least 15 minutes to do himself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Hello Michael

    Whatever the validity of the "organs for sale" theory, my main point is that it, along with the above-mentioned pronouncements on the killer's skill, came from Wynne Baxter, a non-medic.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael W Richards
    replied
    Sam, although the idea of harvesting organs for medical purpose usage is likely not applicable here, it would seem that at least one teaching hospital was able to confirm someone approached them the previous year with an offer to purchase female abdominal organs. My point being.... no matter how screwball the idea might seem, it has some potential validation in that teaching universities statements, and that what may seem improbable may be quite the opposite once investigated further.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X