Tweet
Ed Kempur (again) ?
-
-
Well, to date he is the serial killer who has been the most cooperative with researchers and law enforcement. We know more about him and his brain than any other serial killer. And I talked to him twice in my old job. He's also insanely intelligent, as is Joel Rifkin. Kemper is really the only serial killer I've studied who I really consider to have completely wasted his potential. Which is admittedly snobbish, but he is bright, well spoken, brilliant, self-actualized in a weird way... he could have been one of those change-the-world kind of guys. But instead he killed college girls. He gets to me.Originally posted by DVV View PostThe early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.Comment
-
Most interesting case, I too have read quite a lot about him.
But Kempur sounded like a Gujarati cousin of he.Comment
-
Yeah. My old boss's last name is Kempur, so I get that wrong all the time. Hundred of memos over a span of two years CC'd to "Director Kempur", so I'm pretty resigned to the fact that it's just going to be a crapshoot whether or not I spell it right.Originally posted by DVV View PostThe early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.Comment
-
Gud enough (amharic pun).Comment
-
Talking of profilers and Edmund Kemper, Robert Ressler (the originator of the organised/disorganised criteria) had an alarming encounter with Big Ed after he was mistakenly locked in an interview room.SCORPIOComment
-
It's not like Ed wasn't absolutely correct in pointing out a serious flaw in their interview procedures. That he did it theatrically... I imagine that's one of those things you laugh about later.Originally posted by Scorpio View Post
I was at gas station a couple years ago, went in to pay, got gas, got in my car, started it, started to pull out and freaked the eff out because there was a 50 year old homeless man in the passenger seat that I didn't even notice. I was so used to driving my fiance around that despite seeing the homeless guy, I didn't see him. And then he starts shouting at me about what a colossal idiot I was leaving the car unlocked and unattended, and how he could have been a serial killer or a rapist, and how in god's name did I not see him when I got in the car... for like 5 minutes he yells at me about basic safety, then gets out of the car. Then gets back in the car and yells at me for not locking the door the second he got out of the car, then got out and I locked the door. And he glared at me as I drove away, and I was shaking so hard I couldn't control my gas pedal. He scared me to death, but now I laugh about it. And I always lock my car.The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.Comment
-
Yes, Ed could teach Stephen King a thing about the violent imagination; he threatened to pull Ressler's head off and leave it sitting on the table to greet the guard. I believe Kemper was strong enough and mad enough to do it.Originally posted by Errata View PostSCORPIOComment
-
He was strong enough, but if he was mad enough he would have actually done it. Instead of saying he COULD do it, and then leaning back in his chair grinning. I'm just saying, a valuable lesson was learned about not being trapped in a room with a violent psychopath you just spent the last few hours irritating. And not the hard way. So in a way, he was very lucky it was Kemper and not, say, Gacy.Originally posted by Scorpio View PostThe early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.Comment
-
His way of teaching you a lesson. Some people never learn, you apparently haveOriginally posted by Errata View Post
He may have saved your life!
(did he have wings?)
Regards, Jon S.Comment
-
I was thinking today of an imagined fantasy base built upon over the years verses an almost random chance killing. Semi inspired by similar drives.
The difference between the two being the final 'trigger' urge to act on a fantasy and the other being a chance killing leading to a feeling of what ever 'they' (serial killers) enjoy.
Did 'Jack' have an active fantasy life and had desires to act upon them or was it a chance killing that led to a feeling of power and culminated in a frenzy of violence that even he repulsed from? Resulting in his own death...or did he continue, safe in the knowledge that he won't be caught?Comment
-
To Deathtosnails
I believe Jack was the kind of killer who lived out his fantasies as he was in the process of killing.Comment
-
The "chance killing" trigger is pretty rare, but certainly not impossible. I'm thinking of serial killers whose first murder was essentially unplanned, and I think it might be safe to say that it comes in two types. Okay, four types, but only two that might apply to this case.Originally posted by Deathtosnails View Post
The first applies only to "Angels of Mercy". The second is killing in the commission of another crime, say accidentally during a rape, or on purpose after a rape for the purpose of avoiding jail. There no evidence of any crimes other than murder being committed, so that doesn't apply either. The first that may apply is the Aileen Wuornos model, where her first murder was in self defense, and that triggered a spree. And it's a good model for Jack barring the self defense aspect, but his first murder could have been an accident, or at least not premeditated. The last model is that of Jeffrey Dahmer. Whose first kill was emotionally driven, not intentional, and did not trigger a spree. In fact he didn't kill again for nine years. But he killed his first victim for trying to leave him, and he killed the rest so that they wouldn't leave him. Despite the gap in time, the first murder is inextricably linked to the subsequent murders. And it may even be that he remembered his first murder as the only way he ever managed to keep someone.
If we are looking at either of the two last cases, then the first victim is again the significant one. With Wuornos the first victim gave her power she didn't have before. With Dahmer it defined his motive. But if we are looking at a Dahmer type, the first victim was likely killed well before the others, and probably not the same way. And it was probably someone closer to home. Find that victim, and you find the motive.The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.Comment
-
Profile JTR
My sixpence worth.Originally posted by John Wheat View Post
Jack is two closely related persons thro family or communal association, of long standing. There is an alpha and a beta male. The alpha male carries a strong hatred of his mothers' lifestyle. This is of long standing and stems from the contradiction of the mothers' ongoing misbehaviour and what he knows as normal living.
The JTR pair make their living precariously within the Whitechapel environment, are younger rather than older.
Martha Tabram is their first victim, being a close replica of their mother, who they have approached in the early hours of the morning for money, possibly for drink. It is their intention to mug her.
She has no money, having blown the soldiers money on drink between 12 and 3am. She is grabbed from behind in a chokehold by one assailant, and confronted with a knife by the other. Her small size and poor condition causes her to choke, or she faints. She is laid on her back, and then stabbed initially to prevent the assailant/s from being identified.
The alpha male however, in the heat of the moment, moves to a red rage haze, this mad spell introduces the multiple stabbings, the areas stabbed sending a clear message to his mother.
They disappear quietly into the night, wait the next few days out to see the police response, are ignored in the investigations, and become relaxed over the next weeks.
Soon, knowing they can get away with it, they begin to consider the possibility of another attack, the excitement of the high and the logic of thinking they are doing good rather than bad driving them.
Anyone who has experienced the blood rush of doing something extremely dangerous and then getting away with it will understand the beginnings of this mindset.
At least the next three murders have the same characteristics.Comment
-
Hullo Woocus! Upon what precisely do you base this upon? Not being snarky. Interested in your approach.Valour pleases Crom.Comment
Comment