Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A perpetrators perspective

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

  • A perpetrators perspective

    Hello.

    Over considerable time in the past I wrestled with personal challenges which I believe could bring some insight to forum discussions should anyone be interested. These are of a highly personal nature and involved sexual predatory behaviour towards women, namely voyeurism and stalking.

    I have not engaged in these behaviours for years and have never physically assaulted anyone or been charged by authorities. My experiences were completely within the realm of that of a “sex pest” and never advanced beyond stalking and voyeurism.

    For some time I was able to patrol my local city area at night and trespass undetected (mostly) and evade being seen or caught. All while in a steady and stable relationship and fully employed.

    Over time my activities became more focussed on the stalking type behaviour. Eventually I was reported and the police successfully intercepted me while i was in the act. They spoke to me and arranged to meet me at my workplace. At this discussion they spoke about how my actions would affect my life should I continue, and that I was lucky to be let off with a warning and not be charged. In short, this (in their words) would “nip things in the bud” before things got worse. The shame and embarrassment of just having police talk to me at work about something so pathetic and degenerate shook me to the core and I have not behaved in that way since.

    So there you have it, that’s an overview of my pathetic story about an obviously very personal side of my past life that I’m deeply regretful and ashamed of. Within the context of the Whitechapel Murders of 1888, I believe I can add a hint of insight from an ex-perpetrators perspective.



  • #2
    Thank you for your candour. It’s at least reassuring to hear that such behaviour can be checked and reformed.

    I guess one question could be to what extent you experienced a desire to escalate - ie you “progressed” - regressed actually - towards more stalkerish behaviour. How would that development have continued, do you think? It’s also what the police implied by comments like nipping it early, seems they expected a worsening. Do you agree?

    Comment


    • #3
      It would have progressed. My personal life was getting busier, but the stress of that compounded the deviancy so it was like being stuck in a psychological viscous circle. It seemed like the less time I had to stalk etc. the more time I made for it e.g. leaving for work early or “working” later etc. Before that period of my life I had a lot of time to myself and that’s where the problems began.

      Comment


      • #4
        To be honest, I personally find the Whitechapel case more interesting from a logistical viewpoint as that is where I believe there is some overlap in what I’ve read about the case and my own experiences. The how, when, and where is much more interesting than the why.

        For example, have you considered the issue of reflection? Not “Am I a bad person for doing these deeds?”, but the optical sort.

        Glasses can be especially reflective in dark places, depending on the light source. If you’re having to hide very still and silent with your pants down in a fully compromised position, the last thing you want is to be drawing attention to yourself with the reflection off your glasses.

        Just guessing but I bet the Whitechapel murderer thought the same thing at least on two occasions with his knife. I’d put money on him having some sort of easily retractable blade where it wouldn’t be visible for too long and he could simply retract it quickly and flick it up under his jacket sleeve.
        Last edited by MWatson; 11-18-2021, 01:21 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          What two occasions would that be? Chapman and Stride I presume?

          Is there any reason you suppose the killer wore glasses? None of the men sighted with the victims wore glasses, as I recall.

          Comment


          • #6
            Stride and Eddowes, but I’m talking examples.

            As a voyeur, my weapons were my eyes. The Whitechapel murderers weapon was his knife.

            My weapon could have compromised me by someone catching sight of nearby lights reflecting off my glasses as I hid in dark areas and shadows.

            The Whitechapel guy could have been compromised by someone seeing the knife, or even glimpsing light reflecting off the blade.

            Comment


            • #7
              It’s difficult to assess how “forensically” aware he was.

              he probably wore dark clothing but did he do so by design to avoid blood showing and make it easier to hide, or simply because men’s autumn clothing would have tended to be dark?

              How would he have carried the bloody murder weapon away with him - logistically I think this problem implies a local man.

              Comment


              • #8
                I’m certain he was aware and extremely self conscious of both the way he presented and carried himself and the way he prepared.

                As to how he carried the weapon away? - just as he carried it walking. Casually and straight up the sleeve. Makes no difference if it’s bloody or not as long as it’s not visible and not cutting himself.

                Se long as his clothes weren’t white or beige or whatever, colour is a moot point.

                Even better if the weathers not great. He could hold the knife securely up under the sleeve with the other hand, pretending to be folding arms casually to keep warm as he walked.

                Comment


                • #9
                  …and if he wore gloves, even easier. He could tuck the handle into the top of the glove and still maybe have his fingers extended. Any little visual thing to blend in and not look abnormal, even extending to how relaxed and normal his hands appear as he walks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MWatson View Post
                    Hello.

                    Over considerable time in the past I wrestled with personal challenges which I believe could bring some insight to forum discussions should anyone be interested. These are of a highly personal nature and involved sexual predatory behaviour towards women, namely voyeurism and stalking.
                    As a voyeur, how would you have responded if your victim had caught you in the act then chased you back to where you lived, pounded on your door and then proceeded to scream at you in front of your wife and child, then threatened to shoot you til the clip was empty if she ever saw you again, and then called the cops on you?

                    Always wondered what went through my perps mind when his wife opened the door and he saw me standing there...

                    Let all Oz be agreed;
                    I'm Wicked through and through.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I will be honest with you MWatson, I'm a little uncomfortable with your comfort in discussing so openly the addiction you possess.

                      I'm sure you believe you have it under control, but you minimalise a little too easily for my liking.

                      My experiences were completely within the realm of that of a “sex pest” and never advanced beyond stalking and voyeurism.
                      This is not a light-hearted thing to just dismiss as non-threatening. It is extremely the opposite. I can think of at least three or four serial killers who started out as 'Peeping Toms', which include the lies of Ed Kemper and Ted Bundy.

                      Not every 'sex pest' as you call it goes onto become a sexually sadistic murderer, but one cannot help but be concerned by the starting point of addiction of where you found yourself. I'm sure you have had many hours of therapy on this, but your tone to me comes across as someone who is more at ease at being a voyeur than perhaps one should be. That concerns me.

                      I might be coming across as a little judgmental, but something tells me that you have had thoughts of going further. Have mitigating circumstances simply postponed the inevitable? Where does the next thrill come from? I shudder to think.

                      https://www.oxygen.com/martinis-murd...-ted-bundy-btk



                      Last edited by erobitha; 11-19-2021, 08:32 PM.
                      Author of 'Jack the Ripper: Threads' out now on Amazon > UK | USA | CA | AUS
                      JayHartley.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I haven’t thought about or engaged in the sort of activity I’ve mentioned in a decade.

                        Read as many case histories and medical papers as you wish, I was never going to actually physically engage with anyone. Unfortunately my story is not rare, which I’m sure is something you can read about online as well.

                        The murderer was a different class of perpetrator altogether. I’m just drawing parallels to explain how he might have actually moved around etc., not what he was thinking. In that regard, my guess is as good as anyone’s.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MWatson View Post
                          I haven’t thought about or engaged in the sort of activity I’ve mentioned in a decade.

                          Read as many case histories and medical papers as you wish, I was never going to actually physically engage with anyone.
                          Do you think that because you didn't physically engage with anyone your violations are less generally offensive? That taking away a person's sense of safety and security within their own home is "not that bad"? That causing a person to live in fear, isn't really all that problematic because you didn't physically engage? That being an emotional terrorist makes you better, because you never planned to go through with the threat you represented?

                          Let all Oz be agreed;
                          I'm Wicked through and through.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ally View Post

                            Do you think that because you didn't physically engage with anyone your violations are less generally offensive? That taking away a person's sense of safety and security within their own home is "not that bad"? That causing a person to live in fear, isn't really all that problematic because you didn't physically engage? That being an emotional terrorist makes you better, because you never planned to go through with the threat you represented?
                            I’m never going to be able to defend anything I did in any way. I thought my original post reflected how I now feel about that.



                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Not really. You said you were here to give the perp's perspective but you aren't really doing that. You're pretty much avoiding any direct questions that would provide insight into actual state of mind, accountability and speaking in generalities that anyone who's watched Law and Order SVU could come up with. You think he was hyper aware and hid the knife in clothes? Oh do tell, such deep insight. Anyone could "guess" that. If you're actually here to provide insight into the perps mind, then provide insight. Otherwise you're just here to jerk off.


                              Let all Oz be agreed;
                              I'm Wicked through and through.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X