A major breakthrough

[Pierre]

So why did you say there was a source? See post 11.

Your last paragraph I would completely agree with. In fact, that's the exact point I was trying to make in Post 201.

Hi John,

OK, I see what you mean!

There is a source, but I have been told from an expert that the diagnosis in that source is not the diagnosis I thought it was. I am not within the field of medicine so I asked an expert. That means I can not use this source (which I was hoping for) to refute the hypothesis about the killer, since there was no such severe brain problem. The hypothesis about an organized and strategic killer did not match a person with such a severe brain problem, since such a problem would have made the organized and strategic murders impossible.

So now I have nothing to put against the hypothesis about this organized killer. That means I have to continue.

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

Hi John,

As I write: there are no sources. This means there are no sources available.

Therefore there is no such indication.

Naturally, a mental problem is possible - but I can only say what is in the sources, and the sources must exist. I can not imagine sources or guess.

And your second point was what I said also: we can not apply new tools - like DSM-5 - on this old case.

Regards, Pierre

So why did you say there was a source? See post 11.

Your last paragraph I would completely agree with. In fact, that's the exact point I was trying to make in Post 201.

[Pierre]

What do you mean "we can forget the source for a severe brain problem." How do you know he didn't have a severe brain problem? How is it possible to make an accurate mental diagnosis in 2016 when no one from today has actually examined your suspect?

Hi John,

As I write: there are no sources. This means there are no sources available.

Therefore there is no such indication.

Naturally, a mental problem is possible - but I can only say what is in the sources, and the sources must exist. I can not imagine sources or guess.

And your second point was what I said also: we can not apply new tools - like DSM-5 - on this old case.

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

Hi Steve,

and thanks for sharing your medical knowledge with us.

We can forget the source for a severe brain problem now. This means that there are no such sources.

There are some sources for grandiosity, as I said. This is a personality issue and very problematic if one would like to connect it to some psychiatric diagnosis where grandiosity is one component.

We can not do this for such an old case.

But we do know that there were severe personal problems, there was hate, there were lies, there was fraud, there was manipulation, there was defense and there was grandiosity.

There are very, very good, reliable and valid sources for this. I promise you this, Steve.

It is indeed a very well established historical fact.

Best wishes, Pierre

What do you mean "we can forget the source for a severe brain problem." How do you know he didn't have a severe brain problem? How is it possible to make an accurate mental diagnosis in 2016 when no one from today has actually examined your suspect?

I hope I'm wrong but I'm starting to get very suspicious about the rationale behind this thread.

[Geddy2112]

The biological explanatory variable is in a source showing that there was a severe brain problem in this case.

We can forget the source for a severe brain problem now. This means that there are no such sources.

Oh dear me some folk are going to have a field day with this...

[Pierre]

Pierre

That statement s entirely dependent on what you mean by thinking.

Brain diseases do serious effect the ability to think.

Tumours depending on location and size certainly can.
Likewise Deminta and Alzhimers and of course Human variants of CJD are truly insides on the mental processes of a person.

Disease caused by pathogens can equally be devistating.

Of course this just back the issue I raised in my last post.

Steve

Hi Steve,

and thanks for sharing your medical knowledge with us.

We can forget the source for a severe brain problem now. This means that there are no such sources.

There are some sources for grandiosity, as I said. This is a personality issue and very problematic if one would like to connect it to some psychiatric diagnosis where grandiosity is one component.

We can not do this for such an old case.

But we do know that there were severe personal problems, there was hate, there were lies, there was fraud, there was manipulation, there was defense and there was grandiosity.

There are very, very good, reliable and valid sources for this. I promise you this, Steve.

It is indeed a very well established historical fact.

Best wishes, Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Mayerling;395138]

How ironic. In the past on other threads you have talked about solving this case in order to get a monster off our backs. Now you seem to be heading towards making this monster human enough to possibly forgive.

Hi Jeff,

I do absolutely not suggest any forgiving attitude. If you thought so that is the wrong interpretation of my perspective.

And I am very uncertain as to whether people wish to get the monster of their backs. It seems to me that they like the hunting ground and the monster they are hunting. Am I wrong?

SO WHAT IF WHATEVER THIS "SEVERE BRAIN PROBLEM" WAS, IT HAD A SEVERE EFFECT ON HIS/HER BODY!!! THE TRAGEDY WAS IT DID NOT HAVE SUCH A SEVERE EFFECT BEFORE HE/SHE KILLED FIVE OR MORE PROSTITUES AND LEFT ONE IN SHREDS!!!

I do not understand what you are saying here.

To me, however vicious it sounds to you Pierre, if it had such an effect one hopes his or her last days were spent in absolute agony. It would have been partial payback for what the killer deserved.

Thanks for sharing that hope and I agree with you. But sadly, the last days was spent in freedom abroad in attractive apartments.

My apologies to the rest of this board.

Jeff

You do not need to apologize, Jeff.

I hate the killer. But letīs see if I can use this hate to get the last scrap of data we need.

Best wishes, Pierre

[Mayerling]

Of course it can, but in the case of such a severe brain problem, there would not have been sufficient cognition to commit the murders. And after reading about this problem, I also learned that it would have have a severe effect on the body.

How ironic. In the past on other threads you have talked about solving this case in order to get a monster off our backs. Now you seem to be heading towards making this monster human enough to possibly forgive.

SO WHAT IF WHATEVER THIS "SEVERE BRAIN PROBLEM" WAS, IT HAD A SEVERE EFFECT ON HIS/HER BODY!!! THE TRAGEDY WAS IT DID NOT HAVE SUCH A SEVERE EFFECT BEFORE HE/SHE KILLED FIVE OR MORE PROSTITUES AND LEFT ONE IN SHREDS!!!

To me, however vicious it sounds to you Pierre, if it had such an effect one hopes his or her last days were spent in absolute agony. It would have been partial payback for what the killer deserved.

My apologies to the rest of this board.

Jeff

[Elamarna]

To conclude. There is no source for a brain disease destroying the capability of thinking. There are some sources for grandiosity.

Regards, Pierre

Pierre

That statement s entirely dependent on what you mean by thinking.

Brain diseases do serious effect the ability to think.

Tumours depending on location and size certainly can.
Likewise Deminta and Alzhimers and of course Human variants of CJD are truly insides on the mental processes of a person.

Disease caused by pathogens can equally be devistating.

Of course this just back the issue I raised in my last post.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Of course it can, but in the case of such a severe brain problem, there would not have been sufficient cognition to commit the murders. And after reading about this problem, I also learned that it would have have a severe effect on the body.

The problem with an serious discussion of this issue, especially for those of us with the specific knowledge to debate it realalistacaly is that you non disclosure of the type of illness you are claiming means that you can say anything you like with regards to its effect on a person and NO useful reply can be made.

Once again we have the non disclosure of sources and details.

I am not suggesting this but this could all be simple invention, how are we meant to debate without knowledge?
.

Come on Pierre, show that you are a genuine researche
Why not tell us if this illness is strutural , chemical or caused by a pathogen that at lEast means the debate is useful to a limited extent.

As it stands It is pointless and the reason why I have said little on this thread.



Steve

Ps . I hope you wife is getting better.

[John G]

Of course it can, but in the case of such a severe brain problem, there would not have been sufficient cognition to commit the murders. And after reading about this problem, I also learned that it would have have a severe effect on the body.

How do you know that your suspect was correctly diagnosed?

[Pierre]

Are you seriously arguing that brain disease cannot affect cognition?

Of course it can, but in the case of such a severe brain problem, there would not have been sufficient cognition to commit the murders. And after reading about this problem, I also learned that it would have have a severe effect on the body.

[Abby Normal]

If I open my mouth in the forest, can you hear me yawn?

Mike

Hahahaa. Now that's funny

[The Good Michael]

If I open my mouth in the forest, can you hear me yawn?

Mike

[Fleetwood Mac]

It is a biological explanatory variable.

What exactly is one of them?

Have you been eating dictionaries for breakfast, Pierre?