Originally posted by caz
View Post
You have what you have, a woman killed in a 2 second altercation. The only reason you want to cling to these baseless arguments is because you want to accept the assumptions, or you want to measure the killer against known serial killer data. Problem is....find me another small group of murders that even remotely resembles Polly and Annies murder. By the same man. The medical expert says that Annies murderer used no meaningless cuts and was mutilating her so he could obtain exactly what he wanted. Which is....yep, her uterus. Now you want to portray that same guys as someone who just wants to kill. Thats not what Annies killed wanted, she died so he could mutilate. The kill is almost inconsequential in that respect. It facilitated, it didnt end the attack. Liz Stride is killed by one stroke...and thats all that was intended.
How you could believe this man was Annies killer is only explained by believing that he lost that focus. Based on what? An interruption of some kind?
Comment