Severin and sociopathy

[protohistorian]

There is every reason to believe that by 1891 he was faniliar enough with the use of a knife as a weapon, to secret one away in anticipation of using it. Being only 3 years distant in time from the rippings, one asks where did he learn it. Neck wounds on victims suggested to doctors that beheading was the intent. If one is to argue that his fatal personality onset in 1897, then one must explain how that happened, from normitive to sociopath in one step, and in a matter of month's. We are not bound by legal stricture in this forum, there is far more evidence for Severin than for Maybrick, or prince Eddie. Those individuals have been indicted, why not Severin?

[protohistorian]

he never refuted that claim at trial. By doing so he pleaded no lo contendre. Since their was no legal methodology to learn that skill, and since he did not deny having that skill or making that threat, he must have aquired the skill through experimentation. Respectfully Dave

[Sam Flynn]

the bulk of the evidence suggest strongly that Severin in the late 1880's was experimenting with cutting off heads

How one can leap from the (alleged) threat to cut off his wife's head in 1891, to an assertion that he was "experimenting" with decapitation in the late 1880s, is an argument rather difficult to sustain, Dave.

The onus for consideration of this candidate is not on those who support his consideration, rather on those who oppose it.

How so?

With the little evidence available to us, he is quite substantially indictable in the court of public opinion.

Au contraire. With the vast amount of evidence available to us, we see that he was guilty of poisoning three of his female partners, and that the first of these crimes was committed in 1897. There is no evidence, only a heap of speculation and invented history, that ties him with the Whitechapel Murders of 1888.

[protohistorian]

yeah yeah, Dave's right! The evidence sure does point that way. I was expecting at least some resistance. Considering how often I hear the refrain " there's no evidence."

[protohistorian]

Consideration of murders by this person of interest in 1888 is as follows.

1. In 1903, at his capital trial, Severin displays most of the characteristics of sociopathy, and all of megalomania. He exhibits a fully formed and malignant psychpathology. Evidence since 1888 strongly intimates that this psychpathology is long term in it's development, and terminal in it's duration.
2. In Severin's case it was terminal, so we have an open ended question regarding onset and associate behaviors. Since these pathologies never appear out of nothing, we must ask ourselves, when, and with what behaviors, did the psychopathology begin in Severin. Tied to the crimes or not, the bulk of modern evidence very strongly intimates that earlier behaviors existed.

3. In 1891 while in New Jersey, his wife finds a large knife under a pillow in Severin's shop, and when she confronts him, he said he had meant to cut her head off.

4. Just 3 years after the rippings, we have Severin with a weapon secreted away, ostensibly to cut off heads.

5. Any conclusion other than there is ample evidence for considering Severin as a potential candidate is not based on evidence, the bulk of the evidence suggest strongly that Severin in the late 1880's was experimenting with cutting off heads, and low and behold, we have victim wound morphology to that effect. The onus for consideration of this candidate is not on those who support his consideration, rather on those who oppose it. With the little evidence available to us, he is quite substantially indictable in the court of public opinion.