Shades of a Concept of Kosminski

[The Good Michael]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/14/brazil-cannibal-empanadas_n_1426173.html

Anyone?

Mike

[Cogidubnus]

Shave an' an 'aircut....

Hi Michael

More akin to Sweeney Todd, I'd say!

Dave

[Bridewell]

Hi Michael

More akin to Sweeney Todd, I'd say!

Dave

I'm with you, Dave, on this one. I always thought the Sweeney Todd story was too disgusting to be really credible, but obviously not!

Regards, Bridewell.

[Fisherman]

Disgusting? EMPANADAS?

The best,
Fisherman

[The Good Michael]

Many of the Kosminski proponents claim schizophrenia because of the voices and erratic behavior surmised. I believe JTR cannibalized his victims and the organ trophies were consumed. In the Case of the Imperiled Empanadas, we can kind of see a combination of the two ideas. Does that add a bit to the Kosminski theory, or is it apples and organs?

Mike

[robhouse]

Hello Mike.

Take a look at the following schizophrenic killers and you might start to see an answer:

Richard Chase
Tsutomu Miyazaki
Nikolai Dzumagaliev
Hadden Clark
Marc Sappington
Nicolas Cocaigne
Herb Mullin
Vince Li
Ed Gein
Robert Napper
Ottis Toole
Peter Bryan
James Clayton Lawson

All the above were schizophrenic, all committed cannibalism and/or disembowelment... many took organs as trophies.

Rob H

[The Good Michael]

Rob,

Thanks. I never knew there were so many, and my question was somewhat rhetorical, but I hope it provokes some thought as well.

MIke

[Errata]

All the above were schizophrenic, all committed cannibalism and/or disembowelment... many took organs as trophies.

Rob H

Here is where the discussion about schizophrenia and violence starts to get complicated. Are there violent schizophrenics? Of course. Are there schizophrenic killers? Absolutely. Are schizophrenics more likely to be violent? No. Are they more likely to be killers? No. Do they make up a significant portion of the serial killer population? No. Even in your list of schizophrenic killers, there are problems.

When a schizophrenic kills, it is far more likely to be a spree killing or a mass murder than a serial. Marc Sappington is a perfect example, or Jared Loughner. Schizophrenic delusions typically don't have the staying power to cause a prolonged killing spree. And to be fair, any number of serial killers have been diagnosed schizophrenic when they were not. John Wayne Gacy was diagnosed schizophrenic, when he clearly was not. Ed Gein was not schizophrenic. Which isn't to say he wasn't barking mad, because he was, but he wasn't schizophrenic. Before brain imaging, Schizophrenia was something of a diagnostic catch all for delusional people. Otis Toole probably was schizophrenic. But that wasn't what made him kill. Any more than his epilepsy made him kill. And ritualism and cannibalism are by no means confined to the schizophrenics. Jeffrey Dahmer was not schizophrenic, Karl Denke was not, Albert Fish was not, Andrei Chikatilo was not.

In terms of total fairness, any discussion on what illnesses Jack the Ripper may or may not have had should be in terms of symptoms, not disease. Schizophrenics have a hard enough time as it is without people giving the impression that they are violent or ticking time bombs. We will never be able to say that Jack the Ripper was schizophrenic, even if we knew who he was and that man was so diagnosed. The diagnostic criteria in the LVP was not even remotely accurate. Even today there is quite a bit of wiggle room. We talk about the age of onset as being the early 20s. But the truth is that there is childhood onset (though such an unfortunate could never be functioning by adulthood) and there is late onset. Basically, if you make it to 35 without problems, you're probably in the clear, but even then there have been surprises.

If you think Jack the Ripper was laboring under set of false beliefs, speak of delusions. If you think he heard voices, speak of hallucinations. If you think either of these conditions waxed and waned, speak of cyclical illness. Paranoia, cognitive dysfunction, history of abuse, disorganized thinking, psychosis, asociality, all symptoms without diagnosis. It is not only generally more kind, it is also more accurate. It is hard for most people to see how Ed Gein was not in fact a schizophrenic. But he really wasn't. Delusional as all get out, sure. But schizophrenia is a specific disease with a specific set of diagnostic criteria and specific physical and chemical changes. Which Gein did not have. He was a creation of spectacular abuse and most likely a personality disorder. Those who labeled him as schizophrenic were wrong. Today, if a killer were labeled schizophrenic before anyone knew who he was, it would be a very costly mistake, causing law enforcement to look for someone with a set of symptoms the killer very well may not have had. Not to mention causing renewed fear in the community of a small group of people with a devastating disease that ruins their lives.

And yes, in the interest of full disclosure, I don't think Jack the Ripper was mentally ill. Not in any significant fashion. Which isn't saying he didn't have issues, but I don't think he was at the mercy of a damaged brain. And as I have stated elsewhere, it's because I have some experience with this and it is not something easily hidden. People notice crazy. But I do think it is only right and proper to shift the discussion away from diagnosis to symptoms. It's more accurate, and less judgmental? inflammatory? I don't know what word I'm looking for here.

[The Good Michael]

Errata,

The discussion is connected to the article about a man who was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Some symptoms that were spoken of with regards to Kosminski were also symptoms that are often connected with schizophrenia. For my part, I think it's all just mental illness and labels are controversial, unfair, and are only put on people to allow others to point fingers or to categorize, and have no natural meaning. So indeed, observations are more valid than diagnoses.

Mike

[lynn cates]

violence and schizophrenia

Hello Errata. Quite. My research showed that if a schizophrenic was violent before the episode, s/he will be violent after. But if not violent before, then schizophrenia, in itself, will not induce violence.

However, the schizophrenic WILL become violent if there is a perception of being harmed.

Cheers.
LC

[robhouse]

Hello Lynn,

I am not trying to imply that schizophrenics are likely to be serial killers. I am aware that schizophrenics are a small subgroup among serial killers, and that some (like Gacy, Sutcliffe, Berkowitz) have been mis-labelled as schizophrenic. Also I am aware that there is debate over the label of schizophrenia, in opposition to a focus on a cluster of symptoms. And I am also well aware that schizophrenics are not generally more violent than the general population (although recent studies suggest they might be, but it is by a small margin.) --- In any case, with respect to this last point which is repeatedly stated, I do not see the point. Most people in general are not violent. This is similar to the logical fallacy: "Most men are not violent. Therefore serial killers are not likely to be men." I tend to think that the tendency to be violent predates the onset of schizophrenia... ie. the mental illness is not usually the causal factor in a person becoming violent.

I have tried to look at actual schizophrenic serial killers, (and I do not know of any reputable study on this topic). From a long list I have compiled, it is striking how many of them focus on disembowelment, cannibalism, organ taking etc. In other words, they focus on mutilation of the body after death as the Ripper did. I am not saying that all killers who exhibit such behavior are schizophrenic (Dahmer Chikatilo etc), but instead that a large percentage of killers who are schizophrenic exhibit such behavior. I am simply pointing out that it appears that there are "common" characteristics of MANY (not all) schizophrenic serial killers. Several of these characteristics match Jack the Ripper, which is why the American FBI concluded in their profile that Jack the Ripper was schizophrenic.

You say schizophrenics are more likely to be spree killers, because "Schizophrenic delusions typically don't have the staying power to cause a prolonged killing spree". I agree to an extent, but this is clearly not always true. Nor do I believe that schizophrenic delusions are always the causal factor in motivating a person to commit murder, or serial murder, as I stated above. Sometimes, it clearly is. Other times, I think it is not, although it may be the causal factor in many of the characteristics of the murder. I think the desire to kill is more often motivated by other (external) factors, that lead to great anger and hatred.

Rob H

[lynn cates]

causality

Hello Rob. Thanks.

"I tend to think that the tendency to be violent predates the onset of schizophrenia... ie. the mental illness is not usually the causal factor in a person becoming violent. "

Completely agree.

"You say schizophrenics are more likely to be spree killers, because "Schizophrenic delusions typically don't have the staying power to cause a prolonged killing spree"."

Not I. Perhaps you are thinking of Errata here?

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

However, the schizophrenic WILL become violent if there is a perception of being harmed.

As in a voice telling you that there's danger?

Mike

[Abby Normal]

Hello Lynn,

I am not trying to imply that schizophrenics are likely to be serial killers. I am aware that schizophrenics are a small subgroup among serial killers, and that some (like Gacy, Sutcliffe, Berkowitz) have been mis-labelled as schizophrenic. Also I am aware that there is debate over the label of schizophrenia, in opposition to a focus on a cluster of symptoms. And I am also well aware that schizophrenics are not generally more violent than the general population (although recent studies suggest they might be, but it is by a small margin.) --- In any case, with respect to this last point which is repeatedly stated, I do not see the point. Most people in general are not violent. This is similar to the logical fallacy: "Most men are not violent. Therefore serial killers are not likely to be men." I tend to think that the tendency to be violent predates the onset of schizophrenia... ie. the mental illness is not usually the causal factor in a person becoming violent.

I have tried to look at actual schizophrenic serial killers, (and I do not know of any reputable study on this topic). From a long list I have compiled, it is striking how many of them focus on disembowelment, cannibalism, organ taking etc. In other words, they focus on mutilation of the body after death as the Ripper did. I am not saying that all killers who exhibit such behavior are schizophrenic (Dahmer Chikatilo etc), but instead that a large percentage of killers who are schizophrenic exhibit such behavior. I am simply pointing out that it appears that there are "common" characteristics of MANY (not all) schizophrenic serial killers. Several of these characteristics match Jack the Ripper, which is why the American FBI concluded in their profile that Jack the Ripper was schizophrenic.

You say schizophrenics are more likely to be spree killers, because "Schizophrenic delusions typically don't have the staying power to cause a prolonged killing spree". I agree to an extent, but this is clearly not always true. Nor do I believe that schizophrenic delusions are always the causal factor in motivating a person to commit murder, or serial murder, as I stated above. Sometimes, it clearly is. Other times, I think it is not, although it may be the causal factor in many of the characteristics of the murder. I think the desire to kill is more often motivated by other (external) factors, that lead to great anger and hatred.

Rob H

Hi Rob
Good post.

Several of these characteristics match Jack the Ripper, which is why the American FBI concluded in their profile that Jack the Ripper was schizophrenic.

Do you know if there are any other unsolved serial murders where the killer was suspected and/or profiled as being schizophrenic?

[lynn cates]

scenario

Hello Michael. Sure. In my "Isenschmid piece" there is a story about a schizophrenic who assaulted a woman. He claimed she was focusing a laser beam on his testicles, trying to sterilise him.

If I were a Kosminskiite, I'd pursue this scenario:

1. Aaron's family were related to Martin and Jessie.

2. As such, they were overachievers.

3. Aaron's immediate family taught that sex was dirty, etc.

4. Hence, his curious recreational habit.

5. When solicited, he felt that his virginity was threatened.

Something of that sort.

Cheers.
LC