Charles Allen Lechmere - new suspect?

[Fisherman]

Why the drastic variation? This is highly unusual for a serial killer.

There is no drastic variation. There is a consistency that is remarkable. Get hold of a prostitute, kill her quickly, cut her abdomen open from ribs to pelvis and take out inner organs from the body. Then leave whatīs left like a pile of trash.

If you compare that to, say, Peter Kürten, you will see what drastic variations really look like.

Although the discarding method is of interest too, it is what is done to the victim when he or she is killed that carries the true implications. Here, we have the exact same elements occurring again and again.

If we were to think that the discarding method is way more important than how the murder is committed (which would be ludicrous, but for the sake of argument...), then we would need to look for an explanation to the differences in that department. And that explanation has just been furnished - if you kill in a locality that is tied to yourself, then the body must be disposed of elsewhere. If you kill in a locality with no ties to yourself, that is no necessity at all, and would instead mean a much larger risk of detection if you were to start butchering the victim into parts in the open street and begin carrying them to the Thames. The mere suggestion is ridiculous, as I am sure you will admit.

[Fisherman]

...unable

Letīs see here ... uhm ... okay.

[Fisherman]

As per usual all you are doing is hammering a square peg into a round hole to suit your bullshit pet theory.

I think you will find that you are quite alone in disbelieving what I say about the different methods of discarding of the body. It IS imperative that this is done if the victim is killed in premises that will give away a connection to yourself when the body is found, but it is not something you need to take into consideration of the body is found in premises that cannot be tied to yourself.

[John Wheat]

There is no drastic variation. There is a consistency that is remarkable. Get hold of a prostitute, kill her quickly, cut her abdomen open from ribs to pelvis and take out inner organs from the body. Then leave whatīs left like a pile of trash.

If you compare that to, say, Peter Kürten, you will see what drastic variations really look like.

Althoug the discarding method is of interest too, it is what is done to the victim when he or she is killed that carries the true implications. Here, we have the exact same elements occurring again and again.

If we were to think that the discarding method is way more important than how the murder is committed (which would be ludicrous, but for the sake of argument...), then we would need to look for an explanation to the differences in that department. And that explanation has just been furnished - if you kill in a locality that is tied to yourself, then the body must be disposed of elsewhere. If you kill in a locality with no ties to yourself, that is not necessity at all, but would instead mean a much larger risk of detection.

No there is. If you can't see that then your a bigger buffoon than even I thought. As I said all you do is try to hammer square pegs into round holes in pursuit of your bullshit pet theory.

[Fisherman]

...buffoon.

Rembrandt. Bacon. Van Gogh. All masters of the self-portrait.

[John Wheat]

I think you will find that you are quite alone in disbelieving what I say about the different methods of discarding of the body. It IS imperative that this is done if the victim is killed in premises that will give away a connection to yourself when the body is found, but it is not something you need to take into consideration of the body is found in premises that cannot be tied to yourself.

No the vast majority of posters clearly disagree with you e.g. Katrup, John G etc. But yet again it just suits your bullshit pet theory to peddle this dross.

[Fisherman]

No there is.

No there is what?

[John Wheat]

Rembrandt. Bacon. Van Gogh. All masters of the self-portrait.

Fisherman master of talking bullshit.

[Fisherman]

No the vast majority of posters clearly disagree with you e.g. Katrup, John G etc. But yet again it just suits your bullshit pet theory to peddle this dross.

And how about Debra Arif, Gary Barnett, Abby Normal, Jerry D, Cris Malone, Edward Stow...

What about them? Buffoons? Morons, trying to hammer a round peg into a square hole? And why are they not a "vast majority" if Kattrup and John G are?

[John Wheat]

No there is what?

Clear dissimilarities between methods of disposal. Mutilated in the street or cut up and disposed of in and around the River Thames. As I said complete buffoon.

[Fisherman]

...talking bullshit.

More and more...

[John Wheat]

And how about Debra Arif, Gary Barnett, Abby Normal, Jerry D, Cris Malone, Edward Stow...

What about them? Buffoons? Morons, trying to hammer a round peg into a square hole? And why are they not a "vast majority" if Kattrup and John G are?

How many of these posters besides Abby Normal believe JTR and The Torso Killer were one and the same?

[Fisherman]

Clear dissimilarities between methods of disposal. Mutilated in the street or cut up and disposed of in and around the River Thames. As I said complete buffoon.

Why would we look at the methods of disposal before we look at the similarities in how the victims were killed?
And you have already had an explanation to the variation in disposal methods.

[Fisherman]

How many of these posters besides Abby Normal believe JTR and The Torso Killer were one and the same?

I would say Debra Arif thinks it is probably so, Gary Barnett definitely thinks so, Edward Stow definitely thinks so, Cris Malone thinks it is a very obvious chance, and Jerry Dunlop is more or less certain about it. To be absolutely sure, you must ask them. So I ask you again why you claim that more or less everybody agrees with you.

[John Wheat]

Why would we look at the methods of disposal before we look at the similarities in how the victims were killed?
And you have already had an explanation to the variation in disposal methods.

I never said we should but there are clear dissimilarities to both sets of murders. Yes but your explanation to the variation in disposal methods is as usual to suit your bizarre and perverse quest to convict Lechmere.