Originally posted by Michael W Richards
View Post
But theres at least one of us that isn't satisfied by the myth nor the premise.
There's nothing inherently wrong with the lone killer theory, we know today that lone killers can pause for a while, then take it up again. We also know they can change their style, weapon, M.O. and location.
When we are honest, and admit to the above, what justification is there to call the lone killer theory a 'myth'?
There is more fault associated with using the perceived differences as evidence of another killer, than accepting the same killer can change what he does, and how he does it. Sutcliffe being among the best examples of that.
That said, I wouldn't include the Torso murders, and I am not inclined to include Tabram.
As for the rest, I would not be so sure, perhaps the best way is to use Degrees of Probability.
Comment