Christie

[miakaal4]

Christie, who killed in his North London Flat, and put the victims bodies under the floorboards and behind walls, has always held a dread fascination for me.
I was wondering what people on the Board thought about his crimes. I know he was mainly motivated by sex, but did he really believe he would get away with it? He wasn't stupid. I have heard that some killers want to be caught. Any thoughts?

[Garry Wroe]

If he'd wanted sex, Miakaal, he could have bought it for next to nothing. Christie was an inadequate who killed to imbue himself with a sense of power.

[Limehouse]

I agree with Garry. Christie killed for as long as he could in order to satisfy his sexual perversion which included exercising power over women when they were in a vulnerable condition and position.

I think he realised he would eventually be caught but just carried on until the inevitable end.

It's a horrible, horrible story made to seem worse by the dreary squalor that surrounded the murder location as highlighted so well in the film 10 Rillington Place. It just about makes your flesh creep.

[louisa]

Yes I agree that Christie loved the power he had over women and he enjoyed killing them for his own perverted sexual satisfaction.

It's an extremely sad case though because not only did he kill adult women he also killed a baby. some say Evans killed baby Geraldine but I tend to think that Christie killed all of them.

My parents were looking for a flat in that area around that time. Luckily they chose another one in nearby Swinbrook Road. Mum remembers walking past Rillington Place, very soon after the murders were discovered, and seeing all the police cars.

[Limehouse]

I think Christie killed the baby too.

I am totally convinced that Evans was drawn into Christie's web of lies and was under Christie's control.

I feel so sorry for poor Timothy. How terrified he must have been to face the gallows in the shadow of the death of his wife and child.

Evans was vulnerable to the weaknesses in British justice at that time.

So sad.

[louisa]

Yes I agree. Evans had a diminished mental capacity so he should not have been hanged anyway.

I can't help but wonder what the jurors must have thought once Christie was arrested for multiple murders.

[miakaal4]

I suppose what I am hoping to discuss, is what would make Christie the monster he was? Like you say, he killed without remorse or mercy. He almost certainly allowed an innocent man to hang for his own crimes. Was it about power though? I must read more about this case because I am floundering on half memories. Thanks to all for the interest.

[louisa]

Well now you're into the realms of the complexities of an individual human mind and each serial murderer has their own sets of circumstances, possibly to do with genetics, or the way in which a child was brought up and that child's individual experiences and the way he/she perceived their circumstances and surroundings.

We'll never understand Christie, any more than we will ever be able to understand Ted Bundy, or any other serial killer for that matter.

[Phil H]

It's a horrible, horrible story made to seem worse by the dreary squalor that surrounded the murder location

In the very early 60s, I'd have been about 11, I was taken to Madam Tussaud's and saw the Chamber of Horrors for the first time.

The most frightening and long-lasting image I carried away with me was not of gore or crime, - but the deck chair with a seat made of knotted string that was part of the Christie exhibit (it might even have been an original from the house). I had never seen anything like it before, and could not believe people lived in such conditions. It was somehow emblematic of that particular killer.

I don't know whether the deck chair is still there.

Phil

[caz]

If he'd wanted sex, Miakaal, he could have bought it for next to nothing. Christie was an inadequate who killed to imbue himself with a sense of power.

I agree that Christie was an inadequate, and seems to have got off on the power he had over women 'in trouble'. But wasn't there something about him needing a woman to be unconscious or dead before he could get sexual satisfaction? He couldn't have bought that for next to nothing, which might explain his victim selection, and his methods of getting them where and how he wanted them. If he'd merely wanted the sense of power that killing could give him, why did he restrict himself to risky indoor jobs and having to dispose of the bodies on the premises?

Everyone has their own personal sexual needs and desires, but not everyone's needs are legal, and some are downright evil, so then it becomes a case of whether they are able or willing to control them and make do with nice, legal, consenting adult sex instead, or stick to the old solitary vices, or go without entirely.

I think we'd have to ask the late Mrs. Christie for clues on that score.

Love,

Caz
X

[Garry Wroe]

I agree that Christie was an inadequate, and seems to have got off on the power he had over women 'in trouble'. But wasn't there something about him needing a woman to be unconscious or dead before he could get sexual satisfaction?

As a youngster Christie was known as 'Reggie no-dick', Caz. It requires little imagination to understand why in later life he developed a preference 'passive' sexual partners.

[miakaal4]

Hi Garry, now that is very interesting. It probably meant he was small down there, but it may also have meant that he could not get an erection when he should have been able to. Or when he should have done. The passiveness of the victims could be either to stop them commenting or laughing over his smallness, or, that he stumbled on his fetish, which was sex with an unconcious woman?

[caz]

Hi Garry,

I nearly mentioned his nickname in my post, to make my point even stronger, but assumed everyone knew about it already.

You originally argued that if Christie had wanted sex he could have bought it for next to nothing.

But whether his nickname was earned because he couldn't 'get it up' or was not well endowed, he either developed a preference for 'passive' - ie dead or senseless - sexual partners (just as you suggest) who wouldn't laugh at his performance, or he could only 'get it up' when the woman was not conscious. That could have been his 'thing'.

Either way, that kind of sex would not have been bought easily.

Love,

Caz
X

[Phil H]

In his day - between the wars - sexual ridicule would have been much much more humiliating than it would be even today.

I have the impression that Christie was a man who, notwithstanding his circumstances, liked his dignity. Was he not an ARP (Air Raid Protection) warden or some such in WWII?

I think he was a man who always wanted to be right; always wanted to be in control; always wanted to be looked up to. Surely, humiliation would have affected a man like that even more.

An unconscious woman is helpless, cannot laugh, cannot gossip afterwards and moreover he can do what he wants to her without let or hinderance.

All speculation, of course.

Phil

[Sherlock]

Interestingly, I understand that the post-mortem performed on Christie's body after his execution by pathologist Francis Camps showed that his genitals were in fact very well-developed!!!! This would seem to indicate that Christie's neuroses were mental rather than physical in origin.