Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Serial Killers Who Have Inserted Themselves Into The Investigation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Serial Killers Who Have Inserted Themselves Into The Investigation

    It has been regularly asserted, usually on Hutchinson threads, (most recently on the "Witness statement Dismissed-suspect No. 1?"), that serial killers often insert themselves into the investigation. As this is quite a significant assertion, especially for those who support Hutchinson's candidacy to be JtR, it is perhaps time that this particular claim was put to the test.

    The aim of this thread, then, is to establish which serial killers have indeed done so; and we're talking specifically about serial killers. For the purposes of the discussion:-

    "A serial killer is defined as a person who has murdered three or more people over a period of more than a month, with down time (a "cooling off period") between the murders."

    Please add below any serial killers who are known to have inserted themselves into the police investigation and give brief supporting evidence. This may assist in answering the question (from Babybird 67) of who is the earliest such killer known to have done so.
    Last edited by Bridewell; 03-12-2014, 02:17 PM. Reason: Change thread reference and acknowledge Babybird 67
    "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

  • #2
    Good idea, Bridewell, but I wouldn't restrict it to serial killers. It would be useful to know how frequent any kind of criminal inserts themselves into an inquiry. As a tactic to "throw investigators off the scent", I don't see why such behaviour should necessarily be more particular to serial killers than to other types of miscreant. Casting a wider net should give us a more definitive idea of just how widespread the phenomenon is.
    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

    Comment


    • #3
      It deserves to be pointed out that Ben today has posted this on criminals approaching the police:

      "It may seem counter-intuitive to us non criminals, but rare it most certainly isn’t, especially amongst serial killers."

      Ben seems to be of the meaning that serial killers are more frequent visitors to the cop shop to mix themselves up in ongoing investigations, so I can see why Colin wants to distinguish serialists specifically.

      As a matter of fact, I can intuitively feel that Ben may have some sort of a point here; people repeating their crimes and who get away with it, may develop a sense of being superior to the rest of us, perhaps especially to the police. I don´t think it´s a huge leap to suggest that serial killers who develop this kind of sense of superiority may be more prone to go to the police than one-off killers, in order to confirm to themselves how good they are at what they do. Similarly, these killers would to my mind be more expected to taunt the police than one-off killers.

      Anyway, broadening the picture as Gareth suggests can do no harm, and I think much of the discussion out here will revolve around serialists just the same - it tends to end up that way for obvious reasons.

      My own feeling,, generally speaking, is that killers that inject themsleves into ongoing police investigations are rare creatures - but maybe serialists should be more expected to do so than other criminals? It is an interesting topic.

      The best,
      Fisherman

      Comment


      • #4
        Hello Fish!
        Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
        Ben seems to be of the meaning that serial killers are more frequent visitors to the cop shop to mix themselves up in ongoing investigations, so I can see why Colin wants to distinguish serialists specifically.
        It's for that reason I believe it would be instructive to baseline the "insertion" phenomenon across all criminal groups. Only then can we assess whether serial killers are particularly inclined/disinclined to do so, compared to other criminal types.

        My only fear is that the data may be rather thin on the ground. Let's hope it isn't!
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • #5
          To start off:

          J. R. H. Christie

          Edmund Kemper
          This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

          Stan Reid

          Comment


          • #6
            I find Christie interesting, most "experts" say that SK's start young. The frst murder for Christie was when he was 43 or 44.
            G U T

            There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

            Comment


            • #7
              I also think his tally should be 9 and not 8. He should be credited with Timothy Evans, who he killed as surely as if he shot the man.
              G U T

              There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

              Comment


              • #8
                absolutely agree

                with that GUT.

                Thanks for starting this thread with my question Bridewell (see I can ask sensible questions sometimes!)
                babybird

                There is only one happiness in life—to love and be loved.

                George Sand

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ted Bundy inserted himself into the search for Ridgeway, but I don't think that's what you're after.
                  G U T

                  There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    If you believe in the guilt of Wayne Williams (Atlanta Child Murders), which I don't, then there's an example. The man John Douglas of the FBI believed was the Green River Killer would insert himself into the investigation. Of course, this man has since been proved completely innocent.

                    Yours truly,

                    Tom Wescott

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Searches

                      I think that participating in a search party would be a place for a killer to keep abreast of things.
                      I knew of one that did just that but was not a serial killer (still alive so cant mention)
                      Also the vigilance commitee would be a good place to keep in the know?

                      Pat............................................... ........

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                        Good idea, Bridewell, but I wouldn't restrict it to serial killers. It would be useful to know how frequent any kind of criminal inserts themselves into an inquiry. As a tactic to "throw investigators off the scent", I don't see why such behaviour should necessarily be more particular to serial killers than to other types of miscreant. Casting a wider net should give us a more definitive idea of just how widespread the phenomenon is.
                        Thanks, Sam. I understand the points raised and don't have an issue with broadening the scope of this to include other crimes, although I'd like to see the focus on serial killers particularly. Ian Huntley infamously inserted himself into the Soham murder enquiry, but he wasn't a serial killer.
                        "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by sdreid View Post
                          To start off:

                          J. R. H. Christie

                          Edmund Kemper
                          Thanks, Stan. I have read a book on Christie but it was a while ago. Can you add a one-liner in both cases please, just to show how they did so. I'm not doubting you for one moment but a brief "what he did" would be appreciated. Thanks.
                          "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            G'day Bridewell

                            Chistie gave evidence against James Evans, who hanged for a murder [of his daughter] that is almost universally accepted was committed by Christie. Evans was later given a posthumous pardon.

                            Kemper used to drink with the police who were on his case.
                            G U T

                            There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes, as GUT mostly answered:

                              Christie, gave more evidence in regard to Evans than he would have had to and that took any suspicions off him and put it on to, in my view, an innocent man.

                              Kemper, milked police for information regarding his murders and I believe, according to him, even went on some ride-alongs with some of his officer buddies.
                              Last edited by sdreid; 03-13-2014, 06:15 PM.
                              This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

                              Stan Reid

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X