Different Killers

[Batman]

Ok ok I googled it. Argument from authority. At first glance my post would definitely indicate that, but I actually DO believe in Keppels system, have read most if not all his published works and I believe in his core signature analysis. C'est tout.

Lynn is just misleading you.

Peer review journals and their articles are not and never have been arguments from authority.

The argument is the methodology in the article.

[Batman]

Hi Batman, just a minor technicality - you use the term "profiling" about Keppel's work, when he is in fact deeply opposed to it. He works with facts.

Okay. That makes sense.

[MacGuffin]

Hi John G,

I don't think any of the C5 killings were committed by a schizophrenic killer. In fact it has been argued that there has never been a validated case of a schizophrenic serial killer: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-serial-killer It is said that their thoughts are too jumbled and confused to commit such crimes. (I would note that the FBI define serial murder as 2 or more killings, so Nichols and Chapman, if killed by the same person, would amount to serial murders.)

Richard Chase was, of course, diagnosed as schizophrenic, although one psychiatrist thought he was suffering from a anti-social personality disorder. However, he was hopelessly disorganized. For instance, he attempted to enter the home of one women, but walked away because it was locked. He later told the police that locked doors were a sign he was not welcome. At one point he was found by the police wandering around nude and covered in blood. Nearby was his vehicle, containing several rifles a pile of men's clothing and a liver (later determined to be from a cow).

Now in considering the C5 murders I believe there are both organized and disorganized elements. Thus, as I posted earlier, the risky locations, such as Hanbury Street, suggest a degree of disorganization. However, both Nichols and Chapman appear to have had there throats cut when they were on the ground, enabling the killer to avoid arterial spray. That clearly suggests organization. Moreover, in all of the C5 murders it does appear that the killer was able to quickly overpower his victims, giving them no opportunity to cry out or attempt escape. That suggests a killer exercising a degree of control, and therefore organized behaviour.

Of course what is remarkable in all of the C5 murders is that, in the aftermath of the killings, there doesn't seem to be single witness who reports seeing anything suspicious. There are certainly no reports of suspects wandering through the streets of Whitechapel, dripping in blood and carrying body parts!

Richard Trenton Chase had a known history of psychiatric problems, and was considered a classic disorganized killer due to (amongst other things) leaving bloody hand and footprints at a crime scene, and by having made no attempt to clean up these or hide other aspects of his crimes, nor did he try to conceal any of his victim's remains.
This is a common behavior with disorganized killers, and also highly indicative of the severity of his mental illness.
He had been hospitalized in a mental institution for injecting rabbit's blood, and diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic in 1975. After successful drug treatment therapy, he was released to his mother, who promptly took him off of his medication and set him up in his own apartment.
Having a schizophrenic parent (sans paranoia), I find the stupidity of this to be absolutely overwhelming, and honestly believe she simply couldn't be bothered to care for him personally or properly on a day to day basis.
Less than a year and a half later, he began his killing spree. His motive for the murders was that he needed to drink blood and eat human remains because aliens had stolen his pulmonary artery. It's little wonder that his trial verdict was NGI.

[Spotty]

Hi John G.,


According to Ann Rule's "The Stranger Beside Me", law enforcement had thousands of tips and were becoming computerized specifically for the "Ted" murders. They were cross referencing tips with VW owners named Ted, and the entering of data was extremely time consuming; by the time Bundy was arrested, law enforcement found that his name was the next of the tips to be entered into their new system.
Ann Rule herself had phoned in Bundy's name as a tip, having known him from volunteering together at a suicide hot line, as well as an occasional lunch date and sending each other Christmas cards. After Bundy was convicted, Rule was the only member of the press (a police reporter at the time) that he trusted enough for an "honest" interview.

Hi MacGuffin,
Ted never confessed to Ann Rule. He first "speculated" about his crimes in the third person to Stephen Michaud and Hugh Aynesworth while still on appeal for one of his two death sentences, he was way too wily to admit to anything then.
Keppel himself was the lead homicide detective in the hunt for Ted in Washington State, and when the green river killer showed up in the early eighties, Ted wrote to Keppel from Death Row and offered his own insight into the crimes. Keppel got to know Ted rather well through multiple interviews and correspondence and just before his execution in 1989, Keppel was the detective Ted asked for, and made direct confessions to for the very first time.
This was the first time Ted admitted the extent of his depravity, which included mutilations/decapitations, necrophiliac activities with corpses at different times while they decomposed, the taking home of heads as trophies with which to play necrophilic sex games.
Keppel's book "The Riverman" along with Michaud and Aynesworth's "The Only Living Witness" are the definitive Bundy books.

[Batman]

This is a better example of an argument from authority - http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.p...9&postcount=43

... which Lynn accepted graciously, btw.

[Harry D]

It means that Jacob never intended to kill. When he asked them for money (everything belonged to him--see testimony and chart) and was refused, he lashed out by trying to strangle--just as he did his wife.

The cutting was likely perpetrated upon an imaginary sheep. Recall--he was at the worst phase of his delusions about this time.

Was Nichols an unfinished job, in your opinion, Lynn?

And if it was, why would Isenschmid need to flee the crime-scene if he was having a psychotic episode and thought he was butchering an animal?

[Batman]

Was Nichols an unfinished job, in your opinion, Lynn?

And if it was, why would Isenschmid need to flee the crime-scene if he was having a psychotic episode and thought he was butchering an animal?

This would also mean they where not sex crimes.

[lynn cates]

difference

Hello Spotty. Thanks.

"Does that mean that referencing any peer-reviewed journal article written by a person in a position of authority should be considered fallacious?"

Not at all. The idea is that you seek an opinion from an expert. That is good. BUT believing something because it is from an expert?--not so good.

"I agree that technically you are correct about the way I presented my opinion, but I don't consider my support of this article to be based on a fallacy."

So you actually thought for yourself? Then, no fallacy.

See the difference?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

caged

Hello Greg. Thanks.

"As for Kate, perhaps, but for me it's hard to find a motive for killing such a desperate, poor female..."

Ever wonder why her things were rifled?--dumped on the ground?

The obvious motive for the mutilations would require two things:

1. Knowledge that the perpetrator of the first two killings were safely caged.

2. A nameless unknown entity would be blamed for Kate.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

no fleeing

Hello Harry. Thanks.

"Was Nichols an unfinished job, in your opinion, Lynn?"

No, not at all.

"And if it was, why would Isenschmid need to flee the crime-scene if he was having a psychotic episode and thought he was butchering an animal?"

Moot point.

By the way, have you read his charts? Fascinating.

Cheers.
LC

[MacGuffin]

Hi Batman,

I just finished reading this. It's an excellent paper from an expert whose profiling has been used to catch lust murderers in the past. I am happy to note he is C5+1 like myself which I learned from Sugden.

Its mandatory reading, especially for those who favour multiple killers. His argument is very compelling and my new word this week is picquerism!

Don't you just love learning new criminal psychology words?!
I first learned about picquerism about twenty years ago, when studying the crimes of George Russell.
I've thought for years that the Whitechapel murderer was a picquerist, for with the exception of Stride, most showed signs of picquerism and escalation of such in the mutilations.
Excessive cutting that is incidental to cause of death, especially postmortem, could be considered as picquerism, but I personally don't consider all of the abdominal mutilations to necessarily indicate this, as they appear to be more so for the purpose of organ removal.
Any extra stabbing or cutting wounds made aside from CoD or organ removal however, I do think are picqueristic. In the initial cases, this would include genital stabs, and abdominal cuts or slashes, which almost seem somewhat tentative, as if the killer was testing out a fantasy for the first time.
By the time he got to Eddowes, the facial nicks and slashes had evolved into a text book example of a picquerism paraphilia. MJK's horrific mutilations were most probably the culmination of how the killer's ultimate fantasy evolved, and finally having the time and privacy to fulfill his sick need/desire to cut.

[Batman]

I am now reading about The London Monster who exactly a century before JtR in 1788, went around stabbing/pricking female strangers because of this.

[MacGuffin]

Hi Spotty,

Hi MacGuffin,
Ted never confessed to Ann Rule. He first "speculated" about his crimes in the third person to Stephen Michaud and Hugh Aynesworth while still on appeal for one of his two death sentences, he was way too wily to admit to anything then.
Keppel himself was the lead homicide detective in the hunt for Ted in Washington State, and when the green river killer showed up in the early eighties, Ted wrote to Keppel from Death Row and offered his own insight into the crimes. Keppel got to know Ted rather well through multiple interviews and correspondence and just before his execution in 1989, Keppel was the detective Ted asked for, and made direct confessions to for the very first time.
This was the first time Ted admitted the extent of his depravity, which included mutilations/decapitations, necrophiliac activities with corpses at different times while they decomposed, the taking home of heads as trophies with which to play necrophilic sex games.
Keppel's book "The Riverman" along with Michaud and Aynesworth's "The Only Living Witness" are the definitive Bundy books.

I didn't say Bundy had confessed to Ann Rule, just that she was the only member of the press that he would allow to interview him.
IIRC, he denied his crimes to her when she visited him in jail, but since she was also a former police officer and having made a tip-line call regarding him, she didn't believe his protests of innocence.
I've read "the Riverman" and "The Only Living Witness" (who was Carol DaRonch), in addition to Carlton Smith and Thomas Guillen's "The Search for the Green River Killer", and David Reichert's "Chasing the Devil".
All great books with many insights into his crimes and capture, although Rule's book has the added insight of his ability to charm and seem "harmless" to those who knew him.

[Wickerman]

Not at all. The idea is that you seek an opinion from an expert. That is good. BUT believing something because it is from an expert?--not so good.

Wise words.

It is all very well to ask for the opinion of a professional, but you only get to see the strength of the argument if you subsequently ask, "why?" that is, "why do you think this?".

By all means tell me the "what", but more importantly, tell me the "why".

Then you can judge for yourself.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Batman,


Don't you just love learning new criminal psychology words?!
I first learned about picquerism about twenty years ago, when studying the crimes of George Russell.
I've thought for years that the Whitechapel murderer was a picquerist, for with the exception of Stride, most showed signs of picquerism and escalation of such in the mutilations.
Excessive cutting that is incidental to cause of death, especially postmortem, could be considered as picquerism, but I personally don't consider all of the abdominal mutilations to necessarily indicate this, as they appear to be more so for the purpose of organ removal.
Any extra stabbing or cutting wounds made aside from CoD or organ removal however, I do think are picqueristic. In the initial cases, this would include genital stabs, and abdominal cuts or slashes, which almost seem somewhat tentative, as if the killer was testing out a fantasy for the first time.
By the time he got to Eddowes, the facial nicks and slashes had evolved into a text book example of a picquerism paraphilia. MJK's horrific mutilations were most probably the culmination of how the killer's ultimate fantasy evolved, and finally having the time and privacy to fulfill his sick need/desire to cut.

Bingo!