He killed so he could cut...

[Mike Richards]

Hi Rob,

Some very interesting data to be sure, but from my perspective do we know that we even have a serial killer here? If 2 men kill 2 women and a single murder is added, that could be a Canonical Group.

The assumption that the Canonical Group was and is an accurate reflection of the evidence is I believe a flawed concept, for clearly at least one victim has no physical evidence that might be used to link her death with a postmortem mutilator. By reducing or increasing the death count of any one individual you cannot help but alter the perceptions, or the Profile, of the murderer sought. A Canonical Group that contains at least one entry that is most probably a mislabeled murder can only produced a surreal version of a killer when profiling him...or her.

But for many the 5 Canonicals remain a serial version despite the risks involved by doing so.

For example, if Liz Stride is not a Ripper victim then we have 4 consecutive murders with similar traits. Now that might produce a serial profile that is worth investigating in my opinion....although I personally dont believe 1 man killed 4 or 5 of them.

My best regards

[Howard Brown]

Thanks for that Rob...much appreciated that you mention Hazelwood's views.

On the last post you provided, its stated that :

"Penis penetration is not to be expected from the asocial individual..."

Not to deviate into a discussion on Dahmer or Chikatilo, but both of them appear to be typical of the "lust murderer".

Yet, both did engage in penetration with corpses.

[Rob House]

Yes, Hazelwood distinguishes between two types... labelled (badly) "disorganized asocial" (aka. asocial) and "organized nonsocial" (aka nonsocial).

It is the disorganized asocial type that does not engage in necrophilia... the organized type does.

rob H

[Jeff Leahy]

Originally Posted by Rob House

Specifically, I think Hazelwood would have classified Jack the Ripper as a "disorganized asocial" type lust murderer.

As he wrote in an article on lust murder:

"The investigator may find that the victim has been bitten on the breasts, buttocks, neck, abdomen, thighs, or genitals, as these body areas have sexual associations. Limb or breast amputation, or in some instances total dissection, may have taken place.... the asocial individual approaches his victim in much the same way as an inquisitive child with a new toy. He involves himself in an exploratory examinationof the sexually significant parts of the body in an attempt to determine how they function and appear below the surface."

"Penis penetration is not to be expected from the asocial individual..."

"Frequently, the murderer will take a "souvenir," normally an object or article of clothing belonging to the victim, but occasionally it may be a more personal reminder of the encounter—a finger, a lock of hair, or a part of the body with sexual associations... as previously mentioned, the perpetrator may commit an anthropophagic act [i.e. cannibalism] and such an act is indicative of asocial involvement."

RH

In mind of the Sally Anne Bowan case it appears that she was bitten and objects including her mobile phone taken.

Its believed that Mark Dixie was heavily under psychosis fueled by cocane use.

He also attacked two women that night.

Many thanks for your post Rob. most interesting.

Do you think such a killer can both Stab and Slash?

yours Jeff

[Howard Brown]

It is the disorganized asocial type that does not engage in necrophilia... the organized type does.


Well then ! So much for being organized,eh ?
Thanks for that Rob.

[Rob House]

"Penis penetration is not to be expected from the asocial individual, but is predominantly associated with the nonsocial type, even to the extent of "necrophilia." These activities on the nonsocial's part reflect his desire to outrage society and call attention to his total disdain for societal acceptance. The asocial type more commonly inserts foreign objects into body orifices in a probing and curiosity-motivated, yet brutal, manner."
- Hazelwood and Douglas

RH

[Jeff Leahy]

Originally Posted by Rob House

"Penis penetration is not to be expected from the asocial individual, but is predominantly associated with the nonsocial type, even to the extent of "necrophilia." These activities on the nonsocial's part reflect his desire to outrage society and call attention to his total disdain for societal acceptance. The asocial type more commonly inserts foreign objects into body orifices in a probing and curiosity-motivated, yet brutal, manner."
- Hazelwood and Douglas

RH

Like the attack on Emma Smith are you suggesting? jeff

[Caroline Morris]

Hi Rob, All,

As Jeff said, what about Mark Dixie? He had an apparently normal sex life along with the abnormal one, and was a father of three when Sally Anne Bowman became his victim of opportunity. He pounced on her in the street in the middle of the night while high on drink and drugs; murdered her, bit her, had sex with her corpse and inserted a foreign object or objects, leaving her there to be found by the milkman; and took her bra and knickers away with him as trophies.

If you can have mixed offenders, part-organised, part-disorganised, you can surely have mixtures of asocial and non-social, sexual and non-sexual - and a stream of mixed messages for the profilers to put in their pigeonholes.

While I see no reason whatsoever to doubt that one man was responsible for five or more of the Whitechapel attacks, I'm not sure I trust the rule book that defines an offender 'type' so narrowly that exceptions can always creep in. It only takes one apparent exception to test the rule severely; that's what "to prove the rule" actually means: "to test" it. The old adage really should be updated to "the exception which tests the rule" to avoid the usual misinterpretation. And where there are several apparent exceptions it ought to result in the rule book being rewritten - or preferably left on the cautionary tales shelf.

Murderers don't always follow their own rules, never mind those set down for them by other murderers.

Love,

Caz
X

[Rob House]

I think I would agree with your post in general Caz. However, I am not sure that in this case, an exception would disprove the rule. Is it not possible that there is a spectrum of types ranging from disorganized to organized? I think that these rules might be considered generalizations, but that there are exceptions. Clearly, there is a lot of research and theory on serial killer behavior and etiology. Much of this I think is valid. And many serial killers fit these generalized statistics... but as you say, they also tend to defy categorization, and will often do things that do not fit with any "rules." I do not think this disproves the general findings though.

Rob H

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Caz and Rob

I’ve been giving considerable thought to what you guys have been saying.

Its always puzzled me why someone with Mark Dixie’s profile suddenly commits a crime that shows many symptoms of a lust killer, then stops.

In fact apart from possibly being linked to some standard attacks in Australia this guy doesn’t even have any signs before sally Anne Bowman’s attack of being a killer, I’m not even certain he is actually classed as a serial killer?

Which reminded me of something that my brother was fairly adamant about.

He said that in his experience, if he was dealing with a violent schizophrenic, he would be looking for other factors. Alcohol, drugs, glue, usually Weed or Dope.

Dixie appears to have reached his killing state after prolonged use of cocaine. He was in some kind of drug-induced psychosis that bought out the ‘Lust’ killing tendencies?

Aaron Kosminski lived in a Tailoring workshop. Is it possible that his Schizophrenia could have been affected by any chemicals used in that trade?

I don’t know what chemicals are used in Tailoring but I am aware of the phrase ‘As mad as a Hatter’

Blimey, perhaps Lewis Carol does have a link to the Ripper murders.

But seriously any chemicals in the tailoring workshop would have a different effect on someone suffering schizophrenia.

Yours Jeff