• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
I shall add those two books to the ever growing pile!

Given how quickly some of these fields of research develop I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of his work isn't now considered dated - but I think it's probably still worth a read.
 
Given how quickly some of these fields of research develop I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of his work isn't now considered dated - but I think it's probably still worth a read.
I've no doubt I'll learn something from them!
 
Last edited:
Here is a report on Serial Killer Statistical report compiled by Dr. Mike Aadmont of Radford University.

http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/Serial Killer Information Center/Serial Killer Statistics.pdf

I found it quite interesting.

Questions include. Why were there more female serial killers at the start of the 20th Century? I am betting it was because toxicology was poor, as poisoning has been the preferred method of female serial killers.

I was surprised to find that African Americans surpassed the whites as serial killers during the 1990s. What's up with that?
 
There's a rough overview of Canter and the Duffy case here.

Duffy was one of the criminals I met briefly during my time back-cataloguing offenders' DNA in prison. He is one of the reasons I support the return of the death penalty.

Most of the crims we met were indifferent or even affable*; Duffy radiated hatred. He sat across the table from me trying to stare me down. I'd read up on his crimes, including the horrific death of young Maartje Tamboezer, a 15-year old Dutch girl living in the UK. If I remember correctly, Duffy stretched a rope across a cycle path. When Maartje struck the rope she was knocked from her bicycle. Duffy seized her, raped her and strangled her. Being aware that DNA was now being used to detect crimes, Duffy then built a fire in Maartje's groin to burn out any forensic evidence. This was the prince among men trying to show me how tough he was.

If the government ever finds enough in its chuddies to return the death penalty, I'd queue up to buy a ticket in the lottery to pull the lever on Duffy.

* Dennis Nilsen? Nice man; very pleasant. Probably professional courtesy, him being an ex-bobby...

;)

maximus otter
 
...If the government ever finds enough in its chuddies to return the death penalty, I'd queue up to buy a ticket in the lottery to pull the lever on Duffy...

Hmm. Not sure I'm comfortable with the idea that decisions about the death penalty are somehow based on courage, or the lack of it. I'm absolutely against; any implication that this attitude might be based on the contents of my underpants - metaphorical or otherwise - would be an extremely moot one.

Duffy can rot in hell on a meathook for all I'm concerned - I couldn't care less about him, or those like him; I don't care about what it does to them - I care about what it does to us.
 
...Why were there more female serial killers at the start of the 20th Century? I am betting it was because toxicology was poor, as poisoning has been the preferred method of female serial killers...

There is an argument that this was as much about access to materials as it was about any gender-specific preference. I think Linda Stratmann suggests in her book The Secret Poisoner - A Century of Murder, that doctors, pharmacists and farmers often made poisoners, because of access to, and familiarity with, chemicals and medicines; outside the professionals you then had women, traditionally those managing the domestic administration of a household, who were very possibly more familiar with the contents of the poison cupboard than their husbands.

Stratmann's book is well worth reading. The following is a post I made some time back on the Suggestions for a Good Read thread:

Not simply a catalogue of famous murders (in fact, Stratmann barely mentions some of the most sensational Victorian stories, like the Charles Bravo and Madeleine Smith cases), rather this is a history of the problem - the medical, social and legal aspects involved, and how developments in chemistry, medical science and legislation kept pace with and eventually overtook the criminals. It is also the biography of a moral panic (as with many epidemics it wasn’t quite the epidemic the authorities and the press made it out to be).

It’s more social history than true crime – but that really doesn’t make it any less juicy.

Two things that really struck me:

Firstly, the utter ruthlessness and detachment involved in poisoning an individual: death by poison was very rarely quick, and could take days, weeks, or even months in the carrying out. The murderers tended to be very close to their victims (poison tends not to be for strangers) and watched them die a little bit more every day. Having a ringside seat while your nearest and dearest suffer the most excruciating and upsetting of symptoms at your instigation takes a particular kind of individual. Was it purely psychopathology, or does utter desperation play a part?

Which brings me to the second thing that I began to contemplate: the horrible suspicion that in an age where the poor, and especially poor women, were so utterly unenfranchised that to some individuals poisoning represented a means of bridging a void of helplessness which things like divorce, birth-control, increasing job security and the welfare state would later ameliorate. (Insurance played both ways: it probably eased the financial burden for some of those who - when life went awry - had it and might have been tempted to take more desperate measures had they not. But the temptation to hurry along the benefits of life insurance was so tempting that some forms had to be legislated against - for example, the macabre sounding 'Burial Clubs'.)

Anyway, an enthralling and sometimes uncomfortably entertaining read.
 
On another subject.

Currently available in the BBC’s excellent Storyville series of documentaries is a film called Dance With a Serial Killer (Available here.)

This is based on the investigation into Francis Heaulme (wiki page.) in the late 80’s and early 90’s. The film has an oddly dated feel to it, and in fact feels a little like a product of the 90’s itself, although it was made in 2007. (Personally, I find the slightly dowdy feel and absolute lack of theatricality actually has the effect of enhancing the subject matter - and greatly preferable to the ridiculously lurid nonsense that often passes for crime documentary.)

One particular detail, though, has always struck me more than any of the others (I’ve watched the doc a few times, and read some background on the case): In the murder of 14 year old Laurence Guillaume in Metz in 1992 (I think), Heaulme persuaded the victims cousin – whom he had known for less than an hour – to rape the victim and assist him in the murder.

Less than an hour?

I’m no expert on the subject, but I’m not sure I’ve ever heard of anything that quite compares to this before.

Heaulme appears in many ways to be the antithesis of that tiresome TV/movie cliché, the serial killer savant. He doubtless displayed a certain cunning, but generally speaking was a failure in life, whose rootless and peripatetic lifestyle contributed most to the difficulties involved in: a) connecting the crimes involved; and, b) tracking down the man responsible. However, the story is nowhere near complete and there are uncomfortable suggestions that he had a knack of picking up accomplices on his travels across France.
 
*Dennis Nilsen? Nice man; very pleasant. Probably professional courtesy, him being an ex-bobby[/URL]...

I’ve mentioned somewhere before that a good friend of my parents, who worked in the civil service, had been Nilsen’s boss in a North London office at the time of the killings.

After the arrest, and the story hitting the press, someone had pointed out, with horror, that Nilsen had cooked Christmas dinner for the office.

After a horrified few moment of racking his brains, our friend recalled:

‘No It’s okay. We bought all the ingredients – remember?’

Collective sigh of relief.

Pause...then
:

‘BUT HE USED HIS OWN PANS!!!’
 
Last edited:
:doh::doh:
I’ve mentioned somewhere before that a good friend of my parents, who worked in the civil service, had been Nilsen’s boss in a North London office at the time of the killings.

After the arrest, and the story hitting the press, someone had pointed out, with horror, that Nilsen had cooked Christmas dinner for the office.

After a horrified few moment of racking his brains, our friend recalled:

‘No It’s okay. We bought all the ingredients – remember?’

Collective sigh of relief.

Pause...then, from the back of the room
:

‘BUT HE USED HIS OWN PANS!!!’

My husband worked with a woman who had worked with Nilsen. Very pleasant man who would bake cakes and pies to share with his colleagues...
 
As an aside to the above story - I remember another odd little detail that our friend told us.

Nilsen was on particularly good terms with one woman in their office. Some time after his arrest she somehow got a note from him - the contents were very mundane and made absolutely no reference to the details of his current situation, aside from the fact that he might be away for a bit and she would probably need to write him out of the tea-rota for a little while.

That anodyne little detail always stuck in our friend's mind. And mine too.
 
We used to have a vet we took the family's dogs to called Ryan James in the Burton on Trent area, he was arrested and imprisoned for killing his terminally ill wife by poisoning her with horse tranquillisers. He was also having an affair at the time as it turned out so was presumed guilty and spent considerable time in prison until someone stumbled across a confession note supposedly written by his late wife hidden inside a book in the family home. He was released and moved to Barton Under Needwood, a few times I'd walk with a mate to pick her daughter up from the junior school and there also was Ryan, also picking up his kid although he always walked a good 20ft behind the school Mums .. I always though that was terribly sad as he'd been cleared and released ..

When he was convicted:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...apos_evil_apos__poisoner_who_killed_his_wife/

When he was cleared:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/140779.stm
 
Last edited:
I agree, it was thin.

Stone however was, at the time of his arrest, a nasty, violent and dangerous man, even if he didn't commit this crime. I wonder myself, whether his 'previous' wasn't a major factor in his conviction.

At the time I remember being troubled by the Stone conviction, which appeared to rest solely on the testimony of a traumatised and brain damaged child and a jailhouse snitch even the Crown acknowledged was a known liar. There was no forensic evidence to tie him to the crime and it looked like another “let’s arrest the local weirdo” episode. See also Rachel Nickell.

Agree that if it does turn out to be another Bellfield attack it looks even worse.
 
...Stone however was, at the time of his arrest, a nasty, violent and dangerous man, even if he didn't commit this crime. I wonder myself, whether his 'previous' wasn't a major factor in his conviction.

I used to work in the East End with a guy from Gillingham, who knew Stone by sight and reputation. He once said that when the attack first happened all the locals believed that Stone had done it - but once things had calmed down a bit, none of them did.
 
Maybe a serial killer. His crimes were racially motivated.

John Ausonius, dubbed "the laser man" because of the laser sight on his gun, killed one person and injured 10 others in the Stockholm area in 1991-92.

German prosecutors say he also shot dead a woman in Frankfurt in 1992. He denies the charge.

Ausonius's crimes are believed to have inspired the Norwegian Anders Breivik.

Although Ausonius denies the Frankfurt killing, he did not oppose extradition to Germany on condition that he serve any possible jail sentence in Sweden.

According to the Frankfurt prosecutor's office, Ausonius shot the 68-year-old woman dead in broad daylight while on the run after the shootings in Sweden.

He is alleged to have accused her of stealing an electronic notebook from his coat pocket in the hotel where she worked.

The victim, Blanka Zmigrod, was a survivor of Nazi concentration camps including Auschwitz, Swedish media reported.

Ausonius became one of Sweden's most notorious criminals after he stalked the streets of Stockholm shooting at immigrants. He was jailed for life in 1994.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42340711
 
For a more interesting swedish serial killer story, look up Thomas Quick.
 
For a more interesting swedish serial killer story, look up Thomas Quick.

Yes - very interesting story; I mentioned it back on page 8.

Unfortunately the documentary film on the case is a bit plodding - or at least, I found it so.

And, quoting myself from the Good Read thread:

Thomas Quick: The Making of a Serial Killer, by Hannes Råstam.

For those who don't know, Thomas Quick/Sture Bergwall was Sweden's most prolific serial killer, having been convicted of eight of the over thirty murders he confessed to - until he changed his mind.

The incidences of what amounts to wilful stupidity and professional dishonesty on the part of certain key authority figures involved in the case are far too numerous to list; in fact they're so common that I found myself thinking that if the book had been a work of fiction I'd have been in serious danger of getting bored with that particular element. However, this is not your run of the mill fit-up; Bergwall collaborated with rabid enthusiasm in the whole process - so much so that, although one of the criticisms of the case is that during the trials the adversarial process effectively disappeared, it's sometimes hard to see what else the defence teams could have done, Bergwalls confessions (and it was all about confessions - there being no forensic evidence at all to tie him to any of the killings) being so adamantly and enthusiastically delivered.

The way in which Bergwall was handed the information he needed to prove his involvement in the various killings is sometimes so unabashed that you wonder how on earth it never really got questioned - at times you get the impression that people around the investigation stood with their mouths open thinking 'no...no...that really did not just happen...can't have', and then walked away shaking their heads at the way the mind can play tricks. Alarm bells did ring, but no-one paid much attention - at least to start with - so enthralled were most people by the serial killer roadshow.

It really doesn't take the contribution of the outside experts Råstam interviews to know that when questioning a subject you don't provide essential information couched within the questions you ask them; you do not set up the scene of a complex re-enactment precisely as it really was (and even redirect the subject when he still manages to get things wrong); when an interrogatee provides the wrong information on a particular point, you do not continually return to that specific point in such a manner that the subject is prompted to realise that there is a discrepancy and consequently change their story.

At one point it is discovered that a vitally important physical element in one of those precisely designed re-enactments was wrong - however, this is only found out after the fact, and after Bergwall has been prompted, in the ways described above, to weave it into the narrative of his 're-enacment' of the killing. It's a clear lie, because it couldn't possibly be true - the anomaly was spotted, but effectively ignored by those in charge

The implication that Bergwall was a victim of the whole serial killer roadshow is hard to avoid entirely - but I also found it hard to stomach. He traded false information for increased medication, generally, it seems, of his own choosing - and clearly basked in the importance the confessions bestowed on him. (It's not an exaggeration to describe his behaviour at times as akin to that of some histrionic prima donna-ish celebrity). Admittedly, victimhood becomes a very fluid element when addiction is a main ingredient of the basic mix - but Bergwall also implicated completely innocent people in his crimes and entirely - and probably irrevocably - sidetracked the investigations into over thirty murders. These, as far as I know, remain unsolved - which is probably the most disturbing thing about the whole sorry story.

All in all really quite bizarre and disturbing - and definitely worth a read.
 
Last edited:
Adam The Woo visits the Manson family locations ... technically, Charles Manson wasn't a serial killer because he didn't kill 3 or more people in any kind of pattern, rich kids who thought he was cool at the time went out to kill people .. but here's the Spahn Ranch where they all dropped acid and such stuff anyway ...

 
An unidentified serial killer.

Letter to the Golden State Killer
By Michelle McNamara

January 10, 2018


McNamara-Letter-to-an-Old-Man.jpg

The Golden State Killer raped more than fifty women and likely murdered ten or more people. He was never caught.

Illustration by Brian Stauffer
This piece is excerpted from “I’ll Be Gone in the Dark: One Woman’s Obsessive Search for the Golden State Killer,” which will be published on February 27th by HarperCollins. The Golden State Killer is the name McNamara gave to an unidentified man who raped more than fifty women and likely killed ten or more people in California in the nineteen-seventies and eighties. Several years ago, McNamara began investigating the case and blogging about it on her Web site. She died in April, 2016, at the age of forty-six.

You were your approach. The thump against the fence. A temperature dip from a jimmied-open patio door. The odor of aftershave permeating a bedroom at 3 a.m. A blade at the base of the neck. “Don’t move, or I’ll kill you.” Their hardwired threat-detection systems flickered meekly through the sledgehammer of sleep. No one had time to sit up. Awakening meant understanding that they were under siege. Phone lines had been cut. Bullets emptied from guns. Ligatures prepared and laid out. You forced action from the periphery, a blur of mask and strange, gulping breaths. Your familiarity freaked them. Your hands flew to hard-to-find light switches. You knew names. Number of kids. Hangouts. Your preplanning gave you a crucial advantage, because, when your victims awoke to the blinding flashlight and clenched-teeth threats, you were always a stranger to them, but they never were to you. ...

https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/letter-to-the-golden-state-killer?mbid=social_twitter
 
Good (read: bad) stuff there, Ramon--gives me the creeps.

Here's another in-depth discussion:

In the Footsteps of a Killer
Fifty rapes. Ten murders. Two identities. One man. From 1976 to 1986, one of the most violent serial criminals in American history terrorized communities throughout California. He was little known, never caught, and might still be out there. Now a determined investigator, a retired detective, and a group of online obsessives are on the hunt to track him down February 27, 2013 Michelle McNamara Crime 82 Comments

[ 1 ] MISSING LINKS

ON A SLEEPLESS NIGHT LAST JULY—one of dozens I’ve powered through during the months I’ve spent tracking him down—I Googled a description of a pair of cuff links he stole in the midst of a home invasion in Stockton in September 1977. At that time the Golden State Killer, as I’ve recently come to call him, hadn’t yet graduated to murder. He was a serial rapist who was attacking women in their bedrooms from Sacramento to San Ramon, targeting those who lived in quiet upper-middle-class suburban neighborhoods. He was young—anywhere from 18 to 30—Caucasian, and athletic, capable of eluding capture by jumping roofs and vaulting tall fences. He frequently wore a ski mask. He had either blue or hazel eyes and, some victims reported, a high-pitched voice. He would rant to his victims about needing money, but he frequently ignored cash, even when it was right in front of him.

But he didn’t leave empty-handed. He took items of personal value from those he had violated: engraved wedding bands, driver’s licenses, souvenir coins. The cuff links he stole in Stockton were a slightly unusual 1950s style and monogrammed with the first initial N. From my research I knew that boys’ names beginning with this letter were rare, appearing only once in the top 100 names of the 1930s and ’40s, when the original owner was likely born. The cuff links were a family heirloom belonging to the victim’s husband; they were distinct looking.

I hit the return key on my laptop, expecting nothing. Then a jolt of recognition: There they were, a single image out of the hundreds loading on my laptop screen, the same style as sketched out in the police file I had acquired, with the same initial. They were going for $8 at a vintage store in a small town in Oregon. I bought them immediately, paying $40 for overnight delivery, and went to wake my husband.

“I think I found him,” I said, a little punchy from lack of sleep. My husband, a professional comedian, didn’t have to ask who “him” was. While we live in Los Feliz with our young daughter, my online life has been taken over by unsolved murders—and with maybe someday solving one of them—on a Web site I launched in 2006 called True Crime Diary. By day I’m a 42-year-old stay-at-home mom with a sensible haircut and Goldfish crackers lining my purse. In the evening, however, I’m something of a DIY detective. I delve into cold cases by scouring the Internet for any digital crumbs authorities may have overlooked, then share my theories with the 8,000 or so mystery buffs who visit my blog regularly. When my family goes to sleep, I start clicking, combing through digitized phone books, school yearbooks, and Google Earth views of crime scenes: a bottomless pit of potential leads for the laptop investigator who now exists in the virtual world.

Compelling article (but annoying multipage format):
http://www.lamag.com/longform/in-the-footsteps-of-a-killer/
 
Back
Top