|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Erin Sigler
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 78
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 05, 2003 - 1:32 pm: | 
|
Gary Ridgway has pleaded guilty to murdering 48 women in the Seattle-Tacoma area, making him the worst serial killer in U.S. history. His allocution was broadcast live on CNN. He's pleading guilty in exchange for a life sentence.
In case anyone hasn't heard of it, the Green River Killer was active in the early 1980s and killed mostly prostitutes, strangling them and leaving their bodies in and around Seattle's Green River area. One of the women was eight months pregnant, so the actual total should be 49. The police took a saliva sample from the guy back in 1987 but it took years for DNA technology to finally name him as a suspect.
This is one case I thought would stay unsolved. So maybe there's some hope for the Zodiac and--dare I say it--Jack? |
Erin Sigler
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 80
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 05, 2003 - 11:15 pm: |
|
I found out some more interesting information on this case and thought I would share it with you all. Kind of gives you a new perspective on the behavior of serial killers. In some ways, Ridgway fits the--dare I say it--profile (revisiting the crime scenes, for example, and another I provide later in this post), but in other ways he differs pretty significantly.
The Green River killings started in 1982 and all but ended in 1984. According to MSNBC, Ridgway admitted to murdering one woman in 1990 and another in 1998. It's possible that he's lying, of course, but since he's admitted to 48 murders (and there are possibly more) what's 2 or 3 more to him? Anyway, I think it's fascinating that contrary to popular belief, this serial killer was somehow able to completely stop for a period of years. Not only that, but also contrary to the idea that these guys cannot sustain long-term employment, Ridgway held the same job for around 20 years!
One other point of interest. Apparently Ridgway, like many other serial killers, attempted to inject himself into the investigation. After being cleared in one of the cases, he actually contacted the police "ostensibly to offer information about the case," according to MSNBC.com, voluntarily took a polygraph--which he passed! This is why it's probably a good thing that polygraph evidence isn't admitted in court. Clearly there are people who can beat them.
A lot to think about! |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 403
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 11:48 am: |
|
Hi, Erin--
I was also struck with the periodicity of Ridgway's confessed crimes as revealed in a very interesting graph in this morning's New York Times. The following is the rundown for the 48 murders to which Ridgway has so far confessed, and for which forensics, etc., apparently verify his confession. It is believed to be by no means all the crimes for which he was responsible but it reveals a rather startling and instructive pattern.
Year ..... No. of murders
1982 ...........15
1983 ...........24
1984 ...........2
1985 ...........0
1986 ...........1
1987 ...........1
1988 ...........0
1989 ...........0
1990 ...........1
1991 ...........0
1992 ...........0
1993 ...........0
1994 ...........0
1995 ...........0
1996 ...........0
1997 ...........0
1998 ...........1
Source: King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, New York Times, November 6, 2003, p. A25
This profile of Ridgway's confirmed kills knocks into a cocked hat the supposed general view of the Ripper community that the killings keep going on, increase, get worse, and so on, more proof that us Ripperologists would be wise not to theorize in a vacuum. The Cleveland Torso murderer of the 1930's also seems to have had slackoff periods, as also did the Zodiac killer. This should tell us something about the Ripper.
Note that Ridgway apparently went almost the whole decade of the 1990s without killing in most of the years of the decade and he may have only killed one woman each year in 1990 and 1998. Mind you, the authorities believe he may have killed 60 or more women so that might fill in some of the gaps, and investigators in Canada and elsewhere are interested in him as a suspect in their unsolved cases. However, note that he killed 24 women in one year alone, 1983, following his opening year of 1982 with 15 confirmed murders. What does this tell us about the supposed satisfaction a serial killer gets from killing? Ridgway has admitted to a penchant for driving to the locales were he placed the bodies. Could that have been enough satisfaction for him or would he have had to have killed again to get proper gratification? It seems that constant killing, at least based on these data, was not necessary for him.
Best regards
Chris George
(Message edited by ChrisG on November 06, 2003) |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 405
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 12:54 pm: |
|
P.S., the above table timeline of murders by the confessed Green River killer, Gary L. Ridgway, in my post of Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 11:48 am does not include murders to which Ridgway has confessed but in which the remains of the woman are unidentified.
Chris |
Erin Sigler
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 81
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 1:43 pm: |
|
Chris, thanks! This is very instructive indeed. I read that at one point Ridgway met and I think married, a period which seems to coincide with a sharp decline in his murder rate. Kind of throws a wrench in the theory that nothing can make these guys stop on their own. I thought maybe age could have accounted for the slowing but then again, Chikatilo was in his 50s when he was caught and he doesn't appear to have let up in the least. Gacy was in his late 40s and early 50s, and he actually seems to have escalated.
It's difficult to be certain that Zodiac or the BTK Strangler (a Kansas case from the 1980s) actually ended their murder sprees or if they were stopped for some other reason such as suicide or relocation. Interestingly, John Douglas believes that of all the killers he's encountered Zodiac is one who may have committed suicide and BTK is a rare example of a serial who really did just stop on his own. That's the problem you come up against when attempting to quantify human behaviors--people are just too variable and there are frequently exceptions to the rule.
Now I agree that Ridgway is probably guilty of a lot more murders than the ones to which he's confessed, but the drop between 1983 and 1984 is precipitous. Perhaps we'll discover that there are further murders and the numbers will even out somewhat, but as it stands we have to do some serious rethinking regarding the behavior of serial killers. I'm not sure yet how this applies to Jack, but further study is definitely warranted.
As a side note, I'll bet Douglas is relieved that Ridgway has been caught. This was the case that almost killed him, after all. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1184
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 3:23 pm: |
|
I think a poster recently said that suicide is quite rare among serial killers. Ridgway seems to bear this out, as he prefers life imprisonment without parole to suicide or execution.
Robert |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 409
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 4:52 pm: |
|
Hi Erin and Robert:
Erin, I am glad you found the data instructive on the number of confirmed and documented murders credited to Ridgway. I do find the statistic of 39 murders in his first two years, 15 in 1982 and 24 in 1983, to be quite startling and would appear to show clear proof of escalation and a thirst for slaughter.
But then as you say the precipitous drop off to only two the following year, 1984, and either none or only one in succeeding years of the 1980's and 1990's is instructive. As you note, marriage might account for part of the reduction in his activity -- he wasn't single so he couldn't roam around as he did before. Also, as we discussed, a number of the murders he has done might not be in the table, but still it appears that his main activity was in those two years 1982-1983, twenty years ago, which makes for an interesting and almost baffling statistic.
One thought might be that the hue and cry to kill the Green River killer, notorious because of the number of victims in the early years, was such that so he laid low and was more careful in the following years, particularly since he evidently preferred not to move far away from his Washington State roots and begin to kill elsewhere.
Erin, I don't know anything about the BTK killer beyond your mention of him. Is there a website or a book on the case where I could learn more? Thanks.
All the best
Chris |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1187
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 5:25 pm: |
|
Hi Chris, Erin
Yes, the figures do look very odd. It would be interesting to know whether Ridgway was suffering a personal crisis during his two bumper years - e.g. a serious worry about his physical health, or a family bereavement.
Robert |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 3:20 am: |
|
Ridgway is the perfect example of how previous assumptions about serial killers based upon ones that were caught are flawed. It's only now with DNA that we were able to catch this one, and it's probable that there are lots more serial killers who stopped (or greatly reduced) their attacks that we just haven't been able to catch yet.
It was also relatively recently that DNA determined that someone who had killed a series of white and minority victims was the same person, going against the belief that it had to be more than one because of the varied races involved.
If Ridgway was able to kill with alarming regularity for a while and then stop with only occasional relapses, it certainly is possible that Jack could have as well. More and more I'm thinking that maybe Kitty Ronan (throat slashed upstairs from MJK's old apartment in 1909) could actually be a Ripper victim. |
Erin Sigler
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 82
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 7:37 pm: |
|
Ridgway is just a weird guy. The more I read about him, the more perplexed I am. He's been married three times and had numerous girlfriends. He kept the same job for 30 years. This just seems so out of character for an "organized" serial killer that I think Dan is right--we need to rethink some of the assumptions we have about these guys.
Robert, one of Ridgway's ex-wives indicated that he underwent a conversion at some point, becoming "a religious fanatic, often times crying following sermons and reading the bible," according to Crime Library. Perhaps this combined with the "heat" the Green River murders were catching led Ridgway to curtail his activities, but again, it's still pretty danged strange that anything could stop this guy. I mean, 24 victims in one year? That's like 2 a month! How does someone go from that to 2, or even none?
That being said, I still feel that the Ripper was a killer unlike Ridgway--a disorganized one. However, the fact that we have to reconsider our notions about organized killers leaves room to do the same for the disorganized variety. We have a lot to learn from Ridgway, which is one reason I'm glad he's getting life. Besides, it looks like he'll be clearing the books on more than a few unsolved cases in other jurisdictions.
Chris, BTK was the name a Wichita, Kansas serial killer in the late 1970s (BTK stands for Bind, Torture, Kill, which he certainly did) who attacked families in their homes and wrote taunting letters to police that seem to demonstrate such an uncanny recollection of the crime scenes that it's likely he took pictures. After killing a family of four and then two women, all in their own homes, he seems to have disappeared from view. John Douglas includes a chapter on him in his book The Anatomy of Motive, although he changes the names. He mentions him elsewhere as well, perhaps in the Zodiac chapter of The Cases that Haunt Us. You can read more about this creepy killer (one of the few that's truly terrified me, which is difficult) at www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/unsolved/btk/index_1.html?sect=4. Surprisingly, no one has yet devoted an entire book to this strange, publicity-seeking killer. |
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 642
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 06, 2003 - 9:15 pm: |
|
Hi Erin,
Thank you for the very interesting account of Rigdway. We had it here on the news in Sweden as well this evening! Interesting stuff, and quite something to learn from.
I must agree, that the statistics and time span of the murders are remarkable, seen from a conventional perspective. However, let me just add, that his ability to pass the polygraph and the fact that he injected himself in the investigation would make him a good candidate for entering the psychopath category, so therefore I don't find the part about his long term occupation that contradictive to the general view on that type of serial killers. Such examples are quite numerous.
But the decline in the killings during his marriage and the statistical fact that he stopped for a period is indeed something to ponder. I think this shows more than anything that no method or theorethical construction is water-proof, and I don't think anyone dealing with this sort of stuff, really can over-look that we may have to consider individual discrepancies.
Thank God they caught the guy at last, though. Let's hope we can get some answers on the Zodiac killer as well in the future, that would be a blast.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden
|
AP Wolf
Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 500
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 07, 2003 - 1:12 pm: |
|
You know I do hate to go on about this, but I was coming up with all these conclusions concerning serial killers and how they didn’t react to type way back in 1993, but I was ignored then and it appears I still get ignored now.
Please do try and read some of the stuff I wrote back then concerning the behaviour of serial killers and you will see that I was evaluating and predicting this very scenario regarding Jack and his crimes. It is available on this site.
Personally I am highly dubious about the crimes of this chap, for I do believe he has entered into some kind of plea-bargaining arrangement with the law officials concerned to wipe their burgeoning unsolved murder case slate clean. He will - obviously - have committed some of the crimes but by no means all of them. Any of you who have a real insight into the workings of the justice system will know that this type of thing goes on all the time. Even the officers and prosecution in the Peter Sutcliffe case tried this tack on the court - in an effort to clear up a few unsolved murders - but the wise old judge threw it out.
I smell big rat here.
|
Glenn L Andersson
Chief Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 646
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, November 07, 2003 - 1:48 pm: |
|
You could have a point, AP.
Well, I must admit that I do not have that much insight in the justice system of USA or Britain. I mostly work with Scandinavian cases, and plea bargains are not accepted or legally valid over here.
All the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden
|
Richard P. Dewar
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, November 08, 2003 - 1:49 am: |
|
Putting together the facts of a serial killer case is puzzling even when the crimes have apparently been solved.
Yes, Gary Ridgway has confessed to an astonishing number of killings - apparently as part of a plea bargain to avoid the death penalty. And, yes, there is indeed strong circumstantial evidence to suggest he was the killer.
Nonetheless, it is important to remember that frequently unsolved killings unrelated to the acts of serial killers are ascribed to them.
Henry Lucas, a genuine serial killer, confessed to hundreds of killings - and for a time the authorities attributed the murders to him - until it was shown dispositively that he exaggerated the number of his murders.
Vincent DiSalvo confessed to crimes he never committed before admitting to all of the Boston strangler murders. Now, some experts doubt he committed all, or perhaps any, of those killings.
Wayne Williams denied but was convicted of two murders in the infamous Atlanta child killings in the 1980s (more than 30 were killed). The authorities immediately closed down the investigation after his conviction - even though there was strong evidence that the killings were committed by several different people.
Almost 20 years ago, I read that an FBI report concluded that over 100 serial killers were operating in the USA simultaneously. Most go undetected. And occassionally, the work of several murderers are improperly linked together and attributed to one murderer.
There are two reinforcing interests at work in these crimes. The authorities, in an effort to solve as many crimes as possible, will want to attribute as many murders as possible to a suspect. A serial killer, once declaring an admission, may wish to exaggerate his crimes in order to gain fame.
I think its worth considering that Ridgway committed some of the killings, but possibly not all of the ones he has confessed.
Rich
|
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, November 07, 2003 - 5:34 pm: |
|
Erin,
But if you admit that the criteria for deciding what type of serial killer someone is could be flawed, why hold so tightly onto the idea that Jack was a disorganized killer? Personally I have never seen why some people think Jack was disorganized, other than strict adherence to certain profiling criteria that don't fit logically with the conditions in the East End of London in 1888. Well, that and the longstanding notion that anyone who did this must have been a raving lunatic.
AP,
Yes, certainly it's possible that they are trying to pin murders on him he didn't commit, and he may be accepting it out of ego or to cut a deal. That happens all too often, especially on cases with large body counts assigned to them. On the other hand, some killers do have rather large body counts to their own credit, so it's not necessarily a given that he's being blamed for ones he didn't actually do. Certainly the more we learn about these people the better informed we will be overall, and that should include trying to find out which victims are really his and which are not. |
Jeff Beveridge
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, November 09, 2003 - 4:28 pm: |
|
I think he not only killed ALL 48 vicitms he confessed to but quite a few more. If memory serves me correctly I believe he located ALL of the dump sites where the victims in King County were found (of course he could have gotten this from the media). And all of the victims died as a result of strangulation. Of course this isn't 100% proof that he killed all 48 but but it does suggest it was the same killer.
The reason I believe it was MORE than 48 is because his plea agreement is only binding in King county. And of course he claims coincentally that he didn't kill anyone outside of King county. This is despite the fact that a number victims attributed to the Green River killer are OUTSIDE of King County. And the D.A. in one county is on record saying he will seek the death penalty (so of course Ridgway isn't going to confess to these murders). |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 510
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 1:17 pm: |
|
Thank you for such a good post, Rich, you just about said everything I wanted to say but didn't say in my original post, and put it better than I did also.
There are so many cases like this - on both sides of the big pond - that it defies logic really. When I really started looking at the figures I became quickly aware that there were a hell of a lot of unsolved murders out there, simply passed onto a random killer that had been caught for other murders... and that also means there are still a lot of killers out there who have never been caught but their crimes have been 'solved'.
I sometimes feel that the pressure on the police to catch a killer is so enormous that in the end the whole affair becomes a public relations exercise, and just about anybody will do as long as the crime is written off their books.
Dan, I reckon you are exactly right, but I do get the distinct odour of rodents whenever I read more about this case. |
Erin Sigler
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rapunzel676
Post Number: 91
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 3:21 pm: |
|
Rich, you're a bit off in some of your details.
Henry Lee Lucas is no serial killer, at least not in the traditional sense. The evidence indicates that he killed Kate Rich, an elderly woman, in order to rob her; and his teenage girlfriend, because he got angry with her. The motives are completely different.
Albert DeSalvo may or may not have been the Boston Strangler. He did confess to the crimes and while there are some experts who believe him to be innocent of these crimes, there are others who do not share this view, including some who were actually involved in the case.
I don't know what "strong evidence" it is you're referring to in the Williams case, unless you've been talking with Mary Welcome or Williams himself (and serial killers never lie, right?). Hair and fiber evidence connected Williams with many of the other murders, which is why the prosecution was able to tie them into the murders for which Williams went to trial. If you don't buy the fiber evidence, remember that these crimes exhibited a definite signature and m.o, and that they stopped after Wayne Williams was incarcerated. This whole business about the KKK going into the black community and murdering children is absolute nonsense. If such a man had existed, why didn't anyone see him, particularly in a community on the lookout for white men in their neighborhood? I'm not discounting the idea that a few of the murders may have been committed by other individuals (Lanier, for example), but the evidence, far from exculpating Williams, puts him firmly in the crosshairs for the majority of the Atlanta Child Killings.
The report to which you refer has been widely misreported and grossly exaggerated. In 1988 the FBI estimated that there were 35 (not 100 or 500 as has been claimed) serial killers at work in the U.S. That figure has only increased to 40 in the last decade, and there are some experts who feel that even this number is too high. Any criminologist worth his or her salt will tell you serial murder is incredibly rare. The vast majority of murders committed in the U.S., at least, are impulse killings--bar fights, domestic squabbles, murders in the commission of other felonies such as rape and robbery. I read an excellent refutation of the myths surrounding the 1988 report (based on verifiable statistics and the report itself), and when I find it I'll let you all know.
If anything, Ridgway is probably guilty of more crimes than those to which he's confessed. Look at Bundy and Gacy, for example--Bundy was only convicted of four murders and a handful of assaults. His actual total was at least 30. Robert Ressler believes Gacy, who was convicted of 33 murders, had almost certainly committed many more. Jeff is absolutely right: Why should Ridgway confess to murders in jurisdictions where the death penalty might apply?
Dan, I stand by my original statement that I believe Jack to have exhibited "mixed" characteristics. The ritualistic nature and the extent of the mutilations, as well as the fact that no attempt was made to hide the victims or even to delay their discovery, speak to a disorganized nature. The victims were blitz-attacked, not casually chatted up and induced to go to someone's home or some deserted building (there were plenty in the area) where their discovery might be delayed. The victims themselves appear to have chosen the locations for the assignations. Why not locate more victims like Kelly, who had a room? And don't tell me it couldn't be done, or that there weren't more isolated locations in which to leave the bodies. An organized killer would have planned better. Jack's crimes show virtually no evidence of forethought whatsoever, except with regard to getting away, which may be attributed more to luck than to skill. The Pinchin Street murderer seems more organized, and that's not saying much. At least he made an effort to prevent identification by dismembering his victim.
I'm sorry, I have to go with Douglas and Hazelwood on this. Their combined experience in this area speaks volumes. |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 516
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 4:14 pm: |
|
Erin
You making a lot of sense here, but I hesitate, simply through knowledge.
Presently I am in contact with a chap serving a life time sentence in a Texan institution for the wounding of a single police officer when he in fact shot twelve of them in a drug related incident when they rushed his apartment and failed to wear the correct ID clothing and he assumed that he was being busted by another drug ring. He had no real defence in court but the circumstances of the police being plainly unmarked left him the popular choice of life rather than death. I believe I am right in assuming that to attempt to kill a police officer with a firearm in the state of Texas is considered a capital offence?
Anyways, experience has shown me that it is fairly futile to try and peer into the law enforcement policy of any police force, they wheel and deal, just as do the lawyers and attorneys, and nothing is quite what it seems.
I remember so well another one of my personal cases where the chap was up for four counts of a fairly horrific series of crimes and the arresting officer walked into his cell and said: ‘We’re just running with the one, how do you feel about that?’
‘Fine,’ he replied.
‘That’s with the assumption that you are pleading guilty?’ the officer added.
‘You bet,’ he replied.
We have a funny old system here in the UK where the lesser the offences the lesser the sentence, with other offences being taken into consideration - which basically means they aren’t considered at all at the trial but taken into consideration… never made any sense to me either.
Bargaining can even enter into sentencing, two people might be jailed for exactly the same period for exactly the same offence, but one might receive a concurrent sentence whilst the other receives a consecutive sentence. This means one would serve twelve years and the other six.
This all comes down to plea bargaining at varying levels of the justice system.
Sorry, I still smell rodents.
|
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 1:15 am: |
|
Erin,
You make a lot of assumptions about the Ripper that I don't think are warranted in order to come to your conclusion that he was disorganized (ritualistic? what other single rooms? why hide the bodies if forensics can't find anything useful?). But then we should probably keep the details of those arguments to the appropriate threads and not let them take over elsewhere.
Funny though that a thread about how common assumptions about serial killers can be wrong doesn't help anyone on the rest of the board realize that other assumptions can also be wrong. |
Richard P. Dewar
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 2:43 am: |
|
Hi AP,
Thanks for the kind words!
Hi Erin,
The point I was trying to make is it is not uncommon for those who commit crimes to exaggerate them to comply with plea bargains or to increase their stature. It is also not uncommon for the authorities to ascribe more unsolved murders to a serial killer than the murderer actually carried out.
I stand by my earlier contention that the three serial killer examples I cited demonstrate the tricky nature of ascribing the number of killings to any one serial killer.
Henry Lee Lucas was convicted of ten murders. He claimed over 500. Some believe he may have committed as few as two, others believe over 150. It is difficult to know. What is certain is that some of the killings he claimed to have committed, he did not.
Albert DeSalvo confessed to the Boston Strangler slayings. Yet DeSalvo in 1964 had confessed to a robbery and assault he had not committed. Whether DeSalvo was the Strangler is a point of contention among law enforcement officials and criminologists to this day.
Now, let us review the 44 Atlanta child killings.
Wayne Williams was never convicted of murdering a child - he was convicted of killing two adults. He was never charged but "linked" to child killings.
After Williams was convicted, the police did not close any of the unsolved cases but shut down the investigation. Child murders, contrary to the popular notion, continued after Williams was incarcerated.
The only physical evidence against Williams was that 10 of the 44 victim's bodies were found with a common carpet fiber identical to that in Wayne Williams house.
Aside from Williams and his defense attorney, Mary Welcome, there are others who claim Williams is probably innocent. In 1998, on "Dateline" the DeKalb County Police Sheriff Sidney Dorsey and Fulton County Chief Louis Graham both said they believed Williams was not the person responsible for the Atlanta child murders.
You are correct that the FBI estimates 35-50 serial killers at work in America. My "100" number was a vague recollection of estimates I'd read in the media in the early 1980s.
Again, my point is that just because Ridgway confessed to 48 killings does not necessarily mean that he murdered them all - though indeed he may have.
Rich
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
