Charlot123
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 9,006
- Reaction score
- 60,472
You have to remember this may not even be a case of sexual homicide, though I think the overwhelming gut response is that it is , and I wouldn't be any different in that aspect .
Unless its released that they were sexually assaulted, all we know is that the 2 girls were killed, how, and why are left to the imagination.
If this was an abduction murder for sexual purposes (which it may be, and probably is) then the individual you are talking about above is a great example of the type of person usually responsible
Though he was ruled out as a suspect, for whatever reason, I can say with a very high level of confidence that though hes not responsible , the individual you are looking for would not be all that different than the man you speak of .
This is again all speculative because of what we don't know .
I don’t know the reason they were killed. It might be sexual, or purely “utilitarian”, for the lack of any usable term. If there were any sexual undertones, then, he is a sexual sadist. And I am 50/50 on it.
If the true reason was different (removing someone who knew too much, or whom he, for whatever reason, saw as a threat), then he is cold, devious, planning, but might be very different from any criminals mentioned here. And in this case, he is not mentally ill, merely suspicious, devoid of attachments and knows how to use people for his benefits. This person can never be caught because he is so “normal”. Deep inside, he might probably still hate the victims because in his eyes, they “deserved”. If he used anyone, or lives with someone who could guess, he manipulates these people into silence, and probably, uses logic (emotions are unreliable).
And it is here when he can use arguments that are very smart.
JMO. I am not making “psychological portraits” at all, merely trying to imagine different POIs, even historical figures, and thinking of how it would work. Type 1 could still be vulnerable and have weak links, some attachments, type 2, none, although he “needs” all of it, a GF, or family, or kids, to fit in.
ETA: type 1 was probably alone, type 2 could have used someone, maybe some type 1 loser.
Last edited: