Let's talk about the cat ...

[Justiceseeker35]

I agree. I think the discussion is more of whether one believes being cruel to an animal is a predictor to someone becoming a murderer.

The cat incident really bothers me in a very big way. A cat being killed cruely as part of drunken humor, yes, of course bothers me. I would likely no longer associate with anyone who did that. But the biggest take away on the whole thing is how it mirrors TH's murder so well. Now I don't know for sure if SA was 100% the only person involved in this cat thing, or was is more like the three of them were equally involved but SA just didn't talk first. Who knows. But the incident mirroring TH's murder. Honestly if he did this, there's no way it all went the way BD said. So I propse someone in LE concocted this story based on that cat burning report. And the only reason I can think of doing it was because they were intending to poison a jury pool. Even the judge alluded to an escalation of behavior for past crimes. Meaning the general consenus as far as SA was in that town was: robbery leads to animal cruelty- leads to assault -leads to rape- leads to murder. I wouldn't be suprised if that was some of the rhetoric being espoused by officials stating just those things. And if he didn't do this crime then ie he was framed then using the cat burning incident as the starting narrative for how she died would be a way to just fool the public.

 

[shadowraiths]

Torture and killing of animals is one sign of sociopathy. It demonstrates a lack of empathy. Not every sociopath tortures and kills animals. Some sociopaths do go on to murder. Not all, some. As I posted yesterday, it's not a 1:1 correlation.

- There can be sociopaths who have never killed or tortured anyone ever, including animals.
- There can be sociopaths who do torture and/or kill animals and never harmed a human.
- There can be sociopaths who never have hurt an animal but have killed a human.
- There can be sociopaths who have done both, tortured/killed an animal and killed a human.

We know for a fact SA did torture and kill a defenseless animal.

It also appears, based on the facts presented at trial, that SA also killed a human being.

You missed one. There can be people who torture and/or kill animals who are not sociopaths.

Otherwise put, there is no significant correlation between animal torture/killing and sociopathy. Even in young children. (see Relationship between Animal Cruelty and Comorbid Disorders).

Conduct Disorders, by the way, is an adolescent specific diagnosis. Its adult counterpart is antisocial personality disorder. Moreover, for a person to be diagnosed with ASPD, being diagnosed with CD as a youth, or having the earmarks of CD as a youth is a pre-requisite.

As for SA? Yes, what he and his "buddies" did was atrocious. Even so, and even with the wide-spread myths that animal cruelty is a predictor for murder, the cat incident would not meet the criteria, in that

a) he engaged in this egregious behavior as part of a group
b) he was an adult when this occurred
c) there is no indication that he engaged in chronic animal abuse as a child, or for that matter, as an adult
​

Again, this is not to dismiss or in any way minimize what he did. However, while some (imnsho, the MCSD) may see the cat incident as not only a definite predictor of future violence but also a confirmation that he did, in fact, murder Ms. Halbach?

In reality, and from a psychological standpoint, the cat incident simply does not factor into the equation, where this case is concerned.

What does factor in, again, imnsho, is his historical and chronic behavior toward various women in his life. To include running his cousin off the road, threatening to kill his wife (while he was in prison), assaulting JS, and if true, the sexual assault allegations that were reported in 2004 but for which he was not charged with.

And finally, as for him being a psychopath? Outside of the very little we have to go on (i.e., movie clips, criminal records, etcetera), I am skeptical that his scores would be elevated enough to be classifiable as a psychopath using Hare's PCL-R, his criminal behavior, notwithstanding.

 

[Madeleine74]

I never read anything about MCSO thinking SA was involved in the TH murder because he burned a cat years before. I'd have to say it was the fact she had an appointment at the Avery Salvage Yard and she was with SA that afternoon and she was never heard from or seen again by anyone after that appointment. That and TH vehicle being found is what put SA in the crosshairs, IMO.

 

[missy1974]

As for SA? Yes, what he and his "buddies" did was atrocious. Even so, and even with the wide-spread myths that animal cruelty is a predictor for murder, the cat incident would not meet the criteria, in that

a) he engaged in this egregious behavior as part of a group
b) he was an adult when this occurred
c) there is no indication that he engaged in chronic animal abuse as a child, or for that matter, as an adult
​

BBM This is what I was curious about, but really couldn't find anything. Doing this as a group vs. an individual.

While looking for that, I actually found a lot of information about there not being any correlation between animal cruelty and sociopaths, and it actually has more correlation with abuse. Which I found interesting as well.

To be honest... until now, I always thought there was a correlation, and any kid I saw being mean to an animal (not setting on fire!).... I thought hmmmm. I guess I will look at it completely different now.

 

[TheDuchess]

I never read anything about MCSO thinking SA was involved in the TH murder because he burned a cat years before. I'd have to say it was the fact she had an appointment at the Avery Salvage Yard and she was with SA that afternoon and she was never heard from or seen again by anyone after that appointment. That and TH vehicle being found is what put SA in the crosshairs, IMO.

Kratz has mentioned the cat so many times he's starting to grow whiskers. Not to mention how many others have discussed it and the cat has its own thread. That cat will haunt SA forever!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[missy1974]

I never read anything about MCSO thinking SA was involved in the TH murder because he burned a cat years before. I'd have to say it was the fact she had an appointment at the Avery Salvage Yard and she was with SA that afternoon and she was never heard from or seen again by anyone after that appointment. That and TH vehicle being found is what put SA in the crosshairs, IMO.

so you don't think that it could be reasonable that any LE officer looking at his background and seeing that he had an animal cruelty charge or any of them that were actually involved with said case would make the same correlation that you did and think that animal cruelty is a huge red flag for a sociopath and murderer?

IMO it reinforces the thought that they could have had tunnel vision, and this could just be one more element to why.

oh and, I doubt they would put this on paper for us to read IMO

I will share the quote I shared yesterday again...

Ryan warns that promotion of the triad has real-world ramifications, in that children who exhibit one or more of these behaviors "might be falsely labeled as potentially dangerous."

For example, police officers exposed to the triad in undergraduate criminology courses may target young offenders who have lit a fire or harmed an animal — both fairly common behaviors among troubled youth — as future sex fiends or serial killers. (Enuresis, with less face validity as an indicator of sadism, has tended to drop from more contemporary renditions of the triad.)

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/witness/201205/homicidal-triad-predictor-violence-or-urban-myth

 

[Madeleine74]

Kratz has mentioned the cat so many times he's starting to grow whiskers. Not to mention how many others have discussed it and the cat has its own thread.

Kratz ≠ MCSO
Others, including people on forums ≠ MCSO

In 2005 MCSO arrested SA not because of the cat but because of a murder he was charged with committing.

 

[TheDuchess]

Kratz ≠ MCSO
Others, including people on forums ≠ MCSO

In 2005 MCSO arrested SA not because of the cat but because of a murder he was charged with committing.

OK and it had nothing to do with the cat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BigCityAccountant]

BBM This is what I was curious about, but really couldn't find anything. Doing this as a group vs. an individual.

While looking for that, I actually found a lot of information about there not being any correlation between animal cruelty and sociopaths, and it actually has more correlation with abuse. Which I found interesting as well.

To be honest... until now, I always thought there was a correlation, and any kid I saw being mean to an animal (not setting on fire!).... I thought hmmmm. I guess I will look at it completely different now.

Thought I would chime in...

Up until a few years ago, the general consensus was that--that type of behavior lead to increased violence, up to and including murder. However, the general consensus started changing and thus the tide.

Which leads both statements to be true at certain points in time. It is just that is is now not the general consensus. But, like with any change--it takes time for everyone to get on board. Some will never agree to the change.

 

[RANCH]

Thought I would chime in...

Up until a few years ago, the general consensus was that--that type of behavior lead to increased violence, up to and including murder. However, the general consensus started changing and thus the tide.

Which leads both statements to be true at certain points in time. It is just that is is now not the general consensus. But, like with any change--it takes time for everyone to get on board. Some will never agree to the change.

And the general consensus can change back to where it started. JMO

 

[shadowraiths]

I never read anything about MCSO thinking SA was involved in the TH murder because he burned a cat years before. I'd have to say it was the fact she had an appointment at the Avery Salvage Yard and she was with SA that afternoon and she was never heard from or seen again by anyone after that appointment. That and TH vehicle being found is what put SA in the crosshairs, IMO.

This is an oversimplification, imho.

Importantly, people do not operate in a vacuum. As much as we might wish to be wholly and completely objective when it comes to focusing upon and winnowing out the truth. Preconceived notions can and do play a role with regard to viewpoints and resulting behavior.

Nonetheless, when I started this thread, it was focusing upon the fact that Petersen was the individual not only involved in the cat incident but also the individual who arrested SA for the false rape accusation. An accusation, btw, which, to this day, he believes: SA was actually guilty... even though the DNA cleared him.

And this, in turn, set the framework from which MCSD officers operated. That is, this perception, as MCSD sheriff, naturally bleeds down through the ranks through the process of social influence. A phenomenon that occurs as a result of the socialization process. In this case, the department's preconceived views of SA, and imnsho, tunnel vision, set the stage for rationalization with regard to the arguable planting of the key and possibly, the bullet fragment.

Notably, the cat incident is repeatedly raised to support not only the prosecutor's view that the man is guilty but various participant's views, as well. Moreover, the prosecutor has escalated his embellishment, in a recent interview, now proclaiming that the burning cat escaped the fire and that SA caught him and put him back in the fire. There is absolutely no reason for him to do this. That is, unless he's trying to poison public opinion of SA, as he did with the lurid faux rape/torture story he told the media.

And finally, consider this very thread. People being accused of minimizing the cat incident. Others pointing to it as proof positive that people who torture/kill animals are sociopaths and at increased risk for murdering people.

Otherwise put? If the cat incident is a flashpoint that plays a role with regard to discussants views of SA's guilt or innocence, how much more so does it play a role within the MCSD, whose very leader adamantly refuses to believe that SA was innocent of the 1985 rape?

 

[Limaes]

This is an oversimplification, imho.

Importantly, people do not operate in a vacuum. As much as we might wish to be wholly and completely objective when it comes to focusing upon and winnowing out the truth. Preconceived notions can and do play a role with regard to viewpoints and resulting behavior.

Nonetheless, when I started this thread, it was focusing upon the fact that Petersen was the individual not only involved in the cat incident but also the individual who arrested SA for the false rape accusation. An accusation, btw, which, to this day, he believes: SA was actually guilty... even though the DNA cleared him.

And this, in turn, set the framework from which MCSD officers operated. That is, this perception, as MCSD sheriff, naturally bleeds down through the ranks through the process of social influence. A phenomenon that occurs as a result of the socialization process. In this case, the department's preconceived views of SA, and imnsho, tunnel vision, set the stage for rationalization with regard to the arguable planting of the key and possibly, the bullet fragment.

Notably, the cat incident is repeatedly raised to support not only the prosecutor's view that the man is guilty but various participant's views, as well. Moreover, the prosecutor has escalated his embellishment, in a recent interview, now proclaiming that the burning cat escaped the fire and that SA caught him and put him back in the fire. There is absolutely no reason for him to do this. That is, unless he's trying to poison public opinion of SA, as he did with the lurid faux rape/torture story he told the media.

And finally, consider this very thread. People being accused of minimizing the cat incident. Others pointing to it as proof positive that people who torture/kill animals are sociopaths and at increased risk for murdering people.

Otherwise put? If the cat incident is a flashpoint that plays a role with regard to discussants views of SA's guilt or innocence, how much more so does it play a role within the MCSD, whose very leader adamantly refuses to believe that SA was innocent of the 1985 rape?

The framework was set when the Rav 4 was found on Avery property. I do not believe that when Pam Sturm said 'avery salvage yard' that they were thinking of the cat. The whole family became suspects because her car was on their property, not because SA tortured his cat previously.

Petersen is a stubborn man but I find it very unlikely that his opinion of Avery influenced Calumet County Sheriff's Office, Department of Justice, The State Crime Lab or the FBI.

I personally did not know about the cat incident when I first came across this case. So, neither Petersen or the cat incident influenced me.

 

[missy1974]

the 4th ..... Judy Dvorak deposition

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/n...ry-lawsuit-video-deputy-judy-dvorak/81549194/

uhmm her name is listed as Judy Dvorak Yanda

to refresh everyone's memory.... the cat incident.... his buddy that "tattled" on himself and SA, and was never charged with the same crime that he was also a "party to", was Jerry YANDA!

Screw the 6 degree's of separation in this case... it's like 1 or 2 at the max lol

 

[Safeguard]

*Dueling Banjos* playing in my head every time I read about these people...
It's like the whole state is one big Family Tree. Uhhgg!