Psychological Markers

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Then, logically, you would need an explanation for the different details in all three series.

Sorry Peter, you are approaching me as if I am a profiler, I don't profile, I don't know much about it, but I don't believe it is the best tool to solve this particular case. I believe that profiling is a helpful tool when used by professionals in a case that doesn't have strong leads. I do not believe this to be one of those cases.

Profiling is based on statistics (among other things) which relies on the analysis of historical data ie. prior cases, serial killers, their patterns, and behaviors. Methods like this work, until they don't work, and I am not interested in trying to predict who the serial killer is.

I approached this case because there are leads and details of the events surrounding the disappearance of a victim. I believe this information helps the case resemble a solvable puzzle. Instead of using profiling to try and solve this puzzle, I used analysis of the actual events, players, and probability (not to be confused with statistics).

Yes, there is a chance I could be wrong, but I can say with confidence that the likelihood that cph made that rehab call, and therefore is the culprit, is much higher than the chances of other scenarios which would have resulted in the events that we have all come to know. This assertion is not based on fallible prediction.

For all I know, CPH is the black swan who could roll 3 die a million times and hit 4, 5, 6 every single time. CEE-LO!!! :woohoo:
I just don't believe in anomalous luck (good or bad).
 
Sorry Peter, you are approaching me as if I am a profiler, I don't profile, I don't know much about it, but I don't believe it is the best tool to solve this particular case. I believe that profiling is a helpful tool when used by professionals in a case that doesn't have strong leads. I do not believe this to be one of those cases.

Profiling is based on statistics (among other things) which relies on the analysis of historical data ie. prior cases, serial killers, their patterns, and behaviors. Methods like this work, until they don't work, and I am not interested in trying to predict who the serial killer is.

I approached this case because there are leads and details of the events surrounding the disappearance of a victim. I believe this information helps the case resemble a solvable puzzle. Instead of using profiling to try and solve this puzzle, I used analysis of the actual events, players, and probability (not to be confused with statistics).

Yes, there is a chance I could be wrong, but I can say with confidence that the likelihood that cph made that rehab call, and therefore is the culprit, is much higher than the chances of other scenarios which would have resulted in the events that we have all come to know. This assertion is not based on fallible prediction.

For all I know, CPH is the black swan who could roll 3 die a million times and hit 4, 5, 6 every single time. CEE-LO!!! :woohoo:
I just don't believe in anomalous luck (good or bad).

You don't need to be a profiler, you just need an explanation including all facts. When it comes to your role of the pure detective, then maybe you should remember, that you can link CPH only to SG and even that not conclusive. So, you would need more connections anyway.
And honestly, I had to grin about that short excurs in statistics. Psychologists often use statistics like cars. A lot of people start a car and have no idea, what happens then, they are happy, it makes the right noise and drive off. Shadowraith had lately a nice example for this when he linked that article in which all those peer-reviewed big shots compared apples with pears. So take my word for it, I'm not happy either with blindfolded following the statistics even while I admit to have a much higher tendency to profile. But then, it's both together, that brought LE some successes before they sank down in deep sleep again. So, most cases were closed by luck and accident in the past. Because nobody trusts in the competence of the other part of it all.
 
Yes, there is a chance I could be wrong, but I can say with confidence that the likelihood that cph made that rehab call, and therefore is the culprit, is much higher than the chances of other scenarios which would have resulted in the events that we have all come to know. This assertion is not based on fallible prediction.

For all I know, CPH is the black swan who could roll 3 die a million times and hit 4, 5, 6 every single time. CEE-LO!!! :woohoo:
I just don't believe in anomalous luck (good or bad).

Truthspider

What murderer would call the family of the victim (at that point just known to be missing by family) he just killed, present himself by his real name, and tell them he had been in contact with the victim (missng girl) within the last 24 hours?

It just does NOT make sense whatsoever IMO.
 
I had taken behavioral statistic in college, years ago. The major thing my professor did state was do not trust any statistics, unless you can see the proof/data of how the results were obtained. Oh and never trust the statistics on the news polls.
:what:

to add: btw I do feel strongly that CPH did make the call that MG says he made (rehab)
 
I had taken behavioral statistic in college, years ago. The major thing my professor did state was do not trust any statistics, unless you can see the proof/data of how the results were obtained. Oh and never trust the statistics on the news polls.
:what:

to add: btw I do feel strongly that CPH did make the call that MG says he made (rehab)

True, that is why I check against my own case collection to see, whether it's at least in the same ball park. But then, all the base data doesn't help a thing, when a psychologist tries to prove, the number of serial killer is increasing by looking at the number of stranger-to-stranger homicides because he doesn't realize, there are other stranger-to-stranger cases than only serial killers in his base data too (for example Hickey, I think 1984) and when then people quote that "study" for example in direct comparison with a study looking at number of people killed by SKs and compare the numbers directly. That is what I mean by comparing apples and pears. The base data is probably okay, but the conclusions are wrong because the compared studies don't base on the same data set. I see that mistake more often than real mistakes in acquiring the base data.
And I found, the polls give a good statistical overview about the bias of certain poll makers ...
 
Truthspider

What murderer would call the family of the victim (at that point just known to be missing by family) he just killed, present himself by his real name, and tell them he had been in contact with the victim (missng girl) within the last 24 hours?

It just does NOT make sense whatsoever IMO.

The very same kind of murderer who would continue killing and putting bodies in the same spot just down the road after the May 1 fiasco. We know the serial killer is narcisistic and suffers from his own hubris, so don't ask yourself if you would make that call, ask if a narcistic control freak like our killer would. Our killer would totally make that call....and did. You should read my previous posts on some good reasons to make the call as well.
 
The same jellybean was not picked twice at random from a jar of 70 jellybeans.

There is only a 1 in 5000 chance of that, the two events were not random because it was one person who called both times.

They are 2 independant random events: being picked as the patsy that will call the family, and being a random guy who calls the family. For cph not to have made the rehab call, he would have to be the unluckiest man alive, and I dont believe that to be the case. Him lying about the phone calls for so long is confirmation that he knew he wasn't the unluckiest man alive.
 
Truthspider

What murderer would call the family of the victim (at that point just known to be missing by family) he just killed, present himself by his real name, and tell them he had been in contact with the victim (missng girl) within the last 24 hours?

It just does NOT make sense whatsoever IMO.

The kinda who wants to put all the blame on her pimp/driver, "She left with her driver". He may have been thinking, oh god, the $h1t hit the fan what am I going to do, I'm CPH people will trust me over that pimp, so he calls because he knows people are going to start looking and blames it on the driver. The problem with that is that LE found 10 other dead escorts going back to 95 in the same spot, which then points the finger back to a local.
 
We have been over this many times. When CPH called MG the family did not know she was missing. No one knew she was missing except the people involved, MP and CPH for sure. This was his fatal mistake. How did he know she was in the area if he didn't see her that night? How did he know she was missing if no one else did?

From MG's comments on her facebook page, on the LISK site and discussed here by goathairjones 10-18-2011, 09:31 PM:

Regarding Shannan, she (MG) said that she was the last person to talk to Shannan on the phone the night of 4/30/10. And then the next call she received was on 5/1/10 from CPH's home phone, from a man stating he was CPH, and he said that he ran a halfway house and that Shannan was there but left with her driver that morning.

MG states "Hacketts phone number is on my phone records with time, and date.
In ALL Truthfullness I was the Very Last person Shannan spoke to. Her number is on my phone records.
The Very Next incomming call (other than my daughter updating me on if she heard from Shannan) is Hackett."
http://longislandserialkiller.com/2011/10/bs-9/
Mari answers questions

It is my firm believe that CPH was probably intoxicated when he called MG. I feel he made the call thinking someone had seen him with SG and he needed an explaination. Later he realized no one was coming forward to say they were seen together, so he regretted and retracted any statements regarding her. Dormer clearly says in the 48 HR special that he did make "the" calls. He did not say CPH made two of the calls.
 
Truth,

I think when we try to link SG's death and the GB4 deaths we can really confuse the issue. Initially I believed there was a strong linkage, and that always brought me back to PCH. When I focused on just SG, it became apparent to me that MP was the main and most probable suspect.

Remember there is no record of contact that night between CPH and SG.

There may be some relationship between all or some of the Oak Beach people, and the GB4. However I feel that if I and others focus on SG and MP, then these linkages will become clear.

I envision some evidence will come out that positively points to MP as the perpetrator. If he is then charged, you can believe that if there is linkage to other residents, he will roll on all the others to get a better deal for himself.

Unfortunately when we are dealing with probabilities and potentialities they have to overcome reasonable doubt in court.

I trust your judgement, and was impressed with your work visiting CM. Have you seen the video of MP, what do you think?

Does anybody know where MP is living and what he is doing?
 
We have been over this many times. When CPH called MG the family did not know she was missing. No one knew she was missing except the people involved, MP and CPH for sure. This was his fatal mistake. How did he know she was in the area if he didn't see her that night? How did he know she was missing if no one else did?

From MG's comments on her facebook page, on the LISK site and discussed here by goathairjones 10-18-2011, 09:31 PM:

Regarding Shannan, she (MG) said that she was the last person to talk to Shannan on the phone the night of 4/30/10. And then the next call she received was on 5/1/10 from CPH's home phone, from a man stating he was CPH, and he said that he ran a halfway house and that Shannan was there but left with her driver that morning.

MG states "Hacketts phone number is on my phone records with time, and date.
In ALL Truthfullness I was the Very Last person Shannan spoke to. Her number is on my phone records.
The Very Next incomming call (other than my daughter updating me on if she heard from Shannan) is Hackett."
http://longislandserialkiller.com/2011/10/bs-9/
Mari answers questions

It is my firm believe that CPH was probably intoxicated when he called MG. I feel he made the call thinking someone had seen him with SG and he needed an explaination. Later he realized no one was coming forward to say they were seen together, so he regretted and retracted any statements regarding her. Dormer clearly says in the 48 HR special that he did make "the" calls. He did not say CPH made two of the calls.

MG says she was the last one to talk to Shannan. Meaning the last person before Shannan went to JB's house? Or that she talked to Shannan after she talked to 911 for twenty plus minutes? Just want clarification.
 
She meant she was the last person to talk to Shannan before she left for her date with JB. Just an ordinary mother-daughter talk where SG assured her mother she would be careful. There is a news article about her mother feeling guilty because she thought Shannan shorted JP in order to buy her mother a present for an upcoming visit. I can find the link if anyone is dying to see it.
 
Truth,

I think when we try to link SG's death and the GB4 deaths we can really confuse the issue. Initially I believed there was a strong linkage, and that always brought me back to PCH. When I focused on just SG, it became apparent to me that MP was the main and most probable suspect.

Remember there is no record of contact that night between PCH and SG.

There may be some relationship between all or some of the Oak Beach people, and the GB4. However I feel that if I and others focus on SG and MP, then these linkages will become clear.

I envision some evidence will come out that positively points to MP as the perpetrator. If he is then charged, you can believe that if there is linkage to other residents, he will roll on all the others to get a better deal for himself.

Unfortunately when we are dealing with probabilities and potentialities they have to overcome reasonable doubt in court.

I trust your judgement, and was impressed with your work visiting CM. Have you seen the video of MP, what do you think?

Does anybody know where MP is living and what he is doing?

We do have CPH calling the mother of SG and the mother/sister stating he admitted involvement with SG. (the rehab call) Proof was given of phone calls from CPH to MG via was it 48hrs?

One of the shows said that MP was in GA.
 
Truth,

I think when we try to link SG's death and the GB4 deaths we can really confuse the issue. Initially I believed there was a strong linkage, and that always brought me back to PCH. When I focused on just SG, it became apparent to me that MP was the main and most probable suspect.

Remember there is no record of contact that night between CPH and SG.

There may be some relationship between all or some of the Oak Beach people, and the GB4. However I feel that if I and others focus on SG and MP, then these linkages will become clear.

I envision some evidence will come out that positively points to MP as the perpetrator. If he is then charged, you can believe that if there is linkage to other residents, he will roll on all the others to get a better deal for himself.

Unfortunately when we are dealing with probabilities and potentialities they have to overcome reasonable doubt in court.

I trust your judgement, and was impressed with your work visiting CM. Have you seen the video of MP, what do you think?

Does anybody know where MP is living and what he is doing?

This is not a court room and we are not police, I have been trying to point out to people (maybe even LE) that there is actually PROBABLE cause to dig alot deeper on CPH if they haven't done so already.

You would need a massively profound verifiable reason to unlink SG from the G4, not the other way around. We are dealing with an island that has a tiny population.

There is no record of contact between the 2 that you and I are privy too, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I regularly envision Megan Good chilling on my couch with me but that doesnt make it real.
 
The very same kind of murderer who would continue killing and putting bodies in the same spot just down the road after the May 1 fiasco. We know the serial killer is narcisistic and suffers from his own hubris, so don't ask yourself if you would make that call, ask if a narcistic control freak like our killer would. Our killer would totally make that call....and did. You should read my previous posts on some good reasons to make the call as well.

This is all under the assumption, the killer knew about May 1st at all. Who knew about SG before the bodies at Gilgo Beach were found? Nobody really. She became only later news.
You know, in your assumptions, the killer suffers from a narcissistic personality disorder. Crime scene, the scarce details we heard from the autopsies and the time line suggest otherwise.
 
The same jellybean was not picked twice at random from a jar of 70 jellybeans.

There is only a 1 in 5000 chance of that, the two events were not random because it was one person who called both times.

They are 2 independant random events: being picked as the patsy that will call the family, and being a random guy who calls the family. For cph not to have made the rehab call, he would have to be the unluckiest man alive, and I dont believe that to be the case. Him lying about the phone calls for so long is confirmation that he knew he wasn't the unluckiest man alive.

So had to do with SG. Fine, now you need to find out what and find a hard connection to the GB4 and to all other series in the wider area (till over to Atlantic City) to prove your point. But as of yet, you have nothing to accuse CPH of more than try to spread chaos in the SG case.
 
We have been over this many times. .... two of the calls.


QUESTION!

If Hackett called Mari the day after her daughter called her from OB, screaming that someone was trying to kill her, why when Hackett called did Mari not DEMAND to speak to her daughter being as he was claiming she was now in his rehab.... How come she didn't verify her daughter was OK, or better yet, still alive. If that was my kid, and the night before she called to say she was being hunted down by a killer, I would be forced to ask to speak to my child to verify in fact that what this RANDOM guy who I DON'T KNOW is calling me to say my child is fine and in rehab, that she is in face there and is ALIVE!!!!

I'm sorry, I do not mean to beat on the families, but that is a serious question... If I asked to speak to my kid and I was denied AFTER the call I got, YOU CAN BET YOUR *advertiser censored* THAT I AM ON MY WAY TO THE LOCAL PD AND DEMANDING THEY GO TO HIS HOUSE AND GET MY CHILD!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That was a bad parenting mistake as far as I am concerned, and I would really like to know why she didn't act accordingly. :fence:
 
This is not a court room and we are not police, I have been trying to point out to people (maybe even LE) that there is actually PROBABLE cause to dig alot deeper on CPH if they haven't done so already.

You would need a massively profound verifiable reason to unlink SG from the G4, not the other way around. We are dealing with an island that has a tiny population.

There is no record of contact between the 2 that you and I are privy too, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I regularly envision Megan Good chilling on my couch with me but that doesnt make it real.

As a matter of fact, I listed a lot of reasons to "unlink" SG and the GB4, but everytime, you ignored it or things got hot on this board. You can look them up in my earlier posts.
 
To Lilmiss_cantbwrong: I believe you have the facts mixed up. Shannan's mother never received a call from her daughter screaming that someone was trying to kill her. Shannan called 911 saying someone was trying to kill her. Her mother knew nothing about this call until days later. The doctor said Shannan had left with her driver, so the mother couldn't have demanded to speak to her. Her daughter was a prostitute and Shannan's mother was used to living with this fact and all the danger that implies her daughter put herself in. This forum is victim friendly and there is no need to beat up on the mother.

To the defenders of CPH: We get it that you are an advocate for the doctor. Most of the long time posters here are not. This forum has become very contentious when one cannot make a comment without having to defend it and go over past discussions again and again.
 
As a matter of fact, I listed a lot of reasons to "unlink" SG and the GB4, but everytime, you ignored it or things got hot on this board. You can look them up in my earlier posts.

Peter,

I've read your posts with interest, and would like your opinion on something.

I've been working on a theory that the serial killer is a duck hunter. This theory assumes:

1) That Shannan died of accidental causes and is completely unrelated to the actual serial killer case.
2) That the GB4 and Manorville are a single killer.


I know you've mentioned that it is uncommon for a SK to change their killing style and manner of dumping, but we don't know the manner of death for the Manorville victims. The manner of death could at least be the same (asphyxiation). Certainly the dump site along Ocean Parkway was identical.

The only connection that I've found between the area between Cedar Beach and Gilgo Beach (on the north side of the parkway) and the specific area of Manorville where Jane Doe #6 and Jessica Taylor were found is duck hunting. Duck hunters have a duckboat festival at Cedar Beach through www.sswa.org. In 2000, it was held at Gilgo. The area of Manorville where Jane Doe #6 was found is a waterfowl hunting area (she was actually discovered by pheasant hunters).

Duck hunters use buralp bags for building blinds, and its possible that they use these to carry dead ducks in the field.

My questions are as follows:

1) If it is indeed a duck hunter, what is your take on the psychology behind a serial killer "bagging" his prey? What type of serial killer would this make him? A trophy hunter? Mission-oriented? Thrill seeker?

2) I can understand why a serial killer might migrate away from dismembering. Namely, its messy, leaves a lot of evidence, and in the end is unnecessary when your victims are strangers. Between 2000 and 2007, the killer may have evolved (as many do) to believe that as long as nobody ever finds the body, then nature and time will do the task of eliminating evidence.

There seemed to be alot of attention paid to Jessica Taylor in 2003/2004, so between 2003 and 2007 he became refined to the point where he didn't need to dismember his next victims to prevent identification. Rather, he could simply camouflage them with burlap and noone would ever find them.

My question is: Why do you think he would have dismembered in the first place (assuming that it was meant to prevent identification, which I do assume)? I mean, this guy picks up a prostitute from NYC in 2000 (so the police believe). If Jessica Taylor is any indicator of where Jane Doe #6 was picked up (the Port Authority Bus Terminal), this is pretty much the busiest area for prostitution since Mayor Giuliani cleaned up the city. In other words, its a Red Light district, with pretty much the world's shadiest characters running around all night. Why do you need to obfuscate in 2000 and again in 2003 that the victim came from this area? Did he have an arrest record for solicitation of a prostitute in that area? Was he afraid of electronic surveillance (i.e., video, toll-booth records) that might have tied him to the crime? Or is there some other reason why one might seek to prevent identification of a victim that I'm just not thinking about?


Here's an idea of what the area around the Port Authority Bus Terminal was like in 2000/2003:

http://www.nypress.com/article-6453-best-of-manhattan-2002-manhattan-living.html
Best Surviving Pocket Of Old-Fashioned Midtown Sleaze

"Southport"


Is That a Crackpipe in Mickey’s Pants? We spent much of this past year living right across from the Port Authority on W. 40th St. Those of you still bemoaning the Disneyfication of 42nd St., please believe us when we tell you that the old sleaze hasn’t vanished. We know this from intimate experience. It just got pushed south and west, along 8th Ave. and on several blocks of cross streets between 8th and 9th Aves., the last old-time sleazy *advertiser censored* ghetto area in midtown Manhattan. A hood, one wag friend of ours jokes, that The New York Times and the realtors will soon dub "Southport" (South of Port Authority) when the 42nd St. redevelopment inexorably spreads there.

You want a taste of the old Deuce? Stroll our block of W. 40th between 8th and 9th Aves. after dark. Our building’s immediate neighbors included two *advertiser censored* shops, a greasy Chinese takeout for crackheads, the scariest bodega in Manhattan, the worst fast food joint on the planet and a bar. We passed a dozen more *advertiser censored* shops every day on our walk to work. How many *advertiser censored* shops do you need? Walking home every night we ran a gauntlet of filthy, mean-tempered crackies and drunks, plenty of hoze and lots of just generally bad-looking dudes up to absolutely no good. Every morning, we went out to the lovely aroma left by the bums who’d pissed on our front steps that night. Not to mention the puke in the gutter. Most nights around 4 a.m. we were awakened by the inhuman yowling of the crackies clustered on the parking lot under our window, who’d run out of cash and rock and were coming down loud and hard.

And that’s just our one block. There are several square blocks of good old-fashioned New York City degradation and depravity left in Southport, for you nostalgists willing to go look.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
193
Guests online
1,796
Total visitors
1,989

Forum statistics

Threads
600,855
Messages
18,114,775
Members
230,990
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top