I still believe that by beheading Mr Dermond and not Beheading Mrs Dermond that this was someone close to them who had no problem with Mrs D . Cult killing they both would have been beheaded
colette,
I think a pro would not have used an identifiable weapon; an amateur would have probably been caught by now.
Taking the head as proof also makes little sense, given the media attention to a murder in this neighborhood would bring. Proof is trivial under these conditions.
I think cutting off the head was done to confuse identification of the male body.
Another question I ask myself: why the elaborate, almost staged double murder involving post mortem decapitation of one victim and post mortem body disposal into a lake of the other victim? Could it have been for effect, as in a ruse? Misdirection (the magician's best friend)? Think about it: these murders took a lot of planning, a lot of work and involved significant risk but why go to such lengths? So many questions and so few answers. If the intent was to draw our attention to or away from something I'm missing it.
To make it look like Mrs. Dermond killed her husband and fled?
I don't think it took them more than a few minutes to figure out it was Mr Dermond. This was rage and well planned out. This happened 42 months ago and still no suspect or person of interest
SS may think that but only a person full of rage or a psycho would behead someone. Honestly have you ever heard of a sane person beheading someone. How could SS conclude the beheading was done with care.?
Yes, I see. But I think it was easier to behead the man (after he was already deceased) than a nice elderly lady (who they made sure was dead before subjecting her to the water.) I'm thinking (hoping) that the purpose was not to frighten them or make them suffer unduly, but to make others suffer by having them imagine what these 2 elderly people went through.
Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
I am not a believer in the theory of the beheading of mr dermond was to buy time. I also don't believe the head was taken to show proof of the killing. I do believe the head was disposed of and probably in the same area as Mrs Dermond . Nobody would want to be in possession of a head for fear of being caught . This killing was well planned and executed professionally. SS mentioned early on he had all forms of evidence including prints, fibers and dna and I truly believe he knows who the killer or killers are but can't win a conviction without a witness.
The couple’s three children voluntarily took polygraphs and all have been cleared.
I agree with you that most beheadings involve rage, where the head is hacked off. This one did not.
Could not that fact be this case's equivalent of the dog that did not bark in the night time ?
RSBM for spaceIf these events transpired, the need to return the headless body to the home is clear. The head removal would show no anger. I invite members of this thread to find things (other than fingerprints, of course) that are unexplained by this theory of the crime.
I found this theory to be so compelling that I e-mailed it to SS several months ago. Although I included a return e-mail address and phone number, it has never been acknowledged. He must have found it lacking.
Again, I reject this theory of the crime on an emotional level. I don't want it to be true.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.