Will the Long Island Serial Killer ever be caught?

[DaisyChains]

I'm snipping part of this profile down to focus on the one part I do take issue with. IMO mraccountant contextualized the intent of this profile well but there is an assumption in in the STALK profile that I have seen echoed that I want to mention.




I agree that sex workers who are not NYC metro area natives would be more vulnerable to a SK but IMO it is not simple naivety or lack of vigilance. IMO a sex worker from another area, in some cases estranged from their family (JT) will be much more at risk simply because they do not have any support. Their pimp, if they have one, may be the only one they have in the city and the pimp may take advantage of that. I do not think that all of the LISK victims were naive. Yes, leaving their phones behind was a risk that cost some their lives but they didn't all do that. IMO the risks a sex worker is willing to take has more to do with their circumstances and experience level than hometown. Some NYC born and raised sex workers may take very dangerous risks if they are in a desperate situation. A sex worker new to the industry from anywhere will also be much more vulnerable than one with substantial experience. I'm pointing this out not so much to pick a bone with this particular profile but just to bring this particular element to light.

agreed. Plus, wasn't MB living in NYC when she was murdered by LISK? How was he to know (or take into account) she was raised in Buffalo if he met her once she was living in the city? MB was pretty street smart. LISK even called MB's pimp and boyfriend. He has no fear about someone having local contacts as he contacts them himself. JT was from the city as well when she went missing even though her missing person report was from VA. They both had made friends/contacts in NYC by the time they were murdered by LISK. So I'm not even sure the profiler's assumption is even correct as 2 of the girls DID live in the city when they were murdered. MBB also went missing sometime after being at the Port Authority in Manhattan (even though she was from CT, she often tricked in the city). I mean what is this profiler getting at and where is he getting his info?

 

[LetThemEatCake]

agreed. Plus, wasn't MB living in NYC when she was murdered by LISK? How was he to know (or take into account) she was raised in Buffalo if he met her once she was living in the city? MB was pretty street smart. JT was from the city as well when she went missing even though her missing person report was from VA. They both had made friends/contacts in NYC by the time they were murdered by LISK. So I'm not even sure the profiler's assumption is even correct as 2 of the girls DID live in the city when they were murdered.

His assumption that LISK murdered a baby and Shannen Gilbert is wrong too.

 

[DaisyChains]

Yup I am not so sure about the toddler and peaches being a LISK victim either. I believe that was a domestic issue committed by a very bad man or a pimp even.

Not sure about SG being a LISK victim. I go back and forth as to whether or not she is a victim. Always thought it interesting her body was not discovered earlier than the other victims, but that is understandable. She seemed to be further out in the bramble than the burlap victims.

Asian John Doe's proximity to the 4 burlap remains makes me think perhaps he is a LISK victim.

The only victims I can 100% with certainty ascribe to LISK are the victims with his signature - burlap. The 4 girls set together with an MO. doesn't mean I don't think the other bodies could possibly be LISK victims, but I don't have that 100% certainty like I do with the 4 girls in burlap.

 

[PictureSnatcher]

if lisk stays active he might, i watched the killing season the unearthed more info than the cops. i dont think the cops care because they were protatuts and they could care less about those people..

protatuts...yes :gum:

 

[PictureSnatcher]

Asian John Doe's proximity to the 4 burlap remains makes me think perhaps he is a LISK victim.

The only victims I can 100% with certainty ascribe to LISK are the victims with his signature - burlap. The 4 girls set together with an MO. doesn't mean I don't think the other bodies could possibly be LISK victims, but I don't have that 100% certainty like I do with the 4 girls in burlap.

The problem with that theory is that only 2 of the 4 girls were found in burlap

 

[LetThemEatCake]

Yup I am not so sure about the toddler and peaches being a LISK victim either. I believe that was a domestic issue committed by a very bad man or a pimp even.

Not sure about SG being a LISK victim. I go back and forth as to whether or not she is a victim. Always thought it interesting her body was not discovered earlier than the other victims, but that is understandable. She seemed to be further out in the bramble than the burlap victims.

Asian John Doe's proximity to the 4 burlap remains makes me think perhaps he is a LISK victim.

The only victims I can 100% with certainty ascribe to LISK are the victims with his signature - burlap. The 4 girls set together with an MO. doesn't mean I don't think the other bodies could possibly be LISK victims, but I don't have that 100% certainty like I do with the 4 girls in burlap.

I think it has to be looked at into perspective, and of course follow the facts. LISK only has 4 100% provable victims. And focusing on that will get him caught, there's really no need to focus on the others in relation to this case. The Shannen Gilbert situation is appalling to me. It's akin to insisting on the existence of big foot or man never landing on the moon and so many other BS theories. Whenever anyone begins on about Shannen Gilbert I know that person has lost it. They are not after a serial killer, they are after a romantic fix with their serial killer entertainment.

 

[LetThemEatCake]

The problem with that theory is that only 2 of the 4 girls were found in burlap

Where is the source for this? I've never read such a thing.

 

[PictureSnatcher]

Two of the bodies were stuffed into burlap sacks. source: Craigslist Murder Rampage Dec 15 2010 New York Post.

 

[LetThemEatCake]

Two of the bodies were stuffed into burlap sacks. source: Craigslist Murder Rampage Dec 15 2010 New York Post.

but that's one article?? most articles and sources are in agreement that the 4 were found in burlap.

 

[PictureSnatcher]

but that's one article?? most articles and sources are in agreement that the 4 were found in burlap.

I think this one is the original article that mentions burlaps, & Mr. Crowley was the reporter who had a good source in SCPD. I guess you can believe whatever article you like. I like to look at primary sources, the story just gets muddled after that

 

[LetThemEatCake]

I think this one is the original article that mentions burlaps, & Mr. Crowley was the reporter who had a good source in SCPD. I guess you can believe whatever article you like. I like to look at primary sources, the story just gets muddled after that

Only for conspiracy theorists. The truth of the matter is that, things are always muddy at first and then they get clarified, so yeah I'll stick to what happened, 4 burlap victims.

 

[PictureSnatcher]

Only for conspiracy theorists. The truth of the matter is that, things are always muddy at first and then they get clarified, so yeah I'll stick to what happened, 4 burlap victims.

Not always

 

[LetThemEatCake]

Not always

People thought 9/11 was a small plane that accidentally crashed on the world trade center. Things are always confusing at first, but like I said, not to conspiracy theories, they always look for that early inconsistency and unfortunately stay there.

 

[The Nomad]

Two of the bodies were stuffed into burlap sacks. source: Craigslist Murder Rampage Dec 15 2010 New York Post.

As LTEC said, there has been a few variations. The fact is, LE are probably holding snippets of information back. Note the use of the "stuffed into burlap sacks". Could be journalistic sensationalism, or it could mean something like dismemberment and placed into burlap sacks. If the latter it absolutely opens up many more victim possibilities. Could the journalist have taken the information out of context, like two stuffed into sacks, but not asking anything about the other two who could have been found partially covered etc etc? Would have been sloppy by the journalist, but if he wanted a 'scoop' perhaps he rushed it. We may never know until SCPD release all the information, which they won't until any trial.

There has never been any mention to how big these sacks are, so it's impossible to draw conclusions. There was a picture used by the daily mail, but it's inconclusive.

Also there was little to no mention to the state of the bodies, in tact, mutilated, anything missing (trophies) etc etc?

 

[The Nomad]

This is the updated profile of the Long Island Serial Killer from John Kelly's S.T.A.L.K. Inc. It was his profile and work that helped bring Gary Ridgeway to justice. As an educator, and one who teaches criminal profiling I think his updated profile was exceptionally done. He is taunting LISK, taunting him to get angry to get unhinged. Its in doing so that he is most likely to get enraged and act without thinking!

Its his rage, his anger, the time where he feels he's NOT in control of his life/actions that he is most likely to act without thinking, to act without his ability to be meticulous that will ultimately lead him to making a mistake and giving law enforcement the clues they need to lead them to his backyard!

[FONT=&amp]

​

[/FONT]
The updated Long Island Serial Killer - STALK PROFILE

[snipped]
[FONT=&amp]

​

[/FONT]

Respectfully snipped due to length.

I've read this before, and I think I commented at the time on another thread that I find it a very amateurish profile.

I have considered that perhaps the spelling mistakes could be deliberate as well to appeal to the sociopath within LISK and draw him out. If it's taunting, then surely the reference to impotence has to fall under this as well. There has never been any information released either way as far as I recall to whether the victims had sex prior to death. Same with the taunt about what will happen to him in prison.

I'm of the opinion he is in a dormant stage, he may never resurface on a 'spree' due to the attention he has received, perhaps he's still getting off on the fact it's getting the media attention and continues to bubble away even 6/7 years later, but it's just an opinion.

There is a good chance if he is a sociopath and coupled with the fact internet savvy, with a perceived above average intelligence, that he at least observes the comments made about him on the internet, both here and on other sites.

 

[The Nomad]

agreed LetThemEatCake. I don't find the profile to be that great anyhow. I've seen better by fellow WSers and Reddit folks JMO.


I agree. Not sure how professional this profiler is with his language (though I know I know - he is a profiler). He neglected to bring up the 4 typologies of serial killers that LISK embodies (or 3 should I say). This is important because the typologies have certain demographics that are more likely to embody the typology such as IQ, mental health, social status, etc. LISKS motivations tick 3 of the 4 Serial Killer typologies IMHO. Power&control, mission based, and hedonistic. With visionaries (typically more at risk individuals/socially and mentally unstable) it is always amazing to me when they evade capture for a while b/c essentially most of them are insane and are considered disorganized serial killers. LISK falls under an organized power&control, mission based, hedonistic serial killer profile. I do not believe LISK is responsible for every set of remains found around Long Island/Jones/Gilgo Beach/Hempstead/etc. IMO He is no younger than 38 and no older than 55. I could go on and on, but I won't. Since LISK is an organized killer, it is a toss up as to whether or not he will be caught IMHO. He could end up the Next Jack the Ripper and forever be anonymous or he could be the next Green River Killer and make the wrong move to get caught. Pray that he fails in his organizational methodology and makes that tiny mistake that leads the FBI straight to his front door.

Here's some FBI stats on Serial killers including interesting myths:

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder

and here is info on the 4 types of serial killers. Researchers have expanded these typologies, but for now I think this is all we need to see.

http://crimespace.ning.com/profiles/blogs/investigating-four-types-of-serial-killers
[FONT=&amp]

These are the four basic types of serial killers:
[/FONT]1. Power & Control
This type of serial killer experiences complete sexual gratification from the domination and humiliation of the victim. This killer is a true sociopath and lives by his own personal set of rules and guidelines. Many of the famous serial killers we have seen in history would fall under his type of serial killer.
2. Visionary
This type of serial killer is compelled by voices or visions they experience and are considered psychotic. These voices and visions compel them to kill certain kinds of people.
3. Mission
This type of serial killer feels a “need” or duty to kill certain types of people or “class” of people such as religious or racial groups or prostitutes. This type of serial killer is not considered psychotic.
4. Hedonistic
This type of serial killer makes a strong connection between personal violence and sexual gratification. This type of killer can also be described as a “lust” or “thrill” killer. This killer receives pleasure from the act and has eroticized the experience. They generally take the time to torture or mutilate their victims.

Good post - for me it depends on whether you believe there are one or more killers. If we go with a 1 killer theory, in my opinion he display strong traits from 1 and 4. Touching on 3 for at least some of the victims, but it'd need more proof, although the GB4 were all prostitutes, there hasn't been any evidence that all the victims are. It could have just been a 'phase' in his victim profile.

I.e. it's about the thrill (4), of having power over his victims (1). He likes to taunt and dominate (1), the quickest pool of victims to satisfy the urge (4), are usually prostitutes (3). But there could be some victims he personally knew before. If you believe they are all one killer then dismemberment would also fall under (4).

Just an opinion, everyone is entitled to theirs.

I see no evidence of 2 (lack of mistakes so far - although you could argue that if you are psychotic you are less likely to make a mistake than a sociopath).

 

[maddalena1]

His assumption that LISK murdered a baby and Shannen Gilbert is wrong too.

I'm not so sure he killed peaches and her baby either. Just not feeling it. However, I sense 110 percent that lisk did kill shannan and her murder busted open the fact. That there was a serial killer

His assumption that LISK murdered a baby and Shannen Gilbert is wrong too.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[LetThemEatCake]

Good post - for me it depends on whether you believe there are one or more killers. If we go with a 1 killer theory, in my opinion he display strong traits from 1 and 4. Touching on 3 for at least some of the victims, but it'd need more proof, although the GB4 were all prostitutes, there hasn't been any evidence that all the victims are. It could have just been a 'phase' in his victim profile.

I.e. it's about the thrill (4), of having power over his victims (1). He likes to taunt and dominate (1), the quickest pool of victims to satisfy the urge (4), are usually prostitutes (3). But there could be some victims he personally knew before. If you believe they are all one killer then dismemberment would also fall under (4).

Just an opinion, everyone is entitled to theirs.

I see no evidence of 2 (lack of mistakes so far - although you could argue that if you are psychotic you are less likely to make a mistake than a sociopath).

How can this be reduced to whether you believe or not believe in a theory? We need to go by with what the evidence shows. LISK works alone.

 

[PictureSnatcher]

As LTEC said, there has been a few variations. The fact is, LE are probably holding snippets of information back. Note the use of the "stuffed into burlap sacks". Could be journalistic sensationalism, or it could mean something like dismemberment and placed into burlap sacks. If the latter it absolutely opens up many more victim possibilities. Could the journalist have taken the information out of context, like two stuffed into sacks, but not asking anything about the other two who could have been found partially covered etc etc? Would have been sloppy by the journalist, but if he wanted a 'scoop' perhaps he rushed it. We may never know until SCPD release all the information, which they won't until any trial.

There has never been any mention to how big these sacks are, so it's impossible to draw conclusions. There was a picture used by the daily mail, but it's inconclusive.

Also there was little to no mention to the state of the bodies, in tact, mutilated, anything missing (trophies) etc etc?

Kieran Crowley had a source in SCPD and there are other cases where he has released correct information that no one else ever had. I guess it's up to you what you want to believe about the burlap. If Crowley is correct and I suspect he is then I'd bet that the other two of the G4 were in garbage bags

 

[LetThemEatCake]

Kieran Crowley had a source in SCPD and there are other cases where he has released correct information that no one else ever had. I guess it's up to you what you want to believe about the burlap. If Crowley is correct and I suspect he is then I'd bet that the other two of the G4 were in garbage bags

What does Crowley say? Why garbage bags?