1114 users online (229 members and 885 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 33
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,389

    Killer Types

    There are serial killers - people who kill for pleasure. Then there are crimes of passion - the husband who catches his wife in flagrante delicto with the milkman.

    We really have no idea what kind of killing the Ramsey murder fits into.

    Many people theorise that a family member did it and that it was covered up. Others believe an intruder did it - but for what reason? Very few child murders happen as a result of a stranger breaking into the home. Fewer still occur on Christmas Day - when people are at home, maybe entertaining friends.

    Now if JonBenet were killed by a serial killer, perhaps the pleasure factor was so strong that it overruled any natural fear of being caught. However, does it seem likely that such a fearless and perverted killer would resist the urge to do it again .... and again .....? That's 8 years.

    So if this was a crime of passion - what "passion" would be strong enough for someone to kill a defenceless child? What hatred could overcome the natural urge to protect a little child from harm and to carry out a crime like this in cold blood?
    This is only my opinion

    Let the focus be on Madeleine




    Together we can make a difference





    Alert Viewer in Scotland

    Member of Websleuths since April 2000

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,061

    Hmmm

    Heavy question Jayelles! How about a cover up. How about a child that was going to tell ?something? that would destroy a family?

    Hard to imagine what the reason was for JonBenets murder, an accident OR?



    .
    Opinions expressed by me, are mine, based on life experience, and known facts of any given case.





    """I am just a pixel in the universal plan."""

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oriental, North Carolina
    Posts
    939
    I dunno, but I believe anyone who'd walk into a foreign house, find a child they might or might not be addicted to, murder her, stage her body in the basement, write a ransom note, and get away without ANY detection is HOUDINI. Has to be. Most people interested in messing with a child are sick, on drugs most of the time, and debilitated. If a foreign faction were involved, these folks must be damned stupid. No planning, lots of screw-ups, bad cover-up. Nah. That's not very plausible. Sick people (ie. child molesters) are often not just sick in the mind, they're often unable to hold down a job, have familial relationships, and are on drugs to mostly nullify their urges. C'mon, folks. People like that aren't going to be very successful in entering a house like this, doing what they want, and escaping without leaving evidence of consequence. Foreign factions would most surely plan much better and make sure to retrieve the object of their desired intention - money. Please help me. I'm mostly just venting, but I'd love some direction on this. I need good arguments.
    Simplicity...patience...compassion

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    753
    I think one of the difficulties in understanding this case is thinking in terms of killing. I think Patsy stopped JonBenet's life for sure, but the goal of her actions was not killing. Patsy used JonBenet as an object in her private fantasy life. Patsy did things to the object in order to participate with the fantasy and the object died in the process. The ending of the girl's life was just one event in a long process known as a progressive psychosis. In such a psychosis the sufferer can't tell the diference between themselves and the object. Everything Patsy did to the object, she was doing to herself, in her mind by proxy. Patsy had to separate the soul of the object from the body, so the soul could go to heaven. The object had to die, but that was ancillary to the main goal: JonBenet is in a heaven with a God.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    14,797
    Quote Originally Posted by BrotherMoon
    I think one of the difficulties in understanding this case is thinking in terms of killing. I think Patsy stopped JonBenet's life for sure, but the goal of her actions was not killing. Patsy used JonBenet as an object in her private fantasy life. Patsy did things to the object in order to participate with the fantasy and the object died in the process. The ending of the girl's life was just one event in a long process known as a progressive psychosis. In such a psychosis the sufferer can't tell the diference between themselves and the object. Everything Patsy did to the object, she was doing to herself, in her mind by proxy. Patsy had to separate the soul of the object from the body, so the soul could go to heaven. The object had to die, but that was ancillary to the main goal: JonBenet is in a heaven with a God.
    Please excuse my lack of understanding, but could this be similar to Andrea Yates and Deanna Laney? Laney was convinced she was doing God's work according to her taped testimony. And she proceeded to stone two of her children to death....the third lived, a baby, but with serious repercussions.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    753
    Yes and no. The "mechanics" of the psychosis is similar, but the content of the psychosis is different for each person.

    And in each case, "God" is both an objective archetypal factor and a personal factor in the psyche of the killer. Thus the killer has moral responsibility but will not recognize it as the killer cannot tell the difference between itself and the object. The only way out of the psychosis is to reach a level of rationality and morality to admit to oneself and the world that they were wrong about knowing God intimately and that they sacrificed someone's life to avoid becoming self sacrificing.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,061

    Hmmm

    Quote Originally Posted by BrotherMoon
    Yes and no. The "mechanics" of the psychosis is similar, but the content of the psychosis is different for each person.

    And in each case, "God" is both an objective archetypal factor and a personal factor in the psyche of the killer. Thus the killer has moral responsibility but will not recognize it as the killer cannot tell the difference between itself and the object. The only way out of the psychosis is to reach a level of rationality and morality to admit to oneself and the world that they were wrong about knowing God intimately and that they sacrificed someone's life to avoid becoming self sacrificing.


    ---------------->>>>Brother Moon, your explanations of the intricacies of the 'sick' human mind, as it pertains to this particular case, are interesting to say the least.

    If you would be so kind as to tell us your intellectual area of study, the type of degree you may hold in this science? I am not asking for personal information here, but just the route you have taken in study to achieve this degree of understanding.

    Then IF IF you are familiar with 'any' murder cases where this type of mental problem existed with the killer and what 'sentence' the killer received. Did they end up in a place like "One Flew Over The Coo Coo's Nest"?

    Edited to add: Have you ever found yourself in a courtroom testifying to this type of behavior, and what might the circumstance have been?

    Thanks.
    Camper
    Opinions expressed by me, are mine, based on life experience, and known facts of any given case.





    """I am just a pixel in the universal plan."""

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,575
    OMG Jayelles I was just thinking about the very same things yesterday. Why would someone break into a house with a family home to kill a 6yr.old child? A pedophile would maybe pull a Westerfield and take the child with him so he could satisfy himself. Who would take the time to make a garrote? Why wouldn't he just strangle her with his bare hands? I would think if someone really wanted to kidnap her for randsom they would have done so while she was in the yard playing or some other time, not from her bed with her family home.This just makes no sense to me.

    I think Patsy was getting JB ready for bed and wanted her to go potty first and she resisted Patsy. Patsy then might have pushed her into the bathroom and JB hit her head on one of the fixtures, like the tub or toliet. JB was in bad shape due to the crack in her skull and if she had lived she would tell what happened and no way Patsy wanted that so she staged the whole thing.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    133
    BrotherMoon -

    Wow. That is pretty insightful.

    I want to make sure that I understand what you have said...

    "Thus the killer has moral responsibility but will not recognize it as the killer cannot tell the difference between itself and the object."

    Are you saying that Patsy and these other women who killed their children cannot tell the difference between themselves and their children? So they think that God wants them to kill themselves or a part of themselves so they kill their children which they see as being part of themselves?

    "The only way out of the psychosis is to reach a level of rationality and morality to admit to oneself and the world that they were wrong about knowing God intimately and that they sacrificed someone's life to avoid becoming self sacrificing."
    So these women don't really think that they have done anything wrong. The only way that they would realize that they did something wrong would be if they also realized that they sacrificed another person's life and not their own?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    1,832
    The meat and potatoes seems to be the killer was nuts, right Brother Moon?
    Why does it have to be Patsy? She can't quite live down that monologue in your eyes? Ya' know what, I think you are giving her far too much credit, IMO she isn't that "deep". She didn't have any problem with her reality, her reality was queen on her throne with the ability to call most shots except of course that nasty health turn.
    You , likely, are right, in your portrayal of the perp, if it was someone like Fleet (who I believe took quite a manic turn that Christmas), or if someone like Santa who just seemed "gone". (perhaps he had a little event during his surgery that took a chunk of reality with it?)
    Chances are, however, it was some moronic meth head in the neighborhood who thought he could pull off a kidnapping, maybe with some assist.

    I feel a little bad about one thing here, 'cause I "kinda" know what your response would be if you weren't under a little restraining order, so don't worry, I can feel the real feedback:-)


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by sissi
    Chances are, however, it was some moronic meth head in the neighborhood who thought he could pull off a kidnapping, maybe with some assist.
    Ok, then I have some more questions ...

    A moronic meth head who is able to pull off a murder without a trace and uses words like "Southern Gentleman" and "attaché?" I have never heard of such a thing.

    Also, maybe I am wrong but I don't think that those other crazy women who killed their children did anything to try to cover up their crimes - at least not the one who drowned her kids in the bathtub or the one that cut off her baby's arms. IMO they thought that they were acting in accord with a sign from God and so they didn't think that they had done anything bad that they needed to cover up.
    If Patsy truely is insane and truely thought that killing JonBenet was what God wanted her to do then why would she cover it up?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by Camper
    ---------------->>>>Brother Moon, your explanations of the intricacies of the 'sick' human mind, as it pertains to this particular case, are interesting to say the least.

    If you would be so kind as to tell us your intellectual area of study, the type of degree you may hold in this science? I am not asking for personal information here, but just the route you have taken in study to achieve this degree of understanding.

    Then IF IF you are familiar with 'any' murder cases where this type of mental problem existed with the killer and what 'sentence' the killer received. Did they end up in a place like "One Flew Over The Coo Coo's Nest"?

    Edited to add: Have you ever found yourself in a courtroom testifying to this type of behavior, and what might the circumstance have been?

    Thanks.
    Camper
    I have a degree in chemistry, and was a couple of courses short of having a double in physics. My hobby is reading about art history/interpretation, particularly the interpretation of symbols in the art associated with religion, and specifically things having to do with divine inspiration. Depth psychologists speak of that experience in terms of psychosis. I research western esoterica and the role geometry plays in the development of myth. Geometric figures are experienced in dreams, lowered states of consciousness, the creative process and psychosis. I have experienced psychosis and the spontaneous production of mandala images in dreams and visions as a compensation for my lack of ego/persona development, This occured as the result of reading and unguided thought experiments. I think Patsy Ramsey also found her way to psychosis as the result of her attachment to literature.

    I wouldn't use the word sick, what happened to Patsy and to me is a part of human behavior that we are distant from but other cultures in other times sought these experiences out. Read Carlos Castaneda, read about Chaco Canyon, read about the development of Methodism in the U.S.

    Read the biography of Mark David Chapman, Strawberry Fields (I think).

    No, I have never testified. I'm not an expert, I have no degrees in this area, no professional experience. I'm just a reader. Some things are learned outside of school. One thing I learned is we are under the influence of two philosophies; scientific materialism and Judeo/Christianity, that actively have us lop off huge parts of ourselves during our development.
    Last edited by BrotherMoon; 01-21-2005 at 05:12 AM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by princessmer81
    BrotherMoon -

    Wow. That is pretty insightful.

    I want to make sure that I understand what you have said...

    "Thus the killer has moral responsibility but will not recognize it as the killer cannot tell the difference between itself and the object."

    Are you saying that Patsy and these other women who killed their children cannot tell the difference between themselves and their children? So they think that God wants them to kill themselves or a part of themselves so they kill their children which they see as being part of themselves?

    "The only way out of the psychosis is to reach a level of rationality and morality to admit to oneself and the world that they were wrong about knowing God intimately and that they sacrificed someone's life to avoid becoming self sacrificing."
    So these women don't really think that they have done anything wrong. The only way that they would realize that they did something wrong would be if they also realized that they sacrificed another person's life and not their own?
    God, as supernatural being, is a projection of the inner archetype. A psychotic lacks objectivity and thus blends identity with the inner archetype, they become a God in part. The liturgy that may exist with their particular Myth system is therfore "theirs", and they can do what they want with it as justification and validation for what is really self serving actions. Thus Patsy can write a ransom note based on The Psalms and The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie without actually learning the lesson those stories impart. It's the same reasoning going on in fundamental Islam.

    The result of a person's efforts to get out of the psychosis is first alienation and isolation: loneliness. That must happen before the person can become self reflective and analytical. Most people would rather remain in the fantasy or even kill other humans to avoid the loneliness.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,061

    Wow

    Thank you BrotherMoon for enlightening us all on where you are coming from.

    Princessmir81, what a stupendous question you pose to BrotherMoon - as follows"If Patsy truely is insane and truely thought that killing JonBenet was what God wanted her to do then why would she cover it up?

    ---->>>We have so many choices on the 'who done it' part of this crime.

    1. Patsy or any of the other women who did actually murder their children, it would seem to me were overtaxed and overburdened with responsibility and care, hence found themselves at the end of their own proverbial 'rope'. Look at Susan Smith, she found herself at the end of her emotional 'rope'. Could not deal with it all.

    My theory does not include Patsy doing murder purposefully under her end of the rope scenario.

    I do think she found herself at the end of 'a' rope, but someone handed it to her after the fact, hence, the note.

    I do think BlueCrab wherever he has gone, is barking up the correct tree.

    There is more to the murder of JonBenet than any of us have guessed at so far, or that we have any exact proof of so far.

    When a pet in the household goes poo poo in the house, it is typically the mom who cleans it all up and makes things tidy again. This is from my book of 'mom'.



    .
    Opinions expressed by me, are mine, based on life experience, and known facts of any given case.





    """I am just a pixel in the universal plan."""

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    1,832
    [QUOTE=princessmer81]Ok, then I have some more questions ...

    A moronic meth head who is able to pull off a murder without a trace and uses words like "Southern Gentleman" and "attaché?" I have never heard of such a thing.



    A meth user can stay awake for several days at a time, and is often content to perform repetitive tasks -- even having the patience to stitch together shredded documents.

    Meth “is energizing. It keeps you alert and focused," Gorman says. Unlike heroin, which generally induces sleep, or crack cocaine, which can lead to impetuous violence, meth is far better-suited to the tasks of identity thieves, he says.

    ‘If you bring a gun in a bank, you can face life in prison. Or you can write a series of bad checks and score 10 times that amount and get parole.’


    — Steve Williams
    Eugene, Ore., police detective

    “It’s unique psychopharmacological properties would assist identity theft. The whole detail-oriented aspect of it, the obsessive-compulsive aspect of it.”

    end quote from MSNBC..

    Where ,I realize the above quoted material is describing identity theft, it clearly point out the mind-set of a meth head is one of detail and obsessiveness.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast