HODGE-PODGE - LISK-related
- Thread starter CriminalMinds
- Start date
I should've done that in the first place.Yes, me too... that's why I'm wondering why some others are so sure about some things!
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
I think the above occured two weeks between each other. Its hard to tell whats true. I also read the caller wanted Amber to meet him at the Hotel. She declined. That supposedly happened a couple of weeks before she agreed to meet him. Its seems like he was not going to take no for an answer from her. I think the Dark Minds thread should join these threads. It has alot of info and its buried.
This is so true. How many people were in Brewers house when SG was there? Who was suppose to pay her? Mr. out of work??
I dont think Mari thought Shannan was missing in the literal sense of the word. Concerns began after Diaz called.
PictureSnatcher
Former Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2016
- Messages
- 410
- Reaction score
- 34
Oh ok, well right there means something totally different than he was there.
1. Unresolved podcast isn't even close to a news source
2. At no point in the cbs article does it say Hackett was the last person to see Shannan alive. What it says is "Shannan's family members believe the police should have done more to investigate the man they believe was the last person to see Shannan alive: Dr. Peter Hackett"
You understand that means the family believe he was but at this point we still do not know. In no way am I defending Hackett at all, the man is involved. But I hate to see incorrect information posted on here, as common as it may be.
DaisyChains
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2017
- Messages
- 765
- Reaction score
- 702
Completely agreed.
anxietykiller
Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2017
- Messages
- 150
- Reaction score
- 20
Well, we know based on history that serial killers can and do take an interest in their cases, whether passively or actively. Edmund Kemper and Arthur Shawcross jump out at me right away as two killers who both fraternized with LE during the investigation into their own killings.
Its narcissism and sadism. So yes, just because you post on a board (if you are LISK) doesnt mean you are ruled out. LISK called the victims sister. Seems illogical and risky, but he certainly derived pleasure from it as did Kemper and Shawcross.
Its narcissism and sadism. So yes, just because you post on a board (if you are LISK) doesnt mean you are ruled out. LISK called the victims sister. Seems illogical and risky, but he certainly derived pleasure from it as did Kemper and Shawcross.
TheGardener
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2015
- Messages
- 940
- Reaction score
- 10,260
Whoever this guy is, he's familiar with the metropolitan area prostitute network going back as far as the early 90's. From what I've learned about prostitutes and serial killers, they (prostitutes) tend to trust repeat customers, the guys who use their services often. Serial killers don't kill every prostitute they engage, but they do develop a rep among the women.
I tend to think LISK has been doing this for a long time. He's changed his method of acquisition as the methods for hiring prostitutes has evolved. When the smoke settles and this suspect is tried and convicted, his entire life going back to his childhood should be examined closely. Whoever he is, he's a motherlode of murder.
I tend to think LISK has been doing this for a long time. He's changed his method of acquisition as the methods for hiring prostitutes has evolved. When the smoke settles and this suspect is tried and convicted, his entire life going back to his childhood should be examined closely. Whoever he is, he's a motherlode of murder.
I agree with you. I believe theres one killer. I wonder how the killer met Peaches? How did sex workers advertise in 1997? I dont think a sex worker walked the streets with a toddler.
I tried to make a new thread but it seems I am not allowed. Im only just getting serious about this case but something really bothers me.
Law Emforcement claims that because Times Square and Penn Station are so crowded that we would not be able to see anything on surveillance footage at the time the phone calls were made to the little sister of one of the victims.
I call BS. Give us footage for an hour window around the phone calls at both locations and let us loose on this and I bet we would come up with at least a few possibles.
Unfortunately Im betting that by now any footage has been deleted..... but this whole thing stinks to me. The fact is we HAVE or at least HAD surveilance footage of LISK. Its not even debateable.
Law Emforcement claims that because Times Square and Penn Station are so crowded that we would not be able to see anything on surveillance footage at the time the phone calls were made to the little sister of one of the victims.
I call BS. Give us footage for an hour window around the phone calls at both locations and let us loose on this and I bet we would come up with at least a few possibles.
Unfortunately Im betting that by now any footage has been deleted..... but this whole thing stinks to me. The fact is we HAVE or at least HAD surveilance footage of LISK. Its not even debateable.
We have Rovers crusin around Mars but LE cant get this guy.
How did Melissa get from the Bx to LI? Probably by car. Her phone pinged all the way. Why cant LE zoom in on the plate #s of the cars that went over the bridge? It could have been done. The same applies to Maureen. She was at Penn Station. Cameras everywhere. Inside and out. Did anyone bother to view them? LE blew it.
PictureSnatcher
Former Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2016
- Messages
- 410
- Reaction score
- 34
Agree
bessie
Verified Insider
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 31,771
- Reaction score
- 1,621
respectfully snipped
It's open now. For future reference, please send a private message to an administrator or moderator. Nine times out of ten, we will approve the thread unless there's a very good reason not to.
Thanks, and welcome.
Bessie
WS ADMINISTRATOR
TheGardener
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2015
- Messages
- 940
- Reaction score
- 10,260
In some of the articles I've read there's discussion of John Bittrolff having lived on Long Island for a while, then moving elsewhere, then moving back again. Does anyone know exactly when and where he's lived besides his current address? Also - I saw an interview with one of his neighbors when Bittrolff was arrested. Strange that he described him as a hunter AND animal lover. Kind of contradictory. Anyway, the neighbor said Bittrolff has a cabin "upstate" where he roosts when he's on a hunting trip. Any idea where that cabin is located?
Appreciate any information you can provide.
Also...found this great map that shows the missing from the New York Metropolitan area.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/e...&ll=40.79855312490355,-73.26227395092741&z=10
Appreciate any information you can provide.
Also...found this great map that shows the missing from the New York Metropolitan area.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/e...&ll=40.79855312490355,-73.26227395092741&z=10
I am sorry I have zero information on the questions you asked, but I do want to say that being a hunter and being an animal lover are not mutually exclusive. I myself love venison, though I have very little patience to hunt (I have, but only on few occassions). I have no issue taking a deer. I do not want it to suffer, of course, so well-placed, deadly shot is always ideal as most hunters will agree. I fish regularly. Very often. And I often eat what I catch, which of course necessitates killing it. There again, I try and do it quickly. I have no desire for any animal to suffer.
HOWEVER, there is a huge difference in my mind, and in many people's minds, when it comes to game and pets. A deer is game. A dog is a pet. A dog is a family member. Sometimes even a hunting companion. Heck, we have a family of raccoons that frequents my yard and my deck. I will not harm them. Even though sometimes they knock over my trash cans and make a mess, I would never, ever harm them as I have grown fond of them. (My kids make messes too. ).
These guys that torture animals are scum and I have always wished that long term prison sentences for animal cruelty were standard. But hunting for food is an entirely different matter. Most hunters do not wish to see their prey suffer.
HOWEVER, there is a huge difference in my mind, and in many people's minds, when it comes to game and pets. A deer is game. A dog is a pet. A dog is a family member. Sometimes even a hunting companion. Heck, we have a family of raccoons that frequents my yard and my deck. I will not harm them. Even though sometimes they knock over my trash cans and make a mess, I would never, ever harm them as I have grown fond of them. (My kids make messes too. ).
These guys that torture animals are scum and I have always wished that long term prison sentences for animal cruelty were standard. But hunting for food is an entirely different matter. Most hunters do not wish to see their prey suffer.
coffeeandacig
...
Nope, usually it's an immediate case of throwing up. Then a private homage to the animal for giving it's life so you can eat it. Thrill killers are far and few between in the world of hunting. Anyone will be able to spot them a mile off, and are most likely not to be welcome in the hunting community.
Again, animals are different, specifically game animals. There are hunters who have become desensitized to killing and celebrate their success. I have to say, I resent your statement a little. Most of us believe that some animals are intended for food. Chicken, fish, turkey, deer, cattle, pheasant, all come to mind. I myself will not eat pork because I find pigs to be too intelligent and do not consider them food.
These same hunters, who may get a rush and even post photos of themselves with bloodied carcasses, will come home to their families, their dogs, their cats, wives, children, etc whom they love dearly. Many will give away meat that they cannot use. They would never dream of preying upon a human being. And I assure you, as has already been stated in this thread, that most hunters make every effort to ensure that their quarry does not suffer.