Hi BlackDragon
The press report said the kimono was stolen from a clothesline so I guess the kimono's owner was a victim but we haven't heard yet if the garment's owner was also the victim of an assault. It doesn't seem as if she was, from what I've read, anyway.
I assume the police have tracked down to whom the kimono belonged.
How the BE used the garment depends on when the garment was stolen and whether Huntingdale was a premeditated or spur-of-the-moment attack.
If the kimono was stolen from the clothesline that same night then I'd say he was indulging in a women's underwear/nightwear/clothes fetish and he may not have planned to use it in an attack. It would be hard to get a living person in their own home to put on a garment and as he was quite young and probably just beginning his violent activities, my thought is he was just getting his jollies stealing clothes and possibly looking into windows - maybe he even masturbated and wiped himself with the kimono and thought he'd better take it along with him, rather than leave the evidence of his sexual deviance for someone to find. I think at his young age he would have felt some shame about his nocturnal activities.
If Huntingdale was premeditated and he wanted the victim to wear the kimono then I think BE would have had to have stolen the kimono sometime earlier. Still, I think an inexperienced attacker, as he still seemed to be, would not be so ambitious as to make a victim wear a garment.
Interesting thoughts...
