It depends. If they felt humiliated and/or excluded from the bunch of beautiful, succesfull easy-going girls, they may were hurt deeper than we can think. And a boyfriend/sibling/friend decided to help them to feel better and punish the girls.
That is interesting possibility. It would explain why some but not all girls were targetted as well as clarify perpetrator's good knowledge of house layout anf tenants habits. The killer(s) might haven't been in the house before and were not friends with the any of the victims, someone told them what the girls are like, their habits, and drew layouts of the property and layout of specifics of surrounding areas for them. They may have told them that the patio door is often left open.
But it would be difficult to link the perpetrator to the property, as they never been there before.
Perhaps, that is what baffles the investigators the most?
Their murders don’t track with a petty grievance, IMO.
The way in which they were all killed with a knife suggests a particular type of offender and a particular type of motive.
If the above were true (while anything is possible), it would be more likely than not a result of maybe something less personal, like a gun or burning the house down. I think LE would maybe have a POI if it was someone closer to them and coupled with the fact that it’s been nearly three weeks and police work from the inner circle out — the probability of a grievance killing is less likely because they’re stating there is no POI’s at all.
IMO, the thought calculation, preparation, sheer constitution and physical strength it actually takes to brutally murder someone with a knife,<modsnip>, all while potentially fighting off the victim from defending themselves and keeping them quiet — Not once, but four different times is a different level of brutality.
The manner in which the victims were killed tells investigators a lot about the perpetrator. Since the beginning, this case has reminded me most of Danny Rollings, “The Gainesville Slayer”
In a previous thread, I listed the differences and similarities based off what we know. And I still think as time goes on, this may be a “true” victim crime where the victims possibly didn’t know, and had no real connections to the perpetrator, making it an extremely difficult case to solve, generally speaking.
Also, just because there wasn’t SA present doesn’t mean a few things (I previously discussed in an earlier thread):
1. That there still was a sexual component and it was one of the main drivers for the murders.
2. The perpetrator may have been caught off guard and wasn’t able to finish his fantasy; and or, he physically wasn’t capable of SA.
3. Piquerism may be involved. Basically it’s a type of paraphillia— a sexual disorder that involves knives and the knife is used as a stand in a phallic way.
4. These murders were way more brutal and personal than they had to be: there are many different ways to kill people and besides strangling, the perpetrator chose the most personal.
There are subtype personalities to serial killers and IMO, he’s mostly like a thrill-killer: these are the same types of killers as Rollings, Ramirez, and Israel Keyes.
If this is the case, only he knows why he chose them that night. The victims could just represent a stand in and he took his aggression out on them (as Rollings did). Or, they were seen somewhere by him and for whatever reason, he honed in on them and carried out his fantasy. We don’t know.
It could be a lot of things, but no one really has enough information to have a definitive answer and the longer it goes and people closest to them get ruled out, the circle gets wider and the murderer and his motive get more difficult to uncover. *This is all also conjecture on my part.
Access Google Sites with a personal Google account or Google Workspace account (for business use).
sites.google.com
en.wikipedia.org