Long Island and Jack the Ripper

I think that the LISK case in so many ways parallels the Jack the Ripper case.  Not necessarily in specifics of the crimes themselves nor the offender(s), but in why it was not solved.  I think that, just as in the Ripper case, certain things are cluttering up the clearness of vision of how simple things really are.  For example, in the Ripper case many have just been dazzled by the contradictory levels of disorganized and organized behaviors of the offenses.  I don’t see the contradiction.  Why? Because to me its simple really, there is more involved than what is taken into consideration but the base crimes are less complicated.     Simply put, I see the Ripper’s crimes as 1) Polly Ann Nichols, 2) Annie Chapman 3) Liz Stride, and 4.) Catherine Eddowes.  Liz Stride I am unsure of but leaning towards a yes it was related but he did not get to finish what he started.  There may have been more, but I do not think that Mary Kelly was a Ripper victim.  Now, how did I come to this conclusion? A.  Victimology, B. Offense behaviors, C. Crime scene analysis, D. Offender typology.  Now, why do I not see the contradiction in disorganized and organized behaviors? Answer:  Because I think the two behaviors were not made by the same individuals.  The level of disorganization in the crimes against Polly Nichols, Annie Chapman, and Catherine Eddowes, (Liz Stride is not as profound disorganization as the others) does not fit with an offender who takes the time to carefully extract organs.  Conclusion:  Taking into consideration the environment and the sociology of this place at this time and point in history, I think that the organ extractions were not done by the Ripper, but someone else, either at the morgue or before then sometime while the body was not in official custody, in order to sell them.  If one studies the history of the time, one can easily see this is not so far-fetched an idea as it sounds.  Why do I not consider Mary Kelly a Ripper victim?  A.  Victimology, B. Offense behaviors, C. Crime scene analysis, D. Offender typology.  This was obviously a very personal killing, not like the previous ones.  Even Catherine Eddowes’ murder pales in comparison to the “intimacy” involved in the offenses against Mary Kelly.  This person did not want to just kill her, they wanted to obliterate her entire existence.  This comes from a lot of time stewing in resentment and basking in fantasies of destruction, in other words:  There was a long history between Mary Kelly and her killer, and levels of organization that (when removing the whole organ removal concept as being non-related to the Ripper) was just not found with the Ripper victims.  Conclusion:  These were not committed by the same individual.

How does this relate to the LISK? Well, it seems to me that in ways the LISK has been overcomplicated and yet the simplest facts have been overlooked—Just as in the Ripper Case.  Just as in the Ripper case, there have been umpteen conspiracy theories, nefarious claims, and suspected persons of involvement ranging from politicians to doctors to police and everything in between.  Just as in the Ripper case, there have been whispers of groups of rich deviants and devil worshippers, while what seems to me are obvious clues are overlooked.  As in the Ripper case with the 3 (or 4) murders previous not containing consistent behavioral aspects and being entirely set apart from what occurred with Mary Kelly—It is also apparent to me in the LISK case that A.  the older dismemberment murders are not related to the four girls found at Gilgo, B. The levels of organization and “skill” if you will of the LISK are not consistent when the phonecalls are taken into consideration, hence, I believe that either 1. The phone calls were not made by the killer or 2.  The phone calls were made by the killer as a deliberate tool to mislead.  In the Ripper case an additional note that separates the other murders from that of Mary Kelly is the motive and general ambience of the crime.  Polly Nichols, Annie Chapman, (Liz Stride?), and Catherine Eddowes’ deaths showed anger and detachment, with the motive apparently being an expression of anger.  Mary Kelly’s murder is much more intimate, the motive is not just an expression of anger, it is apparent in Mary Kelly’s death that the offender wanted to obliterate her entire existence.  It could be said, then, that the motive was more akin to an askew love than to anger.  In looking at the four girls at Gilgo, there is no apparent motive.  This within itself is a flag.  With sadists, there are obvious cues and clues, same with the “normal” serial killer.  There is none of that with the girls at Gilgo.  Hence:  I think it has been overcomplicated.  I do not think these girls were killed by a serial killer, but by someone who wanted them dead.  There is a BIG difference.  Serial killers do not want dead victims.  Death is just a side effect of getting what they want and need.   It is my opinion that someone wanted these four girls found at Gilgo dead and, so, made them dead.  I really think it is that simple.  I don’t know why, but I do feel that this is a very logical conclusion.


Long Island dismemberment older murders

These murders could be one offender, or they could be separate offenders of the ilk of one of the many serial offenders in this area over the years who favored dismemberment.  I am of the opinion that these bodies were not all placed where they were found but ended up clustered near each other through erosion and flooding over the years.  Any or all of these could be previously identified offender victims that are not known about.  In an interview for A and E Biography, Joel Rifkin was asked if there were more victims of his that no one knew about, if there were more bodies–and Joel Rifkin said:  “There are always more bodies.”

I think that this is a very profound statement and probably the most honest one that Mr. Rifkin ever spoke.  I do not believe that serial killers will ever tell anyone all of their victims and there were so many from the NY area who dismembered as part of their ritual that I honestly wonder if these will ever be solved.  

Long Island Serial Killer

My thoughts on the LISK are not in line with common opinions.  Firstly, many people (official and non-official) are coming from the position that all the bodies found on Long Island are from the work of one offender.  I am of the opinion that this is not so.  I am convinced that there are at least two offenders that comprise all those bodies, maybe more.   The older dismemberments I feel are one offender, the four girls at Gilgo I feel are one offender, and the Asian male and the child I just am not sure about.  I do not think that Shannan Gilbert was purposefully killed by anyone, serial killer or no.  I have seen nothing in any of the facts related to Shannan’s disappearance and tragic death that points to anything other than an accidental death most probably related to stimulant overdose.  I also do not think that the LISK (as I have defined him) is the same offender who killed the prostitutes from Atlantic City area found in Egg Harbor Township.

What I do believe about the LISK is the following:

He is not a serial killer per se, but an assassin type, meaning:  It is my belief that the LISK wanted these girls dead and he made him them dead.  I do not even pretend to know why.  Serial killers do not want their victims dead.  Though this is a common false belief.  Serial killers do not want their victims dead, death is just a side effect of getting what they do want.

I think that the LISK is very similar to someone like Israel Keyes, who did not consider himself a serial killer.

I think that the LISK is either a pilot or flies a lot, is former military or has had paramilitary training, and follows a strict diet and exercise regimen most of the time.  Also, even though guns were not used in these deaths, I would assume this offender would probably have a love of firearms and probably owns several that he has customized to his liking.

I think that in concerning the calls made to one of the victims’ sister, either a) the calls were not made by the killer, or b) the calls were purposefully done in a focused act of staging to mislead officials.

It is my opinion that there just are way too many inconsistencies for this to be a “simple” serial killer.