Craigslist Killer...shady?Follow

I'm just thinking out loud. Some of the so called "evidence" seems a little odd in what I've read for reports. Initially, of course, there's the capture of this 23 y/o med student. From what I read, there's only one death associated to this. He's being charged for 1 death and 1 robbery from another similar incident.

So now, I read this report today further claiming this guy is a twisted individual that "kept panties as memento's of his victims". Clicky

So two victims, and this guy has a mound of panties hidden, along with a gun & ammo, in his apartment. Also, seems aside from security images from video's that show a "similarity" in appearance (because, how many blonde attractive college guys are out there...?) the primary focus for connecting him to the murder is an email address that was setup about "one day before" the contact and subsiquent murder.

So, not only is a 23 y/o med student with a Blackberry is:

Source


And...hides this monumental stash of victims panties from two victims, of which there was no mention of any/either missing panties, as well as managing to hide such a "collection" from his fiance along with the weapon and ammo in his own apartment.

Mistaken identity or is everyone in this guys life just as oblivious as the media is painting it?

I'm confused...you mean some don't do this?

Seriously though, it seems a little odd that someone with such an apparent good education would flub on some seriously idiotic mistakes such as keeping things like that in their own apartment, as well as using some of their own personal information setting up their secret killer email account. Who knows, though...maybe he is that big of an idiot? I'm interested to see what other evidence spawns in the coming days.

He might have unconsciously made some mistakes because of his feeling about what he is doing. Who knows? Also, there are plenty of idiots with good educations.

True, education doesn't dictate common sense. The internet/email thing kills me, though. I just envision the obvious facepalm from the person that realizes that maybe they shouldn't have used their last name or current email address when registering their super secret murder email.

If this pans out, it may very well be a likely candidate for a darwin award!

The "personal information" may mean he used his home computer to make the email account, not his real name. I haven't read the articles, though.

I'm betting he didn't think he'd ever actually shoot anyone. Robbery was his thing, primarily, though keeping sexual souvenirs is strange in that case. But my point is, consciously at least he didn't see the need to be particularly cautious since in his mind he was just ripping off whores, no big deal.

You know, being a sociopath is harder than it looks and this guy might not be one, which is why he ****** up so much. Some forensic psychiatrist will probably write about that later.

Edited, Apr 22nd 2009 3:22pm by Annabella

Couldn't the panties just be you know, his?

I mean, people get more confounded by empathy than they'd like to admit, especially people in the prison system. I've met plenty of kids and adults, including ones that were labeled by some people as sociopaths and they are alot more @#%^ed up by their actions in strange ways than anyone likes to admit. Most forensic evaluators get excited if they think they have a sociopath in their midst. Most of the time, and experienced forensic evaluators in the field will concur, that a true sociopath is very rare and evaluators who talk about them alot are usually hopeless narcissists who let their ego get in the way of doing good work.

But someone can have empathy and still do horrific things. The capacity to do this isn't usually something done by people without a superego, even though I think we wished they were so we could see it as "inhuman" and not as something that anyone could potentially do.

I've evaluated people who've killed other people. Really, they make basic mistakes and usually it's because of their own feelings of guilt.

Edited, Apr 22nd 2009 3:40pm by Annabella

Yeah, a lot of people are comforted by that idea, oddly.

We'll get you that superegoectomy someday.

As a couple of people have pointed out, it's unlikely that his objective was to kill anyone. He'd robbed at least one other woman, and presumably more than that. He killed her because she attempted to fight him. He didn't put much effort into covering his tracks presumably because he correctly knew that someone prostituting themselves on Craig's List would be unlikely to report being robbed. In most cases, she'd be admitting to a crime (set of crimes actually) more serious than what she'd been a victim of. And if a prostitute reports a robbery, it's not like the police go into full steam ahead mode to catch the guy, and it's not like public outrage makes it a high priority either...

So he didn't have much need to cover his tracks. He was counting on some sad but true facts to protect him.

Huh?

Mistakes in the posts here, mistakes by those investigating the case, mistakes in what the media has been reporting, or mistakes in the way the alleged criminal carried out is devious deeds?

Why do people presume so deeply? People make simple mistakes all the time. Why is that so hard to believe?