Serial Killer at large in Manchester?

[rickmcfc]

Can I ask (if anyone knows) how many bodies have turned up and over what space of time/when it started ? Obviously there will be those that could be purely accidental but when did it start to feel like there were some that couldn't be just coincidence ?

Its about 13.

 

[Hamann Pineapple]

Can I ask (if anyone knows) how many bodies have turned up and over what space of time/when it started ? Obviously there will be those that could be purely accidental but when did it start to feel like there were some that couldn't be just coincidence ?

Have you met our police ? They have targets to meet you know. They can't go round creating more work.

 

[acquiesce]

Ill be honest, when i first saw this thread i just thought the conspiracy nutters were out on one again. It would all wind up being blamed on aliens or the lizard queen liz.

Now i read more and more into this, the more credence (bad moon rising and that) i give it.
There are more and more similarities with every body found, starting with the death itself. No physical signs of attack and drowned in small bodies of water. The victims are all very similar and thetime they were last seen is always similar.

Im no inspector clouseau, but this is certainly something that looks a little more than just the cut and paste " fell in the canal pissed" explanation.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=r...nt=safari&gws_rd=cr&ei=hrQAUpyfCNLB0gXJvoDYBA

Serial killers can be un-noticed for decades, with no fixed MO, very dangerous indeed. His book is a very good, if a little grim, read. And theres a movie coming out soon.
Richard Kuklinski - the ice man. - no remorse, no specific target, just liked to hunt and kill people.

He was a mafia hitman, wasn't he? Did it for the money.

Originally yes. Then he just started doing it for fun and working outside of the mafia circle. There are some youtube interviews he did for HBO out there. Over two hours of stuff if so inclined

 

[bobmcfc]

Can I ask (if anyone knows) how many bodies have turned up and over what space of time/when it started ? Obviously there will be those that could be purely accidental but when did it start to feel like there were some that couldn't be just coincidence ?

Its about 13.

Thanks. And there has been charges brought over 1 death ?

 

[acquiesce]

Just did some quick figuring using WHO statistics for drowning deaths. Based on their figures for developed/industrial countries, roughly .001% of the population will die yearly from drowning deaths. These are all drownings for all age groups, accidental, suicide, murder etc. That equates to 27 people roughly in the Greater Manchester area per year. Of that .001%, the WHO figures 14% of that is related to alcohol. So yearly 4 people will die in the greater Manchester area due to alcohol related drowning, across all age groups male and female.

*these were interpolated from percentages in the United States, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia. They did say, drowning deaths are higher in rural settings, so read into that what you will.

 

[LongLang]

Ill be honest, when i first saw this thread i just thought the conspiracy nutters were out on one again. It would all wind up being blamed on aliens or the lizard queen liz.

Now i read more and more into this, the more credence (bad moon rising and that) i give it.
There are more and more similarities with every body found, starting with the death itself. No physical signs of attack and drowned in small bodies of water. The victims are all very similar and thetime they were last seen is always similar.

Im no inspector clouseau, but this is certainly something that looks a little more than just the cut and paste " fell in the canal pissed" explanation.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=r...nt=safari&gws_rd=cr&ei=hrQAUpyfCNLB0gXJvoDYBA

Serial killers can be un-noticed for decades, with no fixed MO, very dangerous indeed. His book is a very good, if a little grim, read. And theres a movie coming out soon.
Richard Kuklinski - the ice man. - no remorse, no specific target, just liked to hunt and kill people.

He was a mafia hitman, wasn't he? Did it for the money.

Originally yes. Then he just started doing it for fun and working outside of the mafia circle. There are some youtube interviews he did for HBO out there. Over two hours of stuff if so inclined

Sort of.
He ended up being a hitman, but in the beginning when he was younger he just went "hunting" round bars.
It all started by him killing a bully if i remember correctly, and he liked the feeling of power it gave him.
He used to kill people in side streets, in road traffic arguments, all over the place. But with no fixed MO there was no link between cases. DNA wasnt really prvelant at the time so it just looked like random occurances.
He got so into it, he turned it into a science, finding more ways to kill people without being detected.
Cyanide mist in a spray bottle, just enough poison to kill but not enough to show in autopsy at the time.
He tied people to the ground in rat infested caves and let the rats eat them alive.
He dissolved bodies in acid.
A proper jack of all murders.

He ended up getting involved with the mafia/organised crime later in life when he was making a living selling stolen porn and met people throught that.
Really interesting book
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?ie=UTF8&...vptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=t&ref=pd_sl_8xz4b6zqfp_b

 

[jma]

How long would an anesthetic last in the system? Jab of that, push them in and thats that. Would that show on an autopsy.

I cant believe so many people think its just a case of being drunk and falling in a canal. Who does that? Id guess most people on here have been drunk before and not fallen in a canal, river, road etc.

Would all of the men found had a reason to be next to a canal? Ie a route home?

If you are taking issue with people glibly accepting that people have fallen into canals and drowned without, in your opinion, enough evidence to back it up, where do you stand on people glibly encouraging bizarre conspiracy theories with far, far, far less evidence (or specialist knowledge) to back that up?

It's a bit rich to "not being able to believe" people believing the conclusions of the crime and medical professionals who have studied the cases, yet then go on to promote daft theories like a mad anesthetist going on a killing spree with his undetectable syringe, based on no knowledge whatsoever.

 

[tidyman]

Just did some quick figuring using WHO statistics for drowning deaths. Based on their figures for developed/industrial countries, roughly .001% of the population will die yearly from drowning deaths. These are all drownings for all age groups, accidental, suicide, murder etc. That equates to 27 people roughly in the Greater Manchester area per year. Of that .001%, the WHO figures 14% of that is related to alcohol. So yearly 4 people will die in the greater Manchester area due to alcohol related drowning, across all age groups male and female.

*these were interpolated from percentages in the United States, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia. They did say, drowning deaths are higher in rural settings, so read into that what you will.

Yeah but your clever serial killer will limit his killings so that the numbers don't rise significantly from your normal non serial killer eras.

I think he would have got away with it to if it wasn't for those pesky kids on Bluemoon.

He must be pretty good though. He's still 100% if the lack of reported unsuccessful attempts is anything to go by.

 

[johnmc]

If you are taking issue with people glibly accepting that people have fallen into canals and drowned without, in your opinion, enough evidence to back it up, where do you stand on people glibly encouraging bizarre conspiracy theories with far, far, far less evidence (or specialist knowledge) to back that up?

It's a bit rich to "not being able to believe" people believing the conclusions of the crime and medical professionals who have studied the cases, yet then go on to promote daft theories like a mad anesthetist going on a killing spree with his undetectable syringe, based on no knowledge whatsoever.

Yes fair point. But do you think the police arent considering or havent thought about this but wouldnt want it to go public? And these crime and medical professionals - have any of them said the victims have been drunk and drowned?? No they have all said "unexplained" - these experts cant explain it so they dont know themselves.

The anesthetic question was not speculating that someone was doing that, just a question how long it would stay in the system as I have no knowledge.

 

[jma]

If you are taking issue with people glibly accepting that people have fallen into canals and drowned without, in your opinion, enough evidence to back it up, where do you stand on people glibly encouraging bizarre conspiracy theories with far, far, far less evidence (or specialist knowledge) to back that up?

It's a bit rich to "not being able to believe" people believing the conclusions of the crime and medical professionals who have studied the cases, yet then go on to promote daft theories like a mad anesthetist going on a killing spree with his undetectable syringe, based on no knowledge whatsoever.

Yes fair point. But do you think the police arent considering or havent thought about this but wouldnt want it to go public? And these crime and medical professionals - have any of them said the victims have been drunk and drowned?? No they have all said "unexplained" - these experts cant explain it so they dont know themselves.

The anesthetic question was not speculating that someone was doing that, just a question how long it would stay in the system as I have no knowledge.

Yes, 'unexplained' sounds weird for people drowning but I, like almost everyone else, have no knowledge of the procedure for determining a cause of death.

If they don't know how the person fell into the water can they say 'drowned'?
Is 'drowned' even an option open to the coroner?
Does the presence of any other sort of injury prevent them from saying for an absolute fact that 'drowning' is the cause of death?
Does there need to be a witness to a drowning?
Are there medical/scientific circumstances that make it very difficult to say with absolute certainty that someone was alive when hitting the water?
Is 'drowning' a common conclusion as a cause of death?

All these questions, that I have no idea of the answer to, would make me extremely reluctant to pass opinions on such a detailed and complicated issue. Without specialist knowledge that allows someone to address the above (and more) I don't see how anyone can genuinely question it with any seriousness.