The Suffolk 'Ripper'

[Jules]

Any lady members of this forum that live in that area please take extra care

[greencreeper]

Now five dead in ten days. It's scary stuff. A guy who kills and leaves the bodies lying in an open place, but unlike most killers, is confident and comfortable enough to return to the same place again (and again) to leave further bodies. And the rate of killing suggests a man at the height of his enjoyment and confidence. I wonder what started it - and if there are earlier victims and his rate of killing has increased sufficiently for him now to be on the radar.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by greencreeper

and if there are earlier victims and his rate of killing has increased sufficiently for him now to be on the radar.

I saw yesterday that Norfolk and Suffolk police think he may have been active since 1992 and killed up to five more women, worryingly they aren't all prostitutes

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by dooper786

We all have a duty of care to ourselves to take stepsw to mitigate risks in everyday lives, whether it is crossing the road, walking up a dark alley or parading in the dark with a mini skirt and high heels and getting into strangers' cars. The greater the risk, the greater the chance that the outcome of taking that risk will be unfavourable. If i cross at a pelican crossing with a red light showing, the chances are better than 95% that i will make it to the other side. If i cross on green on a dark winters eve wearing dark clothing and without my contact lenses in, I wouldnt lay money on reaching the other side!

So then, if a girl chooses, despite the grave risks involved,to parade around in the dark at all hours,get into strnagers' cars and have sex with them, then it is implied and understood that she is taking an abnormal risk, of her own volition and should not be surprised if there is an unfavourable outcome.

Mate, correct me if I'm wrong but is teh message you're trying to send out along the lines that because they knew the risks involved, some blame (maybe a lot) can be passed on them for them ending up murdered?

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by dooper786

So then, lets cut through the rubbish that is talked.

Yes, lets..

First of all it is tragic that a few young women have lost their lives in this pitifull manner.

True.

But, this is not an arguement nor does it demonstrate a need for legalisation.

True, these girls may have been killed regardless of their occupation.

As for the police not protecting "girls" what rubbish. Prostitutes are entitled to the same levels of protection as everyone else in the UK i.e next to nothing. The thin blue line is very thin and no one should receive preferential treatment, least of all those who choose to break the law and put themselves in potentially hazardous situations by choice.

The fact is that many pros' choose the lifestyle becuase they are non conformists and they enjoy the easy money and flexible hours.

There is no need in the this country for any girl to sell their bodies. It is fortunate that we live in a country that provides a basic safety net.

That's oversimplifying things a little. Sure, income support (assuming you don't rip off the system) will provide a basic safety net (ie food, and some money toward other bills). A girl may also get various other benefits (housing, social fund etc). But these provide a very basic standard of living.

They may not need to sell their bodies to eat, buy clothes and have a roof over their head. Other things may require more money though, and it's possible that a young girl will only get this through prostitution.

We live in a society which has rules, certain moral codes and laws. There will always be those who choose to operate on the fringes of or outside of mainstream society. It could be prostitutes,criminals,travellers,new age type,I'm sure you can all name them. If they choose not to play the game, to be part of mainstream society and to abide by the common law and conventions of our society then that is their choice and they should expect to deal with any consequences.

Yeah, but Morals and Laws are fluid. They can change. Forty years ago, it was an outrage to the moral code of the time that people were Gay. Now, most people people seem to at least accept it, even if they don't encourage it. The same with laws.

There is no need to legalise prostitution simply because non conformists and pressure groups call for it. I would suggest that these women adopt the mainstream rules, laws and moral codes of mainstream society and get themselves a proper job, instead of cocking a snoot at ordinary hard working people who play the game AND do those jobs for 5 or 10 pounds an hour that these lazy pros will not do.

Erm, I believe you are wrong. Prostitution has been around for over 2,000 years. It will stay around, whether legal or not. There will always be people willing to sell their services in that way, and there will always be buyers.

At least if it's legalised, we have *some* hope of controlling it. If it's not, we have none.

It is fact that many girls who work the streets are there becuase they are heroin hookers. What is beyond me is the crass stupidity of the men who are having sex with them! I can only assume that they are niave enuogh to think that the girls are only earning a bit of extra pin money or that they enjoy hte sex so much that they cant get enough of it!

I'm pretty sure thought doesn't' come into it.


Anyhow, regardless of their profession, these girls do not deserve to die.

[Vlad_Dracul]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Mate, correct me if I'm wrong but is teh message you're trying to send out along the lines that because they knew the risks involved, some blame (maybe a lot) can be passed on them for them ending up murdered?

Now we enter the realm of semantics. I am not sure that blame would be quite the word I would use. I would not say that there are many people who deserve to die. Having reached for my dictionary, one definition of blame is

quote-responsibility for something that is wrong.
unquote.

So then, it would be wrong to say that the murdered women were directly responsible for what occured to them. The person responsible for their death was clearly the murder. Having said this, they must have recognised the dangers and risks involved, they clearly did not take sufficient care or steps to mitigate that risk and therefore by their conduct and/or actions, they brought about a situation which exposed them to a high level of risk and in these cases, that risk was realised and resulted in their deaths. To that extent, they contributed to the outcome.

Whilst they may not have been responsible for their own deaths (since they clearly did not commit suicide) what they are responsible for is exposing themselves to a high degree of risk and they must have have some understanding of the degree and possible outcome of that risk. They chose to take that risk and the worst outcome was realised. That responsibility lies squarely with them,not with the police or this ethereal thing referred to as "society".

This does not exonerate the police from carrying out a full investigation in the same way that they would investigate any other murdewr, since clearly, a criminal offence has been committed. No doubt, in this case,as we seem to be talking about a serial killer who will likely kill again, the police will be putting a great deal of resources into the investigation. OTOH, if we were talking about a singular murder, it may just be that,as resources are limited and all other things being equal,, the investigation of the murder of an ordinary everyday woman might well be prioritised over the murder of a female who put herself at un-necessary and perilous risk.

---------- Post added at 17:11 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Yes, lets..

That's oversimplifying things a little. Sure, income support (assuming you don't rip off the system) will provide a basic safety net (ie food, and some money toward other bills). A girl may also get various other benefits (housing, social fund etc). But these provide a very basic standard of living.

They may not need to sell their bodies to eat, buy clothes and have a roof over their head. Other things may require more money though, and it's possible that a young girl will only get this through prostitution.

.

Let us be clear about this, when you say somethings may require more money I presume we are talking about drugs. The ladies in question are all in their early twenties. I am 42. When i was in my twenties some twenty years ago, i know that there was plenty of information around about the dangers of drugs etc etc. So then, if i were aware of all this information, i van only assume that these ladies were also aware of this information.

So then, we can make a safe assumption that at the time these ladies first took those first experimental steps into the world of drug experimentation, they were aware of the dangers of dabbling with drugs and yet they still choose to experiment. Inevitably they fooled themselves that they were in control, didnt have a habit etc etc blah blah blah until the point where they were in too deep.

Fact is,despite public information and almost certain awareness, THEY CHOSE to take drugs.

With freedom of choice comes responsibility. they chose,they are now responsible for the outcome.

I can indeed confirm that the state safety net does provide a basic living. My mother was forced to bring three of us up on her own due to circumstances. Not once did she steal, turn to drugs, drink or prostitution. None of us were ever in trouble with the law, we are all fully employed since the day we left school. was that just pure luck or was it living within your limits and being responsible? Needless to say we have all repaid in taxes many times over, the money that was laid out by the state to bring us all up all those years ago.

[hatedbythemail]

some are prone to addiction, some less so. i refuse to be judgemental about those who succumb to addiction - drink, drugs, sex, gambling.... - and certainly not when something as dreadful as this happens

[Jester]

RIPPER???
Why Ripper- OK so they are Prostitutes and the killer/killers didn't have sex with the victims.(as far as we are led to believe)
But that is where the similarities end.
Peter Suttcliffe (Yorkshire RIPPER for those not in the know) Truly was deserving of the name-
People (like myself) who have studied the Yorkshire Ripper case in depth, will know of the savagery of his murders and these women certainly were RIPPED! (very similar to the original Ripper, but less presice.)
Surely the 'Suffolk Strangler' would be better and more accurate. But what's in a name!! It's all sensationalism- and exactly what the killer(s) want.
The name shows a lack of imagination in the U.K press.

If this man/woman men/women have any sense- they would stop for a while and/or move to another area. Lets hope they carry on- but only so they make mistakes and get caught mind you! don't get the wrong idea here. H e/she needs catching and my professionals- he will probably be very comfortable in a mental hospital- they have it cushy in there- believe me i know.(have close contact with my job)
Forensic evidence is only good if they have already commited a crime and are on file- or already have the suspect in custody- (then it comes into its own evidence wise- and they are nailed)

Prostitution should be legalised and governed-with regular tests- and safe environments- It works abroad- when will the UK catch up with everyone else!!

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Jester

Prostitution should be legalised and governed-with regular tests- and safe environments- It works abroad- when will the UK catch up with everyone else!!

Whether or not that's true, it's not what this thread is about.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by dooper786

Let us be clear about this, when you say somethings may require more money I presume we are talking about drugs. The ladies in question are all in their early twenties. I am 42. When i was in my twenties some twenty years ago, i know that there was plenty of information around about the dangers of drugs etc etc. So then, if i were aware of all this information, i van only assume that these ladies were also aware of this information.

So then, we can make a safe assumption that at the time these ladies first took those first experimental steps into the world of drug experimentation, they were aware of the dangers of dabbling with drugs and yet they still choose to experiment. Inevitably they fooled themselves that they were in control, didnt have a habit etc etc blah blah blah until the point where they were in too deep.

Fact is,despite public information and almost certain awareness, THEY CHOSE to take drugs.

With freedom of choice comes responsibility. they chose,they are now responsible for the outcome.

I can indeed confirm that the state safety net does provide a basic living. My mother was forced to bring three of us up on her own due to circumstances. Not once did she steal, turn to drugs, drink or prostitution. None of us were ever in trouble with the law, we are all fully employed since the day we left school. was that just pure luck or was it living within your limits and being responsible? Needless to say we have all repaid in taxes many times over, the money that was laid out by the state to bring us all up all those years ago.

I don't want to go too far off topic, but I didn't mention drugs for a reason. I wasn't talking about them..

[Jester]

True-
Just needed a vent-
Please continue!
I guess that it will be a drug councillor or sex worker support worker.
Also- Peter S may have took longer to kill 5 women- but his crimes were far more severe and these could turn out to be a druggy who was ****ed off and has got away so far by flukes and luck.
Also be careful not to get the term Schizophrenic (voice hearer) and multiple personality/psychopathic disorder confused.
Can be worlds apart. But ya knew that.
Some of the (so called) professional profiles made up in the papers by supposed police professionals are also pathetic- some going as far as to say- will not be a black man as they rarely become serial killers! what? Surely we haven't had enough serial killers to make such a statement or qualified percentage opinion yet!? 25 or over because someone younger would be too immature to plan such a murder! Who are these idiots! And who is paying them- us probably! Thanks that's really narrowed it down for me-Actually i may send an application in. Easy money. i'll just pop out now and catch him- and collect my quarter of a million (which is a callous publicity stunt- sickko's!) Should have expected it from such a chav gutter paper.

And to think it's just down the road from me- suppose the town will get some (negative) notoriety now! Remeber HUNGERFORD anyone?
Watch ya back 'people'- it doesn't necessarily have to be a woman he/she kills next either. Now wouldn't that be a ironic.
Man walks his girlfriend home to make sure he's safe- then gets murdered himself.!!

[Julian]

MAN ARRESTED

And hopefully thats the end of it. I also hope in vain they dont release pictures or his name until convicted so we can avoid a draw out media goverage of the case and so on.

[Julian]

Originally Posted by Damien

And hopefully thats the end of it. I also hope in vain they dont release pictures or his name until convicted so we can avoid a draw out media goverage of the case and so on.

Agree 100% with that. Tell us about it AFTER the guilty verdict, as should be with all cases.

What are they doing naming him? I dont see in the news any information about him being charged. The police must have a very strong case but naming him before being charged? that cant be right surely