Familiar Portrait?

[lookout]

An interesting read http://crimeandclues.com/2013/01/26/bite-mark-analysis/

Bundy didn't fit the profile of a killer either.

I know/knew nothing about him.

[lookout]

This is the thing about psychopaths,they're usually serial killers. ?

Jeremy wasn't shy. He had an out-going personality.
He didn't appear to be the inferior one in the relationship. Far from it, the way he splashed the cash to show his status as having the money to do so.
He didn't display violence towards Julie,or she wouldn't have stayed with him. Remember the time when he raised his hand to her and she threatened to phone the police ?
He didn't show anger,and so far as I know,it hasn't been reported while he's been in prison.

You can't compare this twisted individual to Jeremy.They're two entirely different characters altogether.

[Alias]

This is the thing about psychopaths,they're usually serial killers. ?

Jeremy wasn't shy. He had an out-going personality.
He didn't appear to be the inferior one in the relationship. Far from it, the way he splashed the cash to show his status as having the money to do so.
He didn't display violence towards Julie,or she wouldn't have stayed with him. Remember the time when he raised his hand to her and she threatened to phone the police ?
He didn't show anger,and so far as I know,it hasn't been reported while he's been in prison.

You can't compare this twisted individual to Jeremy.They're two entirely different characters altogether.

If you believe Jeremy is guilty and want to compare him with someone, you could pick the Menendez brothers or Brian Blackwell for instance who in both cases killed their parents, then went on spending sprees. Not serial killer Ted Bundy, must be for maximum effect.

[lookout]

If you believe Jeremy is guilty and want to compare him with someone, you could pick the Menendez brothers or Brian Blackwell for instance who in both cases killed their parents, then went on spending sprees. Not serial killer Ted Bundy, must be for maximum effect.

I don't believe Jeremy to be guilty,Alias.

[Alias]

I don't believe Jeremy to be guilty,Alias.

Hahah, I know THAT!!!
It is Caroline who thinks that and compares Jeremy to Ted Bundy.

[Jane]

This is the thing about psychopaths,they're usually serial killers. ?

Jeremy wasn't shy. He had an out-going personality.
He didn't appear to be the inferior one in the relationship. Far from it, the way he splashed the cash to show his status as having the money to do so.
He didn't display violence towards Julie,or she wouldn't have stayed with him. Remember the time when he raised his hand to her and she threatened to phone the police ?
He didn't show anger,and so far as I know,it hasn't been reported while he's been in prison.

You can't compare this twisted individual to Jeremy.They're two entirely different characters altogether.

Lookout, they are definitely NOT "usually serial killers" or any other sort of killer.
 They ARE charming and confident so an out going personality would follow.
They certainly won't be the "inferior one" in a relationship and the flashing of cash generously is a way of their showing their superiority.
There was no need for him to show violence towards Julie. She wasn't a barrier to his aims.
Likewise why would he need to display anger then or now? Killing was simply a means to an end. Something which needed to be done.

[lookout]

Lookout, they are definitely NOT "usually serial killers" or any other sort of killer.
 They ARE charming and confident so an out going personality would follow.
They certainly won't be the "inferior one" in a relationship and the flashing of cash generously is a way of their showing their superiority.
There was no need for him to show violence towards Julie. She wasn't a barrier to his aims.
Likewise why would he need to display anger then or now? Killing was simply a means to an end. Something which needed to be done.

Jeremy didn't have the oomph to kill let alone anger.

[maggie]

Lookout, they are definitely NOT "usually serial killers" or any other sort of killer.
 They ARE charming and confident so an out going personality would follow.
They certainly won't be the "inferior one" in a relationship and the flashing of cash generously is a way of their showing their superiority.
There was no need for him to show violence towards Julie. She wasn't a barrier to his aims.
Likewise why would he need to display anger then or now? Killing was simply a means to an end. Something which needed to be done.

A psychopath who kills can be said to be a failed psychopath..... Robert Hare

[lookout]

I bet it took him all his time to muster up the energy to face a days work on the farm.

[susan]

Hahah, I know THAT!!!
It is Caroline who thinks that and compares Jeremy to Ted Bundy.

Alias Hahaha how can lookout think posters don't know she thinks Jeremy is innocent

[Jane]

Jeremy didn't have the oomph to kill let alone anger.

He didn't need "oomph" or anger, Lookout, only desire.

[Jane]

I bet it took him all his time to muster up the energy to face a days work on the farm.

Yes, I agree. One boring monotonous day following another. It must have driven him crackers.

[Jane]

A psychopath who kills can be said to be a failed psychopath..... Robert Hare

I feel very certain that any psychopath who achievs their aims by killing wouldn't feel that they'd failed.

[lookout]

He didn't need "oomph" or anger, Lookout, only desire.

I doubt if he had that quality either. Not the desiring type I'm afraid.

[maggie]

I feel very certain that any psychopath who achievs their aims by killing wouldn't feel that they'd failed.

Maybe not in their own head but the belief is a psychopath should be clever and manipulative enough to reach their goals without killing, the theory is therefore that a psychopath who kills has lost control and therefore failed.