Post by albion on Sept 16, 2016 4:57:40 GMT
One poster from the other board posed the question that if earons was doing hits, then why didnt he just shoot the victims and be done with it. This is my response.
I wonder about that too. I have read about cases in which robbers take hostages, and during this time they are raped. How does that apply to your statement? It seems like it is opportunity for some rapists. If during the course of their activities, they happen upon a vulnerable female, then rape becomes an option. I would suppose that all rapists have some kind of disconnect in their relationship with females. For some it might just be the desire for sexual rape, and then for others it might lead to unknown violence directed toward them and their male friends. It seems very difficult to try and apply logic to an illogical act. Or try and force order and classifications upon people who by their very definition are breaking the rules of society.
In another case, a couple was abducted in a home invasion. They were missing, along with their dog, and their car. Their car was eventually found parked near the airport. The general theory was that the couple had left of their own freewill due to some legal issues they were having. But then their bodies were discovered in a shallow grave. And it was determined that the grave was dug prior to the abduction. IMO, it was a hit, and it was disguised. I would say the reason for this is to hide the motive, which was revenge for the legal issues. If the hitman had just walked into the house and shot the victims, LE should have known right away what happened. So they had to make it look like something else. They had to hide the real motive, in this case, a lawsuit against the victims for embezzling from a very rich client. And a client whose legal representation had a known history for working with a PI firm who was also known for arranging hits. This hit was very subtle. They could have made it look like a burglary gone wrong, like maybe was the case in the Manuela murder. Or possibly a suicide. Or a random act of violence with absolutely no coherent motive. Now I ask anyone who has an opinion, would earons have been good at doing something like this? Could he have gotten into the house, restrained the couple, secured the dog, loaded them up in the SUV in the garage, driven them out into the countryside, deposited them in a grave, and then driven the car to the airport and left it there? If it wasnt for the fact that the grave was shallow, and animals had dug into it, and then someone walking in the area had discovered it, this case would still be a missing persons case, with all the info pointing to the couple leaving on their own free will.
It seems also that hits with in the criminal world are one thing, LE seems to expect it, and there is no reason to hide them. It is usually one criminal against another, and a motive is usually well known. But hits by and against non criminal types, as is the case above, seem to be less well received by LE. And in the case above, when the very rich client realized, that even if he won the case, he was never going to get back his millions of dollars, that he decided to get justice by having the people killed. But I doubt he wanted the whole world to know he was the one who paid for the hit. It might be bad for his reputation and for his business.
In some instances the criminals want the public to know who was responsible for a crime. Terrorists seem to need this publicity. Some gangs do this to establish a reputation. Serial killers do this as well. Ear seemed to do this during the rape phase. And ons seems to have done the opposite. Why? What changed in his approach?
I wonder about that too. I have read about cases in which robbers take hostages, and during this time they are raped. How does that apply to your statement? It seems like it is opportunity for some rapists. If during the course of their activities, they happen upon a vulnerable female, then rape becomes an option. I would suppose that all rapists have some kind of disconnect in their relationship with females. For some it might just be the desire for sexual rape, and then for others it might lead to unknown violence directed toward them and their male friends. It seems very difficult to try and apply logic to an illogical act. Or try and force order and classifications upon people who by their very definition are breaking the rules of society.
In another case, a couple was abducted in a home invasion. They were missing, along with their dog, and their car. Their car was eventually found parked near the airport. The general theory was that the couple had left of their own freewill due to some legal issues they were having. But then their bodies were discovered in a shallow grave. And it was determined that the grave was dug prior to the abduction. IMO, it was a hit, and it was disguised. I would say the reason for this is to hide the motive, which was revenge for the legal issues. If the hitman had just walked into the house and shot the victims, LE should have known right away what happened. So they had to make it look like something else. They had to hide the real motive, in this case, a lawsuit against the victims for embezzling from a very rich client. And a client whose legal representation had a known history for working with a PI firm who was also known for arranging hits. This hit was very subtle. They could have made it look like a burglary gone wrong, like maybe was the case in the Manuela murder. Or possibly a suicide. Or a random act of violence with absolutely no coherent motive. Now I ask anyone who has an opinion, would earons have been good at doing something like this? Could he have gotten into the house, restrained the couple, secured the dog, loaded them up in the SUV in the garage, driven them out into the countryside, deposited them in a grave, and then driven the car to the airport and left it there? If it wasnt for the fact that the grave was shallow, and animals had dug into it, and then someone walking in the area had discovered it, this case would still be a missing persons case, with all the info pointing to the couple leaving on their own free will.
It seems also that hits with in the criminal world are one thing, LE seems to expect it, and there is no reason to hide them. It is usually one criminal against another, and a motive is usually well known. But hits by and against non criminal types, as is the case above, seem to be less well received by LE. And in the case above, when the very rich client realized, that even if he won the case, he was never going to get back his millions of dollars, that he decided to get justice by having the people killed. But I doubt he wanted the whole world to know he was the one who paid for the hit. It might be bad for his reputation and for his business.
In some instances the criminals want the public to know who was responsible for a crime. Terrorists seem to need this publicity. Some gangs do this to establish a reputation. Serial killers do this as well. Ear seemed to do this during the rape phase. And ons seems to have done the opposite. Why? What changed in his approach?