Talking with a killer
Suppose that there is a serial murderer posting pictures of his victims on various online message boards (this actually happened on 4chan). Someone has called the police, but they can't catch him. When someone closes or deletes one of the murderer's threads, more people die, and he posts a new thread on another site.
The murderer says "I'll read 20 pages of comments every day, I want you to show me why I shouldn't go ahead and kill my next victim". Of course, there are a lot of posts in that thread (you can't expect silence in that situation).
What would you do? What do you think authorities would do?
I can be the murderer for this thread (my English is bad though).
Oh, and I'm not a real killer.
The murderer says "I'll read 20 pages of comments every day, I want you to show me why I shouldn't go ahead and kill my next victim". Of course, there are a lot of posts in that thread (you can't expect silence in that situation).
What would you do? What do you think authorities would do?
I can be the murderer for this thread (my English is bad though).
Oh, and I'm not a real killer.
Comments (52)
On the internet, you don't need to have any hacker skills to hide your position. In "real life" you just have to be careful. Fire can destroy all proof. All you have to do is be carefull about witnesses and be careful about your moves ("Where are the bodies?").
But this post is not about that. Let's suppose it happens. You rely on other people, ok, but you don't know how will they catch him, so you should be able to imagine this situation. Are you saying you wouldn't do anything?
If I understand the hypo, if the question is simply whether I would delete a thread if I knew it would result in someone's murder, I'd not delete the thread. I mean I get the need to free up server space and having an orderly website, but I don't see a real harm in letting an uncatchable murderer post at will if it'll keep him from murdering.
But he is asking for a reason to stop, the question is what would you do (maybe, what would you say), it's not only a choice between delete or not delete. You have said what you wouldn't do, but...
Are you saying you would do nothing?
The only "manipulation" is about the thread, since he has asked you not to delete it. But nobody has to answer.
But ok, he killed more people... now he is in another forum. Same question: what would you do now? (And now you can't delete his thread because you are not in charge of that forum).
Maybe, it's your choice, but how would you do it?
He isn't uncatchable, that's beyond imagination. He has been doing this a long time, and it seems that nobody can catch him, that's all. You can try to catch him, you can ask for more info about the hypo... e.g. you can ask "where are the bodies?". Suppose that they're all in the same area and bombing a big zone would kill him (I'm sure you wouldn't do that, even if you could, but that's a possible answer).
Anyway, I find it more interesting what you would say to the killer.
Another forum? Complain to the moderators and leave the forum if they don't respond.
No. the whole thing is a manipulation whereby it becomes the reader's fault if they fail to obey or fail to give 'good reasons'. If you want to kill people, I will stop you if I can, but not by playing your game of making me responsible for your folly.
The killer is killing already, he didn't say "I will kill if you don't answer", he is just asking for a reason to stop, he is not making you responsible, nobody can do that, it's your choice to feel responsible or not.
I find your answer curious XD, you are so sure about the mind of a guy you don't know, that you are not going to try to ask him why is he doing that, and you are going to try to stop those who try... thanks for the answer.
I don't know why you talk in plural, it's just one murderer.
For the killer, it can be like play chess... or it can be many reasons, maybe he is killing bad people, maybe... but you are not even asking. He may want a reason to stop like... a person who want a reason to try pokemon go.
This is out of the thread, you can create a new thread for it: Responsability can't be given, every person accept or not his own responsability in what he wants to accept it.
It seems like you are saying that the murderer actually feel responsability and guilty, but he avoid that sense of responsability by asking that. Even when I didn't say anything about that, you can't imagine a murderer if he isn't like you are saying.
You "know" that he feel that way, even when you don't know him. Even when he is a hypothetical man. "There cannot be any other kind of murderer"
Have you met many murderers? Maybe you are an expert in psychology?
Why don't you say "I think in that situation he is probably this way, and so, I wouldn't say anything" instead of saying how he feel? he doesn't exist! you can't be sure!
For me, if someone want to close a killer thread, he clearly feels responsible (because... you can live the same life with that thread in your forum, you don't have to participate in that thread, the killer can move to another site, the killer will keep killing... he will (probably?) kill more, and yet, you feel that you have to close that thread), it's curious to feel the responsability to avoid people asking or talking. Even when you know you can't do that, you can't stop everybody.
Who is the one who try to avoid a sense of guilty?
If you want to do it, feel free to explain why would you do that. But, ey, only if you want XD
Then it is a question pertaining to ethical systems of another universe, not this one. With that condition insisted upon, the question (as with so many ethical hypotheticals) is properly posed to an inhabitant of such an alternative universe.
In this universe, there will be a very good chance of the person being caught, so most ethical systems will recommend that actions be taken towards catching him, not pandering to him. The decision to delete or not delete, to allow responses or not, should be taken based on expert police advice as to which gives the greatest chance of catching him soon. These sorts of decisions have to be taken frequently often by police incident response teams in negotiating with hostage-takers. Sometimes it is better to give them rope. Sometime it is better to shut them down and close them off.
If all we have to go by is his or her word, then I would assume that they're bluffing and either respond as I pleased or report it to the authorities if I was concerned enough.
There are probably quite a lot of people who falsely claim to be killers on the internet. Why would I believe that this person is any different?
... if this means I'd need to be on a chan4 board, then I'd never see it. Actually outside of this Forum and Facebook I don't think I've ever been on a message board.
Anyway...
... how this?
If I had the time and wanted to bother, I might post a time, a date, a location and a color of a t-shirt and follow this by saying "game on".
Meow!
GREG
Did you read this?
As I said, I think the 4chan killer was never caught, and there have been more serial murderers that are still free.
But now that you've given an answer, I would wait for others like the police in my country to tell me what to do. Not everybody will do the same, as you can see.
He posted photos of his victims. He has proven what he is. (I wrote the original post, but it was edited, as I said, because my english is bad). I don't know how to say it right. :D
He posted the photos, and after that, the police found the bodies, or the families. But he is a murderer, that's for sure.
Okay. And yes, your English is indeed bad, and it's a chore to edit your posts, so please bear that in mind.
Well, assuming that I know that he or she is indeed a killer, I would report the situation to the authorities immediately and refrain from involving myself in any interaction with the killer, because I think that that's the most sensible course of action to take.
Yes, you've already said that, maybe you have read a lot of murderers books, or... films. It's just an opinion. I don't think that all murderers are what you think they are, that's another opinion. Ciao.
Sorry, I try to do my best. And I am grateful for the help.
Thanks for your answer.
Yes, I made that assumption based on the lack of presented evidence that he's a killer, and on the likelihood that he's just an attention whore, [i]because[/I] the part about the photos or whatever it is that supposedly counts as proof was not in the version that I read. I have now given a different answer, in light of this revelation.
I see the part about posting photos. I don't know how I managed to overlook that. But you do realise that anyone can post photos of people that have been killed, and claim that they are their victims? So, I would've actually have to have had it verified in some way, and that doesn't seem very realistic, but then I can't say I'm familiar with the procedure in that kind of situation. What are the chances of the police or whoever getting in touch with me to confirm the identity and status of some anonymous internet user posting photos of dead people online and claiming them to be their victims?
I think in reality, I'd be oblivious, although perhaps suspicious or even alarmed, and the authorities, once aware of the situation, would track the killer down and shut the website (or websites) down as soon as possible to keep members of the public out.
But maybe you are right: it isn't clear in the first post. But now it is: he is a muderer. (Edit the post if you want, I'm sure you can do it better than me).
Do you have a credible source for that?
The wikipedia article on 4chan lists various threats of violence and one actual murder but in all cases the threateners, including the sole actual (non-serial) murderer were swiftly apprehended.
The only thing that sounds like what you are talking about, that I could find via a quick web search is this, of which there seems to be little doubt that it was just a hoax by an attention-craving person.
Well, if it helps the police, then that's good. But talking to known killers who are still at large is something that one should be very careful with. Best left to the professionals, if possible.
I said I think...
Really, the post isn't about the possibility. Of course it is possible, maybe difficult, ok. And because of that, you would act that way. Ok, it's a reasonable answer.
These things are indeed best left to professionals, and sometimes it is difficult to be firm enough to do that.
Perhaps one way to show him why he should not kill his next victim is to render his post ineffective by fictive duplication of his posts, all claiming to be the killer, all claiming to be responsible and all mixed up in time with the complicity of the web site, so that no one viewing the site can distinguish which post is real versus the many fictive posts. This might blunt his horrific excitement/enjoyment, and spoil his routine without transgressing his injunction against deletion.
It's up to the authorities to catch the killer, not the posters.
Or it might anger him, which probably isn't a good idea. Anyway, there's only one way to find out. Who wants to be the killer? Or do we already have one in our midst?
Once I proceed to murder him, he'll be all like "aaah, no! Stop murdering me! Murder is wrong when it's me!". I'll then nod with approval, before I finish murdering him, because fuck that guy, amirite?
If you were placed in such a situation to do so, how might you convince a killer to stop committing murder. I know it is extremely broad as there are hundreds of reasons that the killer might be killing, but that's entirely the point. Is there any kind of argument based on the sanctity of human life or something of the sort with a wide enough appeal so that it might be used on most people? Alternately, what kinds of arguments could be used for different killer profiles (how might you convince the psychopath that enjoys it, the desperate one that does it for money, etc)?
Should I post this as another thread?
But it seems like you are the first one who would do that, David.
No...
... that's playing into the hands of the killer; thus empowering him.
Here's a better question:
Is it possible to have a rational conversation using any standard norms of social behaviour with someone who is a serial killer?
Let's assume for a moment you are not a medical killer (rare, but do exist) or a disorganized killer (they make mistaks - hee hee - and are the easiest to catch) and assume you are a classical organized killer...
... then, you're probably highly intelligent, thus use this form of communication as a means to manipulate. Any conversation would be less and "question and answer modus", but more you guiding the questions with answers that lead to the question being asked you wish to be asked.
You're more than likely well organized to the point of being obsessive compulsive. Every detail of the crime is planned out well in advance (including such a dialog on an internet message board) and the you'd take every precaution to make sure they leave no incriminating evidence behind, so any answers you give would be more misleading than useful in finding out your identity.
A serial killer would, by perhaps older definitions, be considered a psychopath.
Psychopathy (/sa??k?p??i/) is traditionally defined as a personality disorder characterized by persistent antisocial behavior, impaired empathy and remorse, and bold, disinhibited, egotistical traits. (sourse wiki)
Again...
... is a rational conversation, as if you are just the "average Joe", really possible much less useful?
Why did I try to provoke you earlier?
Simple...
... a psychopath, like you, likes to watch potential victims for several days to find someone they consider to be a good target. Once the victim is chosen, the you'd meet up with them in a calculated fashion, often through some sort of ploy designed to gain their sympathy. You'd make sure they were killed in the proper location, either the meeting point or a place that fits your ritual.
Being a psychopath, you'd have certainly an egotistical trait that might well be the Achilles heel. The vast majority of psychopaths cannot resist a challenge or someone exhibiting traits such as their own, especially when the provocation exceeds their own level of egoism.
I simply attempted to see if you'd bite. I appear not to be shocked or even really moved by your anti-social actions and arrogantly provided you knowingly a "victim made easy" guideline. It's a test of your obsessive compulsive egoistic drive.
As Wilde once stated: "The only thing I cannot resist is temptation."
Also, gee whiz ... going to the internet... huh, you obviously want to show off. Once you kill a person you'd usually take precautions to ensure the body is not found … until you want it to be found. You live for control. By presenting your victim in an internet forum of your choosing and presented in your manner, let's face it... you take great pride in what they consider to be your "art" or "design" or "creation" or "gift" or “work”... whatever defintion you wish to attach to self-justify what you are doing.
Like any other serial killer you have a tendency to pay close attention to media and wish to use it. This explains the internet choice. You want to be known.
Obviously one of your motivating factors may be just to attempt to stump the law enforcement officers who are trying to solve their crime. You are probably very savvy as to how they'd do an investigation and feel great power in pulling them by the nose ring you have attached to them by your own means.
So...
... why should I play your game with your rules?
Meow!
GREG
Yes, of course. It's not just possible, but incredibly likely. Do you think serial killers are like extraterrestrials? They're more human than you might think.
Really?
First of all... I have no concept of the rationality of extraterrestrials. Never met one, much less held a conversation with one. Have you?
Also, since when is being "human" a guarantee of any rational conversation?
Sure we can wax validity of their positions only within the context of their psychopathic anti-social behaviour, but is this really the standard of measure we wish to employ?
Really... to what end?
Sure if you are just involved with a thought experiment... well... then have fun... but I prefer to act in more than the theoretical, as let's face it... if they kill someone for real, that's not a thought game.
Meow!
GREG
EDIT:
Indeed you can have a rational conversation within the context standard socially accepted norms (as in killing people for the sake of a psychopathic urge is not one of these socially accepted norms) with a psychopath, but only in therapy... and not in the first couple of sessions.
Remember the "rules of the game" we're made to play... 20 replies a day by just anyone.
Playing this murderer role:
------------
You are wrong about me. I'm not very intelligent, I'm carefull(I hope you understand that I'm not going to tell you how). I generally chose my victims because they are easy targets.
I can't anticipate what are you going to say. You don't have to believe me, but I'm really interested in a reason to stop.
I think a lot of people want to kill someone, it's relaxing, they don't do it because they feel fear. I don't feel guilty about my victims, a lot of people die every day. I really don't know why should I stop. But I know that a lot of people think that this is wrong, and I'm interested in see why, in see how a lot of people think in this matters, or how they feel about it. I feel... alone in my mind, I want to understand and be understood.
--------------
Remember, you are in this situation. If you cannot imagine this, then don't play, but if you play, that's what the killer said. And remember, I'm not the killer, I'm just curious.
20 pages of replys XD and that's what the killer said, he can change his mind.
Yes, really.
Quoting Mayor of Simpleton
No. Well, besides that odd little fellow who wanted to use my telephone. The point was that they'd presumably have no preexisting understanding of any of our standard norms of social behaviour, and might well be more like a cat than a human, so rational discourse might be difficult if not impossible. But who knows?
Quoting Mayor of Simpleton
It's not, and I never said it was, but it makes it much more likely, since most of us humans can and do have rational conversations.
Quoting Mayor of Simpleton
Don't know what you mean. My point was simply that it would be very naïve and a mistake to rule out the aforementioned possibility simply on the basis that they've murdered multiple people. I don't know what could have made you even raise the question unless you have a sizeable misconception somewhere along the line.
Quoting Mayor of Simpleton
I think that this is simply false, and it's based on a misconception you have of both serial killers and psychopaths. It was in fact a serial killer that was the subject of your original question, but you've now changed that to (or made the addition of) a psychopath. Do you use the terms synonymously as labels for someone you, for whatever reason, conceive of as lacking these human features which they do not in fact necessarily lack, and likely do not, unless they're completey insane, which is rare?
Quoting TSBU
Strange...
... you have no selection process other than "they happen to be there"?
That's not very safe or careful.
How are they "easy targets"?
You have to take into consideration so many factors, as just killing someone in a dark place by themself is not really a careful action. I'm not buying this.
Quoting TSBU
Then stop!
Gee whiz! Why all the dramatic cry baby "I can't help myself bullshit" and going to an internet forum to get help. Go to a professional or simply turn yourself in.
Again... I'm not buying this.
Quoting TSBU
Indeed, but they don't. Also, if they do kill someone, that does not make them a serial killer.
Quoting TSBU
Are you bullshitting me?
If it's relaxing, you wouldn't have this conflict of wanting to quit.
Not buying this...
Quoting TSBU
Then why do you want to stop?
Make up your mind!
Sure a lot of people die every day, but since when do you get to decide when someone is to die?
Seriously not buying this...
Quoting TSBU
This is a different question than why should I stop. You are asking is muder wrong. Might I suggest opening another thread or simply staying on the topic.
Seriously... this is a hard sell you are tossing my way.
Quoting TSBU
Get in line...
Quoting TSBU
So it's a false dilemma.
Just peachy!
Meow!
GREG
It's kind of like the all thumbs are fingers, but not all fingers are thumbs.
All serial killers are psychopaths, but not all psychopaths are serial killers.
Meow!
GREG
Playing murderer role:
-----------
I have a selection process, based in how easily I can kill them without letting proofs.
Oh, yes, I'll tell you, then I'll tell you what is my name, where I live...
No, I'm interested in a reason to stop. That's different than being interested in stop. I want a reason because I want to understand and be understood, to feel that there are people similar to me. But I can't see them now, and I still feel good when I kill someone. I'm not crying, I just know what I want, and I search.
Try to do the same over and over, then they'll say you are a serial killer, you know how journalists are. But I don't feel this is a game.
I think I'm not going to answer you anymore...
-------------
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Indeed...
... this space between us is perhaps a very good idea.
Meow!
GREG
Quoting TSBU
Quoting TSBU
Quoting Mayor of Simpleton
ehmmm, what? XD
Quoting TSBU
Quoting Mayor of Simpleton
Made you look.
Meow!
GREG
I don't understand. Can anyone understand what are you saying?
Alternatively we could attempt to occupy their time by whatever means...
Each comment on the daily 20 pages of comments could be a cleverly crafted hook designed to grab any readers attention and pull them into a very time-consuming affair of some kind.
For instance, we could begin by cleverly agreeing with them and planting suggestions that ancient samurai style sword-play is the ultimate method of killing.
We could then waste a shit ton of their time by bombarding them with books and documentaries on the samurai fighting style, and even possibly get them into the actual philosophical teachings of the ancient samurai.
After we have wasted months of their time, thus saving many lives, we can take it even further by coercing them into believing that they must commit seppuku (hara-kiri) for some arbitrary reason, thus finally concluding the dilemma proposed by the OP.
Cheers!
It was fun. I will go to another site (don't worry, that doesn't mean there are going to be more kills XD).
Obviously the person is not motivated to kill by the audiences reaction and the killer cannot simply pass off responsibility for the lives of others to the audience.
If the person wants to kill others that is what they will do regardless of the audience...the first murder is proof of this much.
The only reasonable thing to do...in my opinion...is ignore them and hope they get caught soon.
Unless you believe you might find some clues as to who the killer is by their interaction with audience and solve the case yourself.
It [i]would[/I] be like that if all serial killers are psychopaths, but they're not.
[Quote=Orville Matthews, Forensic Psychiatrist, MBBS, BA, BSc]So, overall, not all serial killers are psychopaths, but they suffer from similar mental conditions. A serial killer who does not suffer from any mental conditions is very rare and I am unsure if they even exist. Killers without mental conditions are common, but their killings are one-off majority of the time. They're the 'husband kills wife when he captures her sleeping with another man' type homicide.[/Quote]
[url]https://www.quora.com/Are-all-serial-killers-psychopaths-If-not-who-are-some-exceptions[/URL]
This article only goes as far as speaking of likelihood and a powerful connection:
[URL]https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wicked-deeds/201406/serial-killer-myth-1-theyre-mentally-ill-or-evil-geniuses[/URL]