Post by Mitchell on May 16, 2017 5:15:26 GMT
Did he actually injure with the knife? Do recall the nail file and bite injuries.
These 'accidental injuries' / 'minor cuts' / 'small cuts' are described in Shelby's book. A knife with a serrated edge was concluded from one of them. He runs the knife along their body, sometimes doing the autopsy Y shape on their abdomen and then up and down the back of their legs. He has pricked their feet with knife. A shoulder. He pricks them usually when pressing the knife against them for the first time. It's a sexual act.
EARs knife is a psychological replacement for his small penis. It would be expected that at some stage if he was unable to have sex that the knife would be used for penetration and that's how it goes to extremes like with Jack the Ripper. The evolution of the piquerism is explained by Keppel very well, tying together his victims and showing the escalation.
EAR didn't stab which seems to indicate he didn't go that far which means he was able to have sex. This could explain the non-escalation of the piquerism.
Which is why for the ONS crimes, we read that he bludgeons his targets instead of stabbing them. He also places the sheets back over them, which is supposed to be suggestive of him knowing the victims and having a degree of sensitivity about what he is done. It seems that he did these things for reasons connected with some forensic awareness.
You can see shades of Jack the Ripper if you like but that is a parlor trick and relegates what we do here to a fashionless attempt at entertainment.