Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Dave67

The Black Dahlia mystery

178 posts in this topic

I started by reading the "FAQ" as they're referred to and he pretends to know the intent of the bisection, so rather immediately, I'm not impressed. :td:

Watch the videos. I had read about this either in a book or somewhere on the web years ago. I think its worth a look.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To be fair it's in response to similarities between that case and the torso killings in Cleveland he only says the bisection of Beth Short was not done for the purposeness of concealment which is true,the killer left all the pieces on public view,unlike the Cleveland Torso killer who generally dismembered his victims and put them in different places

I don't think anyone could say why the body was bisected and when someone claims to know something that I don't believe they could possibly know, then I'm not impressed.

I don't claim to know the intent of the bisection, but I think it could have been for concealment in preparation of transport and to aid transport and for no other reasons and I think the fact that both parts were in the same location is supportive of that.

In that other case- if that's the manner in which the 'torso killer' disposed of the bodies- then I think the dismembering could have been for the same reasons but also for other reasons such as to hinder discovery and/or identification of the victims.

Watch the videos. I had read about this either in a book or somewhere on the web years ago. I think its worth a look.

Well, I've looked and first, I'll say that I don't agree that the perp must have been a surgeon or that he must have had extraordinary knowledge of human anatomy and those things appeared to me to be the major incriminating pieces of evidence used against that person.

Now, the coincidence re: the dump site is interesting, but I wouldn't assume that the only connection to the neighborhood could/would be with that particular family.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started by reading the "FAQ" as they're referred to and he pretends to know the intent of the bisection, so rather immediately, I'm not impressed. :td:

Found an interesting read on those FAQs. He links the FBI files fairly far down. The files are hard to read and redacted but there are also newspaper clippings. There is one article i have found so far on the second link, page two of the pdf file about murders in San Diego in the 30's. Short as you remember lived in San Diego before moving back to LA. I think she went back and forth. It may be unrelated, but there was one posing of a hanging body of a victim.....could be related.

http://www.lmharnisch.com/short_e_part02.pdf

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Found an interesting read on those FAQs. He links the FBI files fairly far down. The files are hard to read and redacted but there are also newspaper clippings. There is one article i have found so far on the second link, page two of the pdf file about murders in San Diego in the 30's. Short as you remember lived in San Diego before moving back to LA. I think she went back and forth. It may be unrelated, but there was one posing of a hanging body of a victim.....could be related.

http://www.lmharnisc...rt_e_part02.pdf

OMG, were there any rape/murders in San Diego between '31 and '34 which also occurred but were actually solved? :hmm:

That circumstance of the hanging body is very unusual!

Edit: According to the following info., it was theorized that the hanging was actually staging.

http://wikibin.org/articles/louise-teuber.html

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG, were there any rape/murders in San Diego between '31 and '34 which also occurred but were actually solved? :hmm:

That circumstance of the hanging body is very unusual!

Edit: According to the following info., it was theorized that the hanging was actually staging.

http://wikibin.org/a...ise-teuber.html

I have not researched the newspaper clipping. did you say it was eventually solved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not researched the newspaper clipping. did you say it was eventually solved?

Not to my knowledge, but it sounds like it could have been or that they could have at least established a strong suspect if investigators had followed the lead indicated by possible staging.

The coroner attributed cause of death to strangulation but evidently because of an injury to the back of the head, he ruled homicide and speculated that the hanging was staged to make the manner of death appear as suicide rather than homicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to my knowledge, but it sounds like it could have been or that they could have at least established a strong suspect if investigators had followed the lead indicated by possible staging.

The coroner attributed cause of death to strangulation but evidently because of an injury to the back of the head, he ruled homicide and speculated that the hanging was staged to make the manner of death appear as suicide rather than homicide.

At least 1947 these murders had not been solved. I think it makes you wonder if other murders after the dahlia did occur somewhere in the country but nobody put it together. This clipping at least seems to suggest the press was curious about any link. Lots of things could have interrupted the murder spree. prison for one. then perhaps a ne'er do well out of prison joins the arm forces in 1941...then finds himself in LA in 1947. Total speculation, but it does make you realize...as bad as this murder was, there were many happening across the country, though nobody ever said serial killer til many years later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least 1947 these murders had not been solved. I think it makes you wonder if other murders after the dahlia did occur somewhere in the country but nobody put it together. This clipping at least seems to suggest the press was curious about any link. Lots of things could have interrupted the murder spree. prison for one. then perhaps a ne'er do well out of prison joins the arm forces in 1941...then finds himself in LA in 1947. Total speculation, but it does make you realize...as bad as this murder was, there were many happening across the country, though nobody ever said serial killer til many years later.

Well, I don't know if they did or not. I mean, I know they didn't use the term "serial killer", but I don't know if they thought the same "sex fiend" was responsible for all the murders or not. (The reporting in that article was a trip! Not only the terminology, but it was nothing if not sensational!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Well, I don't know if they did or not. I mean, I know they didn't use the term "serial killer", but I don't know if they thought the same "sex fiend" was responsible for all the murders or not. (The reporting in that article was a trip! Not only the terminology, but it was nothing if not sensational!)

I like reading comtempory newspaper articles for crimes. Of course we know how inaccurate the press can be, and seems even more iffy in days before our immediate worldwide connections. It kind of gives you a sense of what the public was feeling. It also reveals the psychology of the times. We are very jaded by what we know since ted bundy, jeffery dahlmer,etc. I think these were very innocent times in some ways when it comes to crime. Certainly not when it comes to death. That generation had lived through two world wars and were familiar with ganster crime. I think this was quite a shock. But to think there were similar crimes just 100 miles away unsolved. kind of makes you wonder how many serial killers were active then, where nobody understood the pattern, especially cross jurisdictionally.

Edited by mbrn30000
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like reading comtempory newspaper articles for crimes. Of course we know how inaccurate the press can be, and seems even more iffy in days before our immediate worldwide connections. It kind of gives you a sense of what the public was feeling. It also reveals the psychology of the times. We are very jaded by what we know since ted bundy, jeffery dahlmer,etc. I think these were very innocent times in some ways when it comes to crime. Certainly not when it comes to death. That generation had lived through two world wars and were familiar with ganster crime. I think this was quite a shock. But to think there were similar crimes just 100 miles away unsolved. kind of makes you wonder how many serial killers were active then, where nobody understood the pattern, especially cross jurisdictionally.

Of course, they've always existed...

I think if LE considered a link with all those cases and/or a link between those and the Short case, then that would show their naivety re: offenders and their crimes. For example, that first case in '31 of the 10 year old, right away, I have strong doubts that that case was connected to any of those others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got to thinking about Dr. Bayley as the killer. The story goes his female partner in his practice, a doctor as well, and alledged mistress, held a secret over his head according to Dr. Bayley widow in her lawsuit. Some speculated the secret was that Bayley was the killer. Another allegation was he ran an illegal abortion clinic and she threatened to expose it. No proof of either but just an allegation of a secret. If his secret was that he was this demented killer, why would he just not kill his blackmailer. I know some serial killers do not kill people they know, but it was just a thought. I am beginning to wonder if this female doctor was involved or the actual killer. Could the placing of the body near dr. Bayley's home have been a message to him? did he have some guilt in this crime? I will have to see if there is more about these two out there. Harnish seems to suggest they were both into watching autopsies for fun. She probably would need to cut her in half to move her more easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How funny you're thinking more about Bailey because I've been thinking more about that other guy, Smith, or whatever his name actually was. :-*

Now, about Bayley and the allegation of a secret held over his head, even if it were true that there was some secret (and I really doubt there was), I think it's an enormous leap to consider that it could have been that he committed this sick freakin' murder, don't you? And that's a darned good point you made there; if Bayley was capable of such a horrific crime, then why wouldn't he have just killed off the blackmailer?! :tu:

About watching autopsies for fun, I'd view it as the two of them merely sharing a common interest. I certainly don't think it should be considered an unusual activity. (Now, if neither were doctors, then I'd agree it's a strange activity!)

Re: the possibility of a female perp, I have to say, I've never considered it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How funny you're thinking more about Bailey because I've been thinking more about that other guy, Smith, or whatever his name actually was. :-*

Now, about Bayley and the allegation of a secret held over his head, even if it were true that there was some secret (and I really doubt there was), I think it's an enormous leap to consider that it could have been that he committed this sick freakin' murder, don't you? And that's a darned good point you made there; if Bayley was capable of such a horrific crime, then why wouldn't he have just killed off the blackmailer?! :tu:

About watching autopsies for fun, I'd view it as the two of them merely sharing a common interest. I certainly don't think it should be considered an unusual activity. (Now, if neither were doctors, then I'd agree it's a strange activity!)

Re: the possibility of a female perp, I have to say, I've never considered it.

In the harnish video someone quotes John Douglas as saying the dumpsite neighborhood meant something to this killer. Its clearly placed there to be found but its not the kind of place most people would know about. Its an average neighborhood. The killer could have dumped her in the mountains or some rural road a few miles out of LA. But he chose this lot in this neighborhood. I don't think the dumpsite was by chance. It might not have anything to do with Bayley but he did live right down the street. So if it were him, did he want to watch the discovery unfold? if it was his female partner did she want to say to him, hey you want your girlfriend back? Of course maybe they both kidnapped her and held her, but maybe the partner became angry and killed her. I would think the man could easily move a 120 lb woman without cutting her in half. But of course that might be more signature than ease of movement. Or it might have been more ease of consealment than due to weight. If bayley is not this unsub's connection to this neighborhood, then its a major coincidence. Maybe someone else in bayley's circle. I keep thinking of that cut smile...was he or she trying to say, now you will smile forever or now you will look like a clown forever or was it he wanted people to see a permanent smile when they found her. there is something he is saying with that smile...its unmistakeably the signature way beyond torture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

In the harnish video someone quotes John Douglas as saying the dumpsite neighborhood meant something to this killer. Its clearly placed there to be found but its not the kind of place most people would know about. Its an average neighborhood. The killer could have dumped her in the mountains or some rural road a few miles out of LA. But he chose this lot in this neighborhood. I don't think the dumpsite was by chance. It might not have anything to do with Bayley but he did live right down the street.

The first thing I note about the dumpsite is that it was on a street in a neighborhood not fully developed and so it was somewhere he could dump the body and still likely not be seen, but yeah, I think he was somehow knowledgeable of that location.

If bayley is not this unsub's connection to this neighborhood, then its a major coincidence. Maybe someone else in bayley's circle.

Well, the link to that street is the witness to Short's sister's marriage, though, right?

(Btw, I wonder what the sister's side of the story was re: what that guy said about Short having told him that she would be meeting her sister at the hotel. I've never read/heard anything about the sister until Harnish's info. and my impression has been that Short might have lied to him about it so he wouldn't worry.

I keep thinking of that cut smile...was he or she trying to say, now you will smile forever or now you will look like a clown forever or was it he wanted people to see a permanent smile when they found her. there is something he is saying with that smile...its unmistakeably the signature way beyond torture.

I think the reason was probably something along those lines. I've seen it speculated that because it was to the mouth, it was because of something she'd said, but I don't think so.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I got to thinking about Dr. Bayley as the killer. The story goes his female partner in his practice, a doctor as well, and alledged mistress, held a secret over his head according to Dr. Bayley widow in her lawsuit. Some speculated the secret was that Bayley was the killer. Another allegation was he ran an illegal abortion clinic and she threatened to expose it. No proof of either but just an allegation of a secret. If his secret was that he was this demented killer, why would he just not kill his blackmailer. I know some serial killers do not kill people they know, but it was just a thought. I am beginning to wonder if this female doctor was involved or the actual killer. Could the placing of the body near dr. Bayley's home have been a message to him? did he have some guilt in this crime? I will have to see if there is more about these two out there. Harnish seems to suggest they were both into watching autopsies for fun. She probably would need to cut her in half to move her more easily.

Hmm...you know I've always speculated Jack the Ripper to have possibly been a woman. That would be interesting and is a possible answer.

The doctor or his assistant could have wanted to experiment/play with dead bodies since they were interested in autopsies. Maybe they viewed ladies of the night as worthless and rationalizes their killings that way. Or the ripper could have been a crazy vigilante wanting to rid the world of prostitutes. Interesting...

Edited by Jilliman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr Bayley was an old man, in his 60's, suffering from a brain disease that killed him in 1948. If you're relying on Harnisch then you should know that his research is shoddy and his conclusions the same.

I looked into Dr Alphonse Bayley about 4 years ago. Given that I believe a doctor was involved, I thought I had found the right one. But I hadn't. Dr Bayley was not involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite how Harnisch evaluates info., I'd still like to know what that info is, but it sounds like I've heard the gist of what he's put together.

I'd like to hear more from Gilmore and I'm considering ordering his book, Severed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite how Harnisch evaluates info., I'd still like to know what that info is, but it sounds like I've heard the gist of what he's put together.

I'd like to hear more from Gilmore and I'm considering ordering his book, Severed.

I enjoyed Severed but there aren't any sources listed and a lot of it is made up as I discovered later,for instance the rumour Beth had ill formed genitalia and couldn't have sex stems from him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not ready to dismiss any suspect, and since everyone mentioned is dead, slander is not an issue. I still think the perp had a connection to this dumpsite. He posed her as a proud work of art for someone or a group of people to see. He could have hidden the body, but he chose to pose it. I don't think his choice was random and I don't think convenience was his or her issue.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed Severed but there aren't any sources listed and a lot of it is made up as I discovered later,for instance the rumour Beth had ill formed genitalia and couldn't have sex stems from him.

It sounds to me like a source with access to the autopsy report may or may not have misinterpreted some of the language in the report.

Anyway, I doubt I'll order the book.

I am not ready to dismiss any suspect, and since everyone mentioned is dead, slander is not an issue.

In Bayley's case, it's the evidence I've dismissed and that I haven't seen what I consider real evidence presented against Bayley.

I don't know enough about Smith, but I'm already skeptical about 'the evidence' against him because from what little I've read about it, I can't agree that he accurately describe the crime.

I still think the perp had a connection to this dumpsite. He posed her as a proud work of art for someone or a group of people to see. He could have hidden the body, but he chose to pose it. I don't think his choice was random and I don't think convenience was his or her issue.

I think he had prior knowledge of the site, but I certainly don't know how he came by it. It appears to me it was most likely convenient. Anyway, I don't read any more into it (location) than that.

(I consider the presentation of the body as a separate issue.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not ready to dismiss any suspect, and since everyone mentioned is dead, slander is not an issue. I still think the perp had a connection to this dumpsite. He posed her as a proud work of art for someone or a group of people to see. He could have hidden the body, but he chose to pose it. I don't think his choice was random and I don't think convenience was his or her issue.

I definitely agree he posed the body,the 2 pieces haven't been just thrown to the ground,he has made sure they facing upwards with the legs splayed as if to degrade the victim and shock and horrify the person who discovered it.I think the killer got off on the thoughts of the people who had to see the mutilated corpse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely agree he posed the body,the 2 pieces haven't been just thrown to the ground,he has made sure they facing upwards with the legs splayed as if to degrade the victim and shock and horrify the person who discovered it.I think the killer got off on the thoughts of the people who had to see the mutilated corpse.

Not saying I know how or why Beth ended up in the position she did and the separation of her legs may be the most important feature to suggest posing .....but that said.....

I watched an ID channel program the other night about the 1993 death of Seattle-based grunge musician Mia Zapata. Years ago and before her killer was captured I saw the Unsolved Mysteries segment on her slaying (which I've now learned the band agreed to as a start toward raising funds for a private investigator).

Anyway, the ID show included many forensic details not given in the UM version, one of which was that the first witness (a prostitute) to find poor Mia's body in the gutter immediately observed she'd been posed like a crucifix, with arms outstretched and feet/legs crossed. LE on the scene agreed.

Over the many years it took to solve Mia's brutal murder, police eventually differed on this point, some believing because she'd likely been beaten to w/in inches of death in a car, driven to another location, then dragged from the car by her arms (under arm pits apparently), then strangled, it was possible she was not so much posed as that she simply wound up in that position after dragging.

Who knows? It was LE speculation. But I'm tossing it out to say it could be another way to look at Beth's body. I tend to go with the posing explanation for Beth myself.....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Not saying I know how or why Beth ended up in the position she did and the separation of her legs may be the most important feature to suggest posing .....but that said.....

To me, posing is made most evident by the orientation of the two sections... then maybe indicated by the rest, but I'm curious about the time of death because I think rigor could have possibly factored.

I definitely agree he posed the body,the 2 pieces haven't been just thrown to the ground,he has made sure they facing upwards with the legs splayed as if to degrade the victim and shock and horrify the person who discovered it.I think the killer got off on the thoughts of the people who had to see the mutilated corpse.

Posing is merely another indicator of the same type of perp, so to me, it doesn't matter whether there was posing or not. In other words, I think that the body was nude and the mutilations to the body (and the location of the dumpsite) all indicate enough about the perp that whether or not there was posing- and speculation of what that might have meant- shouldn't make any difference to the approach of an investigation.

I guess I wonder...what's the point?

Re: how the scene might relate to the dumpsite, I think regardless of the location of the dumpsite, there would have been the same presentation.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To me, posing is made most evident by the orientation of the two sections... then maybe indicated by the rest, but I'm curious about the time of death because I think rigor could have possibly factored.

Posing is merely another indicator of the same type of perp, so to me, it doesn't matter whether there was posing or not. In other words, I think that the body was nude and the mutilations to the body (and the location of the dumpsite) all indicate enough about the perp that whether or not there was posing- and speculation of what that might have meant- shouldn't make any difference to the approach of an investigation.

I guess I wonder...what's the point?

Re: how the scene might relate to the dumpsite, I think regardless of the location of the dumpsite, there would have been the same presentation.

We have examples of serial killers who dump the body where he hopes it will not be found, or found soon such as the green river killer, or those who seems to not have a pattern Ted Bundy. I think posing is indicative of something and geography is something for this killer. Green River Killer would have taken her to some secluded forested area and obscured her body. Ted Bundy might have rolled her down a ditch. This killer felt it important to leave her easily found and in a grotesque position to shock or so he could further enjoy his work. I think determining what he meant, or want he wanted from it is guess work. I don't pretend to know, but I can speculate that this dumpsite meant something and his posing meant something to him. One could reasonably speculate I am full of it..lol. But i choose to think this perp, who I am not totally convinced is a man or one person, wanted to send a message or wanted to impress, or wanted to shock, society, or people or a person.....and I think it could be a person or persons who live near this dumpsite. I do think its reasonable to think it could be a person or persons with medical training. Whoever did this would not have stopped though, unless they died or were in prison, in my opinion. It's also possible they did not stop, but moved on. Its also possible this was the only one he took to his home, office or whatever so he could do all that he wanted to do. perhaps the others he just discarded or left and did not mutilate. I know Dr. Bayley died about a year later of a degenerative brain disease, but I do not know the state of his health at the time of the murder. He was not living at the nearby home but his estranged wife still lived there. This connection is what brings me back to Bayley and his female partner and doctor. But I will never be able to prove that and one suspect is as good as another, given the lack of evidence. I do not declare them guilty, just very interesting. I will continue to look for info on Dr. Bayley and see if we can determine the state of health at the time of the murder. Perhaps that will eliminate him. Not sure that would eliminate his partner.

Edited by mbrn30000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But i choose to think this perp, who I am not totally convinced is a man or one person, wanted to send a message or wanted to impress, or wanted to shock, society, or people or a person.....and I think it could be a person or persons who live near this dumpsite.

I agree he wanted to shock society with his degradation of this victim. I think he could have been familiar with the vicinity of that neighborhood for a variety or reasons.

I do think its reasonable to think it could be a person or persons with medical training.

I strongly disagree. Those lacerations to the mouth don't appear to me to have been performed with any surgical precision whatsoever... nor performed with a medical instrument designed for surgery/incisions!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.