Suspected Serial Killer Arrested In The UK

zimovain · 27-05-2010 10:31AM #1

Sick stuff, also heard on the news there could be more victims:(

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/england/bradford_and_west_yorkshire/10169376.stm.

A 40-year-old man, thought to be a PhD criminology student, is being questioned about the murders of three women in Bradford.
The man in custody - believed to be Stephen Griffiths - was arrested on suspicion of killing Suzanne Blamires, 36, who was last seen on Friday.
He is also suspected of killing Shelley Armitage, 31, and Susan Rushworth, 43. All three women were sex workers.
CCTV footage is understood to be playing a major part in the inquiry.
Detectives have been granted extra time, until Thursday evening, to question the suspect who was arrested at an address in Bradford on Monday.
Officers, accompanied by specially-trained sniffer dog teams, have been searching a number of buildings, some of them in the Chain Street area of Bradford's red light district

The Sun (I know, I know) have some info on the guy

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2989295.ece

Griffiths, an expert on serial killers, poses as his doppelganger as he writes: "Humanity is not merely a biological condition. It is also a state of mind.

"On that basis I am a pseudo human at best. A demon at worst."

LiNgWiStIkZ · 27-05-2010 10:35AM

zimovain wrote: »

Sick stuff, also heard on the news there could be more victims:(

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/england/bradford_and_west_yorkshire/10169376.stm.

The Sun (I know, I know) have some info on the guy

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2989295.ece

Scrolled down a tiny bit and just saw the link for The Sun. I was about to flame but thank feck I scrolleed back up and saw the BBC :P

It's weird how qualified he is but ends up being a serial killer

kylith · 27-05-2010 10:38AM

LiNgWiStIkZ wrote: »

Scrolled down a tiny bit and just saw the link for The Sun. I was about to flame but thank feck I scrolleed back up and saw the BBC :P

It's weird how qualified he is but ends up being a serial killer

They're often very intelligent. That's how they become serial killers rather than one-time killers.

zimovain · 27-05-2010 10:40AM

This all reminds me of the Ipswich murders a few years ago.

Standard Toaster · 27-05-2010 10:41AM

Reminds me of Dexter

hardCopy · 27-05-2010 10:45AM

What do Yorkshiremen have against the brazzers?

zimovain · 27-05-2010 10:49AM

Some more info coming from Sky

On a social networking website, he calls himself "Ven Pariah" - a mythical, demonic figure - and featured a list of some of Britain's most notorious criminals.

Photos of Stephen Griffiths from his MySpace and Facebook pages
He also recently reviewed a book called Women And The Noose, a history of female crime, and was trying to buy three DVD box sets on mass murderers and serial killers.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Prostitute-Murders-New-Details-Emerge-About-40-Year-Old-Suspect-Following-Deaths-In-Bradford/Article/201005415639089?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15639089_Prostitute_Murders%3A_New_Details_Emerge_About_40-Year-Old_Suspect_Following_Deaths_In_Bradford

arybvtcw0eolkf · 27-05-2010 11:01AM

zimovain wrote: »

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2010/May/Week4/15639150.jpg

NSFW - LINK CONTAINS IMAGES OF MAN BOOBS!...

zimovain · 27-05-2010 11:04AM

Simon Millions Scotch wrote: »

NSFW - LINK CONTAINS IMAGES OF MAN BOOBS!...

:D

latenia · 27-05-2010 11:17AM

Favourite films include gore fests such as Evil Dead I and II, Reservoir Dogs and Scarface

He likes reggae, hip-hop, house music and drum 'n bass.

I guess that makes me a serial killer too :eek:

kylith · 27-05-2010 11:21AM

[/quote]Favourite films include gore fests such as Evil Dead I and II, Reservoir Dogs and Scarface

He likes reggae, hip-hop, house music and drum 'n bass. [/quote]
Does he like ice-cream? If he likes ice-cream I'd better turn in myself and half the people I know!

rovert · 27-05-2010 11:22AM

Strange way to collect research, Im sure a survey would have done the trick.

Cheap Thrills! · 27-05-2010 11:26AM

Gamekeeper turned poacher

My name is URL · 27-05-2010 11:28AM

What's with this new (Not a Daily Mail Article) fad?

johnny_knoxvile · 27-05-2010 11:39AM

rovert wrote: »

Strange way to collect research, Im sure a survey would have done the trick.

does killing people count as a practical?

walshb · 27-05-2010 11:41AM

My name is URL wrote: »

What's with this new (Not a Daily Mail Article) fad?

It's fashionable and the in thing to ridicule any Daily Mail article....

I think the Jan Moir article on Gately really got to some sensitive folks.

Millicent · 27-05-2010 11:51AM

Or perhaps we just like our news from credible sources?

walshb · 27-05-2010 11:53AM

Millicent wrote: »

Or perhaps we just like our news from credible sources?

So they have zero credibility then?

Amazing they are still in business.....

Personally I think it's just a fashion trend with "most" people. Folks slating
the paper and don't even know why, as they have never even read it.
Following the flock, as per usual.

Abrasax · 27-05-2010 11:53AM

walshb wrote: »

It's fashionable and the in thing to ridicule any Daily Mail article....

I think the Jan Moir article on Gately really got to some sensitive folk...

I think it has a lot to do with Ah'ers being very sensitive about perceived attacks on travellers and immigrants, also.

Millicent · 27-05-2010 11:57AM

walshb wrote: »

So they have zero credibility then?

Amazing they are still in business.....

Personally I think it's just a fashion trend with "most" people. Folks slating
the paper and don't even know why, as they have never even read it.
Following the flock, as per usual.

No, they really don't. And I say that as a journalism student and a few times published journalist. They really scrape the barrel of journalistic standards and are rarely (I'd say never) impartial, unbiased or credible. They are the Fox News of British newspapers.

As an aside, they also spent a good deal of coverage in the past calling all Irish people terrorists. Now that they give away a free DVD now and then with the Irish edition, Irish people seem to forget their stance on the Irish in the past.

They are exactly the sort of publication that give journalists a bad name.

General Zod · 27-05-2010 11:58AM

The Daily Mail often sensationalise issues that aren't necessarily in need of sensationalisation. Coupled with the fact that they will only report what suits their agenda on alot of topics to appeal to a certain demographic (see their support for the cervical cancer jab in Ireland, along with their opposition to the same jab in the UK). Bandwagoners who don't deserve attention.

My name is URL · 27-05-2010 12:02PM

Millicent wrote: »

Or perhaps we just like our news from credible sources?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Daily Mail fan.. You say you like your news from credible sources.. like AH? It's not a news aggregator, it's a discussion forum

If the article turned out to be from The Guardian then fair enough, but it's the Sun for God's sake.. that bastion of informed opinion and analysis!

Millicent · 27-05-2010 12:04PM

My name is URL wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Daily Mail fan.. You say you like your news from credible sources.. like AH? It's not a news aggregator, it's a discussion forum

If the article turned out to be from The Guardian then fair enough, but it's the Sun for God's sake.. that bastion of informed opinion and analysis!

It's from the BBC! The second link is to the Sun. And even though it's AH, I'm not about to discuss something which I might have been misinformed about to begin with. Makes for a pointless discussion when you have to backpedal cos the original source was biased and sensationalist.

walshb · 27-05-2010 12:05PM

What happens when the Mail publishes articles that also appear in the "credible" papers?

Is it a a case of they got lucky? Holy sh!t, the Mail prints dozens of articles, not all will be "perfect" all the time.

Also, just because something appears biased, doesn't necessarily take away from the accuracy
or truth in a report. I will take accuracy and truth over bias any time.

Millicent · 27-05-2010 12:07PM

walshb wrote: »

What happens when the Mail publishes articles that also appear in the "credible" papers?

Is it a a case of they got lucky? Holy sh!t, the Mail prints dozens of articles, not all will be perfect all the time.

Also, just because something appears biased, doesn't necessarily take away from the accuracy
or truth in a report.

The aim of a newspaper is to make sure they are as perfect as they can be all the time. And I don't think I can ever recall seeing a Daily Mail reprint in a "credible" paper.

ETA: What? Accurate and truthful don't really correlate with biased. I'm not a fan of having to filter my news to get to the truth of it.

walshb · 27-05-2010 12:12PM

Millicent wrote: »

The aim of a newspaper is to make sure they are as perfect as they can be all the time. And I don't think I can ever recall seeing a Daily Mail reprint in a "credible" paper.

ETA: What? Accurate and truthful don't really correlate with biased. I'm not a fan of having to filter my news to get to the truth of it.

Listen, if the Mail were so poor, inaccurate, false etc, they would be gone, out of business, sued to the high heavens. You may not like or agree with some of their articles, but to imply that they may be inaccurate or false is a stretch.

They appear biased against immigrants, so what? They are still reporting facts. They still have to adhere to standards

So, are you saying that other papers do not print articles that the Mail have printed, not word for word, but similar and the same story theme? I have seen many Mail articles that also appeared
in other papers, written by their journalists. A lot, if not all the same facts, just different style writing or word choice.

Millicent · 27-05-2010 12:17PM

walshb wrote: »

Listen, if the Mail were so poor, inaccurate, false etc, they would be gone, out of business, sued to the high heavens. You may not like or agree with some of their articles, but to imply that they may be inaccurate or false is a stretch.

They appear biased against immigrants, so what? They are still reporting facts. They still have to adhere to standards

They really, really don't. For a newspaper to be sued or for a complaint to be upheld, the person affected by an article has to make the complaint. Since they don't specifically slander one person in their immigration articles but when it's a whole group, it's actually a lot more difficult to make a complaint.

And their "facts" have been disproven on any number of watchgroups you can find on the net. Just because their journalistic standards are crap and they are biased and inaccurate does not mean they'll go out of business because they speak to so many prejudices that people will still buy the paper for the reinforcement of those stereotypes.

Do you also not have a problem with how they viewed the Irish and what they published about us?

Millicent · 27-05-2010 12:18PM

walshb wrote: »

So, are you saying that other papers do not print articles that the Mail have printed, not word for word, but similar and the same story theme? I have seen many Mail articles that also appeared
in other papers, written by their journalists. A lot, if not all the same facts, just different style writing or word choice.

Word choice makes a giant difference and can affect the slant of a piece. And newspapers gather a lot of their news from much the same sources so it's not surprising that similar themes and stories would appear.

enda1 · 27-05-2010 12:23PM

Millicent wrote: »

The aim of a newspaper is to make sure they are as perfect as they can be all the time. And I don't think I can ever recall seeing a Daily Mail reprint in a "credible" paper.

ETA: What? Accurate and truthful don't really correlate with biased. I'm not a fan of having to filter my news to get to the truth of it.

The aim of a newspaper is to sell as many copies as possible.

The Mail does this through sensationalisation and lying to create stories along with many other dodgy techniques.

A proper newspaper will do it through well researched, topical, factual journalism.

Neither is the objectively right way, its just up to the consumer which they want.

Millicent · 27-05-2010 12:26PM

enda1 wrote: »

The aim of a newspaper is to sell as many copies as possible.

The Mail does this through sensationalisation and lying to create stories along with many other dodgy techniques.

A proper newspaper will do it through well researched, topical, factual journalism.

Neither is the objectively right way, its just up to the consumer which they want.

I almost agree with you except for the "objectively right" part. Lack of bias is the objective right but unfortunately, it doesn't sell as many papers as it should.

walshb · 27-05-2010 12:26PM

Millicent wrote: »

Word choice makes a giant difference and can affect the slant of a piece. And newspapers gather a lot of their news from much the same sources so it's not surprising that similar themes and stories would appear.

Well, a lot of the time I find they say what most people think but are afraid to say.

Suspected Serial Killer Arrested In The UK

Comments