Jump to content

Cat owners, be alert.

singalto

By singalto
in General ED Issues / Gossip

 Share

Recommended Posts

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/croydon-cat-

> killer-unmasked-police-reveal-culprits-after-three

> -year-investigation-and-500-deaths-a3940956.html



Thanks Rendel, that's a very interesting article.


Pity the vet didn't do a proper job on the post mortems in the first place, eh. Might have avoided a lot of hysteria. I'm a bit surprised they got the same vet to look at them again, though - and surprise surprise he found puncture marks this time. How come he missed them on so many bodies before???


John of Chener Books always said he reckoned a lot of these supposedly-killed cats were initially the victims of road accidents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
katanita

katanita

Posted
Posted
I really hope it is foxes after all. SNARL still seem adamant that there is human involvement, I wish they would be clearer about why. But I do think they were well intentioned either way and must have had some cause to believe what they were saying at the time, seems like some of this is new evidence from re-examining bodies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Delainie

Delainie

Posted
Posted
ok I'm tired so this might be all over the place. I do not believe this to be foxes, if my rabbit died and I placed him in the garden, what are the chances he would be carried off by a fox, then if checks were made, yes there would be fox DNA and fox teeth marks on whatever parts were found.yes the same if he was hit by a car, or killed by a person, the chances of being carried away by a fox is pretty much what I would expect, so saying fox teeth marks and DNA doesn't prove anything either way . A fox would pick up a cats head and realise it's not very edible and drop it else where. So cctv of a fox dropping a head in a playground doesn't prove anything. Years ago if our cat caught any creatures, it would eat most of it and leave the head. Sorry I don't believe for a minute that it is foxes, what, they started in Croydon and after quite a long time spread the word to foxes in other areas. The RSPCA said at first it was foxes, then when things went on,got evidence, we the public do not have, they changed their mind. I feel we are being told a load of bs.foxes are generally scared of cats and only a very fragile ,elderly or blind cat or kitten would be easy prey to foxes. My cats and rabbits are in at night and only time will tell.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zebedee Tring

Zebedee Tring

Posted
Posted

Such a clever fox who drives around the country, avoiding CCTV cameras on the road and choosing houses without CCTV - and employing the skills of an experienced surgeon. Where did he train? King's? UCH?


This police announcement just doesn't make sense. There must be more to this than appears to be the case at face value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
singalto

singalto

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Zebedee Tring, I agree. Some witnesses say they have cctv of foxes walking around with cats heads which ?proves foxes are to blame.? How did these heads get detached in the first place? As far as being killed by cars is concerned, one of mine was hit and killed. He was nevertheless still in one piece. Many foxes have also been mutilated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rendelharris

rendelharris

Posted
Posted

Never realised until this current brouhaha one of the weirdest parts of SNARL's theory, which is that the killer is killing the animals with blunt force trauma, then only mutilating them after their blood has coagulated (which takes a minimum of half an hour), hence leaving no bloodstains. So this guy's killed over 500 animals, always in domestic urban situations, and hung around for a minimum of half an hour before mutilating them? And never been caught or seen on CCTV? Or are foxes are coming across cats that have been killed by vehicles once their blood has coagulated? As for why heads and tails go missing (sorry this is a bit distasteful), foxes tend to go, when scavenging, for the easiest bits to get off, which are heads, tails and limbs.


I mentioned this story a couple of pages back, but I think it bears repeating: in our last flat we had an empty rabbit hutch at the end of the garden (the rabbit was supposed to live in it but within a day of arrival he was living indoors and ruling the roost!). One day I found a largish and very neatly decapitated rabbit on top of it, clearly had been someone's pet. Extremely upsetting; the same day a neighbour came round and said she'd seen a fox come through several gardens carrying this body, and it had been spooked as it went over our fence and dropped it, coincidentally on top of the hutch. Now if she hadn't seen it, I might well have thought someone was doing something foul, and had it been this day and age I might well have attributed it to the cat killer. It's easy to construct a narrative, it's not so easy to deconstruct one once it's in the public imagination. Incidentally, the bloke we got to come and remove the remains said he'd seen several pet rabbits decapitated in this way, "amazing how clean it is, you'd think the buggers had carving knives."


There's an awful lot of confirmation bias involved in these stories, I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

singalto Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It?s good to know that foxes have developed good

> knife skills and kill each other as well. I, for

> one, will continue to keep my cats in at night.



It was stated clearly that foxes can in fact produce wounds which are as clean as, and appear to be the same as, those produced by a knife.


And of course you would continue to keep cats in at night if you believe them to be at risk, regardless of what is the cause of these deaths!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
first mate

first mate

Posted
Posted

roxie99 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes as SNARL say

>

> 1.How come no cats killed this way by foxes in

> other areas of England

> 2. They do clarify why they still think human

> involvement

> 3. How come vet pathologist missed puncture marks

> 4. Police statement wrong but they need to move

> on?



I wondered about this but think that with such an intelligent and highly adaptive species we have to allow for the possibility of learned behaviour that is passed down through generations of foxes in a particular area. London is unusually dense with very high populations of cats in close proximity, we also have huge amounts of traffic and roadkill makes for an easy meal.I haven't had a close look at other examples of this but would guess that similar episodes have always been in cities? Why the phenomenon should then die down again somewhat explodes my theory though.

>

> Rxie

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

twinhunters Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Can?t believe it?s taken 2 years and 14 part time

> police officers to say its foxes .

> Surly it?s a case of can?t spend any more time or

> money on it .



I think it is amazing that they have done such a thorough investigation and involved so many non police experts, and other organisations.


If you don't like the outcome, that's another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rendelharris

rendelharris

Posted
Posted

lilolil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So,these clever foxes can unlock a rabbit hutch,

> decapitate and disembowel a rabbit, reassemble it

> so it looks entire, then lock the hutch back up?

> Are they also able to do this to cats and leave

> their bodies on the doorsteps of where they live?

> Just asking.


Can you give a link with evidence of this (about the rabbit) please, as I can't find it mentioned anywhere, not even by SNARL. In any case, individual cases prove nothing; as previously noted, there are undoubtedly instances of people doing horrible things to animals, usually ex-partners, disgruntled neighbours etc. This does not mean there is a maniac going round who's killed 500 animals, all in urban residential areas, waited half an hour in each case for their blood to coagulate, then mutilated them, carefully revisited the owner's property to lay them out ritually and never been seen or caught on CCTV (apart from one instance where someone was seen "near" an alleged incident).


Incidentally, lilolli, you castigated me some time back, saying:


"So, you are saying that experts in their fields, forensic scientists,vets,a police team and SNARL are mistaken?"


I presume you are now saying that the "experts in their fields" police team and their forensic scientists are mistaken, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

lilolil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I won't be

> drawn into any silliness on here.



What is silly is to relate stories and then opt out of the resulting discussion when asked to back them up with evidence.


In my opinion.

Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...