Mind of a Serial Killer - SERIAL KILLER: The Mad Butcher of Kingsbury Run Pt. 1

Episode Date: June 29, 2026

In 1930s Cleveland, a killer known as the Mad Butcher of Kingsbury Run preyed on the vulnerable as the city struggled through the Great Depression. Victims were found dismembered and decapitated across the city, their identities stripped away as deliberately as their lives. This episode examines the psychology of overkill, dismemberment, and a pioneering criminal profile that was decades ahead of its time.Join Crime House+ to binge a special limited series on Murder: True Crime Stories for America’s 250th: The Crimes That Built America. These are the cases that created the FBI, gave us Miranda rights, sparked criminal profiling, and gave us America’s Most Wanted. Join at crimehouseplus.com or if you’re listening on Apple Podcasts, tap “Try Free” at the top of this show’s page. You’ll also get both parts to every Serial Killers & Murderous Minds case released at once ad-free.🎧 Need More to Binge? Listen to other Crime House Originals Clues, Crimes Of…, Murder True Crime Stories, Crime House 24/7, and more wherever you get your podcasts!Follow me on SocialInstagram: @CrimehouseTikTok: @CrimehouseFacebook: @crimehousestudiosYouTube: @crimehousestudios

Hi, listeners, exciting news. Crime House Plus and Murder True Crime Stories are celebrating America's 250th by dropping a four-part limited series on the Crimes That Built America. These are the crimes and cases that gave us Miranda Rights, sparked criminal profiling, and a murder that built America's missing children movement. Follow Murder True Crime Stories for a new episode every Monday leading up to July 4th, or you can listen to all of them right now with Crime House Plus. To join, go to Crimehouseplus.com, or if you're listening on Apple Podcasts, tap Try Free at the top of this show's page.

This is Crimehouse. Anytime you're in a competition, it's important to know your opponent, whether you're trying to win a game, negotiate a deal, or even fighting for survival. If you understand who you're up against, you'll have much better odds. Unfortunately, that's not always possible. Sometimes we have no idea what our opponent is thinking. We don't know what they want or what they're capable of. This was the battle the people of Cleveland faced during the Great Depression. Except unlike most other cities, Wall Street wasn't their biggest threat.

A killer was. Someone so psychotic and depraved, they were powerless against him. The human mind is powerful. It shapes how we think, feel, love and hate, but sometimes it drives people to commit the unthinkable. This is serial killers and murderous minds, a crimehouse original. I'm Vanessa Richardson. And I'm forensic psychologist Dr. Tristan Engels.

Every Monday and Thursday, we uncover the darkest minds in history, analyzing what makes a killer. Crimehouse exists because of listeners like you. Want even more? Join Crimehouse Plus and get both parts of every story dropped on the same Monday, completely ad-free. No waiting three days for part two, plus crimehouse bonus episodes every month. To join, go to crimehouseplus.com. Or if you listen on Apple Podcasts, tap, try free at the top of the serial killers and murderous minds page. Before we get started, be advised that this episode contains discussion of murder and dismemberment,

so please listen with care. Today, we begin our deep dive into an unidentified murderer, known only as the Cleveland torso murderer, or The Mad Butcher of Kingsbury Run. In the 1930s, the mad butcher terrorized the city of Cleveland, Ohio. He dismembered and decapitated his victims, creating an impossible puzzle for detectives as they struggled to catch him. As Vanessa goes to the story, I'll be talking about things like why certain killers engage in the act of overkill,

the psychology of dismemberment, and why they may intentionally leave clues behind. And as always, we'll be asking the question, What makes a killer? In the early 1930s, the city of Cleveland, Ohio was in disarray. Only a few years earlier, Cleveland was a booming industrial town, a hub for steel, oil, and automotives. It was easy for people to find work and feed their families.

Life was good. However, all that good fortune wouldn't last, because when the stock market crashed in October of 1929, Cleveland's prosperity went with it. During the Great Depression, unemployment soared. People could no longer afford to eat. And a city that had once glittered with restaurants and nightclubs was suddenly overrun with shanty towns. Among the makeshift shacks, people dug through trash for whatever source of food they could find, even rotten vegetables. They grabbed dead chickens that poultry shop owners had discarded.

The more desperate people became, the worse they behaved. The rate of assaults and violent robberies skyrocketed. It was a dog-eat-dog world. That is desperation, and that is what extreme widespread poverty can lead to. Extreme poverty is known to increase stress, trauma exposure, substance abuse risk, family conflict, and untreated mental illness. People become consumed with immediate survival needs because that's how we are wired. And when the nervous system stays in prolonged survival mode like that, emotional regulation,

impulse control, long-term plan. and even frustration tolerance can all suffer in return. And also during a widespread economic downfall like that, people often feel abandoned by institutions or disconnected from one another and uncertain about the future. And all of that compounds, and it leaves little room for coping outlets that once existed before. And now that said, poverty alone does not cause someone to become violent or criminal. Most impoverished people are not violent, but statistically,

Severe economic instability is associated with increases in certain crimes, especially crimes tied to desperation, survival, instability, and substance abuse, which is why addressing poverty as a whole is a critical public health and public safety issue, not just an economic one. Unfortunately, in 1944, things took an even darker turn. On the morning of September 5th, 21-year-old Frank Lagossey walked along the shore of Lake Erie and northern. in Cleveland. Frank did this every morning. He lived near the lake, and he went there to find driftwood to burn in order to heat his home. Just before 8 a.m., as Frank inspected a flimsy piece of wood, something in the distance caught his eye. He squinted through the fog to try and get a better look. It appeared the waves had washed up a piece of tree trunk. For Frank, this was like finding a pot of gold. As he moved closer, it seemed the trunk was stuck halfway in the sand,

and the bark had mostly eroded. Frank was excited. No bark meant the wood would burn even better. But when he bent down to inspect it more closely, Frank stopped cold. It wasn't a tree trunk he was looking at. It was the lower half of a woman's torso. Frank tried to process what he was seeing.

Even though the torso was badly decomposed, he could tell the woman's legs had been severed at the knees. He immediately darted to a neighbor's house to call the police. When officers from the Cleveland PD arrived, they carefully pulled the remains from the sand. Their first theory was that this poor woman had died by suicide and that a boat propeller had dismembered her body. They brought the body to the coroner's office to confirm. 51-year-old Arthur Pierce was the Cuyahoga County coroner. Before determining the woman's cause of death, he wanted to try his best to identify her in hopes of giving her family closure.

But it wouldn't be easy. After all, there was no head or hands. Pierce couldn't analyze facial features, dental traits, or fingerprints. Pierce turned the torso over, hoping to find any distinguishing features, but what he actually found horrified him. The woman's spine had been severed in an extremely precise manner. It was the kind of wound that could have only been inflicted by a sharp tool, like a knife, not a boat propeller. Which meant the woman hadn't taken her own life. someone else did. Not only that, but whoever killed her didn't just want her dead. They wanted her to remain anonymous forever.

I would have to agree with that, given the level of mutilation that took place here. The murder itself and the mutilation that can follow with some offenders don't always serve the same purpose. In some cases, mutilation is practical. The offender is trying to delay identification, destroy evidence, or hinder an investigation. Removing the head, hands, or other, identifying features can certainly serve that purpose, as we can see here. It's making it very difficult for peers to identify the victim because of that. But there are also instances where mutilation may indicate that the offender is expressing emotion like anger, domination, or sadism, depersonalization of the victim, or some other psychological need. This offender clearly planned this or has some degree of skill and familiarity with anatomy and is willing to spend significant time with the victim's body after death. That's not impulsive violence. The victims being treated like an object because they are being altered or concealed, controlled, or transformed for some specific purpose.

But what's interesting is that they did not display her after all of that, which I would actually have expected after that level of mutilation, unless they attempted to, but they somehow got washed away accidentally, or they are more interested in concealment, which is entirely plausible as well. In cases of overkill, like you mentioned, what does the victim usually represent to the killer, especially if they didn't know each other personally? Well, overkill simply means the offender inflicted significantly more injury than was necessary to cause death. We don't know what actually caused her death. She could have been killed from an overdose, for example, and the mutilation occurred after the fact.

But overkill tells us something about the behavior, not necessarily the motive. When investigators see overkill, they begin asking why the offender continued the violence after the death was already likely or inevitable. And sometimes that reflects intense anger toward the victim. Sometimes it reflects panic or in some cases psychosis, sadism, loss of control, or just a need to dominate. And in cases where the victim and the offender do not know one another, investigators may consider whether the victim represented something psychologically significant to the offender, rather than being the source of their emotions at all. And statistically, overkill is more commonly associated with victims who are known to the offender. But that does not mean that is always the case.

Richard Ramirez, Ted Bundy and Danny Rowling, all are examples of serial offenders who used overkill on victims that they did not know. And we have done episodes on all of those. Despite what little he had to go on, Pierce continued his exam. intent on learning everything he could about this woman. He determined that in life, she'd likely been around 5'4 foot 6 and 125 pounds, and that she was probably in her mid to late 30s at the time of her death. He noticed that she had an abdominal scar consistent with a hysterectomy that had likely been performed a year before she'd died.

However, hysterectomies were relatively common among women this age at the time, so the scar didn't give Pierce much to go on. All he could do now was focus on the evidence surrounding her death. Based on the condition of her remains, the woman had likely been killed between six and eight months earlier. And there was another major detail Pierce had to address, the woman's skin. It was reddish in color and had a dry, rough feel, almost like leather, which wasn't consistent with typical decomposition. Pierce could tell there was more to this story. He sent a skin sample for testing, and the results were chilling.

They came back positive for a chemical consistent with slay. Slaked lime. Not to be confused with quick lime, which would have dissolved in the body, slaked lime had the opposite effect. It actually helped preserve the remains. Pierce theorized that the killer had likely intended to dissolve the body, but maybe confused the two substances. I think Pierce's theory is reasonable based on the information he had. If someone is dismembering bodies and attempting to conceal identities, which is what it seems like, at least right now, then the most straightforward explanation is that they are trying to destroy evidence and avoid detection. And if the offender mistakenly used slaked mine believing it would accelerate decomposition,

then that fits that objective. Now at first glance, that sounds like a mistake in offender this sophisticated would not make. But someone can be organized enough to kill like this and dismember and transport and conceal bodies and still make mistakes like this. That said, it is hard to know if that is actually what happened here, because there are other possible explanations. For example, when we look at offenders like Jeffrey Dahmer, our very first episodes that we ever did on this podcast,

he preserved body parts because they served a psychological purpose. They functioned as trophies, reminders, and a way to maintain a sense of control and attachment with his victims. At this stage, though, we don't have evidence of that. What we know is that the offender mutilated the victim and ultimately disposed of the remains. But I would not completely rule out the possibility, that the offender's interaction with the body

also serves some psychological purpose beyond simply avoiding detection. But it is an interesting data point nonetheless because slaked lime is a chemical used in certain professions like butchery, for example, and it's used for sanitation and preparation. This feels like a pretty dark question, but I have to ask,

do you think the killer could have kept the missing head and hands? It's entirely possible because the head and the hands, interestingly enough, are among the body parts that are most commonly associated with trophy taking, symbolic significance or post-mortem fascination in some offenders. But again, if concealment was the primary goal,

then it's more likely than not that he disposed of those in a separate location because of the practical value it has in preventing identification. As Pierce shared the findings with investigators, the story was making front-page news, and the sensation had the whole town buzzing. The headline in the Cleveland Press, read, quote, hacked body of woman found on Eastside Beach, end quote. In the article, the paper called the unidentified woman, the Lady of the Lake. When a handyman named Joseph Heddock saw the

story, a lump formed in his throat. Two weeks earlier, Joseph had been working on a lakeshore estate 30 miles east of Cleveland. As he worked, he stumbled upon something chilling. It looked like a human spine and ribs with pieces of flesh still attached. Joseph had, quote, quickly reported it to police in Lake County. However, when officers assessed things, they determined that the bones were from an animal carcass. And they told him to bury it in the sand. Joseph felt like the police had been wrong.

And now, reading about the Lady of the Lake, he felt even more sure. If he was right, that would mean he'd buried human remains. So he called the Lake County police again, and this time they took him more seriously. Officers from both Lake County and Cleveland met Joseph in the area where he'd buried the bones. They'd dug them back up and brought them back to Arthur Pierce.

It's possible that police thought the bones belonged to another victim, but when Pierce laid eyes on them, he had a different thought. He lined them up with the torso belonging to the Lady of the Lake, and they were a perfect fit. In Pierce's opinion, the bones had belonged to the same woman, which raised a frightening possibility, that she'd not only been brutally murdered and dismembered, but the killer had scattered her remains in different areas.

If that were true, authorities were dealing with a truly evil and depraved killer. At the same time, they didn't want to jump to any conclusions. What they needed most was more information. So they enlisted the help of locals, including the Boy Scouts, to help them search Lake Erie's entire shore for any additional remains. But they didn't find anything. However, investigators did have one thing that could possibly identify, the woman. The abdominal scar

Pierce had found during his initial examination. At the time, he didn't think it would help ID the woman, but now authorities were becoming more desperate. So they combed through missing persons reports to see if any women who had disappeared in the last six months had a scar like that. But there weren't any hits. Meanwhile, the story remained in the headlines, and even though the public was well aware of the situation, no one came forward with any useful information. The police felt like the investigation had reached a dead end. So on September 11th, 1934, less than a week after the woman was found, they buried her remains at Highland Park Cemetery. At the time, it seemed like the end of a sad story. A woman who'd been brutally murdered and

dismembered was buried in anonymity. The people who loved her would never know what happened to their daughter, sister, wife, or friend. But no one realized her death, was only the beginning. Soon, more tragedy would be unearthed, and it would be more brutal and shocking than anyone could have imagined. In September of 1934, a woman's dismembered remains were found on the shore of Lake Erie in Cleveland, Ohio.

Soon after, investigators connected a set of bones to the same victim, whom the press had dubbed The Lady of the Lake. They searched for more evidence, but didn't find any. Eventually, both law enforcement and the public dismissed this murder as an unfortunate but isolated incident. Until one year later, when terror struck again. On September 23rd, 1935, just over a year after the Lady of the Lake was discovered,

16-year-old James Wagner and 12-year-old Peter Costura were walking along an area known as Kingsbury Run, which was a large ravine lined with poor neighborhoods on both sides. The ravine itself was filled with. garbage, weeds, and homeless encampments. It wasn't the kind of place for two kids to get caught after dark. But around five that evening, as James and Peter walked home, their baseball rolled into the ravine, and James dared Peter to race to the bottom after it. The two boys darted down the hill. James made it to the bottom first. Once there, he stopped cold, because lying in the weeds was the dead body of a man missing his head. James and Peter ran back up the hill and found a way

to alert the police. Officers arrived within minutes, and when they entered the ravine, they noticed something else. A second body, there were not one, but two decapitated men in Kingsbury run. So there's two bodies, both decapitated found in the same location. That could suggest familiarity and comfort with the area. Offenders often return to locations that they see as safe, secluded, or unlikely to attract attention. He also likely viewed the location as a reliable disposal ground, but it could also suggest confidence. He either believed the bodies would not be found quickly or believe the location offered enough protection from detection that it was worth using again, but there's also the possibility that he developed a routine. Once someone finds a method or a location

that works, they may repeat it because it reduces uncertainty and risk. Criminal behavior can become ritualized in that way. But in general, two decapitated victims in the same area raises the possibility that the offender is developing a preferred method, a preferred victim pool, or preferred disposal strategy. And ideally, when investigators start seeing that kind of repetition, they begin asking, and again, ideally, whether they're dealing with a serial offender rather than isolated homicides. So if the same person killed both those men and the Lady of the Lake, then what are your current thoughts on the type of offender Cleveland's dealing with at this point?

Yeah, if we're assuming for the sake of discussion that the same offender killed both men and the Lady of the Lake, then what stands out to me is not the victim's sex, but the similarities in how the bodies were handled. Because at this point, we appear to have an offender who's comfortable with extreme post-mortem mutilation. That suggests someone who's organized enough to think beyond the murder itself. When what makes the case unusual is that the victims include both men and women. Most serial offenders demonstrate a relatively consistent victim preference, but there are outliers.

Ted Bundy had predominantly female victims, but he did have a male victim. Richard Ramirez targeted both men and women. Israel Keys targeted both men and women. It's less common, but it's not unheard of. So if these cases are connected, I would begin looking less at the gender and more at vulnerability, accessibility, lifestyle, or circumstance. What did these victims have in common that made them attractive targets? I would also be paying attention to the level of confidence. At this stage, there are still multiple possibilities regarding motive.

The mutilation could be primarily about concealment, but it could have psychological significance as well. Or it could be both simultaneously. But this seems like an organized offender. who appears highly comfortable handling bodies, who selects victims that are vulnerable and dehumanizes them. The post-mortem handling of the body appears to be a very important part of their process. Investigators weren't sure how to begin piecing together what lay before them. Based on differing levels of decomposition,

investigators believed one man had died roughly a month before the other. The first victim's race was impossible to determine because of the same. state of the remains. However, he was shorter and weighed more than the second victim. Since the second victim's body wasn't as badly decomposed, officers could tell he was white. He was also tall and thin. And those weren't the only differences, because some aspects of the second victim's remains suggested that the killer's MO had evolved since the first man's death. Not only was the second victim still wearing a pair of black socks, but he'd been posed to look like he was sleeping on his side, clutching a pillow.

Investigators weren't sure what to make of it, and soon they noticed some even more troubling details. The two victims hadn't just been decapitated, their genitals had been removed as well, and there wasn't any blood at the scene, which made police think the killer had drained the bodies elsewhere before disposing of them in Kingsbury-R-R-N. Investigators had no idea how they'd be able to identify these victims. They kept scouring the scene in hopes they'd find something, anything to point them in the right direction. And soon they found it. One of the officers noticed something unusual sticking out of the ground.

It looked like wisps of dark hair. He leaned down and brushed some of the dirt away, then quickly recoiled. It was a decapitated human head. The police were horrified. Still, they knew that despite the decay, this was a valuable piece of evidence. And upon closer inspection, authorities

determine that the level of decomposition matched the body of the first victim, the shorter man whose race was unknown. After making this discovery, officers knew they had to dig up the surrounding area, and when they did, they not only found the second man's head in a separate hole, but both victims' genitals discarded nearby. So now we're going a little bit beyond concealment. when an offender is intentionally engaging in post-mortem mutilation, particularly involving the reproductive organs, it's worth considering whether the behavior serves a psychological purpose. In some cases, it reflects domination, humiliation, trophy taking, or dehumanization. In addition to the removal of the genitals, one of the victims was reportedly positioned on his side as if he was clutching a pillow, which seems almost childlike and vulnerable posing. When you start seeing that kind of post-mortening, interaction. Naturally, we're going to wonder whether the offender is trying to communicate something. But this is the first time that we have seen positioning like this. So it's hard to say if it was intentional. But if it was, one possible interpretation is that the offender was symbolically stripping these victims of

their masculinity, their power or identity. Male genitals are closely tied to concepts of sexuality and masculinity. And when you combine their removal with the positioning of the body like that, it's possible that he was attempting to humiliate, infantilize, or redefine them in death. And this is only a hypothesis. And even then, I still have additional questions, because why position one of the victims and not the other? And maybe that particular victim held greater significance to him. Or maybe the positioning was not intentional at all. It's really hard to say this early. I never thought I'd be asking this question. But what does it say that the killer would leave the victim's genitals behind for investigators to find. Well, I think it suggests that concealment may not be their primary goal,

like I mentioned. We talked about some of the reasons an offender might remove genitalia, but what is interesting here is that he didn't keep them or destroy them. Instead, he buried them separately and not far from the bodies or the heads. So if the offender's only goal was to hide what he had done, there were more effective ways to do that, to conceal it. Instead, he left them in a place where they could eventually be recovered and identified and very easily. So again, that to me raises the likelihood that the mutilation itself was what was significant to him. And I also think it's interesting to compare these victims to the Lady of the Lake if they were connected, because there, it seems he took greater effort to conceal her identity and dispose of the remains. So why didn't

he display her in the same way that he did this gentleman? It is uncommon to see this level of mutilation, post-mortem, and ritualistic behavior without display behavior too, though it's not unheard of either. But here, with these men, everything was left in relatively close proximity to one another. That suggests a potentially different relationship between him and these victims, or again, a change in his confidence, motivations, or behavior. We're certainly seeing escalation of behavior. Well, it seemed like the killer was acting with clear intention, because each dismembered, wound was clean and precise. And once the police were sure they'd uncovered everything, they brought both sets of remains to the morgue. There, Arthur Pierce confirmed that the first

victim had died a month earlier and that the second victim was killed just four days before the remains were found. Pierce also shared the investigator's doubts about being able to ID the first victim, not just because of the decomposition, but because, similar to the Lady of the Lake, his skin had been doused in some sort of acid. As Pierce's concern grew, he did find some relief in the form of fingerprints lifted from the second victim. Soon, investigators matched the prince to a 29-year-old man named Edward Andressee. In life, Edward had worked as a hospital orderly, but in his spare time, he frequented a neighborhood known as the Roaring Third. Located next to Kingsbury Run, the Roaring Third was known for its bars,

brothels and gambling dens. Edward seemed to take advantage of all it had to offer. He'd gotten in trouble with the law for being drunk in public and getting into bar fights. He even had a weapons charge on his record. The police weren't surprised that Edward had ended up in a dangerous situation, one that ended his life. But it wasn't until they spoke to Edward's family and friends

that they learned something unexpected. According to one of Edward's friends, he'd been getting chauffeured around town by a man named Eddie, whom he'd met through one of his girlfriends. Not only did Eddie's car match a description of a vehicle Edward's parents had seen him in, but the description of Eddie himself seemed like a match for the unidentified first victim. However, it wasn't enough to positively ID him. For the police, it seemed like a dead end.

But for the press, the revelations and gossip around Edward's life were gold. Multiple Cleveland newspapers printed the knee-jerk assignment, that Edward had known the other victim and that the same person, branded as the mad butcher of Kingsbury Run, had killed them. Some papers added even more fabrications, too, like the claim that the two men had been involved with the same woman, and their deaths were the result of a love triangle gone wrong. There is something deeper going on psychologically than simply selling newspapers, although that is certainly part of it. Human beings are meaning-making. We don't like randomness, uncertainty, or unanswered questions, especially when,

something this shocking is happening in your community. So we tend to speculate, especially when investigations are ongoing. Narratives form because they're better than not having answers. So a love triangle, a jealous lover, or a personal conflict among friends are explanations that may not be true, but they are familiar. And they take a horrifying reality and they turn it into a story that people already understand. And it's also reassuring for people to believe that something like this happened because the victims were involved in a unique situation that doesn't apply to the rest of the public because it provides a sense of security. All of this reduces uncertainty. And that's why the sensationalization of crimes like this are what sells papers and what the public tends to

respond to. In this case, the sensationalized media coverage led to an onslaught of tips. People had all kinds of theories about how the two victims knew each other and what led to their deaths. The authorities looked into a lot of the leads, but none of them led anywhere useful. And just like with the Lady of the Lake, the investigations soon dried up. Every day without an arrest made things harder for investigators. Months passed and they made no progress. While they struggled to solve the murders, more bodies kept piling up. And soon, the people of Cleveland realized there was a true monster living among them. In October of 1935, authorities in the Cleveland, Ohio area were dumbfounded.

They hadn't been able to identify the Lady of the Lake the year before, and now two more victims had been brutally murdered, 29-year-old Edward Andressee and another unknown man. The police had no idea what happened to any of the victims. Months passed as investigators struggled to piece together what may have happened and pretty soon the nightmare got even worse, if that's possible. The morning of Sunday, January 26, 1936 was brutally cold, and for people who live near the heart manufacturing plant in Cleveland, it was also noisy. Neighborhood dogs had been barking all night long, and no one could figure out why. Then at around 9 a.m., a drunken man was walking near the plant when he noticed

two baskets sitting in the snow against the back of the building. He walked over and peeked into one of them. It looked like cuts of pork wrapped in newspapers and burlap. It didn't seem like anything worth noting, so he walked away. Two hours later, the dogs were still barking, and a woman who lived nearby got fed up. She went outside to investigate and spotted the baskets as well. Just like the man earlier, she also thought they contained pork.

There was a meat market nearby, and she thought they may have come from there. so she went over and told the owner about it. Worried he'd been robbed, the owner raced to the back alley of the plant to see what the woman was talking about. But when he pulled back the wrapping, he realized the meat hadn't come from a pig at all. They were the frozen, dismembered remains of a woman minus her head.

Cleveland police arrived on the scene and quickly determined that the remains were barely decomposed. Not only that, but they'd been removed with extreme precision. Detectives were also quick to note that while the body parts were wrapped in newspapers, those papers had varying dates. Some were from months earlier and others were from just the day before, which suggested that whoever had done this intentionally timestamped their work. I don't think that's necessarily enough to suggest that that was intentionally done. But that said, most killers don't leave clues behind intentionally. Often they are mistakes. But when they

do leave behind intentional clues. It's often because they enjoy influencing an investigation, and the underlying motives for doing it can vary. It can be about power and superiority, recognition or validation, communication, reliving the crime, or just their own compulsion or ritual. A well-known serial offender who did leave intentional messages is the Zodiac Killer. And a confirmed example of this as Dennis Rader, though his messages were really more toward law enforcement communication directly rather than at the scene of the crime. But if these dates were intentionally selected, that clearly means they wanted that to be noticed, whether it was to confuse investigators, demonstrate some kind of control, document some kind

of timeline of their process, or it just was not intentional. It was just newspaper that he had lying around that he reached for, and it's a situation where investigators assigned meaning to something that really had none. That's absolutely possible, too. Do you think it's possible this killer is feeling comfortable now enough in his murder ritual that he's starting to treat it like a game with the police? Yes, that's certainly a possibility. I know I mentioned some offenders like influencing an investigation because it can be rewarding, almost like a game. And if all of these murders are connected, this would potentially be the fourth victim. And at this point, nobody knows who he is. In fact, the previous murders were largely being discussed as an isolated dispute or a love

triangle that's gone wrong. No one was thinking a serial offender was active, at least up until this point. And if he gets enjoyment out of playing a game with law enforcement, then he would get enjoyment out of playing a game with the public too, which is why I find it interesting and maybe not even coincidental that these remains were not hidden in some remote location. They were left in baskets, almost like gift baskets, where they were ultimately discovered by ordinary members of the community who were no longer afraid that some deranged killer was on the loose because of the narrative that they formed about a love triangle. So if that placement was intentional, then he was likely becoming more confident and superior, more comfortable with his process, and less concerned about discovery. Some serial offenders

develop a sense of superiority after repeatedly avoiding detection, and they do get frustrated when they're not getting recognition or validation, or the fear of the public is waning. So they can begin to feel untouchable and they can begin to escalate. And that may be what's happening here, given the increasingly risky disposal from where he started

to where he is now, if, in fact, they are connected. The newspaper dates weren't all the police had either. The woman's hands were also left in one of the baskets, which meant they could obtain fingerprints. And by that afternoon, they found a match. The victim was 42-year-old Florence Polillo. She worked as a waitress and barmaid,

and she'd been arrested a few times over the past five years for sex work. The next morning, the discovery of Florence's remains was the top story in every local newspaper. But one paper, the Cleveland News, went a step further in their reporting. They theorized that there could be a link between Florence's murder and the murder of the Lady of the Lake from two years earlier because both women had been dismembered. Interestingly, the press didn't seem to draw a connection between Florence and two recent male victims,

and neither did the authorities. Regardless, the people of Cleveland started to panic. It was clear to them that a killer was terrorizing their city, and they felt like the people in charge weren't showing enough concern. A man named Elliot Ness had recently been appointed as Cleveland's new safety director who oversaw the police and fire departments, and his top priority was to address possible police corruption in general rather than solve these murders.

This may have been why police tackled each case separately, and by the time the most recent set of remains was found, the previous investigations had completely stalled, so detectives shifted all their focus to this new case. They spoke to Florence's loved ones in an effort to piece together her final days, but they kept hitting dead ends. And just like all the times before, the investigation soon petered out.

The local authorities were out of their depth, and everyone knew it, including the killer. So months later, what would soon be known as the Summer of Terror began. Around 8 a.m. on June 5, 1936, two boys were walking along the train tracks in Kingsbury Run, that gorge where Edward Andressee and the unidentified other man had been found.

As the boys walked, they noticed a pair of brown pants rolled up in a ball underneath a willow tree. Hoping there might be money in one of those pockets, they picked up a stick and poked around. Soon, the pants unraveled and revealed a man's severed head. Within no time, police swarmed the area. The first thing they noticed was that, like Florence before, these remains didn't appear badly decomposed, and the next day when they found the rest of the man's body, they made other crucial connections. The rest of the body was found intact, about a thousand feet from where the head had been found. Officers quickly determined that the pair of pants was a size match for the body, which suggested they had belonged to the victim.

But that wasn't all. The body was also located just 800 feet from where Edward Andresi and the unidentified man had been found the year before. and his head had been removed with the same level of precision. However, unlike in those cases, investigators found pools of blood, which meant that for the first time, the murder had likely taken place in the same general area where the remains were disposed of. One of the biggest misconceptions about serial offenders

is that they commit every crime exactly the same way each time. And in reality, their behavior often evolves over time for a number of reasons. circumstances change. Opportunities are different. They may be learning from prior crimes, becoming more confident, adapting to different obstacles, or learning how to be more efficient. And sometimes they take greater risks over time because they have repeatedly gotten away with it. And other times they become more cautious after a close call. But what tends to stay is what's psychologically important to them. And that's often tied to their fantasy, emotional needs, sense of control, or source of gratification. So in other words, if it's central to

why they are committing the crime in the first place, they're more likely to repeat it. So if this is the same offender, I would focus more on the consistencies. We continue to see precision, decapitation, dismemberment, and extensive post-mortem interaction with the body. And these are all relatively uncommon offender behaviors on their own. But seeing them recurred together across multiple victims is very significant. Despite the changes in MO, the immediate steps of the investigation were starting to feel redundant. Officers ran the man's prints. This time there was no match. Once again, they were short on leads. So they thought outside the box. This victim had tattoos, which investigators hoped would increase the likelihood of someone being able to identify him.

So they arranged the body for display and opened a public viewing. Two thousand people filed through the morgue, but none of them knew who the victim was. To widen the number, even further, the man's plastered death mask and tattoo chart were displayed at the Great Lakes Exposition of 1936, where over 100,000 people saw it, but still nothing. The police were back to square one, trying to identify him on their own. Until once again, the killer seemed to act faster than them, because one month later, on July 22nd, 1936, another headless male body was found alone in the woods near Big Creek on the west side of Cleveland. When police arrived, they found the victim's head and a bloody pile of clothing about

10 feet away. It seemed like this man had been dead for about two or three months, and once again, blood was found nearby. Investigators struggled to identify this victim as well, so the horror only continued from there. About two months later, on September 10, 1936, the torso and legs of a man were found floating in a deep pool of water in Kingsbury Run. And like all the others, the victim had been dismembered with expert precision. When the news broke, panic swelled. In one summer, three dismembered bodies had been found in three different locations, and that was in addition to the four bodies found earlier. Police finally had to admit that they were dealing with a highly capable killer, and because of that, safety director Elliot Ness got more involved with the

investigation. He worked closely with the coroner, Arthur Pierce, who suspected they wouldn't succeed by relying on traditional investigative methods. So far, they'd barely had any luck collecting crime scene evidence and conducting witness interviews. In Pierce's opinion, they had to figure out who this killer was at his core. So he organized an emergency meeting, which he referred to as a torso clinic. It was a pioneering attempt to establish a criminal profile. On September 15, 1936, over 30 police officials and medical experts from the area

gathered in Cleveland to review all the evidence from each case. Their goal was to paint a picture of the kind of person who'd be capable of carrying out such crimes. They concluded that their suspect was probably a large man, someone strong enough to not only dismember, bodies, but to carry those bodies into parts of Kingsbury Run that couldn't be reached by car. And because he left remains in different parts of Kingsbury Run, they believed the killer knew the area well, and that he may have been living in one of the surrounding neighborhoods.

In addition, they believed the killer had a job that involved knife work, given the expert manner in which every single victim had been dismembered. However, there was some disagreement about this. While some believed the suspect was a search, surgeon, others thought that no one so well-educated would commit such brutality. They believed he was actually a butcher or hunter. When it comes to developing an offender profile or conceptualizing a case, it's critical to be aware of any personal biases because it can drastically affect the outcome. And that's evident in the disagreement here regarding the offender's potential background or profession. The problem is they're disagreeing about two separate questions. One is whether the

offender possessed a particular skill set. And the other is, whether they believe someone with that background, being a surgeon or a physician, would commit murder. Our personal beliefs about the answer to the second question can influence how we answer the first question. And this is why it's important to let the evidence lead the profile or the conceptualization of the person rather than the profile lead the evidence. Once we become attached to a particular theory, there's a risk that we start filtering new information through that and overlook alternative explanations. The reality is that offenders come from all backgrounds. They can be highly educated or poorly educated.

They can be wealthy or they can be poor. They can be respected professionals or unemployed. They can be big in stature or they can be small. That said, they said he had to be a large man in order to subdue and carry the bodies. Well, he can subdue them by intoxicating them. And dismembering bodies does make it easier to transport them as well, regardless of your size. We also don't know that he's working alone either. So these are examples of possibilities that these biases can filter out.

I'm curious, when building a criminal profile, is it important to draw distinct lines when it comes to a suspect's possible profession? Or would it have been enough for the investigative team to just say the suspect worked with knives? Yeah, I think it's too specific if you're focusing on a distinct person. profession this early because it narrows possibilities. If I'd been in that room, I probably would have focused on the behavior rather than the job title. The evidence appears to suggest someone who has knowledge of knives, knowledge of anatomy, was comfortable using those cutting instruments and who has possessed a level of skill beyond what most people would have. That conclusion is supported by the evidence. The exact profession is much harder to determine. It's often safer to identify the skill set first and then

consider the range of occupations that could produce it rather than assuming a specific occupation and working backward from there. I understand why they want to narrow it down because it makes their search easier, but again, you're filtering out so many other possible suspects in the process. Unless you've identified evidence that genuinely points to a singular profession and could not reasonably be explained by another, I think it's important to remain open to alternative possibilities. The members of the torso clinic made one final standout point. While they may not have agreed on what the killer did for a living, they believed he

lived under two distinct identities. In their opinions, the killer lived a normal life on the outside, but on the inside, he was clinically insane and possessed abnormal sexual inclinations. In other words, he was hiding in plain sight, and he wouldn't stop killing unless they took him down. But the more they tried, the easier it became for him to slip through their grasp. Until eventually, the investigation fell into a destructive, downward spiral. Thanks so much for listening. Come back next time for the conclusion of our deep dive on the Cleveland torso murders and the Mad Butcher of Kingsbury Run. Serial Killers and Murderous Minds is a

crimehouse original powered by Pave Studios. Here at Crimehouse, we want to thank each and every one of you for your support. If you like what you heard today, reach out on Instagram at Crime House. And don't forget to rate, review, and follow serial killers and murderous minds wherever you get your podcasts. Your feedback truly makes a difference.

And to enhance your listening experience, join Crimehouse Plus and get both parts of every story dropped on the same Monday, completely ad-free, no waiting three days for part two, plus Crime House bonus episodes every month. To join, go to Crimehouseplus.com, or if you listen on Apple Podcasts, tap Try Free at the top of the Serial Killers and Murderous Minds page.

Serial Killers and Murderous Minds is hosted by me, Vanessa Richardson, and Forensic Psychologist Dr. Tristan Engels and is a Crimehouse original powered by Pave Studios. This episode was brought to life by the Serial Killers and Murderous Minds team, Max Cutler, Ron Shapiro, Alex Benadon. Lori Marinelli, Natalie Pritzowski, Sarah Camp, Alyssa Fox, Dana Rossi, Sarah Batchelor, Kaylee Pine, and Carrie Murphy. Thank you for listening.