- Joined
- Sep 26, 2009
- Messages
- 6,343
- Reaction score
- 6,066
Do you think it's possible for a city itself to have a disturbed enough psychological undercurrent that it becomes more likely that extreme crimes will take place there, or is something like this a case of academics et al perhaps reading too much into what may very well be a string of mere coincidences?
Some background to place the question into context: As most of you already know I live in Adelaide, South Australia - the official title for Adelaide is 'The City of Churches", unofficially it's known as 'The City of Corpses" and/or "The Serial Killer Capital of the Southern Hemisphere" (we've also been called the 'cruelest city in Australia' and nominated as 'the best place to set a horror movie' because of our rather notorious criminal history). Adelaide earned its reputation over a period of three to four decades that saw a number of child disappearances, murders, and serial killings take place - and just to top it off the serial killings themselves, of which there were three known separate incidents (Truro, The Butchered Boys aka 'The Family Murders', and Snowtown) were all sexually sadistic torture murders in nature.
Since at least the early 2000's things have returned to some semblance of normality in Adelaide, as in we don't exactly have any sadistically torturous serial killers on the loose (that we know of) and children aren't tending to disappear without a trace in unusual circumstances, but even so it seems every murder, discovery of a body or child abduction that does still take place here is automatically lumped in with the city's dark reputation. Some commentators have speculated that one day Adelaide will eventually lose it's 'city of corpses' moniker, but they always tend to add the caveat, "if we can figure out why these events happened in the first place and ensure changes are made in our city so they don't happen again". I believe criminologists have also attempted to study Adelaide itself to see what might have contributed to some of the crimes we've seen here, and posit some theories regarding 'hot house environments'.
So can a city itself be psychologically 'sick' in some way, or is it a case of coincidence or correlation doesn't equal causation (or whatever the correct terminology is)?
Some background to place the question into context: As most of you already know I live in Adelaide, South Australia - the official title for Adelaide is 'The City of Churches", unofficially it's known as 'The City of Corpses" and/or "The Serial Killer Capital of the Southern Hemisphere" (we've also been called the 'cruelest city in Australia' and nominated as 'the best place to set a horror movie' because of our rather notorious criminal history). Adelaide earned its reputation over a period of three to four decades that saw a number of child disappearances, murders, and serial killings take place - and just to top it off the serial killings themselves, of which there were three known separate incidents (Truro, The Butchered Boys aka 'The Family Murders', and Snowtown) were all sexually sadistic torture murders in nature.
Since at least the early 2000's things have returned to some semblance of normality in Adelaide, as in we don't exactly have any sadistically torturous serial killers on the loose (that we know of) and children aren't tending to disappear without a trace in unusual circumstances, but even so it seems every murder, discovery of a body or child abduction that does still take place here is automatically lumped in with the city's dark reputation. Some commentators have speculated that one day Adelaide will eventually lose it's 'city of corpses' moniker, but they always tend to add the caveat, "if we can figure out why these events happened in the first place and ensure changes are made in our city so they don't happen again". I believe criminologists have also attempted to study Adelaide itself to see what might have contributed to some of the crimes we've seen here, and posit some theories regarding 'hot house environments'.
So can a city itself be psychologically 'sick' in some way, or is it a case of coincidence or correlation doesn't equal causation (or whatever the correct terminology is)?