To think that the idea that the Croydon Cat killer is actually a Fox is a load of b*ll**cks

[mumof2andsurviving]

^^just that really. I'm not buying this fox theory. Mutilated cats left on owners doorsteps...don't think even the most intelligent foxes could manage that.

AIBU to feel that either a) the police no longer have resources to spend on this or b) it is a tactic used to try and lull the perpetrator into a false sense of security?

I think TV has misled people to believing that these things are a lot more obvious than they usually are.

There’s a really simple explanation for why the expert could have been wrong initially -
If he was a vetinary pathologist, he won’t be very experienced in identifying and classifying cut marks. And if he were a human pathologist, he wouldn’t be very experienced at examining animals.

In other words, it’s very easy to make a mistake looking at the remains of small animals because there isn’t the vast experience we have with damage to humans.

There have been umpteen dead cats. There won't be one cause for all these cases, whether fox or Dahmer-in-training.
I think we can ascribe bodies in carrier bags to humans though, either serial killer or guilty driver. Everyone knows urban forces are 'woke' and only use jute bags.

I feel quite sorry for the two people involved in Snarl tbh. According to the articles, it’s a tiny shelter which has rescued 12 cats. Most of the money they’ve raised has gone to investigating this. They’ve spent 2+ years completely building their livelihoods and identities around the Cat Killer. I’d be more surprised if they did accept the police findings tbh.

I’m not trying to suggest they’re being dishonest or they’re motivated by all the money donated to them or anything. I genuinely don’t think that’s it at all. I just think that this is such an emotional/psychological hurdle to jump past - dedicating your life for years to something that was all a moral panic - the cognitive bias is just too great.

I know it's horrible and scary to fact the fact that some humans do some really scary things. It's much nicer and safer to believe it was a fox. But it happens. It is not common. But it happens.

wgntv.com/2018/08/30/13th-cat-found-mutilated-as-washington-authorities-investigate-disturbing-serial-crime-spree/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luka_Magnotta

There was an opinion piece in New Scientist a few weeks ago suggesting foxes for cat killer.

Someone wrote in next week pointing out this person hadn't seen the corpses attributed to the cat killer.

Some foxes have killed some cats - makes sense

All cats killed by foxes - no way

The police aren’t saying the cats were killed by foxes. The police are saying the cats were killed by cars and scavenged by foxes.

We could just as easily say that it’s more thrilling and exciting for a bored suburban cat owner to believe danger stalks the streets.

And once you’ve invested emotionally in that theory, your brain will actively fight against changing its mind. Even when the evidence people accepted - a pathologist saying there was a human using a knife - turns out to have been wrong. People will twist and try to do anything to stay committed to their original theory.

It’s called cognitive bias and it’s all over this thread.

Sorry , that was in response to the idea that it’s “nicer and safer” to believe in foxes doing fox things, than in a serial killer.

Someone wrote in next week pointing out this person hadn't seen the corpses attributed to the cat killer.

But the person who has seen the corpses has now said they are satisfied a fox could have caused the damage.

How many experts have to say it’s foxes, when not a single one (beyond a pair of self-appointed investigators with no expertise, who have made this their whole identity) says it’s a human?

Having had two cats attacked by foxes it is definitely a possibility. There was fox DNA on some corpses. I think before commenting, or only commenting on the newspaper report we should read the actual autopsy reports the vets did. Only then can we comment, Jounalists and social media take the lazy way to discuss facts. Dying cats can often drag themselves home and are vulnerable to urban foxes. Some CCTV showed foxes carrying cats. It is a very real problem. One of mine lost a leg due to a bite to the spine and 4 years later had the remailing leg bitten through the bone and she dragged herself home

I think there are probably lots of different causes - some foxes, some road accidents and possible one or more sick individuals all at the minute being put under cat killer total.

It’s known cats are walking around with air gun pellets in them – people I know have had cats deliberately poisoned. Copy cat crimes aren’t unknown occurrence either.

Police have experience and resources think there in best place to judge if they need to investigate or not – something I’m sure they review regularly.

Also neighbours feuding

But the person who has seen the corpses has now said they are satisfied a fox could have caused the damage.

If that's happened, then I’m sure the police are taking that into account.

I don't remember opinion price in New scientist suggesting that or the letters rebutting it saying anything like that.

I’d hope police would have access to more information than general public on which to base their decisions - whatever their decsions are on the issue.

I think it does sound plausible. We have had warnings that the cat killer had been operating round here-we're outside London. It tends to be brought up round summer time and then forgotten about until the next summer.
We also have huge numbers of foxes, you can almost guarantee seeing one if you go out round dusk in the summer.
My parents' area have rarely seen a fox (df has seen one in 45 years of living there) and there hasn't been any suggestion of the CCK there.

HoldMeCloserTonyDanza I agree

So are foxes scavenging on other foxes...?!!

yes probably. Foxes will eat anything!

“mumof2andsurviving

It doesn’t seem like all these examples can be logically put to foxes but then, who knows how true they all are? Like the collar appearing 6 months later- according to the owner at least. Who knows whether that actually happened or whether they wanted to extend their 5 mins of fame?*

Seriously? You think this is about wanting to extend their fame? So not about people who are traumatised and are being continually traumatised? - just think for a minute about just how scary that must be... not everyone is attention seeking”

Sorry I don’t understand or agree with your point. It’s not traumatising if you’ve made it up. Plenty of people make things up for attention, it’s very common. And I can imagine plenty of people wishing to involve themselves in the vigilante drama in this case. It’s not something I need to think about for a minute at all

Surely it's possible that some of it's foxes/ cars and some of it is a sick individual? It doesn't have to be all or none?

Few points:

1. It's understandable that if it's rumoured there's a cat killer around you would assume your dead cat has been killed by it.

1. If some sick individual killed a cat and left it's corpse out, a fox could still find it and chew on it

Both these points could show evidence that cat was killed by fox , but it doesn't mean all of them are.

glintandglide

Sorry I don’t understand or agree with your point. It’s not traumatising if you’ve made it up. Plenty of people make things up for attention, it’s very common. And I can imagine plenty of people wishing to involve themselves in the vigilante drama in this case.

Evidence for this?

*umdont
*
Both these points could show evidence that cat was killed by fox , but it doesn't mean all of them are.

Exactly.

I think the tongues had been cut out (saw a post a while back where someone said that had happened to their cat)

That's the small bit that has been missing.

Clever fox.

What do you mean evidence? What kind of question is that? Are you just trying to shut down anyone who doesn’t agree with you?

My duck was very neatly decapitated and its head left. It looked exactly as though someone had cut it off with a knife.