Talk:Kenneth Erskine

Sexuality
Just because Erskine sexually assaulted a man doesn't mean he's gay or bisexual. Read homosexuality and Men who have sex with men for more info. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Erskine burgled, raped, sexually assaulted, and murdered, old people of both genders because he is a sadistic bisexual gerontophile; an extreme case of a pervert who enjoys abusing physical force to inflict suffering on unsuspecting innocent people. That is beyond (reasonable) dispute; no-one could reasonably claim that he has no preference for breaking into people's houses, committing offences of sexual violence, that he has a strong preference for elderly victims (in contrast to the clear majority of sex offenders who choose young victims). Why deny his bisexuality, when he chose to spend his time and effort being an active participant in both heterosexual and homosexual acts? Contrary to SatyrTN's comment, Erskine did not sexually assault only one man, it was at least two (there are likely to be other men similarly violated by him who have not reported it, and/or such men who have not been recorded as being the victims of Erskine). He is a rapist who found many female victims; if he were heterosexual, he would not have sexually assaulted men as well. He is likely 1 or 2 on the Kinsey scale, which is still LGBT, and definitely relevant to his notability and crimes. Reading articles about homosexuality, as SatyrTN suggests, does not, in any way, back his claim that Erskine is straight or of unknown sexual orientation. The Wikipedia article Men who have sex with men does not state that straight men rape or sexually assault men. A person's identity is defined by what he is and what he does. I can't imagine anyone claiming that "just because he burgled houses, that doesn't make him a burglar"! Werdnawerdna (talk) 06:28, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Only one reference?
I would've thought that more references could be found for such a notable serial killer.--Malleus Felonius (talk) 23:58, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Really?
Guy raped and brutally murdered 11 people so he could burglarize their houses, and is given a 40-year sentence? And that's "one of the harshest sentences" ever recorded in the British justice system? Good place to be a criminal; still got plenty of life left to enjoy at 65 years old. More than you can say for the ELEVEN people he murdered. But they were old anyway, so what the heck. AnnaGoFast (talk) 01:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC) StuZealand (talk) 13:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC) The sentence was for a minimum of 40 years, not a maximum.

The Bible
"As a child he read the Bible, but he became violent as he grew up." - eh? These are two unrelated things. It's like saying he ate ham sandwiches as a child, but became violent as he grew up. Can we delete this sentence please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonlit321 (talk • contribs) 10:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You could've fixed that yourself, I think. I just did. —BarrelProof (talk) 00:30, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

he has been released
he appealed his sentence it was reduced to manslaughter with diminsished responsibility and has been given his new identity without public knowledge 86.187.231.63 (talk) 16:29, 22 March 2023 (UTC)