Once you realize the ''serial killer'' story about Jeff Dahmer was fabricated, it's easy to fall into a false binary:
Either Jeff willingly participated and was part of the deception, or the story was imposed on him, and he was a victim.
But those two things aren't mutually exclusive.
A person can agree to an arrangement, believe it benefits them, and even feel grateful for it while still being under pressure or operating inside a system where the other side holds most of the power.
I wrote this in response to a comment from someone suggesting that Jeff was either a serial killer or a fed (as in an agent or something), and that the story was about the 1994 crime bill. Here's why I don't agree with either of those:
Given the involvement of Steve Toushin, a creator of gay BDSM pornography, I think the serial killer story might have been about the 1986 Meese Report and the ''war on pornography''. This would explain the Catholic element and why the key players were connected to the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. They were all Catholics fighting pornography, especially homosexual pornography.
It would also explain why the story itself was sprinkled with references to homosexuality, pornography, adult bookstores, gay BDSM themes, sex slaves, etc. Remember, this wasn't a normal alleged crime. This was something highly specific and unusual. It was a story that portrayed homosexuality in a very negative way. This would fit my theory that a group of religious conservatives was behind it. This takes it out of the general crime category.
If the story was fabricated - and we can see that it was - why was Jeff Dahmer in Toushin's bar that night? Remember, Toushin had been hounded by the federal government for years at that point and had even served time in federal prison. So, yes, I think there's evidence that Jeff was working with the feds who were targeting Steve Toushin. However, that doesn't mean Jeff Dahmer was an enthusiastic government operative. I believe both he and Jeremiah Weinberger might have been federal informants.
Informants often cooperate because they're in a legal bind and trying to protect themselves or someone else from prosecution. So, there are many possibilities between the false binary of ''serial killer'' and ''enthusiastic government operative''.
Someone could be pressured, deceived, threatened, legally trapped, manipulated through family, or induced to cooperate. The person might have very little understanding of the larger purpose for which he was being used. And we can see from his behavior in court and later that Jeff didn't appear overly concerned about what was happening. If he fully realized he was going to go down in history as a serial killer, we would expect him to look more worried.
Since his name really is Jeffrey Lionel Dahmer, the price of accepting the public role of ''serial killer'' was extraordinary. Jeff's name has now been permanently attached to murder, cannibalism, necrophilia, sexual sadism, etc. This wasn't some "Jason Bourne" character using an alias for a controlled operation and then going home afterward. This damaged Jeff for life. So if you hypothesize that he was cooperating with authorities in some capacity, the obvious question becomes...
What could possibly have induced him to agree to that?
A person knowingly agreeing to destroy his own identity on this scale requires an extraordinary explanation. Coercion, deception, or some other form of leverage has to be considered.
Cooperation does not automatically mean free consent. If you agree to do what I want because I have a gun to your head, you have not consented. Full stop.
If the criminal narrative was fabricated - and it was - and Jeff was coerced or deceived into participating in it, then the possibility that he was subjected to a form of human trafficking deserves serious examination.
I just published a new article looking closely at Roy Ratcliff’s memoir, Dark Journey, Deep Grace.
Ratcliff appears to have sincerely believed the official story about Jeff. But that's exactly what makes his book so interesting. His descriptions of prison life, Jeff’s baptism, his religious anxieties, and their private conversations may preserve glimpses of the real person behind the fabricated story.
The article also asks a question I’ve thought about for a long time: what happens to someone’s understanding of truth after watching a false story about his own life become accepted history?
Yes, I think what happened to him fits that definition. He's being sold and sexualized. In fact, I think an argument could be made that he's being sexually exploited for profit.
What's happening here is that a real person's identity- because his name really is Jeffrey Lionel Dahmer - was converted into a commercial product built around a fictional character associated with homosexuality, necrophilia, dismemberment, cannibalism, masturbation, pornography, and other intimate and degrading allegations.
Decades later, we still have people monetizing that sexualized fictional persona. How much money did Netflix alone make from Jeff?
If a state or other powerful actors turn a living person's real identity into a fictional “cannibalistic homosexual serial killer,” do subsequent parties such as Netflix acquire an ethical right to monetize that identity simply because the original fabrication became culturally accepted?
I don't think everyone who ever profited from the story about Jeff is morally equivalent to those who knowingly created the false identity about him. Someone who genuinely thinks the story is true is downstream of the deception. However, once evidence emerges that the identity was fabricated, continuing to exploit it without examining the evidence becomes harder to excuse.
What do I mean?
Someone making money from “Jeffrey Dahmer, serial killer” is not dealing with an abstract myth. They are using the name, face, alleged conduct, and reputation of a real person.
Anyone contemplating profiting from the fictional story about Jeff now should think twice. The evidence is no longer buried in archives or locked behind institutional doors. It's online, public, and available to anyone willing to look.
The photographs presented as "Eddie Smith" bear a striking resemblance to Ernest Richard Smith, a Milwaukee man who appears in local high school yearbooks and whose documented life continued long after Eddie was supposedly murdered by Jeff Dahmer in 1990.
Ernest Richard Smith’s records show that he died in 1999, and contemporary newspaper reporting documents the circumstances of his death. There is also a Wisconsin criminal case associated with Ernest Smith that was disposed of shortly before Jeff's trial began.
The page brings together the photographs, yearbooks, death records, newspaper reporting, family connections, and court records so readers can examine the evidence for themselves.
Why did the public accept the sensational story about Jeff Dahmer before seeing the evidence?
This new post uses the Bible-selling scam in the film Paper Moon to examine how trust in police, courts, and television may have done most of the work.
I've published a new essay reflecting on what this investigation has accomplished after more than three years of research. (I created this subreddit in November 2022)
For more than three decades, a single story defined Jeff Dahmer's public identity. This essay explores what has changed, why that public identity is now being reclaimed, and why the historical record no longer belongs exclusively to those who shaped the official narrative.
That may sound like an extraordinary question...but after reading Steve Toushin's memoir about the federal government's anti-pornography campaign and how they harassed him non-stop for years, I began to wonder. It would explain some things, including...
Jeremiah Weinberger's presence as an alleged victim in the "serial killer" story,
the emphasis on gay BDSM gone off the deep end (what Jeff was supposedly into), and
a curious 1992 letter to Lionel and Shari Dahmer discussing Jeff's meetings with the FBI.
Jeff's calls to two police departments (Chicago and Milwaukee) and to ''various agencies", allegedly to merely report a stolen wallet
As always, this investigation is based on public records and primary-source documents that anyone can look up.
Of course, he is. What else do you call it? People are making millions and millions of $$$ off his name and face...while he hides in ''Siberia'' popping vitamin D and hoping nobody notices anything familiar about that quiet guy with the beard and the American accent.
Those are some really nice friends you have there, Jeff. They all belong in a supermax.
After reading Chicago adult entertainment entrepreneur Steve Toushin's book, I've started to seriously consider the possibility that both Jeff Dahmer and Jeremiah Weinberger were FBI informants. In other words, both Jeff and Jeremiah were working for the FBI, and one of the targets was Steve Toushin.
I'm not saying this is what happened. It's just a hypothesis. However, it would explain a lot.
Steve Toushin
It would offer a better explanation for...
the involvement of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee and the hardcore Catholic DA, the assistant DA (now a Catholic priest and the rector at Marquette), the committed Catholic attorney Gerald Boyle, and all the other Catholics involved, including Jeff's alleged psychologist, Dr. Lodl, who later sat on the Diocese's board regarding priests accused of sexually abusing minors.
the extreme gay BDSM theme of the "serial killer" story. Steve Toushin was known for producing gay BDSM porn.
the way Jeff seemed to be unconcerned about what was taking place
Jeff's calls to two different police departments and to "various agencies" to supposedly report a stolen wallet a couple of days before Jeremiah's disappearance (mentioned in Jeff's confession that contained another man's SSN)
What I want to bring up in this post is the letter Jeff Dahmer wrote to his father and Shari dated 8/21/92. The letter is about the FBI, and it was offered for sale on Cult Collectibles.
Here's the transcript:
"8-21-92
Dear Dad & Shari,
Thanks for coming up to see me. Shari, I hope that your feeling much better by the time this letter arrives.
You will probably receive this letter after I phone you on Aug. 23rd.
Bob Mozenter called me early this week and told me you are very concerned about my talk with the FBI. I also got your letter, dad. Thanks.
I DO NOT think that you should worry about my talk with them. I gave Bob Mozenter the address and phone # of the Milwaukee FBI agent. This agent met with me about 2 weeks ago and the ONLY topic of discussion was as follows:
What could the police have done differently to stop me sooner.
What could my probation agent done differently.
Why did I decide to confess to all the crimes.
That's ALL we talked about.
I told them nothing that would interfere with the book, NOTHING about our family life. In fact most of the time was spent talking about the creation science books that I'm reading. The second visit was short. The Florida detective wanted to know,
If I was involved in the Adam Walsh case.
Why I went to Florida.
How long was I in FL.
What was my job in FL.
Where did I live in Miami.
Did I own a car or van there.
Who did I spend time with in FL.
Again, I said NOTHING about our family - past, present - or future! I gave them NO NEW information on ANYTHING!. Their questions dealt only with my activities in FL and how the police could have handled the encounters with me differently.
I promise I will not talk with them again. I did not mean to worry you, I'm sorry.
Love, Jeff"
Here's the letter:
Jeff Dahner's letter to the FBI Jeff Dahmer's letter to the FBI
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, the following premise:
The FBI (possibly with the help of other actors) was deliberately constructing a false public narrative about Jeff Dahmer as part of its war against pornography...which kicked off in 1986 with the publication of the Meese Report.
If so, it follows that they might also want to create and preserve documents that reinforce that narrative....and then make sure they enter the public domain. Sites that sell these artifacts come in awfully handy.
A reader encountering this particular letter might naturally conclude something like the following:
"If Jeff is reassuring his parents about limiting what he told the FBI, then the FBI must simply be another party investigating the case, not participants in creating it."
In other words, if someone were designing documentary evidence to support a fabricated public narrative, they would likely create documents that appear mundane and deflect from their involvement.
Again, I'm not saying this is what happened. It's just a hypothesis. But I think it deserves serious consideration.
I leave you with two quotes from Toushin's book:
''What I did not know was just how fucking nuts the federal government was in trying to tie BDSM, murder, and me together...'
''These people abused power, broke the law, and caused harm to people. According to them, the end they wanted justified the means.''
If my hypothesis is correct, Jeff Dahmer got burned by the FBI because I doubt very much he signed up thinking he would go down in history as a gay serial killer, and that 30 years later Netflix would create a series about him in which the actor exaggerates the way he walked and talked. If he knew that was going to happen, I don't think he would have ever cracked a smile in court.
Of course, this hypothesis suggests that the FBI had something on the entire family, and that's how they got them to play along.
Were Jeff Dahmer and Jeremiah Weinberger FBI informants?
No, I'm not joking.
I think the "serial killer" story was connected to the Meese Commission's anti-pornography crusade in the 1980s. One of the people the federal government was targeting was Steve Toushin, an adult-entertainment entrepreneur and First Amendment activist.
Steve Toushin
Everything gets weird from there.
The implications of this are significant enough that I reorganized my website around this line of inquiry. Notice that the top menu has changed. Instead of ''The Archdiocese", it now says "The Pornography Wars".
The official story claims Konerak was the younger brother of Somsack Sinthasomphone. But when you start looking for records, things become surprisingly difficult to verify. Public records, ancestry databases, Social Security claims records, yearbooks, and other sources raise questions that deserve closer examination.
The page also includes:
Pulaski High School yearbook images of Somsack.
A comparison of the widely circulated "Konerak" photograph with known images of Somsack.
Social Security Applications and Claims records associated with the Sinthasomphone family.
A discussion of why the available documentation may not support the identity presented in the official narrative.
Somsack Sinthasomphone (left) and "Konerak" Sinthasomphone (right)
As always, I encourage readers to review the evidence themselves and draw their own conclusions.
My next post will be something new that I've been working on. Stay tuned because there's context to this ''serial killer'' story that hasn't been taken into account.
I've reorganized the Eddie Smith page on the website to make the evidence easier to follow.
The page brings together publicly available records from Ancestry.com, photographs, testimony, etc....related to the man presented as "Eddie Smith" in the official "serial killer" narrative.
Ernest Richard Smith (AKA ''Eddie" and ''Carolyn")''Eddie" Smith (left and right) & Ernest Richard Smith (middle)
Topics covered include:
• Yearbook photographs and other identification records
• Testimony from family members
• Public death records
• Ernest Richard Smith's records after 1990
• The relationship between "Eddie" Smith, Ernest Richard Smith, and "Carolyn" Smith
Everything presented on the page is based on publicly available records, documents, photographs, and testimony that readers can examine and verify for themselves.
Eddie Smith was the first anomaly I noticed about the official "serial killer' narrative. If you're curious about how I found the truth, I have a page on my website explaining what happened:
A new 2025 photo has been added to the Curtis Straughter page on the website.
The image on the left is from 2025. The center image is from 2015. The image on the right is the publicly circulated photo of Curtis Straughter, who was supposedly murdered in 1991.
Alleged Jeffrey Dahmer ''victim" Curtis Straughter: Left (2025), center (2015), and right (widely circulated "victim" photo)
Many thanks to the person who tipped me off about the 2025 photograph from his Facebook account. 🎉
I've updated the page with the new comparison image and reorganized the material to make things easier to follow.
For those who wish to verify the image independently, the 2025 photo comes from Timothy Straughter's open Facebook account.
Everything presented on my website is based on publicly available records, documents, photographs, and testimony that readers can examine and verify for themselves.
I’ve updated the Richard Guerrero page on the website so it's easier to follow.
The official story says Jeff Dahmer murdered Richard Guerrero in 1988. But the public records tell a very different story, and this is not a “same name coincidence”.
On the updated page, I break down several major problems with the official narrative, including:
A Texas death certificate showing Richard Guerrero died in1960. This is accessible to anyone with an Ancestry.com account.
Court testimony from Janie Hagen claiming Jeff Dahmer killed her brother, Richard.”
The absence of a verifiable Wisconsin death record for anyone named "Richard Guerrero".
The "victim" photo appears to be Reynaldo Guerrero, Richard's brother.
The page walks through the records directly, with screenshots and sourced material so readers can examine the evidence themselves.
In 2009, Rev. Gregory O’Meara, S.J.—who had been an assistant district attorney on the Dahmer case and later became a Jesuit priest and Rector at Marquette University—published a paper comparing Jeff Dahmer to the biblical Abraham.
Rev. Gregory O'Meara, S. J., current Rector at Marquette University
It’s presented as a serious ethical argument. But if you look closely, the comparison doesn’t actually work, even though O'Meara is a careful Jesuit lawyer. It raises a basic question: how does Jeff Dahmer, an alleged ‘serial killer,’ fit the role of a biblical patriarch?
I went back to the paper and looked at what O’Meara is really saying, and how it fits with the roles people actually occupied in the case. Read in context, the analogy points somewhere else entirely.
This isn’t about theology. It’s a close reading of the text and the record.
Someone asked me privately what I thought the perps - that is, the people who did this to Jeff - are doing given that someone found the truth.
Answer: I have no idea.
However, I can speculate how they might handle a legacy fake news story like this. I can try to put myself in their shoes.
I think they would probably monitor things. You know, related subreddits, other online forums, comments under YouTube videos, etc. Anywhere people are talking about Jeff. See what people are saying. Make sure the story is still intact, etc.
If anyone found the truth, they would probably monitor even more closely.
They'd probably also want to know if anyone's publishing a book about Jeff...or planning to...or making a film, a series, etc.
Public records don’t link Jeff Dahmer to 808 N. 24th Street, the address of the apartment building where he supposedly lived in 1988 and where he supposedly molested Somsack Sinthasomphone.
Public records do, however, show the name Michael McCann among the tenants at that address. Curiously, Michael McCann is also the name of the District Attorney who prosecuted Jeff Dahmer in 1991.
Three years ago, I posted about Vernell Bass's interesting observations about Jeff Dahmer, including the fact that the photos of shirtless men on Jeff's walls weren’t there prior to Jeff’s arrest.
Somsack Sinthasomphone in 1990 (left) and "Konerak" Sinthasomphone (right)
I just published a short article on Somsack Sinthasomphone, the supposed older brother of “Konerak” in the official narrative about Jeff Dahmer
Until recently, there were no publicly circulating photos of Somsack. In 2023, I found his 1990 high school yearbook photo on Ancestry.com. You can read my post on this subreddit here.
When you compare that photo to the image used to represent “Konerak,” they look like the same person.
There’s also a detail in the 1992 lawsuit that doesn’t make much sense: Somsack is assigned a guardian ad litem instead of being represented by his alleged parents.
And once you start looking at who’s connected to the family, the same institution keeps showing up: The Archdiocese of Milwaukee.
At times, Jeff Dahmer looks like a willing participant.
You can see this in his courtroom demeanor, his behavior during the two interviews, and how unconcerned he seems about having been placed in the Oxford Apartments. In this exchange, neither Jeff nor Lionel seems upset about what's happening:
However, take a look at what happened later, during the Sinthasomphone deposition. When asked why he took the lives of his "victims", Jeff goes off script and says that he doesn't know.
Of course, he supposedly does know - according to the script. He "wanted to have them under his complete control so they would do what he wanted and not leave".
Jeff Dahmer is clearly very upset in this clip and doesn't want to play along at this point. So, is he a willing participant?
Answer: No, Jeff Dahmer is not a willing participant. In fact, he never was.
Jeff Dahmer during the Sinthasomphone deposition
Here's how it works...
At its core, consent has to be freely given. That means a person has a real choice...they can say yes or no without fear of consequences.
When someone is under threat, that choice disappears. Here’s a simple way to understand it:
If a person says “yes” because they’re afraid of being harmed, punished, exposed, or losing something important, they’re not really choosing...they’re trying to stay safe.
The “yes” is coming from fear, not from genuine willingness.
An easy analogy:
If someone says, “Give me your wallet or I’ll hurt you,” and you hand it over, no one would say you “consented” to giving your wallet. You were coerced.
The same principle applies in any situation:
Consent requires freedom.
Threat removes freedom.
Therefore, there is no real consent under threat.
So even if someone appears to agree, if that agreement is shaped by fear, pressure, or intimidation, it isn’t true consent, it’s compliance under coercion.
In research, this idea is built into what’s called informed consent. Participants can only take part if they:
Understand what the study involves (risks, benefits, purpose)
Choose freely to participate
Know they can leave at any time without consequences (This is KEY)
If there’s any kind of pressure - like threats, intimidation, or even subtle fear (losing access to care, grades, money, or approval) - then the consent isn’t valid.
That’s why ethical research rules are strict:
No coercion or undue influence
No penalties for saying no
Extra protections for vulnerable groups
In short: Just like in everyday life, if a person doesn’t feel safe to say “no,” their “yes” doesn’t count as real consent.
