I’ll start with what I concluded. Feel free to agree or disagree.

"The perp is someone living in the cat owner’s neighbourhood. You don’t become aware that somebody owns a cat unless you are fairly familiar with them. The perp has been in the vicinity of the owner’s home on more than one occasion, watching and waiting for the perfect opportunity to strike. This crime was premeditated, probably even fantasised about for a long time. I would say that the owner knows the perp, on a casual basis at the very least. The perp’s preoccupation with telling the reader that they cannot be traced makes me think that they are, indeed, living fairly nearby.

"I believe this person when they say they took enjoyment in torturing the poor cat. The word ‘sociopath’ immediately leaps to mind – cruel, sadistic and utterly lacking in empathy. Their brain is overrun with savage fantasies. A monstrous ego is at work, too – the kind of mind that thinks they can do no wrong. At the heart of the matter also lies cowardice. In public, they would have a propensity for off-colour or inappropriate humour, but not much more. They’d probably be fairly quiet and nondescript in the open, as a matter of fact. I see this person as being a classic ‘keyboard commando’ on the Internet.

"The impression I get from the letter’s cocky tone is of someone young; late-teens to mid-twenties. I predict a privileged upbringing – ‘spoiled, narcissistic rich kid’ is the image in my head. Despite being born with a silver spoon in their mouth, there is no love lost between this person and their parents. In fact, I’m pretty sure that there is a fair bit of conflict between both parties.

"It is likelier that the perp is male, although I would hesitate to completely rule out a female perp. They could have a maximum of one accomplice, although the usage of the term ‘we’ does feel as though they are trying too hard to convince people that there is more than one perp at work. If there is an accomplice, they are probably submissive to the perp and perhaps a little less smarter, although just as twisted.

"The perp is intelligent, probably well-read in the field of true crime, serial killers and the like. You will likely find material pertaining to these subjects (books, videos, et cetera) in their room – possibly even a collection of gory or even sexually sadistic stuff. On the subject of their lodgings, I do not believe that they committed the crime in their home. Most young people in Singapore live with their families, and I doubt they could have accomplished all that with family members around. The crime scene was someplace else – somewhere away from the perp’s residence, somewhere that they would have no fear of being disturbed.

"This almost certainly is not the first animal they’ve done horrible things to. Their prior targets were probably strays; I think this is the first time they’ve graduated to snatching someone’s pet. Torturing it was not enough this time; they saw the need to torment the owner, to rub salt into the wound. They’ve tasted blood, and they want more.

"The public nature of this crime might prompt them to lie low for a bit, but the murderous instinct will persist. Unless this person is caught, they will kill again. And I cannot rule out them going on to kill a human being (possibly a child), if given the opportunity. Treating their sickness is unlikely. They are irredeemable. Only imprisonment will stem their bloodlust; only death will stop it.

"If I wanted to find this person, I would start by looking at people whom the owner knows, then widen my net to include young people living in the owner’s immediate area. If there are any derelict buildings in the neighbourhood, one of those will be your crime scene."

Hi Nachtsider,

My two cents, for whatever it is worth:

-Fairly high quality written English, not perfect, but most likely either native English speaker or very advanced
-Somebody who is accustomed to writing reports, essays, but not professional writing habits
-Familiar with laboratory methods, though not necessarily a qualified scientist–may show and interest or aptitude in science, technology, etc.
-Organized
-Uses British Commonwealth spelling (Neighbours)

-Has probably done vicious acts before, so may be known to others as a cruel individual, but context may be different
-Uses the formalities of politeness, so probably more than capable of passing of as gentile sort
-May be "rehearsing" for more serious crimes later

Some potentially useful questions:

Should ask more about the circumstances of the cat’s disappearance: was it in the house or in the yard when it disappeared? Was it roaming? What would the exact challenges have been to grab it and take it away? What was the risk of being caught? How might the perp have been able to know who the owner was (assuming cat was roaming)?

What were the possibilities of the perp being seen, both on the abduction and the return?

How would he (assuming male) have concealed his actions, or was there any need to?

Are there cameras in the area?
What about local gas stations, etc, that the perp might have passed with his cargo?

What is the linguistic mix in the area? What percent speaks high quality English–and would use British Commonwealth spelling? (Probably British Commonwealth spelling is common in Singapore, I suppose)

Some possible approaches to action:

I would recommend attending local school group meetings, if that is an option, to discuss the matter and to try to get neighborhood folk to talk about any personalities that might match the above. Neighbors with school-age children will be very cooperative as they will be concerned about an implied threat to their children (and pets), and school volunteer types will have established communications channels from their volunteer work. Additionally, the schools may be a good source of information about former students with cruelty issues.

Lastly, I would avoid bringing up any profile descriptions that are not very well rooted in fact, as that may only confuse the situation.

Good luck,

G

I forgot one question:

I suspect the perp would have a keen interest in witnessing the petowner’s reaction. How might they have done that?

Would they have an opportunity to go back to watch the petowner again (to relive the experience)?

(Understood that they cannot relive the precise moment when the owner discovered the message and the tortured cat, but they may feel compelled to go back to see the owner again.)

G

Hi g,

British English is the standard where I come from (the Singapore/Malaysia area). Practically every Singaporean has an at least decent command of English; it’s a compulsory school subject. Your observation about a perp accustomed to writing reports and essays, plus being familiar with lab methods, fits pretty much most Singaporeans who passed through the high school system and above; chemistry, physics and other lab-related subjects are widely taught. Someone with a background as a science-stream student would be worth looking into, yes.

The cat was allowed to freely roam the owner’s house and garden. It occasionally ventured beyond the compound, but never so far that the owner could not relocate it. This suburb is a classic ‘good neighbourhood’ of middle to upper middle class folk. No crimes have taken place there, barring a very open-and-shut burglary that went down more than a decade ago. There are no security cameras or anything like that. The nearest public facilities (gas stations, stores, etc) are about a kilometre away.

Those bits you brought up about how the perp may have been able to know who the owner was, and how they would witness the owner’s reaction, are issues that I pondered myself. They were made me conclude that the perp is a neighbourhood youth, probably known to the owner at least on a casual basis.

Rallying the neighbours and poking around the schools are very good suggestions. I’ll bring them up. And no fear; I won’t pitch in with anything that doesn’t jibe with the facts as they stand.

Thanks heaps.

I have heard that Singapore has an extremely low crime rate–and that the laws are very stern.

Presumably, that is why there are no cameras.

That may be an advantage as the culprit may be much more brazen than criminals in NA who by now would expect to be on camera.

I would recommend your friend installing a camera where it won’t be noticed. If some of his more trustworthy neghbors do the same, they may find this individual skulking about.

G

Nacht.

I’m thinking along the same lines regarding derelict buildings. I would also consider new builds and more specifically tall buildings, or even bridges. That testing of landing capabilities may suggest height but not necessarily, just a thought.

I get the same feeling about the use of ‘we’ as subterfuge’ but if there was more than one perp then your scenario sounds good regarding a submissive other. I find it odd that ‘they’ claim they like to educate but then later say they won’t tell their reasons, when technically they already did. Feels like it’s being made up to some degree.

The part about ‘offspring’ was troubling, certainly seem to hint at a possible escalation in the type of target.

I would also maybe pull back a bit and consider more normal triggers. Although the injuries caused to the animal most likely suggest disturbed motives the actual trigger may have been something common. Cats love fresh soil so perhaps anyone in the neighbourhood who is particularly keen on gardening observed the animal using their nicely weeded flower beds as a litter tray. Not necessarily the homeowner but perhaps a young relative.

Is there a website that can be checked for missing cats in the area or surrounding areas. Might throw up a pattern?

I also doubt the truthfullness of the letter. If the cat wasn’t there, I would say that it was made up entirely.

I’d be on the lookout for peeping toms or any such voyeuristic tendencies. I think you’re right about it being a young person who lives in the neigborhood. If it’s possible to do such things it would be best to organize a neighborhood meeting/ watch group. The perpetrator might even show up or join. It could also have the effect of scaring him off, but that could be for the best.

Interesting.
"Possibly" the police are involved? I certainly think they should be. (We all know the classic profile, right?!)

Yes, this person’s local, reasonably well-educated, "scientific" in the broadest possible sense, knows or knew the owner quite well.
Had a grudge against the cat? Maybe, but not necessarily.
(We like to find a motive we can understand, because we don’t get pleasure from torturing a cat. This guy’s different. He does.)
If there’s a grudge here, it’s against a member of the household who had the cat, I’d suggest. If you’re tired of a cat shi**ing on your lawn, you poison the cat, or take it holiday someplace else. There may not be. He might just be a start-up cat torturer.

He had the cat for a while, so he has private premises where no-one else got in the way of his cat experiments, so presumably he lives alone. I don’t think he shares those premises since I don’t believe in a "We" element, either. That makes him a bit older, self-supporting and presumably, employed.
He’s not a rocket scientist. He may be a woman, but that’s pretty unlikely. If they hold a meeting about this incident he might attend, yep.

He returned the cat alive, so perhaps didn’t intend to kill it and underestimated the harm he’d caused; but that’s being very generous. He’s a sh*t-bag.
The "little present" thing is an odd description. Who was in the household? Someone with whom he might have been involved at some time in the past?
Is it the daughters cat? "Resident cat that you have been taking care of…" is also a little odd. (But again, I’m assigning motivation where there may be none.)

Tell us when they find the guy, Nacht.

Not much to add here but I do agree with smithy’s suggestion that the cat seems to be a means to an end i.e. the main goal is to terrify or intimidate the owner or family of the cat. For what reason, I have no idea. I also agree that the "Your Concerned Neighbours" signature is almost certainly bullshit. I have difficulty imagining a cabal of cat-hating neighbors doing this and presenting themselves in this way unless it is truly a group of individuals with some legitimate reason for targeting the owner or family member. The idea of a group of sociopathic, murderous individuals threatening you seems more terrifying than just one. Sociopaths lie and I would guess that the signature is an example of that. I would obviously hope that the police would interview the entire family thoroughly and really question them about who might want to terrify them like this. They probably know him, IMO.

Best of luck, Nacht. Let us know what happens with this ugly case.

E., I’m not sure I said that, unless you think so, in which case I agree with you!
I was rather to-ing and fro-ing about the guy’s motivation. He is, though, to state the completely obvious, a genuine sicko.

My bad, smithy. I thought that’s where you were going with this but I apologize for putting words in your mouth.

If there’s a grudge here, it’s against a member of the household who had the cat, I’d suggest. If you’re tired of a cat shi**ing on your lawn, you poison the cat, or take it holiday someplace else. There may not be.

Glad you agree with what I imagined you saying though…

This threatening letter is more serious than about the cat: ‘You might want to protect and keep your offspring close to you’

I’d say it is something about the son or daughter of the cat owner..they threaten him personally, and to me, this sounds to be a business or law suit related issue. If I was the cat owner, I’d ask myself who my enemy could be.

QT

…He returned the cat alive, so perhaps didn’t intend to kill it and underestimated the harm he’d caused; but that’s being very generous. He’s a sh*t-bag.
The "little present" thing is an odd description. Who was in the household? Someone with whom he might have been involved at some time in the past?
Is it the daughters cat? "Resident cat that you have been taking care of…" is also a little odd. (But again, I’m assigning motivation where there may be none.)

The cat was returned alive? Did I miss that somewhere?

I would say this person is very close to the person taking care of this cat. Sounds like the cat did not belong to this person. It was being watched over; fed, etc., and whoever this cat-killer psycho is didn’t like it. Maybe this cat received more love and attention than this sicko did from the cat’s caretaker.

I wouldn’t doubt it being a family member or close friend….right there to witness the horror.

I’ll refer to this cat torturer below simply as “author”, not to soften what they did but mostly because everything else I tried to think of seemed too cute a description for the really disturbing behavior by this potential psychopath.
Thoughts, some of which may have already been stated better:

1. This seems like an act by an individual not a “we”. Firstly, the author of the letter seems to overstate “we” and “us” literally. Nearly every instance of “we” or “us” could easily be rewritten to have the same sentence meaning without forcing “we” down the readers throat:
a. “You may not appreciate what we have (was) done, . . .”
b. “Let us explain.” Sentence fragment could be removed altogether.
c. “We enjoy . . . We truly had fun.” Redundant usage for impact.
d. “There is a list . . . we subjected the cat to.” Or rather, “the cat was subjected to: xyz“, separating the author from the obvious and overstated ownership of the acts against the victim.
e. “. . . we are reasonable . . .” and rest of last paragraph. This could easily be rewritten to remove the “we” possession of the author’s actions yet preserve the description of the author as reasonable, purposeful, elusive, a future threat, and clever enough not to leave evidence. In this paragraph, “we” feels forced.

2. In addition to the forced “we” there is a general lack of any hint of individualism in the letter as I would expect from a plurality of authors. In my opinion, this was purposeful to magnify the fear felt by the victim or to disguise in some way the authors lone act. Rather than have individual yet common motivations, this group of “us” seems to agree and enjoy equally the experiments on the cat; there seems to be no unique mark of each individual in this “we”. This seems more typical of an “I” pretending poorly as a “we”. For example, a true “we” who both had strong independent personalities but shared a common psychopathic purpose, might have written something like, “While my friend enjoyed testing your cats threshold to pain, I particularly enjoyed shoving foreign objects into . . .” This would be even more scary since these psychopaths would share a common purpose of torture but need to satisfy their need differently. I don’t see hints of “we” or individualism but rather, “We are Borg.”

3. Strange conditional usage of apostrophes. When writing by hand, this doesn’t apply as much, but when typing, condition usage of apostrophes might be a “signature” of this author. If you can get a sample of other works by your POI, you might detect a similar signature of apostrophe usage :
a. Conditionally uses them for replacing “not”, as in “aren’t”(2), “don’t” but later writes “would not”
b. Never uses them to replace “is”or “are”.
i. “It is highly. . .”
ii. “As you are well aware, your resident. . .” , although clearly aware of proper useage of “your” and “you are”, chosing not to use “you’re”
iii. “Finally, we are . . .” instead of we’re

4. Less used phrasing:
a. “We do hope . . .”, instead of “we hope”. The “do” seems extra.

5. Strange sentence hinting at knowledge of victim by the author and a particular dislike of victim:
a. “Now now, don’t be so hasty . . compulsive decisions (plural instead of singular) . . . which you may . . . (basically regret)”. The author is chiding the victim here, for wanting to open the “present” too early. This would be a single compulsive decision by the victim, not really hasty if one could hear the cat in distress of somekind. The pluralization of “decisions” could hint the author has seen the victim be what he would describe as compulsive and hasty in the past, several times.
b. “We hope you aren’t emotionally attached . . .” Clearly, anyone who has this animal knows it’s a pet. But the author is particularly enjoying the idea this particular victim missing the cat rather than focusing on emotional damage done to the victim in a general sense. If the victim and author didn’t know each other, a reasonable rewriting of this sentence by similarly motivated psychopath could be, “I’m sure you missed your beloved pet and are devastated it’s returned to you as a bleeding mess . . .” This would focus on the goals of hurting the victim, more as a general victim rather than a specific one.
c. “you may not appreciate what we . . . all in good will. “ Of course the victim doesn’t appreciate it nor have they made any compelling argument about anything related to “good will”. This is just a taunt, without knowing the victim, the pleasure of this phrase might not be worth writing. Something like, “You might not understand why this has been done, but I assure you, it’s been critical for me to use your pet as practice for my next series of experiments.” The second sentence is much worse, but lacks the pleasure an author trying to hurt this specific victim.
d. “. . . cat’s aren’t fit for domestication . . .” Could this hint to a conversation that the author has had in past with victim about disliking cats as pets? Maybe general discussions with friends about his dislike for cats? General dislike of cats by the author is clear, if author is youthful or otherwise unable to control his environment, may indicate that in reality the family has cats which the author hates. Publically obedient author may not have ever actually been caught or risked being caught hurting the families pet cat(s) but daydreams about killing them, this victims’ pet provided the perfect outlet without direct risk.
e. “Unfortunately, almost no details . . .” Why did the author waste time suggesting they’re “reasonable” and purposeful, offer the victim to ruminate on that, then pull the rug out from under them and offer no explanation for the authors actions? To me, the first three sentences would have been a great start of a manifesto-like explanation of why the author is so smart to hate cats, how clever his experiments were, how much suffering there was, how much planning went into the torture, etc. Nope, the author offers no cleverness here, just the chuckle of pulling the rug out from under this particular victim to leave them wondering why this happened. Focus in on this victim not on the acts as part of a greater story about the author.

6. Improper or otherwise odd wording:
a. “. . .unable to contain it no further . . .”
b. “It is highly advised . . .“, why not super duper advised?
c. “. . . resident cat . . .” , whole sentence is odd. Likely a few thoughts here, over-edited to the point that the sentence becomes strangely worded, but the author liked part of the wording and couldn’t let it go of it completely.
d. “. . . curiosity may get the better of you . . .”Author is imagining what it’d be like as the victim reading this letter but is missing the boat completely. The victim wouldn’t be curious at this point, at least I wouldn’t. I have never received a box with a scared, likely moaning, nearly dead cat that is moving around in a box with a letter taped to the top but I can assure you, I’d be a little more than “curious” upon seeing it within a few seconds.
e. “. . educating the feline in the affairs of . . .“ The author already has referred to the “present” as a “cat” twice already by the time we get to this sentence. The second “affairs of” seems to be trying too hard.
f. “. . . testing the limits of the feline . . .” Again, strange usage, with “cat” being used in preceding sentence, just after first usage of “feline”. Clearly author is drafting and redrafting the message to get it just right. This makes the other mistakes and oddities stand out because they clearly pass a revision process and thusly don’t stand out to the author.
g. “6) . . . & Dehydration. . .” strange usage of abbreviation mark as well as including “dehydration” as part of starvation item on list. Why not merge other similar “tests”. Did the author think 10 items was a good amount?
h. “Finally, we are reasonable . . .” Usage of “finally” is typical when drafting an essay or letter as a start to the final paragraph or thought. However, it’s odd to me to use “finally” when breaking thoughts into parts without preceeding this usage with other thought separating words in the composition like, “Firstly, I experimented on your cat . . “, “Then, I packaged it up, . . .”, “Next, we wrote you this letter to scare you. . . “.
i. “. . . you might ponder?” Odd usage of ponder, I’d have used “wonder”.
j. “And rest assured , . . “ don’t need for the “and”, it’s just “Rest assured, no . . .”
k. “. . . letter or the feline.” Last usage of “feline”, at the very end of the message, in a part that was finished last (likely) and edited multiple times for just the right wording, as most of us do when drafting a letter; editing the beginning and ending the most. I think “cat” started early in the drafting, then as the author’s composition gained steam, “feline” took over. Maybe it had a better ring?
l. “Yours Truly, ” Could have been much creepier here, seems to show a waning of focus on hurting the victim or just general lack of wit, more typical of an emotional mind rather than an obsessive and analytical one. I’d have signed off more Z-like or “zlike” as I like to say. Maybe something like, “Looking forward to meeting your kids,”, “We’ve got our eyes on you,”, or maybe “See you at the next potluck,”.

Hope this helps and provides some true insight toward solving this case.

I agree with others that this was done by someone who knows the victim at least casually. I’d start by knowing what is knowable about the victim and those immediately around the victim. I’d focus on males in their teens through late twenties, as others have pointed out, who seem polite and not overtly rebellious but with a history of emotional outbursts or social discord. This might help you narrow the list to candidates which you can rule out based on your interpretation of what the letter as evidence reveals.

I don’t think this particular victim has much to worry about but I’d get those cameras as others have mentioned. I’d also encourage the victim to discuss their reaction to the letter to anyone who asks or shows interest in their experience, paying particular attention to how their story is heard by the other party. I agree with others that the author of this letter might subtly seek to experience the victims pain at some later time. This inquiry likely wouldn’t come soon, but rather later, when the heat of this event dies down and the risk of being found out still high.