Profiles of Child Killers

[RiverSelah]

http://itsamysterytome.wordpress.com...their-victims/

From a study of 883 cases where the murderer was caught and convicted. Percentages based strictly on the cases researched in this study

He lives on the edge of society, and is socially retarded. “Social marginals” is the term used for him.

I say “him” because child killers are almost 100% male.

His average age is 27.8 years old.

69.8% are white, 19.1 black,

He is usually unmarried and unattached at the time of the murder.

17.1% of child killers live alone, and 33.2% live with their parents.

He usually either lives in the neighborhood where the abduction takes place or frequents that area during his everyday activities.

1/2 of child killers are unemployed or work in unskilled or semi-skilled jobs.

2/3 of child killers have prior arrests for violent crimes. 1/2 of those violent crimes were committed against children.

The child killer’s most frequent past crime is sexual in nature, and the primary motive for a child abduction is sexual.

The use of pornography by killers as a trigger to murder has increased since the original study.

The child is usually abducted in a place very close to where he/she was last seen.

The child killer usually takes the child more than 1/4 mile from where he was abducted,

but the distance between the murder site and where the body is later dumped is less than 199 feet in most cases.

23.7 returned to the place they dumped the body

9.7 contacted the victim’s family

10% of the child killers interjected themselves into the actual murder investigation.

In the initial study, the name of the killer was almost always in police files within the first week. When the supplemental cases were studied, that proved to no longer be the case. (does that mean the killers are getting smarter?)

Police usually have contact with the killer before he becomes a primary suspect.

[RiverSelah]

These are the stats I think fit into this case in reference, for example, to the three persons of interest who went in front of the grand jury. This profile could fit several persons involved in this case. I bolded the stuff that looks good.

He lives on the edge of society, and is socially retarded. “Social marginals” is the term used for him.
I say “him” because child killers are almost 100% male.

His average age is 27.8 years old.

69.8% are white, 19.1 black,

He is usually unmarried and unattached at the time of the murder.

17.1% of child killers live alone, and 33.2% live with their parents.

He usually either lives in the neighborhood where the abduction takes place or frequents that area during his everyday activities.
1/2 of child killers are unemployed or work in unskilled or semi-skilled jobs.

2/3 of child killers have prior arrests for violent crimes. 1/2 of those violent crimes were committed against children.

The child is usually abducted in a place very close to where he/she was last seen.

The child killer usually takes the child more than 1/4 mile from where he was abducted,

but the distance between the murder site and where the body is later dumped is less than 199 feet in most cases.

23.7 returned to the place they dumped the body

9.7 contacted the victim’s family

10% of the child killers interjected themselves into the actual murder investigation.

In the initial study, the name of the killer was almost always in police files within the first week. When the supplemental cases were studied, that proved to no longer be the case. (does that mean the killers are getting smarter?)

Police usually have contact with the killer before he becomes a primary suspect.

[RiverSelah]

It is only after careful study of many crime scenes that the veteran criminal profiler can confidently try to rebuild the offender's behavior at a particular scene. From this reconstruction can the profilers arrive at conclusions regarding the motive for the crime.

No respectable criminal profiler continues to believe in the age-old definition of method of operation (M.O.) that a particular type of criminal act is always and unavoidably the result of the same motive. On the flipside, it can be assumed that a number of motives can result in a particular kind of behavior. Suppose a crime scene investigator comes across a body with its eyes blindfolded. This could indicate that the offender may have known the victim and did not want to be identified.

Many times, criminal profiling can result in the narrowing of a broad list of suspects. Although this is not an exact science, it is an invaluable tool because it permits police agencies to focus more effectively their limited resources. For instance, if the offender is most likely to possess qualities A, B, and C, profilers do not have to look for perpetrators who possess characteristics outside of these qualities.

http://ezinearticles.com/?Basics-of-...ife&id=1043895

[Littledeer]

GREAT INFO River!

Maybe we can list who we think killed these girls and try to profile them based on your stats with what we know about them??

[RiverSelah]

We can assume the 3 guys who testified in front of the GJ submitted DNA and it didn't match. The profilers don't always get it right, but in about 90% of the cases it is a match. As my theory changes almost daily I have added my armchair comments in blue.

Based on the profile info, here's what could match this case:

He lives on the edge of society, and is socially retarded. “Social marginals” is the term used for him.

I say “him” because child killers are almost 100% male.

His average age is 27.8 years old.

69.8% are white, 19.1 black,

He is usually unmarried and unattached at the time of the murder.

17.1% of child killers live alone, and 33.2% live with their parents.

He usually either lives in the neighborhood where the abduction takes place or frequents that area during his everyday activities.

1/2 of child killers are unemployed or work in unskilled or semi-skilled jobs.

2/3 of child killers have prior arrests for violent crimes. 1/2 of those violent crimes were committed against children.

The child killer’s most frequent past crime is sexual in nature, and the primary motive for a child abduction is sexual. Don't know about this one because it didn't appear sexually motivated.

The child killer usually takes the child more than 1/4 mile from where he was abducted,

but the distance between the murder site and where the body is later dumped is less than 199 feet in most cases.

23.7 returned to the place they dumped the body

9.7 contacted the victim’s family Has this been reported?

10% of the child killers interjected themselves into the actual murder investigation.

In the initial study, the name of the killer was almost always in police files within the first week. When the supplemental cases were studied, that proved to no longer be the case. (does that mean the killers are getting smarter?)

Police usually have contact with the killer before he becomes a primary suspect.

[Littledeer]

Originally Posted by RiverSelah

We can assume the 3 guys who testified in front of the GJ submitted DNA and it didn't match. The profilers don't always get it right, but in about 90% of the cases it is a match. As my theory changes almost daily I have added my armchair comments in blue.

Based on the profile info, here's what could match this case:

He lives on the edge of society, and is socially retarded. “Social marginals” is the term used for him.

I say “him” because child killers are almost 100% male. I disagree with this. Look at all the mothers who have killed their children. I would say 85% to 90% is more realistic today.

His average age is 27.8 years old.

69.8% are white, 19.1 black,

He is usually unmarried and unattached at the time of the murder.

17.1% of child killers live alone, and 33.2% live with their parents.

He usually either lives in the neighborhood where the abduction takes place or frequents that area during his everyday activities.

1/2 of child killers are unemployed or work in unskilled or semi-skilled jobs.

2/3 of child killers have prior arrests for violent crimes. 1/2 of those violent crimes were committed against children.

The child killer’s most frequent past crime is sexual in nature, and the primary motive for a child abduction is sexual. Don't know about this one because it didn't appear sexually motivated.

The child killer usually takes the child more than 1/4 mile from where he was abducted,

but the distance between the murder site and where the body is later dumped is less than 199 feet in most cases.

23.7 returned to the place they dumped the body

9.7 contacted the victim’s family Has this been reported? Are you asking if the people who testified at the grand jury have had any contact with the family since then?

10% of the child killers interjected themselves into the actual murder investigation.

In the initial study, the name of the killer was almost always in police files within the first week. When the supplemental cases were studied, that proved to no longer be the case. (does that mean the killers are getting smarter?)

Police usually have contact with the killer before he becomes a primary suspect.

I think LE do know who did this crime, but as was stated by the OSBI, need one more piece of evidence to prove it. Is it a family member to come forward with opposing information that was given by the killer(s) in their statements??

[RiverSelah]

Originally Posted by Littledeer

I think LE do know who did this crime, but as was stated by the OSBI, need one more piece of evidence to prove it. Is it a family member to come forward with opposing information that was given by the killer(s) in their statements??

Good question. I'm not sure what the one piece of evidence is- other than to match the DNA to a suspect.

So many thoughts on this case and it is so frustrating.

[Littledeer]

If it is that (DNA), then that would rule out anyone in that area that has a rap sheet. Their dna would be in the database.........right?

Originally Posted by RiverSelah

Good question. I'm not sure what the one piece of evidence is- other than to match the DNA to a suspect.

So many thoughts on this case and it is so frustrating.

[RiverSelah]

Originally Posted by Littledeer

If it is that (DNA), then that would rule out anyone in that area that has a rap sheet. Their dna would be in the database.........right?

The law was passed in Oklahoma in 2001 to obtain DNA from all convicted felons. The problem is that until 2006, it wasn't enforced.

My thoughts are that LE has the DNA of persons such as the 3 who testified in front of the GJ and it didn't match. As the rain destroyed evidence, I'm not sure if the DNA is a good forensic tool in this case as a lot had to be lost. Not to mention the idiots paved the road!

[RiverSelah]

Based on the information above, here is my armchair analysis- tell me what you think:

According to the link in the above post: General profiling rules, such as, for example, "the older the victim, the younger the offender, starting at 25 and adding or subtracting years based on the degree of sophistication." I'm assuming the offender in this case is male and approximately 19 years of age.

The motivation was revenge as seen in a spree killing. The killer is a Caucasian male and has had a lot of negative law enforcement contacts. His DNA is not in the database, which means he has not been convicted of a felony after Oklahoma passed the law mandating this in 2006. (It passed in 2001, they didn't mandate collections until 2006). The crime scene was organized, as the shooters brought the guns to the scene and intended to kill these 2 little girls. There are no signs of remorse by the killer (reported at least) such as the bodies being covered or cared for after death.

The assailant lives near the victims and has been interviewed by the police.

The perpetrator is not acting out a fantasy- he went there to kill the girls and didn't leave until he was sure they were dead. He is a sociopath and is not worried about an arrest. He believes the victims deserved to die as a revenge for a perceived wrong- either by one of the girls or their family members. He did not take any items from the girls as a trophy, the memory serves him well.

This offender is unskilled and works as a farmer or in some field where he doesn't associate with groups of people. He plays violent video games and hunts as a hobby.