ddav
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2014
- Messages
- 48
- Reaction score
- 169
Assuming that Little doesn't turn out to be another be another Henry Lee Lucas, I believe that he, like Deangelo and Rader, will have to cause us re-examine what the profiles have told us about this kind of criminal. While he doesn't appear to be particularly intelligent he seems to have done everything a potential killer would have to do not to get caught. Firstly if he did indeed kill 90+ victims in a period of over three decades that means he averaged less that three victims a year. This would have not created the police and media attention that the frequency of killings of say a Ted Bundy, or a Wayne Williams who kept escalating their killing until they were caught.Secondly of course was the peripatetic nature of Littles crimes, moving all over the country, once again making linkage difficult. When you add to that the fact most of his victims were living in at risk lifestyles like drugs and prostitution, you have all the makings of a prolific serial killer.
No doubt given that he was 62 at the time of his arrest, if he had not been caught he would have ceased killing due to old age and had it not been for DNA his murders would have gone unsolved, like Deangelos. These recent killings are demonstrating that the idea that the serial killer cant stop is a myth. The frightening thing wondering how many killers out there who because they are itinerant and pace their crimes have not been caught.
No doubt given that he was 62 at the time of his arrest, if he had not been caught he would have ceased killing due to old age and had it not been for DNA his murders would have gone unsolved, like Deangelos. These recent killings are demonstrating that the idea that the serial killer cant stop is a myth. The frightening thing wondering how many killers out there who because they are itinerant and pace their crimes have not been caught.