fcavanaugh
#ShineBrightForSuzanne
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2018
- Messages
- 753
- Reaction score
- 18,600
Just thought I’d share an interesting article I came across by a FBI Special Agent assigned to the FBI’s National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, Behavioral Analysis Unit 4, for anyone interested. It specifically relates to missing persons investigations from first report, type of missing person case i.e., voluntary, foul play/criminal etc, how the cases are initially investigated, how they rule voluntary disappearance out and investigation transitions to no-body homicide case.
There’s lots of great info in the article at link below.
Something I learned was that the FBI BAU 4 has created a database of hundreds of no-body cases to include prosecutors’ contact information, and states that prosecutors with no experience prosecuting a no-body case should contact one of these experienced prosecutors for support and guidance. Since the FBI has been involved in this case since early on, I would imagine District Attorney LS is aware of this and my hope is she will/already has contacted one of these experienced prosecutors for help with the case against BM. I know it was mentioned the 4th Judicial District was going to assist them with the evidence organization, etc, so my best guess is most likely they (LS and team) has also reached out for help preparing the actual prosecution for trial court. Maybe LS has been busy with that and might be reason she wasn’t in attendance at the recent motion hearings, moo.
Snipped and BBM are some things that stood out in relation to the case at hand, or should I say, the case in the hands of DA Linda Stanley et al:
Investigators sometimes receive inadequate information in the beginning of a missing person investigation. If people portray the victim as routinely running away, being reckless, or acting irresponsibly, others may express less concern and possibly not even file a formal report. Investigators could treat the case as a reported event, rather than a potential criminal act. However, when facts and circumstances indicate a strong possibility of foul play or the disappearance occurs due to criminal action, investigators should consider the missing person case as a potential homicide.
People falsely report someone missing for various reasons. Perhaps the person died due to negligent homicide, accidental death, or murder, and the individual responsible for the death wants to create distance (time and space) from the act by establishing an alibi, obstructing justice, or avoiding detection.
A no-body homicide often begins as a missing person case. In such scenarios, an early determination that the matter is more than a routine case often results in successful prosecution.
While a motive may prove unnecessary, it helps explain the reason for the murder. The motivation for the crime provides important clues, particularly when investigators have no body to confirm death or location where the murder occurred. Investigating circumstances leading up to the disappearance emerge as critical to the case. Sometimes, what appears on the surface as a perfect, harmonious domestic situation in reality equates to an abusive relationship. Understanding the missing person’s background often exposes truths known only to the offender and the victim.
Many criminals strive to create an illusion of distance in time and physical proximity from the victim’s last-known whereabouts. Successful disposal of the body is another way offenders detach from the crime. The body itself provides the best evidence of an unlawful death. However, other ways exist to determine that a person died. Many homicide prosecutors often base their cases on circumstantial evidence. They must establish 1) that the victim died; 2) that the person was murdered; 3) the approximate time of death; 4) that the likely location of the crime is within the prosecutor’s jurisdiction; and 5) the person responsible for the murder.
In one particular case, the judge determined that “the fact that a murderer may successfully dispose of a victim’s body does not entitle the offender to an acquittal.”
If suspects attempt to distance themselves in time or location, investigators must invalidate any fabricated alibis. A concise timeline, forensic evidence, and behavioral analysis help link offenders to the crime scene and wipe away any false illusions. BAU 4 aids investigators and prosecutors by assessing the strength of the homicide investigation and providing collaborative recommendations for a successful outcome.
Since the 2012 symposium, BAU 4 has created a database that contains over 660 no-body homicide prosecutions in the United States, including over 477 cases prosecuted since 1995, along with the prosecutors’ contact information.
BAU 4 often recommends that a prosecuting attorney who never has taken on a no-body homicide case and plans to should contact experienced prosecutors who can help assess the strength of the current case and provide guidance and support. The FBI’s database serves as a conduit for individuals to locate fellow prosecutors to discuss best practices for no-body homicide cases and investigative steps to cover before proceeding.
No-Body Homicide Cases: A Practical Approach — LEB
IMHOO
#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne
There’s lots of great info in the article at link below.
Something I learned was that the FBI BAU 4 has created a database of hundreds of no-body cases to include prosecutors’ contact information, and states that prosecutors with no experience prosecuting a no-body case should contact one of these experienced prosecutors for support and guidance. Since the FBI has been involved in this case since early on, I would imagine District Attorney LS is aware of this and my hope is she will/already has contacted one of these experienced prosecutors for help with the case against BM. I know it was mentioned the 4th Judicial District was going to assist them with the evidence organization, etc, so my best guess is most likely they (LS and team) has also reached out for help preparing the actual prosecution for trial court. Maybe LS has been busy with that and might be reason she wasn’t in attendance at the recent motion hearings, moo.
Snipped and BBM are some things that stood out in relation to the case at hand, or should I say, the case in the hands of DA Linda Stanley et al:
Investigators sometimes receive inadequate information in the beginning of a missing person investigation. If people portray the victim as routinely running away, being reckless, or acting irresponsibly, others may express less concern and possibly not even file a formal report. Investigators could treat the case as a reported event, rather than a potential criminal act. However, when facts and circumstances indicate a strong possibility of foul play or the disappearance occurs due to criminal action, investigators should consider the missing person case as a potential homicide.
People falsely report someone missing for various reasons. Perhaps the person died due to negligent homicide, accidental death, or murder, and the individual responsible for the death wants to create distance (time and space) from the act by establishing an alibi, obstructing justice, or avoiding detection.
A no-body homicide often begins as a missing person case. In such scenarios, an early determination that the matter is more than a routine case often results in successful prosecution.
While a motive may prove unnecessary, it helps explain the reason for the murder. The motivation for the crime provides important clues, particularly when investigators have no body to confirm death or location where the murder occurred. Investigating circumstances leading up to the disappearance emerge as critical to the case. Sometimes, what appears on the surface as a perfect, harmonious domestic situation in reality equates to an abusive relationship. Understanding the missing person’s background often exposes truths known only to the offender and the victim.
Many criminals strive to create an illusion of distance in time and physical proximity from the victim’s last-known whereabouts. Successful disposal of the body is another way offenders detach from the crime. The body itself provides the best evidence of an unlawful death. However, other ways exist to determine that a person died. Many homicide prosecutors often base their cases on circumstantial evidence. They must establish 1) that the victim died; 2) that the person was murdered; 3) the approximate time of death; 4) that the likely location of the crime is within the prosecutor’s jurisdiction; and 5) the person responsible for the murder.
In one particular case, the judge determined that “the fact that a murderer may successfully dispose of a victim’s body does not entitle the offender to an acquittal.”
If suspects attempt to distance themselves in time or location, investigators must invalidate any fabricated alibis. A concise timeline, forensic evidence, and behavioral analysis help link offenders to the crime scene and wipe away any false illusions. BAU 4 aids investigators and prosecutors by assessing the strength of the homicide investigation and providing collaborative recommendations for a successful outcome.
Since the 2012 symposium, BAU 4 has created a database that contains over 660 no-body homicide prosecutions in the United States, including over 477 cases prosecuted since 1995, along with the prosecutors’ contact information.
BAU 4 often recommends that a prosecuting attorney who never has taken on a no-body homicide case and plans to should contact experienced prosecutors who can help assess the strength of the current case and provide guidance and support. The FBI’s database serves as a conduit for individuals to locate fellow prosecutors to discuss best practices for no-body homicide cases and investigative steps to cover before proceeding.
No-Body Homicide Cases: A Practical Approach — LEB
IMHOO
#FindSuzanne
#BringSuzanneHome
#JusticeForSuzanne
Last edited:
What am I missing??? Please, tell!