Gunther Toody
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2013
- Messages
- 456
- Reaction score
- 339
I can honestly say I've read every post on every thread and I am caught up.
I wanted to post this article re: Child Homicides and the Psychology of the Perpetrators because as I was reading, I didn't read a lot about the criminology/victimology, forensic psychology of the BG, and statistics for this type of crime and I think it's a very important topic for discussion.
Here is an excerpt containing important facts and statistics from that article:
"Published in the academic journal Victims and Offenders, this review conducted in the United States, also confirms that police can infer a lot about who committed the crime just from the age of the victim. When a child is younger than five, the suspect, who is equally likely to be male or female, is most probably from within the same family, not motivated by the urge to molest and tends to kill using their hands. When the child is between the ages of five and 12, the suspect is most often male, a close friend or a stranger, sexually compulsive, killing using means such as strangling. Finally, if the child victim is between 13 and 17, the suspect is most likely to be a close friend or a stranger, sexually driven and killing with weapons.
Heide and colleagues also report on the most complete previous study of sexually motivated child abduction murders. Analysis of 621 cases representing 44 states across the U.S. showed that in 44 percent of the cases the victim was deceased within one hour after they were abducted. Within three hours, 74 percent of victims were dead. Fast action in missing children cases becomes vital because data suggests there is typically a two-hour delay after a child is reported missing.
Heide, Beauregard and Myers also report location patterns now play a crucial rule in the way forensic science is used to apprehend culprits. They report studies which conclude that in the majority of cases (72 percent,) the radius from the body recovery site to murder scene is less than 200 feet. The distribution was different when it came to journey from the initial contact setting to the murder site: 31 percent travelled 0199 feet, whereas 43 percent trekked 1.512 miles.
Christine Gregoire an Attorney General from Washington State reports the killers are usually at the initial contact site for legitimate reasons. They either lived in the area or were engaging in some routine. She also reports most child abduction murders are opportunistic. Only in 14 percent of cases was the victim picked out because of some physical characteristic. The initial contact site is within 1/4 mile of the victims last known location in 80 percent of cases."
Here is a link to that article: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...rs-children-psychology-profiles-child-killers
I am also going to attach a dissertation that thoroughly discusses child-abduction/homicides and the cited perpetrator's geographical habits and how the crime scene in its location and how the victims were left (which we don't know yet) among many other assailant tendencies is also invaluable to understanding the MO of these vicious killers, and hopefully bringing Abby and Libby's killer to justice ... This paper is long, but it is incredible resourceful even if skimmed, IMO:
http://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1545&context=gc_etds
I think it's important for us to analyze criminology and the statistics of child murders because, Science... And there are different types of killers motivated by different types of scenarios and victims. Do we think he's a "Lust", "Mission-Oriented", "Visual", or "Power and Control" type of killer? As described here:
https://sites.google.com/site/psych...hat-are-the-different-types-of-serial-killers
*I'm aware he may not be a serial killer, but, for reference sake, this type of killing can be ascribed to the methodologies often used by serial killers*
Let me know what you all think. :thinking:
This is the proper approach to take...thanks for posting this information.