I'm curious what others think about this.
BG had to of seen that Libby and Abby were together. So in his mind, as he was walking across that bridge or beforehand, his decision to act included that fact. He acted in broad daylight and on a public trail with the odds of two against one. Even if he had a gun or knife he still had two to his one.
My question is what sort of person does that? Is he just so bold, confident and so enamored with himself or is he on the other side of the spectrum, throws caution to the wind because he's self-loathing, spontaneously just acts on his feelings and if I get caught so what type of killer?
From reading around, double murders seem to happen in a home by someone known to the victims or if outside, like Son of Sam, at night. I'm finding it hard to find another instance of a double murder outside in a public area in broad daylight. Spree killers like to use separate locations and not much time in between, serial killers have some cooling off period between victims. Other than murderous couples who kill two people at once, I don't see this type of double murder being written about.
Yeah, I can’t find a double murder case that has the elements that we have here.
If we take away the incredibly unusual fact that he killed two victims at once, and just focus on the fact that he committed murder, then I can find similarities.
That’s how I’m approaching it, because I believe we are seeing a variation of the same thing.
As a model, I look at killers who target joggers on jogging trails. They tend to share a lot of traits with serial killers, even if they haven’t yet met the criteria for being one.
They see their victim, they make contact with their victim, they drag her off the trail, and commit their grotesque acts under the cover of trees and brush.
There is plenty of precedent for that particular MO.
I think this guy was looking to commit rape, and unfortunately found the girls.
The case I’ve come back to a million times (because it happened near me), is the Vanessa Marcotte murder.
Her killer had no previous criminal history, and simply came upon her jogging.
He pulled over, attacked her, dragged her into the woods, sexually assaulted her, and ultimately beat and strangled her to death.
It was a rural area, and everyone assumed that he must have had a reason to be there (he was likely from there).
Thanks to an accurate physical description (in part) from Parabon, and an alert state police officer who spotted a vehicle that matched one seen in the area, he was ultimately arrested.
It turned out that his delivery route went through that town, and although he was off work that day, he likely (my opinion) drove from his neighboring city to this area where he had previously seen joggers running.
He was probably hunting, and came across a target of opportunity.
I think that’s what we’re looking at here. He just killed two instead of the usual one.
Just because one part of the crime is particularly unusual, doesn’t mean that all of it is. That’s how I see it anyways.
So this is different, but likely the same.