MA MA - Molly Bish, 16, Warren, 27 Jun 2000

[:+:MrTT:+:]

I know I cannot trust any of these "photos" of the crime scene like 48 hours or Disappeared or Unsolved Mysteries because I cannot ever seem to figure out where the open first aid kit is in the photo. I am guessing the large black bag next to her lawn chair in the 48 hours mystery photo is the first aid kit, but it just looks like a big bag to me.

So you thought I was referring to Molly Bish's reaction out on the beach? I can only guess as to what Molly Bish would have done. She had to make quick decisions. I got my lifeguard certification through the American Red Cross. I think this is where Molly got her certification, but I don't know. And I wonder if they keep records too because they give you these little paper cards to keep in your wallet to prove you have certification.

Anybody can get lifeguard certification.

I think it went something like this... ALL MOO AND SPECULATION, NOT POSTING AS FACT JUST A MERE ASSUMPTION/GUESSING/THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX

 

[:+:MrTT:+:]

. duplicate posting., sorry about that

 

[Kell1]

I think it went something like this... ALL MOO AND SPECULATION, NOT POSTING AS FACT JUST A MERE ASSUMPTION/GUESSING/THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX

Add a weapon (and possibly a badge ) I tend to agree

 

[Deleted member 269000]

Actually sometimes they do , if that alone fullfills their fantasies, there are such things as odd as this sounds as Pedophiles who dont molest.

They usually seek out ways around it short of offending, such as hiring yong looking prostitutes , or odd masturbatory practices etc..

Its rare, but they do exist, they even have support groups for ach other .

Thats an extreme, but i mentioned that to give you an idea that it can be done .

Something like 94% of offenders in sexual abduction murders of kids, have a history, and this offender seems to have some criminal experience to the point of planning.

Im not saying you are wrong, Im saying that speaking from a LE perspective, Im taking a REALLY long hard look at suspect #2 (now deceased)

I respect your point of view. I was a prosecutor for a few years and have some familiarity with child sex crimes myself. While it’s true that many pedophiles don’t act on their desires (and indeed many hate them), RS wouldn’t be your typical pedophile (or, more accurately, hebephile), if he raped Molly. Given that he allegedly had at least one snuff film of a young girl (presumably used for sexual gratification) and the belongings of others, it’s possible that he was aroused by violence as much as age. Research has also shown that impulsivity is generally much higher in untreated child sex offenders. It would have been hard for him to resist the urges.

And I’m not saying he doesn’t have a history, if he’s responsible for what happened to her. Unless he was buying young girls’ clothing accessories, he very likely could. I’m saying that he wasn’t arrested or convicted. Approximately 40% of violent sex offenders don’t have a prior conviction. Parents for Megan's Law

His relatively advanced age is similarly not a reason to discount him as a suspect. While the average age of a child sex offender is around 30, the average age for a convicted violent sexual offender is 37, and almost 1 in 5 is over 50. Mandatory Minimum Penalties for Federal Sex Offenses. For child , the average crawls up to 42.

Perhaps the most important statistic is that 90 percent of child sexual victims know the offender. https://www.d2l.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Statistics_2_Perpetrators.pdf. Not only could RS have known Molly from his frequent trips to the Pond to fish, he also lived a few blocks from the YMCA where she got her lifeguard certification shortly before she disappeared. Apparently, she was also known to frequent a coffee shop in the area. Molly Bish, Rodney Stanger may have crossed paths.

Again, I’m not certain and am not claiming RS is responsible for Molly’s murder, is a sex offender, or is even sexually attracted to children. The above are just my opinions, but I think there’re convincing reasons why each of those propositions could be true.

 

[Deleted member 269000]

I apologize for all the edits. When it comes down to it, what I’m doing is armchair speculation without all of the facts, and when it comes to discussing the possible involvement of a specific individual in a crime, I try to be very careful with my wording. I want to again clarify that I’m not accusing RS of anything. I just think there are some warning signs that could potentially point to his being a suspect.

 

[Rocky1]

I agree there are no absolutes in solving crime. About the only thing I would add is that sometimes our background helps determine how we think about a particular case. For example, this case is about a lifeguard named Molly Bish who ended up missing from Commins Pond.

I got my lifeguard certification. So this case was naturally interesting to me for that reason. I cannot remember exactly when I came across this case, but I do remember that at the very beginning before I had really had a chance to research the case I wanted to email her mother to ask about the whistle and whether there were any strange people in her lifeguarding class. Her mother directed me to the Unsolved Mysteries segment and said that is the correct information. A woman arrived at the beach and took the whistle out of Molly's bookbag. Molly never got a chance to put it on.

That part about the open first aid kit was always strange to me, even if not to others lifeguards. There is a rule in lifeguarding called "Call first" if you are the only lifeguard. I remembered that rule specifically when I read about this case. Now the rule is mostly for major injuries, not a tiny cut that can be cured with a band-aid, but that is not the point. I think we need to remember that for all anyone knows, a beach patron or Molly Bish could have been seriously injured. I really thought that putting myself in Molly Bish's shoes recreating the crime scene as they say, that if someone feigned an injury, no matter what that injury was, that it would have reminded me that I still needed to call in to check in with the police that day.

Maybe that is what happened? Right at that point she remembered the abductor pulled a gun and she was not able to get back to her bookbag to get out the radio or the whistle. I would assume the bookbag was open in order for this to make sense although I have never read whether it was open or closed. There is so much confusing information that I do not know what is right or wrong about Molly's stuff out on the beach, but I do believe the information about the whistle is correct. I come up with theories based on whether this or that information is maybe correct. And I know that the way I think may not have been the same way Molly Bish thought as a lifeguard.

I think what I am trying to say is that I would never have thought that way about the open first aid kit if I had not gotten lifeguard certification.

It's been a while since I've read about this case, but I remember when it happened.
In reference to the first aid kit....
I may be wrong, but, if I remember right, there wasn't anyone else around when Molly was abducted. I would think if there was that whoever was there would have been able to give LE information as to which way they went etc. You may be right, but I don't think the first aid kit was open to treat a beach patron.
Let me ask you this. Do you think it's possible that Molly had the first aid kit open to make sure she had enough supplies for the day, was busy doing that when this guy walked up to her without her seeing him? Is that something that a Lifeguard would do? Check the first aid kit at the beginning of each day?

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Familial DNA was most famously used recently to make an arrest in the Golden State Killer case.

“This is a tool for unresolved cases using science. It helps law enforcement,” Heather Bish, a member of the Massachusetts Missing Persons Task Force told me.

Heather is the sister of murder victim Molly Bish, and she is working on legislation to standardize the use of familial DNA in Massachusetts.

“It really is just a standard procedure that’s already being used in Massachusetts, but it allows victim’s families have some hope that there is another tool that could find the person that is responsible,” Bish said.

But more than that, the bill standardizes, for all Massachusetts District Attorneys, the way familial DNA is used, once it’s gathered.

Bish says she is concerned, without a set procedure, cases could be lost in court.

In 21 years, there’s never been an arrest in Molly Bish’s case.

“Could you imagine, in my case, if someone had given DNA to exonerate themselves in Molly’s case and the DA was using it to compare with other crimes in other counties? That is a privacy issue,” Bish said.

“We certainly we want to catch the bad guys, but we want to do it in a way that is a process, a standard, protocol-driven so it’s not getting all this wiggle room for a disastrous outcome, like a trial being messed up from it,” Bish added.

If the bill becomes law, it is hoped the guidelines will ensure that familial DNA will be available to investigators across the state.
Familial DNA bill filed in Massachusetts

 

[Deleted member 269000]

“Could you imagine, in my case, if someone had given DNA to exonerate themselves in Molly’s case and the DA was using it to compare with other crimes in other counties?”

It’s comments like these that make me believe they have a usable suspect DNA profile, which would almost certainly exclude RS and GB, as convicted felons. So confusing.

 

[Kell1]

I respect your point of view. I was a prosecutor for a few years and have some familiarity with child sex crimes myself. While it’s true that many pedophiles don’t act on their desires (and indeed many hate them), RS wouldn’t be your typical pedophile (or, more accurately, hebephile), if he raped Molly. Given that he allegedly had at least one snuff film of a young girl (presumably used for sexual gratification) and the belongings of others, it’s possible that he was aroused by violence as much as age. Research has also shown that impulsivity is generally much higher in untreated child sex offenders. It would have been hard for him to resist the urges.

And I’m not saying he doesn’t have a history, if he’s responsible for what happened to her. Unless he was buying young girls’ clothing accessories, he very likely could. I’m saying that he wasn’t arrested or convicted. Approximately 40% of violent sex offenders don’t have a prior conviction. Parents for Megan's Law

His relatively advanced age is similarly not a reason to discount him as a suspect. While the average age of a child sex offender is around 30, the average age for a convicted violent sexual offender is 37, and almost 1 in 5 is over 50. Mandatory Minimum Penalties for Federal Sex Offenses. For child , the average crawls up to 42.

Perhaps the most important statistic is that 90 percent of child sexual victims know the offender. https://www.d2l.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Statistics_2_Perpetrators.pdf. Not only could RS have known Molly from his frequent trips to the Pond to fish, he also lived a few blocks from the YMCA where she got her lifeguard certification shortly before she disappeared. Apparently, she was also known to frequent a coffee shop in the area. Molly Bish, Rodney Stanger may have crossed paths.

Again, I’m not certain and am not claiming RS is responsible for Molly’s murder, is a sex offender, or is even sexually attracted to children. The above are just my opinions, but I think there’re convincing reasons why each of those propositions could be true.

And trust me I respect yours as well, however you are making a huge (and often fatal ) mistake in looking at this case

You are taking a suspect and trying to make him fit the profile, with little or no supporting evidence.

The clinical community does this often, theyll take a suspect (personality) and infer behaviors that they feel an offender MAY be capable of . In that case though they may not be wrong , they are casting too wide a net and often youre looking in the wrong direction

They will look at what the offender is "capable of" and try to use that to say thay could possibly be responsible for such attrocities.

As we say in basic firearm training "Find your front sight", dont focus on the target , focus on your sights .

What Profilers, and investigators do is look at what is in front of them and infer outward from there, in profiling its known as "retro classification" in which we take the behavior, and infer a personality from there where as those used to dealing with offenders in a different setting do the opposite

One thing we never want looking at a case, is s suspect list. We want to look at the behaviors at the scene , and put forth the type of person we feel is most likely responsible .

Because if we have a suspect list well invariably start tailoring what we think to try to make them fit, and often like firearms training , if we focus on the target, and not our sights, we miss , ore were off.

Another mistake you are making is trying to use an adult framework and apply it to crimes against children.

Though the end result may be the same in many cases, the offenders and motivational factors behind them are usually vastly different than those who prey upon adults

If you re ever so unlucky to have to investigate a case, NEVER overlook whats right in front of you .

I can cite a many references on the topic as well from many experts in the field .

Pedophiles (hebephiles etc..) are adults over the age of 18 that have a defined, enduring and pervasive sexual preference for children.

That doesnt men they all offend, though many do, hence the legal difference beteween a "Child Molester" and a "Pedophile" , which is a clinical diagnosis

Pedophiles in terms of behavior fall into 3 categories this doesnt mean they molest kids, but the behavioral motivation behind each is specific, and different

Ther are 3 types of pedophiles recognized by motivation (note some motivational factors may overlap)

1) Seduction: this type has a perverted view of sexual relationships between adults and children, insomuch that they desire a sexual relationship with the victim, the way consenting adults do . They will usually spend a great deal of time and money grooming the victim (and their families) they will break down the victims inhibitions, and reward their compliance. To the offender its love and sex.
These types will often play to a youthful mentality by engaging in youthful activities (such a gaming nowadays) they will often have rooms in their house that are youth oriented . Though this type is overwhelmingly non violent, this type has the propensity to molest (if they do ) a staggering number of victims, on average, they molest anywhere from 50-300 victims before their crimes come to light.

2) Introverted: An introverted pedophile is an individual with weak social bonds, poor self esteem, and usually a very weak or non existent social structure , they tend to be loners, theyll usually live with their parents, and though they have a sexual preference for children, they often lack access, or the ability to be in any situation with them. Therefore their interactions with children (if they do offend) is usually limited to brief interactions such as exposing themselves, or masturbatory practices, etc. They may collect child , frequent youthful looking prostitutes, they also may if the situation presents itself abduct a child

3) Sadistic: These are the most rare types of pedophiles, they are also the most likely to abduct, and murder their victims. Because the act of torture takes time, the offender usually has a location, or at least, items he needs to commit the crime either with them, or somewhere . The victim in these cases, usually are kept alive for a time. These types often live alone but may also be married, or have a significant other. Their sexual issues are usually well known by their partners as well.

WHen a sadistic offender eroticizes the death of their victim, during the torture itself , they enter a even more sinister classification known as "Mysopeds" .

This type of individual receives gratification, by literally engaging in sexual torture of the victim till it causes their death , very few individuals fall into this category (Wesly Dodd, Joeph Edward Duncan, Albert Fish) are a few examples .

As a prosecutor comparing the 2 individuals mentioned , which one would you rather have in front of you ?

The guy with a perverse criminal history and access to the area, or the guy who looks like the sketch, that killed his girlfriend years later in another state ?

 

[brontefan]

You could be right , There are anomalies, but those are exceedingly rare

Scahra's wife suspected him as early as a year after he killed Ziegert, he was brought to the attention of police that year as well, though he didnt have a criminal record, id be willing to bet there were attempts, and behaviors prior that someone just didnt put together, guy doesn't all the sudden decide his fascination with bondage is so powerful he just goes out abducts, rapes and murders some innocent victim.

No one goes from being a great guy to your own wife suspecting you of murder, there was something that was her +1 if you will.

Oh and confession letters, always take those with a grain of salt, one thing I find constant in cases, in many cases, (and is a HUGE red flag for guilt) is acknowledging an action, but denying the savage intent behind it.

"It was just rough sex"-Joseph Smith to his brother after he killed Carlie Bruscia
"Yeah I hugged him naked, but it was only because we were playing"-Jerry Sandusky

Hundreds of others

Theres a trail, its just hidden, why would his ex commit parental kidnapping to get away from him? because she was most likely scared ,

something most likely preceded Zifert's killing as well, I believe in the months prior Schara was in a heated custody battle with his ex, recently became a new father and had just got married .

I know everyone has opinions, as do I , but remember this is what we do .

Most abductions of children (those under the age of 18) are by family members, but in terms of stranger abductions, they are only slightly less than those by acquaintances.

Most of those have criminal records, but without doubt there was some behaviors that in their past caused alarm.

There have been numerous studies done on the topic .

I don't take his letter seriously either. He knew he was about to get caught. All those years he worked with LE to try to get his son back when he knew exactly why she'd moved across the country. Bundy said the same thing about that he did. To have the cajones to move to the town where he committed the murder says a lot, I think.

My only question in that case is did he do it again. Can you commit a crime like that and not reoffend for three decades?

 

[brontefan]

Do we

Granted, there are several tempting possibilities in this case and LE has played it close to the vest, but I’m particularly suspicious of RS.

He lives nearby, looks almost identical to one of the suspect sketches, drives the right car, visits the Pond regularly to fish. He stabbed his girlfriend to death. Her sister visits his house to collect some belongings and finds what appear to be trophies from young girls: hair scrunchies, barettes, etc. Things she knows didn’t belong to her sister and appear to belong to much younger girls. She also finds a video of a young blonde girl apparently being murdered by having her neck snapped after something is placed on her head.

Now in prison for the murder, RS looks like he has a Twitter account where he describes himself as a “Cold case suspect” and posts some fairly misogynistic and disgusting stuff.

He could certainly be trolling for attention, but then again....That being said, there are other POIs. But given what we know, I think he’s the best suspect at this time.

Do we know it's actually his? I have so many fake people contacting me there and on FB it's ridiculous.

 

[brontefan]

“Could you imagine, in my case, if someone had given DNA to exonerate themselves in Molly’s case and the DA was using it to compare with other crimes in other counties?”

It’s comments like these that make me believe they have a usable suspect DNA profile, which would almost certainly exclude RS and GB, as convicted felons. So confusing.

I'm skeptical about the DNA but maybe advances will help. From what I read, it looks to me like it would have been pretty degraded. Also no Parabon sketch like they released with Vanessa Marcotte and Lisa Ziegert. And from what I read GB was supposedly tested for a match years ago and RS definitely would have been. Yet nothing.

 

[somequestions]

It's been a while since I've read about this case, but I remember when it happened.
In reference to the first aid kit....
I may be wrong, but, if I remember right, there wasn't anyone else around when Molly was abducted. I would think if there was that whoever was there would have been able to give LE information as to which way they went etc. You may be right, but I don't think the first aid kit was open to treat a beach patron.
Let me ask you this. Do you think it's possible that Molly had the first aid kit open to make sure she had enough supplies for the day, was busy doing that when this guy walked up to her without her seeing him? Is that something that a Lifeguard would do? Check the first aid kit at the beginning of each day?

The prevailing theory is that the first aid kit was open because the abductor approached Molly and pretended to have some type of injury. So Molly opened the first aid kit and it was at this point she was abducted. Or what may have happened is that Molly was checking her first aid kit to make sure she had enough supplies, like you wrote. Then at that point someone approached and maybe asked her for the time or followed her back to her bookbag on the bench. Then at this point they abducted her.

We will probably never know the order for how Molly Bish sets up her stuff on the beach. But people tend to follow patterns many times so someone else who was familiar with that pattern could shed some light on this.

The one thing I can say for sure(in my opinion) is that she was not fully set up to begin lifeguarding that day. And the open first aid kit is interesting if it were indeed a stranger who approached asking for a band-aid because of the Call First rule in lifeguarding when you are the only lifeguard. This does not mean that Molly Bish would have been expected to call first, only that I think it would have triggered in her mind at that moment that it would be important to let the police know she was out at the beach. I am going by what another person on here wrote, but supposedly Molly Bish was supposed to call in to to the police using the two-way radio she had each day letting them know she had arrived at the beach. She never did this that day. The police radio was still in her bookbag depending on what information you believe.

My point about having lifeguard certification is that I would not expect you or @Kell1 to have done these things or thought this way for the precise reason that you do not have lifeguard certification(or maybe you do, I don't know). So if someone who had lifeguard certification showed up and saw an open first aid kit, I would have expected them to think someone may have been injured to the point the lifeguard, being the only one there, had to call the police because of the serious nature. Then maybe the lifeguard left in a hurry to help a patron or were injured themselves. And the sandals still being there would be strange too and could suggest there was some emergency that caused her to leave quick or that she was injured and could not even get back to the beach chair to put them on.

The point about the parks commissioner is that I thought I read that he closed the first aid kit. I do not know how true this information is either. It is so hard to figure it out what information is correct. But the one question any detective I think should ask themselves is "Why" if that person is the abductor/murderer. So I started thinking about it and I came to the conclusion that maybe sometimes subconsciously that could explain the closing the first aid kit. The person thinks like someone who has lifeguard certification. If the first aid kit was closed when the first witness arrived, I would think none of this.

I have no clue if the parks commissioner has lifeguard certification. It is a theory. Whether it is known suspects like RS or the sand truck driver(who I could also theorize) or the man in the white car or one of Molly Bish's teachers, coaches, co-workers, anybody could be the abductor/murderer. I know that, but this is a forum for discussion and unfortunately the only things you can discuss and theorize about are information you think you know. And I am still confused about a lot of it. I do not know the answers to a lot of my questions, but I ask them anyway.

 

[Kell1]

I don't take his letter seriously either. He knew he was about to get caught. All those years he worked with LE to try to get his son back when he knew exactly why she'd moved across the country. Bundy said the same thing about that he did. To have the cajones to move to the town where he committed the murder says a lot, I think.

My only question in that case is did he do it again. Can you commit a crime like that and not reoffend for three decades?

Absolutely, even serial killers have stopped for long periods of time, such as the grim sleeper and BTK

 

[somequestions]

I sometimes wish there was a crystal ball to look into that would show the solution behind each unsolved case. I wonder who we would see abducting Molly Bish?

I feel like one of the people in the Abby and Libby case who continually accuse the property owner simply because they know who the property owner is. We cannot forget that in this case, all the known people in it have been looked at for over 20 years now by police. Sometimes it is hard to accept that fact.

I think it is difficult to accept that sometimes cases remain unresolved.

 

[Kell1]

I sometimes wish there was a crystal ball to look into that would show the solution behind each unsolved case. I wonder who we would see abducting Molly Bish?

I feel like one of the people in the Abby and Libby case who continually accuse the property owner simply because they know who the property owner is. We cannot forget that in this case, all the known people in it have been looked at for over 20 years now by police. Sometimes it is hard to accept that fact.

I think it is difficult to accept that sometimes cases remain unresolved.

There was a piece of art hanging in the FBI ISU for years of a dragon picking its teeth with a lance from a knight it killed , and the caption read

"Sometimes the dragon wins"

Thats the sad truth, sometimes we dont get the bad guy.

 

[brontefan]

There was a piece of art hanging in the FBI ISU for years of a dragon picking its teeth with a lance from a knight it killed , and the caption read

"Sometimes the dragon wins"

Thats the sad truth, sometimes we dont get the bad guy.

I think there is a chance if the same person was responsible for Molly and Holly's deaths. State police went back to the area in 2018 to get DNA samples from neighbors. Holly's remains were found much more quickly and the technology is advancing rapidly.

I don't think Holly was grabbed by a driver on Allen. Which greatly narrows the field.

 

[somequestions]

There was a piece of art hanging in the FBI ISU for years of a dragon picking its teeth with a lance from a knight it killed , and the caption read

"Sometimes the dragon wins"

Thats the sad truth, sometimes we dont get the bad guy.

Back when I was in junior high, I remember I had this teacher who talked about the difficulty of taking tests. I still remember her name. She said that if you do not know the answer to a question, and you are struggling with what to choose, try and remember what you first thought. If you go with that answer she said, most of the time you will find out you are right.

I think that would be a better question for discussion(for anyone). When you first read about Molly Bish's case who or what type of person did you think committed the crime? My answer is sort of ironic.

I thought Molly Bish was murdered by a lifeguard.

 

[Kell1]

Back when I was in junior high, I remember I had this teacher who talked about the difficulty of taking tests. I still remember her name. She said that if you do not know the answer to a question, and you are struggling with what to choose, try and remember what you first thought. If you go with that answer she said, most of the time you will find out you are right.

I think that would be a better question for discussion(for anyone). When you first read about Molly Bish's case who or what type of person did you think committed the crime? My answer is sort of ironic.

I thought Molly Bish was murdered by a lifeguard.

Thats the old "gut response" thing that is actually a protective instinct, in terms of a protective feeling its unmatched, theres a few outstanding books on it actually, I teach that as part of a class I teach on self protection.

It has to be in the right context though, context always trumps content

You may be right, it could absolutely have been someone she was familiar with, that had issues in his past, he knew she would be there, knew there was a place to get her out of there ...

I tend to disagree (respectfully)

I feel it was a stranger , I feel he was no stranger to the law though, though this type would certainly have impulse issues, but this was planned at least somewhat, in that he knew there were sometimes young girls alone at Commins.

Hes almost certainly from the area, i feel something triggered him, before it happened, which most child killers don't usually need.

This individual would most likely have sexual issues, as well as anger issues , problems with impulsiveness in his past.

A police officer or impersonator also wouldnt be out of the realm of possibility .

 

[Yemelyan]

And trust me I respect yours as well, however you are making a huge (and often fatal ) mistake in looking at this case

You are taking a suspect and trying to make him fit the profile, with little or no supporting evidence.

The clinical community does this often, theyll take a suspect (personality) and infer behaviors that they feel an offender MAY be capable of . In that case though they may not be wrong , they are casting too wide a net and often youre looking in the wrong direction

They will look at what the offender is "capable of" and try to use that to say thay could possibly be responsible for such attrocities.

As we say in basic firearm training "Find your front sight", dont focus on the target , focus on your sights .

What Profilers, and investigators do is look at what is in front of them and infer outward from there, in profiling its known as "retro classification" in which we take the behavior, and infer a personality from there where as those used to dealing with offenders in a different setting do the opposite

One thing we never want looking at a case, is s suspect list. We want to look at the behaviors at the scene , and put forth the type of person we feel is most likely responsible .

Because if we have a suspect list well invariably start tailoring what we think to try to make them fit, and often like firearms training , if we focus on the target, and not our sights, we miss , ore were off.

Another mistake you are making is trying to use an adult framework and apply it to crimes against children.

Though the end result may be the same in many cases, the offenders and motivational factors behind them are usually vastly different than those who prey upon adults

If you re ever so unlucky to have to investigate a case, NEVER overlook whats right in front of you .

I can cite a many references on the topic as well from many experts in the field .

Pedophiles (hebephiles etc..) are adults over the age of 18 that have a defined, enduring and pervasive sexual preference for children.

That doesnt men they all offend, though many do, hence the legal difference beteween a "Child Molester" and a "Pedophile" , which is a clinical diagnosis

Pedophiles in terms of behavior fall into 3 categories this doesnt mean they molest kids, but the behavioral motivation behind each is specific, and different

Ther are 3 types of pedophiles recognized by motivation (note some motivational factors may overlap)

1) Seduction: this type has a perverted view of sexual relationships between adults and children, insomuch that they desire a sexual relationship with the victim, the way consenting adults do . They will usually spend a great deal of time and money grooming the victim (and their families) they will break down the victims inhibitions, and reward their compliance. To the offender its love and sex.
These types will often play to a youthful mentality by engaging in youthful activities (such a gaming nowadays) they will often have rooms in their house that are youth oriented . Though this type is overwhelmingly non violent, this type has the propensity to molest (if they do ) a staggering number of victims, on average, they molest anywhere from 50-300 victims before their crimes come to light.

2) Introverted: An introverted pedophile is an individual with weak social bonds, poor self esteem, and usually a very weak or non existent social structure , they tend to be loners, theyll usually live with their parents, and though they have a sexual preference for children, they often lack access, or the ability to be in any situation with them. Therefore their interactions with children (if they do offend) is usually limited to brief interactions such as exposing themselves, or masturbatory practices, etc. They may collect child , frequent youthful looking prostitutes, they also may if the situation presents itself abduct a child

3) Sadistic: These are the most rare types of pedophiles, they are also the most likely to abduct, and murder their victims. Because the act of torture takes time, the offender usually has a location, or at least, items he needs to commit the crime either with them, or somewhere . The victim in these cases, usually are kept alive for a time. These types often live alone but may also be married, or have a significant other. Their sexual issues are usually well known by their partners as well.

WHen a sadistic offender eroticizes the death of their victim, during the torture itself , they enter a even more sinister classification known as "Mysopeds" .

This type of individual receives gratification, by literally engaging in sexual torture of the victim till it causes their death , very few individuals fall into this category (Wesly Dodd, Joeph Edward Duncan, Albert Fish) are a few examples .

As a prosecutor comparing the 2 individuals mentioned , which one would you rather have in front of you ?

The guy with a perverse criminal history and access to the area, or the guy who looks like the sketch, that killed his girlfriend years later in another state ?

So much good information contained in this post. Thank you @Kell1