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 pornography, 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 pornography, 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 ?