General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDark Paroxysm
"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." Oscar Wilde
I've been talking quite a bit with my west coast brother lately, about the University of Idaho murders. He used to live outside of Los Angeles, and enjoyed city life for decades. But when his older daughter was ready for college, he was glad she picked that university. He said a big part of it for him was it seemed like a nice, safe community.
Law enforcement has, in my opinion, done a good job in this case. Keep in mind that crime scene analysis is the first step in the making of a profile of the killer. For example, he made an effort to commit the "perfect crime," including leaving no clues. Yet that is a clue, in and of itself.
Like most people who followed this investigation, my brother and I considered a number of possible scenarios. None included a PhD student of criminology looking to commit the perfect crime. But there were a few ideas that were not that far off. Not all were original -- early on, a DUer said "incel," and I really wish I could remember who to give credit.
I mentioned that to my brother, and expanded on it to include other men who, while not incels, have a diseased hatred of women. An obvious subgroup would be those who resent educated women. This type exists. Yet, as it turned out, it appears that the DUer who said "incel" was on target. There is no evidence he ever even went on a date, but there is evidence that women he attempted to talk to at a bar found him "creepy."
On one of the shows covering the crime, I saw a retired FBI agent saying the police were wrong to say the house could be the target. She said it had to be one of the four victims. I told my brother that she must not be familiar with 10050 Cielo Drive. Yet, if the house was selected as the target, it would not mean the killer was 100% unfamiliar with who the occupants of the household were.
There is reason to believe one of the young ladies thought she had a stalker. My impression was that this issue was not being addressed publicly by police, though there could be something to it. At the same time, it is not difficult to do surveillance without being noticed. Private investigators do so every day. (It tends to be easier to remain unnoticed surveilling an individual or an automobile, than a house.)
On one program, a cop noted that "if you want to get away with murder, kill someone you don't know." Yet in this case, it appears likely the scum thought he was picking a "soft target," a household of women. That is distinct from randomly picking a house, which could have numerous men inside. Again, a crime scene is the foundation that a personality profile.
"The killer awoke before dawn
He put his boots on
He took a face from the ancient gallery
And he walked on down the hall...."
-- Jim Morrison
Through the 11th grade, he was an intelligent, overweight, and socially awkward kid who was sometimes picked on. The summer before his senior year, he got into shape. During the school year, he began to bully his friends. He also attempted to learn to box, which likely was the source of his broken nose. A bully does not do well in amateur boxing.
His studies in criminology had two focuses: learning about the passions of mass- and serial murderers, and proving himself to be the smartest person in the room. A former classmate from DeSales University said he often talked over the professor, a nationally respected expert on crime. Although she is not commenting, there is reason to believe he studied the subject of her important book, the BTK killer.It's worth noting that scum proved hard to catch, because he was an outlier among serial killers.
Seven months ago, the killer posted a survey on Reddit, asking criminals to describe their thoughts, emotions and actions from the beginning to end of the crime commission process. With 20/20 hindsight, I think it is clear that the killer not only was taking an unhealthy interest in murderers, but was fantasizing about becoming the most intelligent mass murderer, able to escape detection as a respected criminologist.
The killer identified his favorite quote as coming from Aristotle: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Yet the Buddha and Gandhi said that "what you think, you become."
Although I've only heard it twice today in the media, a non-media source told me days ago that investigators have evidence that the killer was surveilling the house nights for around two weeks before the murders. Even if he was not familiar with the residents, this creates a pattern. Neighbors notice cars that show up at night. Cameras catch the car. And cell phone pings can be found.
In college, I took some law enforcement classes. I remember the sheriff that taught the courses saying that a smart criminal might think if eight ways to cover their tracks, and a really intelligent criminal might think of sixteen. But that police have fifty ways to catch them, and the FBI has a hundred. I'm sure technology has increased the ability of law enforcement to catch criminals in the decades since then. DNA is a huge one, capable of pulling mask off.