Document text
JOURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE / September I936
john E. Douglas, M.S., isSuperuisovy Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation
and Program Manager, Criminal Erofiling and Crime Scene Assessment Program,
Notional Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, FBI Academy, Quantico, VA.
Arlene McCorm¢ck is Assistant Professor 0/ Sociology, University of Lowell,
Lowell, MA.
60
»: EZ¢¥e ' -1
'1 1t$
5 12 £3 zz :/=,;: 4. iii?eé.>£?*>=:22;§
Aiéia
>¢:2<¢1~
>4 4iii! III #¢:;,:a~i
ta» =12?4?-t2§z
6Z1
92?
er
3,.
3;,
$1,5121213113, 7;?=v l:¢;'.=<=;%i<2.mam patterns of sexualThe study of crime scene profiling eorts elicits two impi ' ' 'l'h.. e law enlorz t'1!|C7ll tritegories have beenil 5 organiud and dimrganizeil. rtI ite ii] texual murders. The studymur er . . rlerwrrl from eviilrnrr and fiattrrm III ruiilrritr at t tr .s r ml ll.92 relatmmhifr to thr two t ategories. In partic-' d tiuethen explores inttim informattmi a nder I terms ol no resistance an acular, we explored victim response tn the ne resistance to the assault. We found that regardless of type of resistance, active or passive,d. When we examined nine victims who survived. - .. dand category of oender, death ensueder was not the predictor, rather, "chance happenings preserve
the category of oen
life.
Sexual Killers
and Their Victims
Identifying Patterns Through
Crime Scene Analysis
ROBERT K. RESSLER
FBI Academy
ANN W. BURGEQS
University of Pennsylvania
JOHN E. DOUGLAS
FBI Academy
CAROL R. HARTMAN
Boston College
RALPH B. DAGOSTlNO
Boston University
rants"i+'de range of human behaviors ofInterpersonal violence spans a wi ' e of the terminal disruptions in the equi-which murder represents on ' d r and its irrevocable effectlibrium of a society. The tragedy of mur e ' ' ' e lected in the focus on the mur-on victims and families is often n g
______'__,-Authors Note: Preparation of this article was supported by Department of Justicegrants: Office of juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention #84-]N-AX-K0l0! and
]OURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE, Vol. l N0. 3, September I985 288-$03
O l985 53g? Publications, lnc.
6 1
Resslei et ;|l. / IRIMI2 S jl'.Nl-. AN/92|.YSlS
tlerers. This interactional component between victim and murderer
and its social impact needs to be addressed constantly if there is to be a
balance in the understanding of such violence.
The voluminous scholarly and professional literature on murder
traditionally has focused on the murderer and has presented a variety
of ways to classify murderers Lester, 1973; Wolfgang, I958!. Simon
I977! emphasizes that identifying personality profile types is crucial
to the task of offender treatment and prediction of dangerousness for
the prevention of murder. Wolfgang and Ferracuti I967! identify two
basic behaviors of murderers: I! premeditated, intentional, felonious,
planned, and rational murder; and ! killing in the heat of passion or
slayingas a resultof intent to do harm, but without a specific intent to
kill. They observe, Many authors fail to distinguish between two
basic types of murderers and clarify that their concentration is on the
second type, the "passionate" killer. In contrast, the type of killer
frequently profiled by agents at the l"lll's Behavioral Science Unit,
who investigate unsolved in urdeisat the requestof local law enforce
merit officials, are those who not only plan their murders but who
repeat their crimes.
The professional literature regarding murder victims has been
relatively silent. When the interpersonal aspects of murder have been
considered, victims are conceptualized in limited ways. One of the
most pervasive ways of analyzing victims has been through the
concept of victim precipitation and victim participation, a concept
explored by sociologists and criminologists such as von I-Ientig
I940!, Mendelsohn I963!, Wolfgang I958!, and Schafer 968!.
The victim is one of the causes of a crime, suggests Hans von
I-Ientig. In I948 he stated, In a sense the victim shapes and molds the
criminal. . . . To know one we must be acquainted with the comple-
mentary partner." Mendelsohn I963, pp. 239-24]!, in writing of the
biopsychosocial personality of the accused and of the victim, elabo-
rated on the doctrine of victimology while preparing for the trial of a
man who, had it not been for "the perversity of his former wife,"
would never have been found guilty of murdering her and her lover.
Wolfgang 958! has utilized the concept of victim precipitation in
his well-known studies of criminal homicide, applying it to thosecases in which the role of the victim is characterized by his having
National Institute 0f]ustice #82-CX-0065!. We wish to acknowledge gratefully PierceBrooks and Marieanne L. Clark for contributions to earlier drafts of this article.
62; .
3.2.
/0% .
t -. >~: ii
V/9292 /92 w ,
. ,.:
é
i
2
3..
11?.
.,.
2?;
ii.sé
{$7
:3"
it.
<33.
i
2?
3,3.g.*
7 ,
s~1 23
§b§§i%E112213713
~§~
l
er . t3;.
P$2"
ti
Z
ii
,
%
e==@'¢>.@='K
Q_| !llRN/92l . !l~' lN'l'l".RPF.RS !N/92l. Vl !l .l".N ll~I / St-ptt'|ii|!ri VIN:
dbeen the first in the homicide drama to use physical force directeagainst his subsequent slayer" p. 252!. An example is the husbandwho attacked his wife with a milk bottle, a brick, and a piece of
concrete block while she was making breakfast. Having a butcher
knife in her hand, she stabbed him. Wolfgang 958! found victim-preciptated homicides represented 26% of a total of 588 homicides. . . . . h. on_studied through police reports in Philadelphia. Adding to t is ccept, Schafer 968, p. 152! concluded that it is far from true that
all crimes happen to be committed; often the victim's negligence,precipitative action, or provocation contributes to the genesis or
performance of a crime."In contrast to this view, FBI profilers, in their work of analyzing
crime scenes for clues leading to a suspect in an unsolved homicide,
k different approach They did not find it helpful to perceive the too a .victim as provoking the murder. Rather, the agents tried to be aware
of how the offender thought and, subsequently, how he wouldrespond to key characteristics of a victim. For example, a victim
wearing a red dress and shoes was perceived by the offender as asking
for it. Such a victim can not communicate because the offender
selects and interprets communication cues of which the victim is
totally unaware. The agents understood the offenders habitual rea-soning pattern that selects out characteristics of the victim, building a
strong justification for violating her. The offender may retrospec-tively think he went "a bit too far," but will hold to his justifications.
If a victim is passive, this is reason for attack; if the victim struggles,
this is reason for the attack, and so it goes.Thus the agents regarded all victim and crime scene information as
critical data in their investigations. As a result of their insights into
understanding the motivation of the offender, agents at the Behavioral
Sciences Unit of the FBI Academy initiated a study of sexual homicide
crime scenes and patterns of criminal behavior. Data obtained in the
study were examined from the perspectives of crime scene analysis
and of victim-murderer interaction.
STUDY
For several years, FBI agents, in profiling sexual murderers by
analyzing crime scenes, have typed sexual murderers and the crime
scene in terms of an organized/ disorganized dichotomy. The premise
6 3
ll:-sslrr ct ;tl. / JRIMF. S Zl'INF. /92Nl92l.YSl.i
for this ditltotomy is that facets of the t;riminal's personality are
evident in his offense. l.ilu~ a lingerprint, the crime scene can be used
to aid in identifying the murderer. An organized murderer is one who
appears to plan his murders and who displays control e.g., absence of
clues! at the crime scene. The disorganized murderer is less apt to
plan, and his crime scenes display haphazard e.g., presence ofclues at
crime scene! behavior.
Our study was an exploratory one. lts major objectives were as
follows: ! to test, using statistical inferential procedures, if there are
significant behavioral differences at the crime scenes between the
crimes committed by organized offenders and those committed by
disorganized murderers, and ! to identify variables that may be
useful in profiling murderers and on which the organized and dis-
organized murderers differ.
For the study to achieve its objectives, the agents first had to
classify the 36 participating murderers into the organized/disorgzr
nizctl dichotomy. The dichotomy was as follows: 24 organized with
97 victims!; l2disorganizetl with 2] victims!. The method for classifi-
cation is published elsewhere Ressler et al., I985!.
Data Set
The data set for the study comprised 36 convicted sexual murderers.
Data were collected on l I8 victims of these murderers. Of the victims,
9 survived the assaults; thus those 9 assaults were classified as at-
tempted murders.
Each murderer who provided consent was interviewed extensively
by FBI agents. The offender was asked questions regarding his back-
ground, his behavior at the crime scene, and his postoffense behavior.
In addition, FBI agents reviewed criminal records of all participating
offenders. The data set for each murderer consisted of the best avail-
able data compiled from these two sources.
Due to the complexities of obtaining these data and the confiden-
tiality issues involved, there were "no response" answers to certain
questions by some offenders. Although the missing data appear to
have little effect on the univariate analysis, any interpretation of the
results should consider this situation.
The data for this article were computerized and stored in separate
files, which are described below.
! Background Information on offender!. This file contains 134
variables pertaining to the murderer. Variables within this file are
64
' 7
2/gziggi.2 Mg:
¢
5
9
I
5
»<
7
'6
3?
t$v
9
4
2*
y.;¢%.»..
%.
¬..8% 1»;
W...
§%%:92.
r=s>~'>'
?
2] !URNAl. OF INTERPERSONAI. VlOl.F.NCf'I / September 1986
tlassified into eight categories: demographics, physical appearance,lift-style, family structure, subject s early background history familyprnblelns, subjvit s llS 'l]!llllf/2ll!ll5 ' and subject s sexual history.
! !f]en.v- I on o]]c1i.w-!. 'l'liis lilr tnntaiiis variables ubtaini-llfront the offt-rises i-.g., the crime snriit-s!. 'l'ht-re are I19 variables inthis file, which umtains information for each separate crime. Vari-ables in this file are classified into four categories: leading to theoffense such as frame of mind, premeditation of crime, and precipi-tating events!; offender dress and residence variables relating to theoffender at the time of offense; action during offense variables such asconversation and behavior toward victim, weapons, and substanceabuse!; postoffense variables such as keeping news clippings and
visiting crime scene site and victims grave!.
! Victim 2 on offense!. This file contains 57 variables and isdivided into two subsets: l ! victim characteristics such as victim age,sex, height, weight, physique, race, complexion, attractiveness, mari-tal status, residence, socioeconomic status, and actions during offense!;and ! offender's actions and behavior during the offense such asvictim mode of death, body position, sexual acts before and after. . . . . fdeath, postmortem acts, postmortem mutilation, and disposition o
the body!.! Crime Scene on offense!. This file contains 47 variables and isdivided into four categories: ! vehicle variables relating to the modeof transportation of the offender and the description of his vehicle;! use of vehicle variable describing how a vehicle was used in thecrime; ! variables concerning physical evidence weapon, finger-prints, and so on, left at the crime scene!; and ! distance variablesmeasuring the distance from the crime scene to the victims home, to
the offenders home, and so on.
Data AnalysisBasically, the analysis was directed at testing for statistically signif-icant differences between the organized and disorganized murderers.For variables in the Background Information data file, the unit ofanalysis was the murderer. The maximum sample sizes were 24 for theorganized group of offenders and 12 for the disorganized group. Forvariables in the other data files, the maximum sample sizes were 97' ' ' ' ' ff d rs.victims for the organized and 21 victims for the disorganized o en e
Rl92.92lfl1'lJll / IRlMi'. .'*i I|'.Nl. /92N/92l.Y.'~ilS
The major statistical anzilysis procedure einployed lot" the variables
was the two lIl l |!lIl lt'lIl sainple t test l!'/'92gostino, I97], I972; l.un~
ney, I970!. For these variables, the F test for equality of variance was
employed to aid in selecting the appropriate standard error for the
denominator of the t test and the appropriate degrees of freedom.
Variables significant at the .05 level of significance by the t test were
identified. The full description of statistical tests employed is
reported elsewhere D'Agostino, 1985!. The major findings of differ-
ences between crime scene variables and profile variables for organized
and disorganized offenders are reported as follows. See Table I.!
Crime Scene Differences Between
Organized and Disorganized Murderers
We first established that based on data available at the crime scene,
there are significant differences between the organized and disorga-
nized offender. However, there are no situations where the organized
and tlisorgaiiizetl offemletsaie mutually exclusive. That is, holh types
of rnurderels are iapahle of all types ol behavior. For exarnple, an
organized murderer might not use a vehit le or a disorganized mur-
derer might use restraints. Summary results are listed below. See
Table 2.!
Organized offenders are more apt to
0 plan,
I use restraints,
0 commit sexual acts with live victims,
O show or display control of victim i.e., manipulative, threatening, want
victim to show fear!, and
O use a vehicle.
Disorganized offenders are more apt to
I leave weapon at the scene,
O position dead body,
I perform sexual acts on dead body,
0 keep dead body,
O try to depersonalize the body, and
0 not use a vehicle.
In meeting the studys first objective, we demonstrated that there
are in fact consistencies and patterns in crime scenes that are objec-
tively quantifiable and that distinguish organized from disorganized
66Z
;
9 .__..., ¬
é
.5="='Ii.jI.:;;:t;";I£; Ii
=; .1:
333313-e
>i>5.nIi=<t2*'
a
'/>1
@;a-was
-= :*'é'
1
4
2 i
.
.
s
If. ii
5
:35.is
,.
t
151;. 7..*2»
ée
gt
gr:
'?2
=2
ii
2,
1;
3" ?
s
l
e
1
¢.1;§
.5
?;
ei
2¬
5
:2
53
>2;
Q,
$1
fl;
if
Z
Z
Z
5Q, ;z¢'
-4 ,,....¢..| ll l1 N/921 l|' lN'l'l' Rl'l".R.wl IN/92l . VI .l".N ll. 1 S4'plr||||n'| HIHII
p Vnlucs lur L-Tcs! un Jriinc Sccnc and Profile Variables:
urganizcd Dichotomy
0 ' "#1 01' M12 M A Profile Variable 1Orgunizw .md Dis
.rim¢' Scum: Variable I-Tst
strategy
achvscx
restrain
wcapnlft
scxoff
sadism
masochism
unusual'Z
umwl
muv2
umv 5
1 ullVlI
1 nnv
mnvfl
react!
iucraggr
alcohol
position
sb4death
safdcath
pmact
pmact7
pmact8
torture.0001
.002
.0 I U
.0001
.03!
.04.:
.0001
.005.003
002
0001
0001
034
34
001
.014
.002.001
R1-ssler ¢-t al. / CRIME SCI-INF. ANALYSIS
'1'/92Bl.E 2
Irime Scrn:- V;ll'l;lIll fr1 l!il'l'¢-r.-iitiutirlg
'g;.1ni'/.rt l ziml l!isurg;1niv.1:1l S1-x11;1l M11r1l<:1cr.s
ACTIONS l!URlN ; Ol-HELNSI-L
Offense I Data Set
Strategy] Planned versus Sudden;
Organized more likely to have planned
Violent act done to achieve sexual
relations; Organized less likely
Restraints used;
Organized more likely
Weapon left at scene of crime;
Organized less likelyAchvsex/
Restrain/
Weapo nlft/
Sexoff/ Sexual acts committed;
Organized more likely to commit
sexual acts
Sadism/ Surlistir acts Committed;
!r1.1;||1iz¢~1llrss likely
M;|s<>1l1s1n/ Mnsm liislir; .14 ts 1 urnmillrcl;
Uligairiivvll may, lll.92'll|'KiIlllI.I'II lllll Illll
Swnllnw l~11|1¢-1lv|1l||1|lnrluxu;
~.¢-|111-|1/ !|y,.n1i/.I'¢l may,¢l|sn|p4!||1iu'1lrlnl nnl
Urgzrni/.1-clshowsrnu1v1u11lm| n1.1y In usrliil lur cases in which v
Conversation with victim aspects shown!
Manipulative
Threatening
Inquisitive
Polite
Threatens family
Obtains name
Reactions desired by offender
Fcar/ Wants victim to show fear;
Organized more likely
Wants victim to lie still;
Organized more likelyLie still}
lncraggrl Things done to increase aggression;
Organized more likely
Alcohol] Alcohol use associated with offense;
Organized have greater use
Victim 2 Data Set
Position] Victim's body positioned;
Organized less apt to position bodyII'rren mgr:
Urganizml I!i_mrganizer1
as
81!
2s
8!
49
97!
19
7!
76
85!
32
97!
I5
11!
ll!
7!
51
54
45
43
4
41
97!
39
9!
29
5!
62
5!
5644
8!
as
!
10
1!
as
6!
46
3!
43
1!
U
Z |!
U
Z1!
ictim lives!
14
25
1o
19
0
0
1!x
1
Z7
"62.I
:1 1&5,
4. §,;:c, .
;;:f%"i
E!
-' 15%;? '::'~/:
i
r
2é,
1?;
ii.
I_
?
y.
3'
Sliiilralli] ! iiized mnre IIRUIY
Safdeatlil
Victim 2 Data
PmactlCE / Se tember I986JOURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLEN p
'IABLh 2 Luntinued
Pr rcentageOrgani Duurgam ed
!~ii'xuaI .u.tslutI'ur1- dearth I'vi1Ii'iii'i: ~
at scene!; rga '
Si-xual ans after death -viili:ni~r at
scene!; Organized less like-ly
Se! cuiilinued!
tivity with budy'
Irganin-d less liltelyI serts fureign objects intn virtim s anus _ . , _ . Pmact7/ II I'mact8I Inserts foreign objects iiiln VICIIITI s vagina IO
VI".lII ZI.IQ IN CRIME
.YfIIIl' Simruf Data Si! ' ' " ' ' or actiun with a vehicle
62
I!It I in do anything indicating planning Ilisorganizcd is less li e yVehicle involved in crime; B5 93! Vehicle] " ' likely to use a earOrganized is more
' d iilikely to do the following:Disurganize isu. . . . . _ .dcOffer victim a nde or give victim 4 rt
Force victim into car
Disable victim's ear
Bump victim: car
Run victim; ear off ruad
Pretend to have an accident
Expose himself from car
Assault victim in carPark ca! and follow victim on footTransport victim from encounter site to crime scene
site or disposal lite27
st ortem mutilation 88! Tort] Po m _ ' ' 'l te dead Organized less likely to mutt a
victim6Tortll Facial mutiliation disfigurement! I5Tort2I Genital mutilationTort$/ Breast mutilation I2'I'ort4I Disembowelment 2'I'ort5I Amputation I 7Tort9I Vampirism drink blood! 0
Keepbody/' Offender keeps corpse; I4Organized less likely 88!Depersonl Offender tries to depersonalize victim 8 blindfoldirig. eradication of features!: 88!Organized is less likely
VICTIM CHARACTERISTICS
Victim 2 Data Set _X = 23Agevicl" Age of the victim;Organized has younger victims 93! 87! l
54 H
3! 9!
Pustmonen ae . 23 52 88! I!
' 0 29
58
76
2l!
45
as
29
43
as
Rcsslcr l'l nl. / CRIME S Il'lNli ANALYSIS
TABLE 2 Continued
_ Percentage
Organized Disorganized
Attract] Physical attractiveness of the victim; = l.6 2.0Organized has more attractive 84! 0!
victims to 4 scale!
EVIDENCE AT SCENE
Crime Scene Data Set
F ootpsl Evidence of footprints;
Organized less likely to leave footprints
Weapon] Weapon left can be used as evidence !;Organized less likely to leave weapon
for evidence5 29
97! 1!
18 51
97! 1!
NOTE: n = numbers in parentheses.
Level of signicance is p = 0.09; not p = 0.05.
"Level of significance is p = 0.06; not p = 0.05.
sexual murderers. 'l'hc labels organizt~tl" and lisurgar|izt'd" are not
only convenient l! ? '2lUI$ ? of their visual connotations to the crime
scene but also have an objectivity to them.
Profile Characteristic Differences Between
Organized and Disorganized Murderers
After establishing crime scene differences we identified thosecharacteristics that could be used in a criminal profile. By profilecharacteristics, we mean those characteristics that identify the subjectas an individual. This contrasts with crime scene characteristics, the
tangible clues left or missing! at the crime scene where the body isfound. Profile variables can be grouped into four areas: background
variables; variables describing the situation of the criminal before the
crime precrime state!; variables relating to residence, vehicle use, and
distance to crime scene; and postoffense behavior variables.
Based on our analysis, there are different characteristics for the
organized and disorganized murderers that may prove useful in
developing criminal profiles. The statistically significant variables
are summarized below. See Table 3.!
Organized offenders are more
O intelligent,
0 skilled in occupation,
704.
<
5
1
aKi.
3sq
§.
<
3*
ll
I éé
lg
...
.2.
2%
.
5
é
is
é
><
1
s
asE
1??
l
n
lr.
ts
J5
~
1
°§<
3§
lg
.5
2
.
1%
C
Ag? '2:;,;'*§':/.vi
4
%¢:,
is
»
l
3
l
l
131
§,
5 .
go
?<
2:
:5
4
5
<s
ii,:;;:4~,;/XV.
§?§?c1::,
'z:¢:"-
v
&Mw
>
<
* »- l ldrinm l _
| !lIRN/92l. !l- lN'l l'IRi'|".RS !N/92l.Vl !I.I".N Zl*'. / Srpu-lnln-I lllllli
'l'l92Bl.l". 3
Profile Chui 92Ci.CflSllCS DifferentiatingOrganized ant iisorganized Sexual Murderers
Percentage
Organized Disorganized
BACKGROUND
Background Data Set
Demographic ___ X = 5.0 4.2
lntelll lntellige ec; Organized more intelligent 2! l2!
LifestyleOccup] Oeeupation; 50 0Organized more skilled 4! l l!lrsf0u;/ Preferred occupation is skilled work; 74 38Organi/.ed is more likely lo want to 9! 8!
do skilled work
l;|mily $l|un Inn-lhrllumll llu lli nnlri; X 2.! L3 !||.;.||ii/ml h.|vr .| liiiglin lmlh null! Ill! I2!l'.92lhs|.|/ I-.|lhr|'~i wmk was iuimlaihlr; '7. nnslzihlr I2 4.:U |! !rg.ini"/.r¢l mun: xlnlvlr I Ii!
l!is|i|1linc[/92buxr llislorylluslilel 592llJ_!li92Ll received hostile disciplim: asa child; Disorganized treated with more
hostility
Sex Acts/PreferenceSexpref] Sexual preference % heterosexual = 74 100
heterosexual versus other!;All disorganized were heterosexual 3! 1!Disorganized is more inhibited and more likely to be a compulsive masturbator.
Sexual ConcernsDisorganized is more ignorant of sex and has more sexual aversions.
12 Scxprob2/ Sexual problems; 62Disorganized is more likely to have had 7! 8!
sexual problems
PRECRIMF. STATE leading to offense!
Offense J Data SetFramelf Angry frame of mind; X = 2.0 3.3Organized more angry 7! 0!
l to 5 scale: 1 = predominant;
5 = not at all! __Frame4/ Nervous; = 3,5 2,6Organized less nervous = 3! 20!Frame6/ Organized less frightened i = 4.1 3.0' = 4.4 5.0
Frame7/ Organized less confused
R1-.~.92I<~r <-| .|l. / IRIMF. .~5 ll-".NE ANALYSIS
'l'Alll.1:l 3 tjontinucd
Percentage
Organized Disorganized
l*ram<:l'l/ Organized more depressed = 3.4 4.3
1"ramc!/ Organized calmer. murc relaxed if = 3.1 4.3
Prccipilating Events/Precipitating Stress
Organized more likely to have events/stresses due to financial, marital, females,
employment before the murder.
RESIDENCE/VEHICLE DISTANCE
Offense I Data Set
Relat/ Offender knows who victim is; % know 14 47
Organized is less likely to know 93! 7!
who victim is
Livewithl Offender lives alone; 33 62
Organized is less likely to live alone 97! 1!
Crime Scene Data Set
[!istvres/ Distance crime scene to victim's house;
Organized more apt to have scene farther
away from victim's home than
disorganized
llisturesl Distance crime scene to offender's home;
1!isorgani'/.1-d lives nearer to crime scene
than dues 0rg:|ni7.l-H]
l!istowrk/ Distance crime scene to offender's work;
Disorganized works nearer to crime scene
than dues organized
Trans] Usual transportation is by driving; 70 45
Organized more apt to drive 97! 1!
Condition of the vehicle;
Organized more apt to have better 2! 1!
conditioned vehicleVecond/
POSTOFFENSE BEHAVIOR
Offense I Data Set
Behav3/ Follows in media; 51 24
Organized more likely to follow 97! 1!
in media
Behav1l/ Change jobs; 8 0
Organized may change jobs, 97! 1!
disorganized did not
Behavl 2/ Leave town; ll 0
Organized may leave town, 97! 1!
disorganized did not
NOTE: n = numbers in parentheses.
7 2ts
9 H -. =_==-=-
92/tr; 61%;;@541
_¢.»<£Ql
.:. ' >/;;::='
;,>5?%§22/
5
x.
e
5
Z.2
5.
2
2
i
=§1
2
g:
is
r
1%
§
§é
r
1
2
2
' 2' 3.3:?!= 2-,:§=
. oz 1:
..'
. ,.,,,,
i4I wt 1-v I/4
i>Z>?%Zn'2:;
i 2 :;:$z'"
§
l
i
it
E
.,.
Z?
H
e:
E
é
r
<a. ::<.,=
_ ,-32. .2- vggiz_!OURNAI. ll-' INTERPERSONAI. VIOLENCE / September I985
I likely to think out and plan the crime,0 likely to be angry and depressed at the time of the murder,0 likely to have a precipitating stress financial, marital, female, job!
O likely to have a car in decent condition,
0 likely tn follow crime events in media, and
0 likely to change jobs or leave town.
Disorganized offenders are more likely to
0 be low birth order children,
O come from a home with unstable work for the father,
0 have been treated with hostility as a child,I be sexually inhibited and sexually ignorant, and to have sexual aversions,
0 have parents with histories of sexual problems,0 have been frightened and confused at the time of the crime,
I know who the victim is,
O live alone, and
I have committed the crime closer to home/work.
The analysis established the existence of variables that may be
useful in a criminal profile and for which the organized and disorga-nized sexual murderers differ and thus met the study's second objective.
VICTIMS OF ORGANIZED AND
DISORGANIZED SEXUAL MURDER-HRS
The organized/ disorganized dichotomy provided a new contextfor analyzing the victim-murderer interaction. Rather than using thetraditional view of victim focused on the concept of precipitation andprovocation as interpreted by criminologists from police reports of a
murder, we examined our data of murdered victims from the percep-tions of the offenders who had killed them. Thus our view is on victim
response by type of offender analyzed through crime scene evidence.Data were obtained for l 18 victims, 9 of whom survived murderattempts. The majority of victims in the sample were white 93%!,female 82%!, and not married 80%!. Ages for l 13 victims ranged from6 to 73 ages were unavailable for 5 victims!. Of the victims, I4, or 12%,were I4 years old or younger; 83, or 73%, were between l5 and 28 yearsold; and 16, or 14%, were 30 years or older. Thus the majority ofvictims 3%! were between ages 15 and 28, which matches the age
range for rape victims in general.
73
1 t
Re.~.:,it~| rt J1. / CRIME *. Ll".N1' /92N/921.Y.$|-S
The majority of victims 81% or 89! were strangers to the offender;
19%, or 21, were known to the murderer. Nearly hall 7%! of the
victims were closely related in age to the offender. Over one-third ol
the cases 7%! involved a youn_t;er Vl lim than offender, and in 15% of
the cases, the victim was older than the offender. More than half of the
victims came from average or advantaged socioeconomic levels 2%!,
30% had marginal incomes, and 9% had less than marginal incomes
In over one-third of the cases, the victim had a companion i.e., was
not alone! at the time of the assault; 63% were alone at the time of the
murder.
Victim Response to Assailant
Any cause-effect determination in victim resistance reports needs to
include the total series of interactions between a victim and assailant,
including the dynamic sequencing of victim resistance and offender
attack. Offenders were asked to report on their victims resistance in
terms of whether they tried to negotiate verbally, verbally refuse,
scream, flee, or fight. The offender was then asked to report his own
response to the victims behavior. lt is important to keep in mind
that the data represent only the offender's perceptions of the viettm~
offender interttrtioni
ln the 83 cases with victim response data, 23 victims 8%! a<:qui
esced or offered no resistant e as perceived by the offender. As one
organized murderer said, She was compliant. I showed her the gun
She dropped her purse and kind of wobbled a second and got her
balance and said, A11 right; Im not going to say anything. just don't
hurt me. " A total of 26 1%! victims tried verbal negotiation; 6 %!
tried to refuse verbally; 8 0%! screamed; 4 %! tried to escape; and
16 9%! tried to fight the offender.
Offender reaction to the victim's resistance ranged from no reaction
in 31 cases 4%! to violence in 24 5%! cases. In 14 instances 5%!,
offenders threatened the victim verbally in response to victim resis-
tance; in 23 cases 5%! offenders increased their aggression. Thus in
two-thirds of the cases assailants countered victim resistance; often
0%! it was met with increased force and aggression. In 9 cases
the offender both verbally threatened the victim and increased his
aggression.!
Our analysis of cases, in terms of an organized/disorganized di-
chotomy, found that of the 83 cases with data on victim response to
74
Pi
t?
E.
%
2
if
F
F
2.
is
yI
j !llRN/92l. !l*' lNTl*.RPl-ZR.s !N/92l.Vl !l.l¬NC|¬ / Slrptetnbl I985
aissai lant, the organized offender s had 67 victims and the disorganizedhad l6. Of the l6 vicfms of the disorganized offenders, l0 usednonforceful resistancr acquiescence or verbal resistance! and werekilled. With the organized offender, 45 out of 67 victims used non-forceful resistance and died as well. In total, 55 out of 83 victims usedf l sistance The data suggest that nonforceful resistancenonforce u re .s not a deterrent with either of these offender types. ' e iswaThe interpretation of what is considered forceful resistancimportant to clarify. We identified screaming and fleeing as physical forceful! reactions because offenders specifically cited those victimresponses as the reason for their use of increased aggression. With ama'ority of the offenders interviewed, both physical and verbalertn aJ or forceful and nonforceful! resistance played a part in trigg g
reaction by the offenders.An almost equal number of victims in our sample were said to haveresisted physically 5! as were said to have made no attempt atresistance 3!. Both types of victim actions resulted in death.The FBI agents interviewed the murderers about deterrence to kill.This information was analyzed in terms of the organized/ disorganizeddichotomy. Organized murderers, who had a conscious intent basedon motive to kill, said that factors such as witnesses and location didnot matter because the murder fantasy was so well rehearsed thateverything was controlled "I always killed in my home, and therewere no witnesses"!. Or as one murderer said, The victim did nothave a choice. Killing was part of my fantasy." Also, the organizedmurderer with the detailed fantasy to kill either believed that hewould never be caught or that he would have to be killed to bestopped. On the other hand, disorganized offenders, who were notconsciously aware of their intent to kill, were able to identify factorsthat might deter their killing. They stated such deterrence factors asbeing in a populated location, having witnesses in the area, or coop-
eration from the victim.
Surviving VictimsThe surviving victims of murderers in the study provide insightsabout victim-murderer interactions in the context of the organizedand disorganized classification. Victims who survived murder at-tempts of these killers used the following strategies: hiding from theassailant, jumping out of a car, feigning death, escaping the area,
75
Ressler et al. / CRIME SCENE ANALYSIS
knocking the weapon out of the assailants hand, and screaming forassistartct-. The following two cases illustrate victim-murdererdynamics as well as the crime scene and profile characteristics for
each type of murderer.
Victim ofrm organized murderer. Driving home front work at lO:3Oat night, :1 ltigltway patrol officer passed a car pulled off the road. Henoticed the car's dome light was on and the right front door was open;he then saw two people in a scuffle between the car and the woods. Ashe turned around to investigate, his headlights picked up a womanlying on the ground, fighting violently with a man on top of her.When the police officer approached them, the man dropped the gunhe had been holding and held up his hands. The woman picked upthe gun and ran to the officer screaming, He's trying to kill me!
The assailant was handcuffed. He stated, "I just wanted to scare her. Ijust wanted to tie her up. I dont know if I would have raped her ornot, but I might have. Ijust met her tonight. The victim related that she worked part-time as a photographer's
model and that she had been told by an agency that a man would takeher to his studio to take photographs. As they were driving along the
freeway, the man pulled over, saying he thought he had a flat tire. Hethen pulled a gun and said, "Do as I say and I won't hurt you." The
victim reported,
I said I would do what he said if he didn't hurt me. He told me to turn
and put my hands behind my back, which Idid, and he proceeded to tiemy wrist. When he went to tie my hands together, I began to strugglebecause the gun was not in his hand. During the struggle the manbegan choking me and said, "I am losing my patience with you. With
my record I would just as soon kill you and go the the gas chamber."He pulled the gun and pointed it at me. Igrabbed at the gun, screamed,and beat on the window of the car, but no oneiwould stop. We keptstruggling, and the gun was discharged with the bullet going throughmy skirt and grazing my outer right leg. I decided if I got out of the car,
someone would see me and stop. I got the door open and we fell out onthe ground and we wrestled. Then the officer arrived.
This case example underscores the organized murderers premedi-
tated approach to the victim and his planned intent to kill. In this
case, when the assailant tried to bargain with her by saying she wouldnot be hurt if she cooperated, the victim did not believe him. Although
the victim tried negotiating not to be harmed by the assailant, she¢?§
E;
s
§
33 =5it
t_- I
*4?A T
' ~_;.
<
'-= .t 13.,
g2 =;
V II?.' ti
tt
It
V! as W.. mt/AV
2'
¢
Q
3% .9.
1
55}:~
1:/as:
r
"é]OllRNAl. Of" lNTi'lRfl".l S !N192L VlOl,F.NCl-'. / September l986
strategically waited for an opportunity when he did not have the gun he had to drop the gun to tie her wrists! and foughtat the point whenher wrists were being tied. The gun was a straightforward deaththreat, yet being inunobilived inrreasetl the woman's vulnerability.
Thus she risked fighting despite the gun.The assailant's preconceived strategies were based on his under-standing of a victim's response to a violent death threat. This assailanthad three prior victims whom he murdered. His first victim wascontacted after he answered an ad in a lonely hearts column; in thesecond and third cases he posed as a photographer needing a modeland went through an agency. He claimed to have raped all threewomen and then transported them to another location where hestrangled them. The bodies were left in a desert; until the man wasapprehended for the attempted murder, the bodies remained missing.The murderer showed most of the characteristics of an organizedsexual killer. The murders were carefully planned. The killer usedropes as restraints and raped the women prior to killing them. He alsotook photographs of his victims before he killed them; their facesshowed great fear. The man's car was used to transport the victims totheir deaths. The offender's IQ was in the superior range, and he hadrecently lost his job and moved from the Midwest to the West Coast.
He followed newspaper accounts of his crimes.However, in this case, this victim did not respond as his othervictims. As a victim she did not acquiesce to his multiple threats andgun. She fought him. He continued his pursuit of dominance andintent to kill her. l-le shot her. From his view, the rules suddenlychanged. He had a choice. He did not stop his action and say tohimself, This is not fitting in with my scheme," and leave the scene.Instead, he persisted in fitting her into his mode of escalation.When apprehended by police, the assailant tried the same manipu-lative ploy with the officer. He claimed that he did not know if hewould have raped the woman. The police officer disbelieved thisstatement i.e., he believed the assailant had intended to kill! and the
assailant was taken into custody.Victim statement of disorganized murderer. According to thehe and somecount of the surviving victim, a 21-year-old woman, sac
friends returned to a girlfriend's apartment after dining at a restau-Af ntinued conversation and television viewing, everyonerant. ter coleft except one of the men. The victim's girlfriend retired to her room
i 77
Ressler et al. /' CRIME SCENI-'. ANAl.Y§lS
as she had to work the next day; the victim stayed with the man, whom
she knew, hoping he would gel the hint and It-ave." While they wen-
watching television, slIt' fell asleep lying on lll'l side on the tom It.
When she awoke, she was "fer-ling funny" and lying on her bat k.
A shadow or a figure at the edge ol the couch was moving toward the
bedroom. As the victim started to stand up, she saw her girlfriend
standing between the bedroom and the living room with the man
holding her by the wrist. Her friend was screaming. At about this
time, the victim realized her pants were partly down around her
thighs, and as she reached down to pull them up, she discovered she
was covered with blood. Her face and abdomen had been slashed. The
victim ran outside to a neighbor, holding her stomach as she ran. The
neighbor let her in and called the police. After the victim was rushed
to the hospital, she was found to have suffered multiple cuts and
lacerations to her throat and face and extensive abdominal lacera-
tions. The assailant had attempted to disembowel her. H:-t girlfriend
was found lying nude in her bedroom with fatal multiple knife
wounds in the abdomen, throat, and arms. A knife with a ten-inch
blade subsequently identified as the murder weapon! was lying near
the victim.The disorganized murderer often kills quickly to maintain control.
ln this case, control was achieved by the murderers attack on sleeping
women. The bodies were depersonalized through extensive cuttings
and stab wounds and the weapon was left at the crime scene. The
murderer knew his victims and had a history of masochistic behavior,
as evidenced by autoerotic asphyxial practices as an adolescent and
adult. The premeditated aspect of the crime was revealed by a letter,
found in the murderers car and dated five days before the murder, that
stated that the killer intended to force one of the victims to eviscerate
and emasculate him and that she was to be found innocent of the
CIIYUCS.One might speculate that the disorganization of the crime escalated
when the offender's fantasy did not match the reality of the situation.
In his evisceration fantasy, the assailant rehearsed the disembowel-
ment both by assuming the role of victim and of victimizer. There is
similarity in intent at the crime scene with the presence of two
women. The assailant tries out the evisceration fantasy on the first
victim and then attacks his fantasy object. We speculate that between
the first and second victim he experienced tension relief from trying
out of the fantasy and he escalates the murder behavior to a second
target.
78=55==E.
>1
;
é.
$72"
A9292wzs92-92 wt%
,.
2
.
$
la
X!
s2
%>
ii
e:
ii
/
vl
j !URN/92l. OF INTERIWLRSONAI. VIOLENCE / September l986
The actounts of surviving victims of an organized and a disorganized offender highlight their levels of awareness regarding thetlangerousness of lht oflemler. Both women acted independently in
response to a situation they perceived as life threatening, and swiftpolice and int-dicul intervention combined with their efforts to save
their lives. The killers were remarkable in their intent and assurancethat they could successfully carry out their crimes. These men, at least
in their own minds, had already rehearsed how they would kill andescape capture. The killing was an integral part of their fantasy. The
murderers, in this sense, had consciously planned their murders-one, setting about to target a victim for his plan, and the other
utilizing a chance encounter.
DISCUSSION
This article reports on a new typology of sexually oriented mur-
derers based on crime scene evidence and victim resistance strategies
and outcome in terms of this new classification. This new typologyprovides an opportunity to expand and advance the psychosocialframework for studying murderers that is sometimes criticized for its
unproved theories, obscure interpretive level, and lack of attention to
cultural factors Wolfgang Sc Ferraruti, I963! to include measurable,
behavioral indicators from analysis of crime scene e..g., presence or
absence of a weapon; injury to victim!. This law enforcement typol-ogy is based on discrete, verifiable concepts and behavior. It does not
rest solely on controversial statements of motivation derived from
a complex theory of subconscious motivation. Consequently, thetypology has the potential for verifiable classification of acts and
visual evidence, enhancing the investigation and study of murderers.
For example, to hypothesize that a serial murderer killed a young
woman to destroy his internal female identification with his sister is
cumbersome and cannot be substantiated by analysis of crime scene
evidence or other data available before his capture and evaluation.
What is clear is the pattern of killing of young women of a certain age
range in a repeated and particular systematic style. Analysis of these
data from the crime scene may be useful in understanding the psycho-
social nature of the murderer and lead it is hoped! to his capture.Additionally, we study victim response to the offender in terms of
active versus passive response. We found that regardless of type of
resistance active or passive! or category of offender organized versus
79
Resslerrtal. / lRlMF..SCl'lNE ANALYSIS
llS !fg;.tHlI. tl!, death ensued. When we examined 9 victims who sur-
vived, the category of offender was not the predictor, rather, chance
happenings" preserved life.
REFERENCES
Cox, D. R. 970!. Analysis of binary data. London: Methuen.
D'Agostin0, R. B. l97l !. A second look at analysis of variance on dichotomous data.
Journal of Ed. Mea.s., 8, 327-333.
D'Agostino, R. B. I972!. Relation between the chi squared and ANOVA tests fortesting the equality of k independent dichotomous populations. American Statis-
tician, pp. 30-32.
D'Agostin0, R. B. 985!. Statistical inference procedures for crime scene patterns andprofile characteristics of organized and disorganized offenders. In Final Report toNational Institute of Justice #82CX-0065!, Washington, D CLester, D. I973!. Murder: A review. Corrective and Social Psychiatry and journal of
Applied Behavior Therapy, 19 !, 40-50.
l.unney, C. H. 970!. Using analysis of variance with a dichotomous dependent
variable: An empirical study. journal of Ed. Meas., 4, 263-269.Mi-ndelsohn, B. l963!. The origin of the doctrine of victimology. Excerpta Crimino-
logica, 3, 239-244.
Ressler, R. K., etal. 985!. Violent crimes. FBILaw EnforcementBulletin, 51 8!, l-33.S h' le S. I ' ' ' ' ' c a r, 968!. The victim and his criminal: A study in functional responsibility.
New York: Random House.
Simon, R. I. 977!. Type A, AB, B murderers: Their relationship to the victims and tothe triminal justice system. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and
the Law, 5 !, 344-352.
vun Heniig, H. 940!. Remarks on the interaction of perpetrator and victim. journal
of Criminal Law and Criminology, 31, 303-309.von Hentig, H. 948!. The criminal and his victim. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press.
Wolfgang, M. E. 958!. Patterns in criminal horn
Pennsylvania.
Wolfgang, M. E., 8: Ferracuti, F. l967!. The subsculture of violence. Great Britain:Tavistock.icide. Philadelphia: University of
Robert K. Ressler, M. S., is Supervisory Special Agent, Federal Bur Ieau of r|vestiga-lion, and Program Manager, Violent Criminal Apprehension Program NationalCenter for the Analysis of Violent Crime, FBI Academy, Quantico, VA.
Ann W. Burgess, R.N., D.N.Sc., is van Ameringen Professor of Prychiatric MentalHealth Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and Associate Director ofNursing Research, Boston City Hospital, Boston.
80ti; .
1
5.
.3
t;
t
-z
inF2
i§
i7W341. :;
»,s~Z;%"
"2*:=-
N./..,.
.* ¢zs::;:
:L:?7:l'
5@ s
j !URNAl.. !F lN'l'ERPl'lRS !NAL VIOLENCE / September I986
john E. Douglas, M .S., is Supervisory Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation,' ' ' ' d C ime Scene Assessment Program,and Program Manager, Cflmtl Projalmg an r' l ' of Violent Crime, FBI Academy, Quanttco, VA.National Center for the Ana ysis
' A iate Prolessor and Coordinator of theCarol R. Hartman, R.N., D.N.Sc., I3 ssocGraduate Program in Psychiatric Mental Health Nursing, Boston College, Chestnut
Hill, MA.
cs Boston University, Boston.Ralph B. D'Agostino is Professor of Mathemati ,
Bl
In comparing sexual murderers with a history of sex abuse n = I2! with murderers
without such a history n = I6!, findings that approach a level of significance between
early sexual abuse and sexual deviations include zoophilia .06! andsexual sadism .07!
with the ultimate expression of the murderer's perversion being the mutilation of the
victim. Murderers with sexual abuse histories report fantasizing about rape earlier than
murderers without sexual abuse histories .05! and report aversion to peer sex in
adolescence and adulthood .05!. Significant differences in behavioral indicators com-
paring across developmental levels of childhood include cruelty to animals .05!, and
differences approaching significance include isolation .09!, convulsions .09!, cruelty
to children .09! and assaultive to adults .09!. Significant differences in adolescence
between murderers with child sexual abuse history versus nonhistory include running
away .01!, sleep problems t .05!, daydreams .05!, rebellious .05!, assaultive to adults
.05!, and indicators approaching significance include temper tantrums .09! and
selfmutilation .09!.
Murderers Who Rape
and Mutilate
ROBERT K. RESSLER
FBI Academy
ANN W. BURGESS
University of Pennsylvania
CAROL R. HARTMAN
Boston College
IOHN E. DOUGLAS
FBI Academy
ARLENE McCORMACK
University of Lowell
The origins and significance of sexualized acts in the commission
of a sexual crime have been implicit themes in the professional
literature. Deviant sexual behaviors of offenders have been reported
in terms of sexual dysfunction Groth 8c Burgess, 1977!, sexual
Authors Note: Preparation of this article was supported by Department of Justice
grants: Office of juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention #84-]N-AX-K010! and
JOURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE, Vol. I No. 3, September 1986 273-287
D I986 Sage Publications, Inc.
82
51J~ <3:
szggg <> ,
¢Z;j§E;1;; ,/72
Afét
cz 2
s
if
. liéi9
4 /T .
~¢%;;:;.
/
,JOURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE / September 1986
arousal Abel, 1982!, sadistic fantasies Brittain, 1970; MacCulloch,Snowden, Wood, 8: Mills, 1983!, and childhood sexual abuse Groth,
1979; Seghorn, Boucher, 8c Prentky, in press!.In a report of a British study of 16 male patients diagnosed withpsychopathic disorders and hospitalized in a psychiatric facility,the crucial link between sadistic fantasy and behavior is discussed MacCulloch et al., l983!. The authors raise the following question:If sadistic fantasy has a role in the genesis and maintenance of sadisticbehavior, what factors lead some individuals to act-out their fantasies?Although they state that they believe any answer would includemultiple factors, the authors speculate that factors observed in theirsubpopulation of 13 sadistic fantasizers include childhood abuse being tied up and anal assault! and/ or adolescent sexual experiences
MacCulloch et al., 1983!.The linking of childhood sexual abuse to subsequent problemsand behavior is not a new idea. Freud in 1895 believed that hystericalsymptoms of his female patients could be traced to an early traumaticexperience and that the trauma was always related to the patientssexual life. The trauma manifested itself when revived later, usuallyafter puberty, as a memory. However, Freud later reversed his belief in
1905 and said that the sexual seductions his patients reported were notall reports of real events, but fantasies created by the individual Masson, 1984!. This reversal created a major shift in the priorities ofpsychological investigation. The external, realistic trauma was re-
placed in importance by infantile sexual wishes and fantasies.In the past decade clinicians Herman, 1981! and feminists Rush,1980! have challenged this perspective and are now proposing thatsexual abuse in childhood may have a common base in a wide rangeof social problems. The propositions are based on observations ofthe prevalence of early child sexual abuse found in populationsof runaways Janus, Scanlon, 8: Price, 1984!, juvenile delinquents Garbarino 8: Plantz, 1984!, prostitutes James 8c Meyerding, 1977;Silbert 8: Pines, 1981!, psychiatric patients Carmen, Rieker, 8c Mills,1984!, substance abusers Densen-Gerber, 1975!, and sex offenders
Groth, l979; Seghorn et al., in press!.Although these studies have looked at various populations, nonehas examined sexual murderers. In an attempt to address the question
National Institute of justice #82-CX-0065!. We wish to acknowledge gratefullyMarieanne L. Clark for contributions to earlier drafts of this article.
83
Ressler et al. / MURDERERS WHO RAPE AND MUTILATE
raised by MacCull0ch and colleagues about acting out sadistic fan-
tasies, this article discusses results of an assessment of the relation-
ship between sexual abuse in childhood or adolescence and sexual
interests, activities, and deviations in convicted sexually oriented
killers.
METHOD
Apprehension of a crime suspect is the job of law enforcement.
In many crimes, this task is fairly straightforward when a motive
e.g., robbery, revenge! has been identified. However, in many crimes
the motive is not readily apparent. FBI agents became involved in
assisting local law enforcement agencies in their profiling of un-
solved homicide cases in the early 1970s. These crimes, often referred
to as motiveless, were analyzed by the agents to include a sexual
component. The agents, sensitive to crime scene information, began
their own efforts at classifying characteristics of the murderer by
virtue of evidence found at the crime scene. From this evidence they
devised a new typology that characterized crime scene patterns as
being organized or disorganized. This typology inferred a motiva-
tional framework that included expectations, planning, and justi-
fication for the criminal action as well as hunches regarding
postcrime behaviors. As a result, particular emphasis was placed on
the thinking patterns dominating the murderer's actions indicating
differences in acts committed against the victim and suggesting sub-
categories of motivational constructs.
The selection of subjects and methodology used to develop the
organized/disorganized typology are reported elsewhere Ressler
et al., 1985!. Briefly, FBI special agents collected data in various U.S.prisons between 1979 and 1983. The data set for each murderer con-
sisted of the best available data from two types of sources: official
records and interviews with the offenders.To qualify for the study, a murder had to be classified through
crime scene observations and evidence as a sexual homicide. These
observations included the following: victim attire or lack of attire;
exposure of sexual parts of the victim's body; sexual positioning of
victim's body; insertion of foreign objects into victim's body cavities;
or evidence of sexual intercourse. Primary analysis was conducted on
information about the crime scenes of 36 sexually oriented murderers.
84l