A question about GSK's M.O./.Signature/Paraphilic Behavior Feb 9, 2019 8:06:09 GMT via mobile trabuco and faser41 like this
Post by mistress9 on Feb 9, 2019 8:06:09 GMT
There was a poster on the board named Murderinc. He has been banned because he won't stop stating things as fact instead of opinion and that's a shame because he is coming up with a lot of crimes. He's coming up with so many crimes, they can't all be DeAngelo but his info is helpful to people that are researching.
Then there are the 12-26-75 podcasters that have been coming up with some very interesting cases. I had already been very interested in the Cindy Wanner case and knew about some of the other cases they brought up but while I had discounted some of them the podcasters have furnished new enlightening information that makes me interested again.
These cases are interesting for a number of reasons, either location or other things. However some of these cases involve strangulation or stabbing.
Here is my question: Would it be considered almost unheard of for a serial killer to change his preferred method of killing people. Would a killer that bludgeoned his victims to death, never killed with a knife as far as is known a knife but did kill with a gun if he lost control or was being pursued change to strangling or stabbing his victims? Would that be almost unheard of, or is that something that isn't unusual at all. Does a strangler always strangle for instance. Does a bludgeoner always bludgeon unless he loses control?
I wonder if the method of murder is considered paraphilic behavior unless circumstances means he has to do something different to escape therefore it becomes M.O.
A sampling of interesting cases I wonder if could be connected: Terry Lynn Ray in Redding stabbed, Cindy Wanner strangled. Would that eliminate DeAngelo?
How does LE determine what is paraphilic behavior and what is MO and what is Signature?
I found the following information but it doesn't discuss the weapon or method of killing a person:
All criminals have a MODUS OPERANDI consisting of techniques, habits, and peculiarities in behavior which are performed with three basic objectives (Turvey, 2002):
1. Complete the crime
2. Affect escape
3. Avoid capture
M.O. is the sequence of events necessary to actually commit the crime. The criminal does each part a specific way because it has led to success. For instance, a burglar may always enter through a bedroom window because the burglar has met with success doing this. M.O. because a habit or fixation that is directly related to committing the crime.
A signature is an action done that is beyond the act of the crime. It is a tell tale sign for that individual. For instance, the lipstick murderer always used red lipstick to write on bathroom stall doors taunting police. Leaving the message was not necessary to kill the girl but it was necessary for the killer to leave his mark or statement.
Other signatures include taking trophies or defecating on the scene.
Offender signature can be broken down into two separate but interdependent halves:
1) SIGNATURE ASPECT defines the theme or motive of an offense, and can include motivational categories such as profit, anger, retaliation, assertiveness, sadism, and et cetera (Turvey, 2002).
2)SIGNATURE BEHAVIORS on the other hand, are committed to satisfy the emotional and psychological needs of the offender and usually define the theme of a crime
The common challenge in distinguishing the MO from offender signature lies in the fact that certain offender actions committed in the act of the offense may satisfy both the offender’s MO and his or her signature. The key to determining which behavior falls into what category lies in the totality of the circumstances surrounding the offense. An example would be a rapist who covers his face. The act in and of itself could be an MO behavior in that the rapist may be attempting to conceal his identity. It could also be classified as offender signature in that covering his face enhances the sexual pleasure he may derive from the rape scenario in itself.
So the question remains about the method of killing a victim.
By the way, I've always thought that he never stopped and that he just changed his MO from home invasion to kidnapping. Don't know if that will ever prove out to be correct or not but I think there were indications that home invasions were not a necessity for him since several times he kidnapped his victims as the EAR to a neighboring home or down the drainage canal in case #9.
people just want to make up their own definitions and force other people to respect that. A paraphilia is any object or ritual that is not inherently sexual yet causes sexual excitation. That's it. EARONS' paraphilia was bondage, violence and eventually murder.