JOURNAL OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE /September I936

Notional Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, FBI Academy, Quantico, VA.
Lowell, MA.

john E. Douglas, M.S., isSuperuisovy Special Agent, Federal Bureau Investigation of and Program Manager, Criminal Erofiling and Crime Scene Assessment Program,

Arlene McCormck is Assistant Professor Sociology, 0/ University of Lowell,

60

The study of crime scene profiling e'l'h.. orts elicits two impi ' ' elaw enlorz t'1!|C7ll tritegories have been
mur er .

mam patterns ofsexual

ii]texual murders. The study il 5 organiud and dimrganizeil. rt I ite rlerwrrl from eviilrnrr and fiattrrm III ruiilrritr at ttr.s r. ml ll.92 relatmmhifr to thr two tategories. In partic' d tiue
then explores inttim informattmi a

ular, we explored victim response tn the n e

thecategory ofo en
life.

resistance to the assault. We found that regardless of type of resistance, active or passive, d. When we examined nine victims who survived.
and category of o ender, death ensue der was not the predictor, rather, "chance happenings preserve
.. d

nder I terms olnoresistance an ac

Sexual Killers

and Their Victims Identifying Patterns Through

Crime Scene Analysis
ROBERT K.RESSLER
FBI Academy
: EZe ' -1

ANNW.BURGEQS University ofPennsylvania

&#39;1 1t$ 5121213113, 7;? 5 1 =v l:;&#39;.=<=;%i<2. 2 3 zz :/=,;: 4.iii? e.>?*>=:22; Aiia >:2<1~ rants" >4 i+ iii! III 4 # i :;,:a~ ta =1 2? -t2z 4?

JOHN E.DOUGLAS
FBI Academy

CAROL R.HARTMAN
BostonCollege

RALPH B.D AGOSTlNO

Boston University

6Z1 92? er
3,. 3;,

Interpersonal violence spans ae witerminal &#39; of the disruptions in the equiwhich murder represents &#39;on d r and its irrevocable effect librium of a society. The tragedy of mur e &#39; &#39; &#39; e lected in the focus onthe muron victims and families isoften n g
______&#39;__,-

&#39;de range ofhuman behaviors of

Authors Note: Preparation of this article was supported by Department of Justice grants: Office of juvenile justice and Delinquency Prevention #84-]N-AX-K0l0! and ]OURNAL INTERPERSONAL OF VIOLENCE, Vol. lN0. 3, September I985 288-$03
Ol985 53g? Publications, lnc.
61

$1,

;.

Resslei et ;|l. / IRIMI2

S jl&#39;.Nl-. AN/92|.YSlS

tlerers. This interactional component between victim and murderer and its social impact needs to be addressed constantly there if is to be a
balance inthe understanding of such violence.

who investigate unsolved urdeisat in the requestof local law enforce merit officials, are those who notonly plantheir murders but who
repeat their crimes.

frequently profiled by agents at the l"lll&#39;s Behavioral Science Unit,

* 23 i 1 2

basic types of murderers and clarify that their concentration is on the second type, the "passionate" killer. In contrast, the type of killer

slayingas a resultof intent to do harm, but without a specific intent to kill. They observe, Many authors fail to distinguish between two

planned, and rational murder; and ! killing in the heat of passion or

I977! emphasizes that identifying personality profile types crucial is 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,

of ways to classify murderers Lester, 1973; Wolfgang, I958!. Simon

traditionally focused has the on murderer and has presented a variety

The voluminous scholarly and professional literature on murder

3.2. /0% .

t -. >~: ii

V/9292 w ,

. ,.:

criminal. . .To know one we must be acquainted with the complerated on the doctrine of victimology while preparing for the trial of a man who, had it not been for "the perversityhis of former wife,"
mentary partner." Mendelsohn I963, pp. 239-24]!, in writing of the biopsychosocial personality of the accused and of the victim, elabo-

I940!, Mendelsohn I963!, Wolfgang I958!, and Schafer 968!. The victim is one of thecauses of a crime, suggests Hans von I-Ientig. In I948 he stated, In asense the victim shapes and molds the

explored by sociologists and criminologists such as von I-Ientig

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

The professional literature regarding murder victims has been relatively silent. When the interpersonal aspects of murder have been

bi% 122137 3.. ~~ 11?. .,. 7 , s~

caseswhich the in role of the victim is characterized by his having

Brooks and Marieanne L. Clark for contributions to earlier drafts of this article.

Wolfgang 958! has utilized the concept of victim precipitation in his well-known studies of criminal homicide, applying it to those
2?;

would never have been found guilty of murdering her and her lover.

National Institute 0f]ustice #82-CX-0065!. We wish to acknowledge gratefully Pierce

s {$7 :3" it.

<33.

ii.

62

i
2? g.

_| !llRN/92l . !l~&#39; lN&#39;l&#39;l".RPF.RS Vl !l .l".N !N/92l. /ll~I St-ptt&#39;|ii|!ri VIN:

d been the first inthe homicide drama to use physical force directe

againstsubsequent his slayer" p. 252!. An example is the husband

who attacked his wife with amilk bottle, a brick, anda pieceof concrete block while she was making breakfast. Having a butcher knife in her hand, she stabbed him. Wolfgang 958! found victim. . . . .h. studied through police reports in Philadelphia. Adding totis con_

preciptated homicides represented of a 26% total 588 of homicides

cept, Schafer 968, p. 152! concluded that it is far from true that all crimes happen to be committed; often the victim&#39;s negligence, precipitative action, or provocation contributes to the genesis or
performance of a crime."

In contrast to this view, FBI profilers, their in work of analyzing crime scenes for clues leading toa suspect in an unsolved homicide, approach They did not find it helpful to perceive the too kadifferent . of howthe offender thought and, subsequently, how he would

victim as provoking murder. the Rather, the agents tried to be aware

respond to key characteristics a victim. of For example, a victim

wearing a red dress and shoes perceived was the by offender as asking
for it. Such a victim can not communicate because offender the selects and interprets communication cues of which the victim is

totally unaware. The agents understood offender the s habitual rea-

soning pattern that selects out characteristics of the victim, building a

strong justification for violating her. The offender may retrospecthis is reason for the attack, and so it goes.

tively think he went "a bit too far," but will hold to his justifications. If a victim is passive, this is reasonattack; for the if victim struggles,
critical data in their investigations. a result As of their insights into

Thus the agents regarded all victim and crime scene information as

understanding motivation the 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 obtainedthe in
and of victim-murderer interaction.

l K ==@&#39;>.@=&#39;

study were examined from the perspectives of crimescene analysis

3;. P $2" Q ti Z

STUDY

ii ,

analyzing crime scenes, have typed sexual murderersthe and crime

scene terms in of an organized/ disorganized dichotomy. The premise

For several years, FBI agents, profiling in sexual murderers by

% e
63

ll:-sslrrct ;tl. / JRIMF. S Zl&#39;INF. /92Nl92l.YSl. i

for this ditltotomyis that facets of the t;riminal&#39;s personality are

evident in his offense. l.ilu~ a lingerprint, the crime scene can be used to aid in identifyingthe murderer.An organizedmurdererisone who appearsto plan his murdersand who displays control e.g., absence of

clues! at the crime

scene. The disorganized murderer is less apt to

e.g., presence ofcluesat

plan, and hiscrimescenes display haphazard

crime scene! behavior.

Our study was an exploratory one. lts major objectives were as follows: ! to test, using statisticalinferential procedures, if there are significant behavioral differencesat the crime scenes between the

crimescommitted by organized offenders and those committed by disorganized murderers, and ! to identifyvariables that may be useful in profilingmurderers andon which theorganized and disorganizedmurderers differ. For the study to achieve its objectives,the agents first had to

classify the 36

participating murderers into theorganized/disorgzr

nizctl dichotomy.The dichotomywasas follows: 24 organized with 97 victims!;l2disorganizetl with 2] victims!.The methodfor classification is publishedelsewhereRessleret al., I985!.
Data Set

The datasetfor the study comprised 36 convicted sexualmurderers. Data werecollected on lI8 victimsof thesemurderers. Of the victims,
9 survived the assaults; thus those 9 assaults were classified as at-

temptedmurders.

Eachmurderer whoprovided consent wasinterviewed extensively by FBI agents. The offender was asked questions regarding hisbackground, hisbehavior at thecrime scene, andhispostoffense behavior. In addition, FBIagents reviewed criminalrecords of all participating
offenders. The data set for each murderer consisted of the best avail-

able data compiledfrom thesetwo sources. Due to the complexities of obtaining thesedata and the confiden-

tiality issues involved, therewere"no response" answers to certain questions by some offenders. Althoughthe missing dataappearto havelittle effect on theunivariate analysis, anyinterpretation of the
results should consider this situation.

Thedata forthis article were computerized andstored in separate

files, which are described below.

! Background Informationon offender!. This file contains 134

variablespertaining to the murderer. Variables within this file are

64

] !URNAl. INTERPERSONAI. OF /September VlOl.F.NCf&#39;I 1986 tlassified eight into categories: demographics, appearance, physical

lift-style, structure, family s subject early background family history prnblelns,ssubjvit llS &#39;l]!llllf and subject /2ll!ll5 s sexual history. &#39; ! !f]en.vI on o]]c1i.w-!. lilr &#39;l&#39;liis tnntaiiis variables ubtaini-ll
front the offt-rises the i-.g., crime snriit-s!. are &#39;l&#39;ht-re I19 variables in this file, which umtains information each for separate crime. Variables in this file are classified into four categories:to leading the offense as such frame of mind, premeditation crime, ofprecipiand
offender the at time of offense; action during offense variables such as conversation behavior and toward victim, weapons, and substance

&#39; 7 2 Mg: 8% 1;

tating events!; offender and dress residence variables to relating the abuse!; postoffense variables as keeping such news clippings and
visiting crime scene and site victim grave!. s

.;%... %. 2/gziggi.
5 9

W... ! Victim 2onoffense!. file This contains 57 variables and is divided two into subsets: ! l victim characteristics as victim such age, %%:92. sex, height, weight, physique, race, complexion, attractiveness, marital status, residence, socioeconomic status,actions and during offense!; r=s>~&#39;>&#39; and offender&#39;s ! and behavior actions duringoffense the as such
victim mode of death, body position, sexual before acts and .. .. . after f death, postmortem acts, postmortem mutilation, disposition and o
the body!.
? 2

I ..

dividedfour intocategories: ! vehicle variables relating to the mode

! Crime Scene on offense!. This contains file 47 variables and is of transportation of the offender the and description of his vehicle;
measuring distance the the from crime scene the tovictim home, s to
the offender home, s andso on.
Data Analysis

5 < 7

! use of vehicle variable describing how a vehicle was used in the crime;variables ! concerning physical evidence weapon, fingerprints,so and on, left the at crime scene!; ! distance and variables
Basically, analysis the directed wastesting at statistically for signifFor variables in the Background Information data file, the unit of
variables the inother data files, the maximum sample were sizes 97 &#39; &#39; &#39; &#39; &#39; ff d rs.
victims the for organized and 21 victims the for disorganized o ene

&#39;6 3? t$v

icant differences between organized the disorganized and murderers.

9 4 2* y

analysis the was murderer. The maximum sample were sizes for 24 the organized group of offenders 12and for the disorganized group. For

Z ; 9 . ., __..

.5 ="=&#

=; .1:

Rl 92.92lf l1&#39;lJll / IRlMi&#39;. .&#39;*i I|&#39;.Nl . /92N/92l.Y.&#39;~ilS

The major statistical anzilysis procedure einployed lot" thevariables was thetwo lIl l |!l Il lt&#39;lIl sainple ttest l!&#39;/&#39;92gostino, I97], I972;l.un~

333 >i>
a

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 ttest and the appropriate degrees of freedom.

Variables significantat the.05 level of significance by thettest were identified. The full description of statistical tests employedis

reported elsewhere D&#39;Agostino, The 1985!. major findings of differences between crime scene variables andprofile variables for organized

&#3

and disorganized offenders are reported as follows. See Table I.!

Crime Scene Differences Between

@;a

Organized and Disorganized Murderers

We first established that basedon data available at the crime scene,

-= :*& 1

there are significant differences between the organized and disorganized offender. However, there are no situations where the organized

and tlisorgaiiizetl offemletsaie mutually exclusive. That is, holh types

of rnurderels are iapahleof all types ol behavior. Forexarnple, an

organized murderer might notuse a vehit le ora disorganized murderer mightuse restraints. Summary results are listed below. See
Table 2.!

4 2 i

Organized offenders are more apt to

0 plan,
Iuse restraints, 0 commit sexual acts with live victims,

. .
s

O showor display control of victim

victim to show
O use a vehicle.

i.e., manipulative, threatening, want

.ii 5 If

fear!, and

Disorganized offenders are more apt to

Ileave weapon at the scene,

O position dead body,

I perform sexual actson dead body, 0 keep dead body,

:35. is ,. t

O try to depersonalize the body,and

0 not use a vehicle.

151
*2

In meeting the study s first objective,we demonstrated that there are in fact consistencies and patternsin crime scenes that are objectively quantifiableand thatdistinguish organized from disorganized

e gt

66 gr:

&#3 =2

ii

|ll l1 l|&#39; N/921 lN&#39;l&#39;l&#39; Rl&#39;l".R. IN/92l .VI .l".N llwl 1.S4&#39;plr||||n&#39;| HIHII
2,

pVnlucs lur L-Tcs! un Jriinc Sccnc and Profile Variables:

1; Q, ;z&#39; 3 " ? s -4 ,,...... l e 1

0 &#39;

. rim&#39; Scum: Variable

urganizcd Dichotomy Orgunizw .mdDis "#1 01&#39; M12 M A Profile Variable

I-T st

strategy achvscx restrain

wcapnlft

.1 ; .5

scxoff sadism
masochism unusual&#39;Z umwl muv2 umv 5 1ullVlI 1nnv mnvfl react !

.003 002 0001 0001

?;
ei 2

5 :2

034 34 .0001
.002 001 .0 IU .0001 .03 ! .04. : .0001 .005

53 >2; Q,

$1 fl; if Z
Z Z

iucraggr alcohol position sb4death

safdcath pmact pmact7 pmact8 torture

.014 .002

R1-ssler -t al. /CRIME

SCI-INF. ANALYSIS

&#39;1&#39;/92Bl.E 2 Irime Scrn:- V;ll&#39;l;lIll fr1 l!il&#39;l&#39;-r.-iitiutirlg &#39;g;.1ni&#39;/.rt l!isurg;1niv.1:1l l ziml S1-x11;1l M11r1l<:1cr.s

ACTIONS l!URlN ; Offense I Data Set Strategy]

Ol- HELNSI-L

I I&#39;rr en mgr: Urganizml I!i_mrganizer1

Planned versus Sudden; Organized more likely to have planned as Violent act done to achieve sexual Achvsex/ relations; Organized less likely Restraints used; Restrain/ Organized more likely Weapon left at scene of crime; Weapo nlft/ Organized lesslikely Sexoff/ Sexual acts committed; Organized more likely to commit sexual acts 97! Sadism/ Surlistir acts Committed; 19 !r1.1;||1iz~1llrss likely M;|s<>1l1s1n/ Mnsm liislir; .14 ts 1urnmillrcl; Uligairiivvll may,lll.92&#39;ll|&#39;KiIlllI.I&#39;II lllll Illll Swnllnw l~11|1-1lv|1l||1|lnrluxu; ~.-|111-|1/ !|y,.n1i/.I&#39;l may,l|sn|p4!||1iu&#39;1lrlnl nnl 85!

81! 2s 8! 49

x 1 Z7 "62. I

7! 76
44 8! as !

Urgzrni/.1-clshowsrnu1v 1u11lm| n1.1y In usrliil lur casesin which v 32 Conversation with victim aspects shown! Manipulative

. ,;:c, . :1 1&

Threatening Inquisitive
Polite Threatens family Obtains name Reactions desired by offender Fcar/ Wants victim to show fear; Organized more likely Lie still} Wants victim to lie still; Organized more likely

97! I5 11! ll!

7! 51

4
E!

;;:f%"i

1! as
6! 46 3! 43 1! U Z |! U Z1!

10

-&#39 &#3

lncraggrl Things Alcohol] Alcohol

Victim 2 Data Set

done toincrease aggression; use associated with offense;

Organized more likely Organized havegreater use

54 45 43 4
41 97! 39 ictim lives!

Position] Victim&#39;s body positioned;

Organized lessapt to position body

9! 29 5! 62 5! 56

14

25 1o 19 0
0

2 , 1?; ii . I_ ? y.

CE /Se tember I986 JOURNAL INTERPERSONAL OF pVIOLEN

&#39;IABLh 2 Luntinued

Organi Duurgam ed
Sliiilralli] Safdeatlil

Pr rcentage

!~ii&#39;xuaI dearth .u.tslutI&#39;ur1I&#39;vi1Ii&#39;iii&#39;i: ~ 87! l

at scene!; ! rga iiized mnre &#39; IIRUIY
Si-xual ans after death -viili:ni~r at scene!; Organized less like-ly 3! 9!
54 H

Victim 2 Data Se! cuiilinued! tivity with budy&#39; Pmactl Irganin-d less liltely &#39; IIIserts fureign objects intn _ virtim anus . ,s _ . Pmact7/

Pustmonen ae .23

88!
0 29

I!

52
58

I&#39;mact8I foreign Inserts iiiln objects VICIIITI s vagina IO

do anythingindicating planning
&#39; &#39; " &#39; &#39; or actiun with

VI".lII ZI.IQ IN CRIME

Iin Ilisorganizcd less is It lie y

Vehicle]

.YfIIIl&#39; Simruf Data Si !

a vehicle
62 I!

" &#39; likely to use a ear Organized is more

Vehicle involved in crime;

B5 93!

&#39; d isu iilikely todo the following: Disurganize . .. . . _ .dc Offer victim a nde or give victim 4 rt
Force victim into car Disable victim&#39;s ear

Bump victim : car Run victim ear ; offruad Pretend to have an accident Expose himself fromcar
Assault victim in car

Transport victim from encounter site to crime scene

site or disposal lite Tort] Po mst ortem _ mutilation &#39; &#39; te Organized less likelyto mutt &#39;l a dead victim 27 88! 6

Park ca! and follow victim onfoot

76 2l!

Tortll Facial mutiliation disfigurement! I5

Tort2I Genital mutilation

Tort$/ Breast mutilation I2 &#39;I&#39;ort4I Disembowelment 2

&#39;I&#39;ort5I AmputationI7 Tort9I Vampirism drink blood! 0
Organized less is likely
88!

Keepbody/&#39; keeps Offender corpse; I4 Organized likely less 88! Depersonl Offender tries to depersonalize victim 8 blindfoldirig. eradication of features!:
VICTIM CHARACTERISTICS

Agevicl" Age of the victim;

Victim 2 Data Set _

X=

23

Organized younger has victims 93!

45 as 29 43

4. <
5 1

Rcsslcr l&#39;l nl. /

CRIME S Il&#39;lNli ANALYSIS

s TABLE 2 Continued

_ Percentage
Organized Disorganized

Attract]

Physical attractiveness ofthe victim; = l.6 Organized has more attractive 84!
victims to 4 scale!

2.0 0!

a Ki 3

EVIDENCE AT SCENE Crime SceneData Set

Footpsl Weapon]

Evidence of footprints;

Organized less likely toleave footprints Organized less likely to leave weapon
for evidence

29

Weapon left canbeused asevidence !;

97!
18

1!
51

97!

1!

NOTE: n = numbers in parentheses.

Level ofsigni cance isp = 0.09;notp = 0.05. "Levelofsignificance isp = 0.06; notp = 0.05.

scene butalso have anobjectivity to them.

ProfileCharacteristic Differences Between Organized andDisorganized Murderers

only convenient l! ? &#39;2lUI$ of their visual ? connotations to thecrime

sexual murderers. &#39;l&#39;hc labels organizt~tl" and lisurgar|izt&#39;d" are not

E <

aresummarized below. See Table 3.!

Organizedoffenders are more
O intelligent,

Based onour analysis, there are different characteristics forthe organized and disorganized murderers that may prove useful in developing criminal profiles. The statistically significant variables

distance tocrime scene; and postoffense behavior variables.

crime precrime state!; variables relating to residence, vehicle use, and

variables; variables describing the situation ofthe criminal before the

found. Profile variables can be grouped into four areas: background

as an individual. This contrasts with crime scene characteristics, the tangible clues leftor missing! atthe crime scene where the body is

characteristics, we mean those characteristics that identify the subject

characteristics that could be used ina criminal profile. By profile

After establishing crime scene differences weidentified those

3*

ll s

.2 l 2% .

J I ~ lg 1 ... 3

. 2

0 skilledin occupation,

1 C 1??

5 is
><

70

1 l s n as lr.

- l ldri nm l _

| !lIRN/92l. l&#39;IRi&#39;|".RS !l- lN&#39;l Srpu-lnln-I !N/92l.Vl lllllli !I.I".N Zl*&#39;. /

Ag? &#39;2 :;,;&#39;*&#39;:/. vi 4 &#39;l&#39;l92Bl.l". 3

Organized iisorganized ant Murderers Sexual

BACKGROUND

Profile Chui 92Ci.CflSllCS Differentiating

Organized Disorganized
Percentage

% : ,
Background Data Set
Demographic ___

lntelll lntellige
Lifestyle

ec; intelligent Organized more

X =

5.0 4.2

2! l2!

Occup] Oeeupation; 50 Organized skilled more 4! l0 l! l rsf0u;/ Preferred occupation skilled iswork; 74 38
Organi/.ed is more likely want lo to 9! 8!
do skilled work

l ;|mily $l|un Inn-

is :;;:4~,;/XV.
??c1::, &#39;z::"31 v , &Mw

lhrllumll lli llunnlri; X 2. ! L3 !||.;.||ii/ml .| liiiglin h.|vr lmlh null ! Ill! I2! l&#39;.92lhs|.|/ wmk was iuimlaihlr; I-.|lhr|&#39;~i &#39;7. I2 4.nnslzihlr : U |! !rg.ini"/.rl xlnlvlr mun: IIi!
lluslilel 592llJ_!li92Ll received hostile disciplim: as
hostility

l!is|i|1linc[/92buxr llislory

a child; Disorganized treated with more

l> < 5 . * 3 l

Sex Acts/Preference

Sexpref] Sexual preference heterosexual % 74 100=

heterosexual versus other!; All disorganized were heterosexual 3!

go l ?< 1 2: :5
4 5 <s

Disorganized more inhibited and is likely more be a to compulsive masturbator.

Sexual Concerns

1!

Disorganized more ignorant is of sex andmore has sexual aversions. 12 Scxprob2/ problems; Sexual 62 Disorganized more to likely ishave had 7! 8!
sexual problems

PRECRIMF. STATE leading offense! to

Offense J Data Set

Framelf Angry frame mind; of X

Organized angry more 7!
= not at all! Frame4/ 5Nervous;

= 2.0
__

l to 5 scale: 1 = predominant;

0!

3.3
2,6

Frame6/ Organized less frightened i&#39; = 4.1 3.0 = 4.4 5.0

Frame7/ Organized less confused

Organized nervous less =

= 3,5
3!

20!

ts

9H -. =_==-

R1-.~.92I<~r .|l. <-| / IRIMF.

. ~5 ll-".NE ANALYSIS

tr; 61 92/ @5 &#39;l&#39;Alll.1:l tjontinucd 3 Percentage Organized Disorganized

l* ram<:l&#39;l/ Organized more depressed 1"ramc !/ Organized calmer. murc relaxed if

3.4 4.3 = 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 IData Set Relat/ Offender knows who victim is; % know Organized is less likely to know 93! who victim is Livewithl Offender lives alone; Organized is less likely to live alone 97! Crime SceneData Set [!istvres/ Distance crime sceneto victim&#39;s house; Organized more apt to have scenefarther away from victim&#39;s home than disorganized llisturesl Distance crime sceneto offender&#39;s home; 1!isorgani&#39;/.1-d nearer lives to crime scene than dues 0rg:|ni7.l-H] l!istowrk/ Distance crime scene to offender&#39;s work; Disorganized works nearer to crime scene than dues organized

_.

.:. >/;;: &#3 ;,>5?% 14 47 7! 33 62 1!

5 x. e
5 Z .2 5. 2 2 i =1

Trans] Usual
Vecond/

transportation is by driving;
Organized more apt to drive Condition of the vehicle; Organized more apt to have better conditioned vehicle

70 45
97! 1! 2! 1!

POSTOFFENSE BEHAVIOR Offense IData Set Behav3/ Follows in media; 51 24

g:
follow 97!
8 0

Organized more likely to

in media Behav1l/ Change jobs;

1! 97! 1!
ll 0

is

r 1%

Organized may change jobs,

Behavl 2/ disorganized did not Leave town;

Organized may leave town,

disorganized did not NOTE: n = numbers in parentheses.

97! 1!

72

1 2

= 2-,: =

.oz 1: .. &#39; 3.3:?! 2&#39;

&#39;
. ,.,,,, i 4 I wt 1-v I/4

_!OURNAI. INTERPERSONAI. ll-&#39; VIOLENCE /September I985

I likely to think out and plan the crime,

0 likely to be angry and depressed theat time of the murder,

O likely to have a car in decent condition, 0 likelytn follow crime events in media, and
0 likely to change jobs or leave town.

0 likely to have a precipitating stress financial, marital, female, job!

a. ::<.,= _ ,-32. . 2 -vgg iz i>Z>?%Zn&#39;2:; i2 :;:$z&#39;"

Disorganized offenders are more likely to

0 be low birth order children,

O come froma homewith unstable work for the father, 0 have been treated with hostility asa child,

Ibesexually inhibited and sexually ignorant,to and have sexual aversions,

0 have parents with histories of sexualproblems, 0 have been frightened and confused at the time of the crime,
Iknow who the victim is,
O live alone, and

Ihave committed the crime closer to home/work.

useful a in criminal profile and for which the organized and disorganized sexual murderers and differ thus met the study&#39;s objective. second
VICTIMS OF ORGANIZED AND

The analysisestablished existence the variables of that may be

DISORGANIZED SEXUAL MURDER-HRS

l i

for analyzing the victim-murderer interaction. Rather than using the

traditional view of victimfocused on the concept precipitation of and

The organized/ disorganized dichotomy provided a new context

it E
.,. Z? H e:
E r <

provocation interpreted as criminologists by police fromreports ofa

murder, we examined data ourof murdered victims from the percep-

tions the of offenders who had killed them. Thus our view on is victim

response type byoffender of analyzed through crime scene evidence. Data were obtained for l 18 victims,of whom 9 survived murder attempts. The majority of victims in the sample were white 93%!, female 82%!, and not married 80%!. Ages lfor 13 victims ranged from 6 to73 ages were unavailable for 5 victims!. Of the victims,or 12%, I4, wereyears old I4 or younger; 83, 73%, or were between and l5 years 28 old; and 16, or 14%, were years 30 older. or Thus the majority of
victims 3%! were between ages 15 and 28, which matches the age
range for rape victims in general.

73

Re.~.:,it~| J1. rt /CRIME

*. Ll".N1&#39; /92N/921.Y. $|-S

The majority of victims81% or 89! were strangers the to offender; 19%, or 21, were known tothe murderer. Nearlyhall 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 in15% of the cases, the victim was older than the offender. More thanhalf of the victims came from average or advantaged socioeconomic levels 2%!, 30% had marginal incomes, and 9% had less than marginal incomes In overone-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 thetotal series of interactions between a victim and assailant,

attack. Offenders were asked to report on their victims resistance in scream, flee, or fight. The offender was then asked to report his own
offender interttrtioni

including the dynamic sequencing of victim resistance and offender terms of whether they tried tonegotiate verbally, verbally refuse,
that the data represent only the offender&#39;s perceptions of the viettm~
ln the 83 cases with victim response data, 23 victims 8%! a<:qui escedor offered no resistant e as perceived by the offender.As one

responsethe to victim behavior. s is lt important to keep in mind

She dropped her purse and kindof wobbled a secondand gother balance and said, A11 right; I mnot going to say anything. just don&#39;t
hurt me. " A total of 26 1%! victims triedverbal negotiation; 6 %!

organized murderer said, She was compliant. I showed her the gun

tried torefuse verbally; 8 0%!screamed; %! 4 tried to escape; and

16 9%! tried to fight the offender. Offender reaction to thevictim&#39;s resistance ranged from no reaction

in 31cases 4%! to violence in 24 5%! cases. In 14instances 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 assailantscountered 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

Our analysis of cases, in termsof anorganized/disorganized dichotomy, found that ofthe 83 cases with data on victim response to

aggression.!

74

j !llRN/92l. !l*&#39; / lNTl* Slrptetnb I985 .RPl-ZR. l s !N/92l.Vl !l.l

aissai the lant, organized offender s had 67 victims and disorganized the had Of l6. the l6 vicfms of the disorganized l0 used offenders, nonforceful acquiescence resistancr verbal resistance! or and were killed.the With organized offender, of 67 45 victims used forceful and resistance as well. died Inout total, 55 of out victims 83 nonused
nonforce u
wa

important clarify. identified to We and screaming fleeing as physical forceful! because reactions specifically offenders those cited victim responses the reason for as their use increased of With aggression. a ma&#39;ority the nonforceful! offenders interviewed, of physical both verbal or forceful and resistance a part in played trigg gand
J ertn a

fl resistance data The suggest that nonforceful resistance . s not a deterrent with either of these offender types. The interpretation of what is considered forceful resistanc
&#39; e is

reaction by the offenders.

Pi t?

E.
% 2

if
F F 2.

An almost equal number of victims in our sample said were have to resisted physically 5! as wereto said have made attempt no at resistance Both3!. of types victim actions in resulted death. Theagents FBI interviewed the murderers about deterrence to kill. This information was analyzed in terms of the organized/ disorganized dichotomy. murderers, Organized had a conscious who intent based on motive to kill, saidfactors that as witnesses such and location did not matter because murder the was fantasy well so rehearsed that everything controlled was always "Iinkilled my home, and there were witnesses"!. no as one murderer Orsaid, The victim not did have choice. a was Killing of part my fantasy." the Also, organized murderer thewith detailed fantasy to killeither believed that he wouldbe never caught or that he would have to be killed to be stopped. the On other hand, disorganized offenders, were who not consciously of their intent aware kill, towere able identify to factors that might deterkilling. their stated Theydeterrence such as factors being a populated in location, witnesses having the area, or in cooperationfrom the victim.
Surviving Victims

The surviving victims of murderers in the study provide insights about victim-murderer interactions the context of in the organized and disorganized classification. who Victims survived murder attempts these of used killers following the hiding strategies: the from assailant,out jumping a of car, feigningescaping death, area, the

is

75 y

 ? E; s

Ressleral. et/CRIMESCENE ANALYSIS

each type of murderer.

dynamics well as as the crime scene and profile characteristics for

assistartct-. The following two cases illustrate victim-murderer

knocking weapon the of out the assailant s and hand, screaming for

-= 1

victim reported,

freeway, man the pulled over, saying he thought he had a flattire. He then pulled a gun and said, "Do as I say andwon&#39;t I you." hurt The
my wrist. Whenwent he tie to my hands together, I began to struggle because gun thewas not in his hand. During the struggleman the
I said I would do what he said if he didn&#39;t me. hurt He told me to turn and put my hands behind back, my which Idid, and he proceeded to tie

her his to studio to take photographs. they As were driving along the

model and that she had been told by an agency that a man would take

the gun and ran to the officer screaming, He&#39;s to kill trying me! The assailant was handcuffed. He stated, "I just wanted to scare her. I just wanted to tie her up. I donknow t Iif would have raped her or not, but I might have. Ijust met her tonight. The victim related she that worked part-time a as photographer&#39;s

he had been holding and held up his hands.woman The picked up

lying on the ground, fighting violently with man a on top of her. When police the officer approached the them, man dropped gun the

he then saw two people ain scuffle between car the and the woods. As he turned aroundinvestigate, to headlights his picked up a woman

noticed car&#39;s the light dome was on and the right front door was open;

Victim ofrm organized murderer. Driving home front work at lO:3O at night, :1 ltigltway patrol officer passed a carpulled off the road. He

g 2 =

V .&# tiII?

it

tt

t_-I *4? A T &#39

33
<

V! W a .. m

someone would see me and stop. I got the door open and we fell out on
the ground and we wrestled. Then the officer arrived.

struggling, the and gun was discharged with the bullet going through my skirt and grazing my outer right leg. I decided if I got out of the car,

and beat on the window the of car, but no oneiwould We stop. kept

He pulled the gun and pointed it at me. Igrabbed at thegun, screamed,

my record I would just as soon kill you and go the the gas chamber."

began choking me andsaid,am "I losing my patience with you. With

&#3 Q

not be hurtshe if cooperated, the victim did not believeAlthough him. the victim tried negotiating not to be harmed by the assailant, she

tated approach to the victim and his planned intent to kill. In this case, when the assailant tried to bargain with her by saying would she

This case example underscores the organized murderer s premedi-

]OllRNAl. lNTi&#39;lRf Of" / l".l September S l986 !N1 92L VlOl,F.NCl-&#

3% .9 . 1 ~ 55}: 1:/as:

strategically foropportunity an waited he did not when have the gun heto drop had the to gun her tiegun wrists! and foughtat the point when her wrists were tied. being The a was straightforward death threat, being yet inunobilived inrreasetl woman&#39;s the vulnerability Thus she risked fighting despitegun. thewere The assailant&#39;s preconceived strategies on based his understanding a victim&#39;s of response a violent death to This threat. assailant had three prior victims whom murdered. he first His victim was contacted he answered after an in ad lonely a column; hearts thein second third and he cases posed as aphotographer a model needing and went through agency. an claimed He have to all raped three women then and transported them another to where location he strangled The them. bodies werein left a desert; until man the was apprehended the attempted murder, for bodies the missing. remained The murderer showed of the most characteristics an organized of sexual The killer. murders were carefully planned. killer The used ropes restraints as raped women and the tokilled prior killing them. also He took photographs of his victims he before them; faces their showed fear. great man&#39;s Thewas to used transport car the victims to their deaths. The offender&#39;s IQ was in the superior and range, had he recently hislost and job moved from the Midwest the to West Coast.
He followed newspaper accounts of his crimes.

"

However, this in case, this victim did not respond his as other victims. a victim As shenot didacquiesce to his multipleand threats gun. fought She He him. continued his pursuit of dominance and intent to killhad her. shot l-le did From her. view, his rules thesay suddenly changed. choice. He a He not stop action his and to himself, is This not fitting with in scheme," my leave theand scene. Instead, persisted he in fitting her into his mode of escalation. When apprehended by police, the assailant triedsame the manipulativewith ploy officer. the He claimed hethat did not know if he wouldraped have woman. the police The officer disbelieved this statement he believed i.e., the assailant had intended to kill! and the assailant was taken into custody. Victim statement of disorganized murderer. According to the he and some countthe of surviving victim, a 21-year-old woman, s ac friends returned a girlfriend&#39;s to apartment dining after a restauat Af ntinued conversation television and viewing, everyone left except one the of men. The victim&#39;s girlfriendto retired her room
rant. ter co

i 77

=55==

>1

Ressler et al. /&#39; CRIME SCENI-&#39;. ANAl.YlS

as she had to work the next day; the victim stayed with the man, whom she knew, hoping he would gel thehint and It-ave." While they wen-

watching television, slIt&#39; asleep fell lying on lll&#39;l side on the tom It.

When she awoke, she was "fer-ling funny" and lyingon 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 time, the victim realized her pants were partly down around her

holding her by the wrist. Her friend was screaming. about At this
was covered with blood. Her face and abdomen had been slashed. The

thighs, and as she reached down to pull them up, she discovered she neighborher let 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-

victim ran outside a toneighbor, holding her stomach she as ran. The

tions. The assailant had attempteddisembowel to her. H:-t girlfriend was found lying nude in her bedroom with fatal multiple knife
wounds in the abdomen, throat, and arms. A knife witha ten-inch
the victim.

blade subsequently identifiedthe as murder weapon! was lying near

The disorganized murderer often kills quickly to maintain control. ln this case, control was achieved by the murderer s attack on sleeping The

and stab wounds and the weapon was left at the crime scene.

women. The bodies were depersonalized through extensive cuttings 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 a by letter,
found in the murderer car s 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 befound innocent

CIIYUCS.

of the

In hisevisceration fantasy, the assailant rehearsed disembowelthe ment both by assuming the role of victim and of victimizer. There is similarity inintent atthe crime scene with the presence of two
women. The assailant tries out theevisceration fantasy on thefirst victim and then attacks his fantasy object. We speculate that between the first and second victim he experienced tension relief from trying
target.

when the offender&#39;s did fantasy not match the realityof the situation.

One might speculate the that disorganization of the crime escalated

out ofthe fantasy and he escalates murder the behavior to a second

78

j !URN/92l. INTERIWLRSONAI. OF VIOLENCE /September l986

organized offender highlight their levelsawareness of regarding the tlangerousness lht oflemler. of Both women acted independently in response a situation to they perceived as life threatening, swift and
police and int-dicul intervention combined with their efforts to save
their lives. The killers were remarkable in their intent and assurance

The actounts of surviving victims of an organized anda dis

that they could successfully carry out their crimes. These men, at least

escape capture. The killing was integral an part oftheir fantasy.The

; . $7 2" %

in their own

minds, had already rehearsed how they would kill and

murderers,this in sense, had consciously planned their murdersutilizing a chance encounter.

one, setting about to target a victimfor his plan, and the other

DISCUSSION

,. 2 .
$ la X! s2

This article reports ona newtypology sexually of oriented murderers based on crime scene evidence and victim resistance strategies

and outcome in terms of this new classification. This new typology

framework studying for murderers that is sometimes criticized for its

provides opportunity an expand to and advancepsychosocial the

cultural factors Wolfgang Ferraruti, Sc I963! to include measurable,
behavioral indicators from analysis of crime scene e..g., presence or

unproved theories, obscure interpretive level, and lack attention of to

absence a weapon; of injury to victim!. This law enforcement typol-

%>

ogy based is discrete, on verifiable conceptsbehavior. and does It not rest solely on controversial statements motivation of derived from a complex theory subconscious of motivation. Consequently, the
visual evidence, enhancing investigation the study andof murderers. For example, to hypothesize thata serialmurderer killed a young woman destroy to internal his female identification with his sister is
cumbersome cannot and be substantiated by analysis of crime scene

typology the haspotential for verifiable classification acts of and

ii e: ii
/ v

evidenceother or data available before his capture and evaluation. What clear is is the pattern killing of of young women of a certain age

range a in repeated and particular systematic Analysis style. these of

social nature of the murderer and lead it is hoped! to his capture.

data from the crime scene may be useful in understanding the psychoAdditionally, study we victim response the to 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

ti; .

Resslerrtal. / lRlMF..SCl&#39;lNE ANALYSIS

happenings" preserved life.

llS !fg;.tHlI. tl!,ensued. death When we examined 9 victims who survived, the category offender of was not the predictor, rather, chance
1

REFERENCES

D&#39;Agostin0, B. l97l !. A second R. at look analysis of variance on dichotomous data.

Journal of Ed. Mea.s., 8, 327-333.

Cox, D. R. 970!. Analysis of binary data. London: Methuen.

D&#39;Agostino, B. I972!. Relation R. between the chi squared ANOVA and tests for
tician, pp. 30-32.

testing the equalityk independent of dichotomous populations. American Statis-

D&#39;Agostin0, B. 985!. Statistical R. inference procedures crime scene for patterns and profile characteristics of organized and disorganized offenders. Final In Report to

F i

Lester, I973!. D. Murder: A review. Corrective Social and Psychiatry and journal of
l.unney, H. C. 970!. Using analysis of variance with a dichotomous dependent variable: An empirical study. journal of Ed. Meas., 4, 263-269. Mi-ndelsohn, l963!. B. origin The the of doctrine of victimology. Excerpta Criminologica, 3, 239-244. Ressler, K.,R. etal. 985!. Violent crimes. FBILaw EnforcementBulletin, l-33. 51 8!, S h&#39; le S. I&#39; &#39; &#39; &#39; &#39;
ca r,
New York: Random House.

National Institute of Justice #82 CX-0065!, Washington, DC

Applied Behavior Therapy, 19 !, 40-50.

968!. The victim and his criminal: A study in functional responsibility.

the triminal justice system. Bulletin of theAmerican Academy of Psychiatry and 344-352. vun Heniig, H. 940!. Remarks the on interaction of perpetrator and victim. journal
the Law, 5!,

Simon,I.R. 977!. Type AB, A, murderers: B relationship Their theto victims and to
of Criminal Law and Criminology, 31, 303-309.

von Hentig, H. 948!. The criminal and victim. his Haven, New Yale CT: University Press.
Wolfgang, M. E. 958!. Patterns criminal in horn icide. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania.

Wolfgang, E., M. 8: Ferracuti, l967!. F. The subsculture of violence. Great Britain: Tavistock.

lion, and Program Manager, Violent Criminal Apprehension Program National Centerthe for Analysis of Violent Crime, FBI Academy, Quantico, VA.
Nursing Research, Boston City Hospital, Boston.

Robert Ressler, K. S., M.is Supervisory Special Agent, Federal Bur I eau of r|vestiga-

5.

.3

Health Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Associate and of Director

Ann W. Burgess, R.N., D.N.Sc., is vanAmeringen Professor of Prychiatric Mental

t; t

80

-z in

@s

j !URNAl.. !F lN&#39;l&#39;ERPl&#39;lRS VIOLENCE September / I986 !NAL

john Douglas, E.M .S., is&#39; Supervisory Special Federal Agent, of Bureau Investigation, &#39; &#39; &#39; d C ime Scene Assessment Program,
and Program Manager, Cflmt Projalmg l an r
Carol R. Hartman, R.N., D.N.Sc., I3 ssoc
Hill, MA.

&#39; l&#39; of Violent Crime, FBI Academy, National Center for the Ana ysis

Quanttco, VA.

Graduate in Psychiatric Program MentalNursing, HealthCollege, BostonChestnut

cs Boston University, Boston. Ralph D&#39;Agostino B. is Professor of Mathemati ,

&#39; iate A Prolessor and Coordinator of the

7 W341. :; ,s~Z;%" "2*:=-

N./..,. .* zs::;: :L:?7:l&#39;

i
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 sexualabuse and sexual deviations include zoophilia .06! andsexual sadism .07! with the ultimate expression of the murderer&#39;s perversion being the mutilation of the victim. Murderers with sexual abuse historiesreport 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 comparing across developmental levelsof 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 abusehistory versusnonhistory include running away .01!, sleep problemst .05!, daydreams .05!, rebellious .05!, assaultive to adults .05!, and indicators approaching significance include temper tantrums .09! and self mutilation .09!.

Murderers Who Rape

and Mutilate
ROBERT K. RESSLER FBI Academy ANN W. CAROL R. BURGESS HARTMAN

University of Pennsylvania 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 OFINTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE, Vol. I No. 3, September 1986 273-287 D I986 Sage Publications, Inc.

82

JOURNAL INTERPERSONAL OF /September VIOLENCE 1986

arousal Abel, 1982!, sadistic fantasies Brittain, 1970; MacCulloch,

Snowden, Wood, 8: Mills, 1983!, childhood and sexual abuse Groth,
1979; Seghorn, Boucher, Prentky, 8c press!. in

psychopathic and disorders hospitalized ina psychiatric facility, the crucial link between sadistic fantasy behavior and discussed is MacCulloch al., l983!. etThe authors raise the following question:
If sadistic fantasya has role in the genesis and maintenance of sadistic behavior, factors what some lead individuals to act-out their fantasies?
J ~ <3: 1;; , /72 Aft

In a reporta British of study16 male of patients diagnosed with

Although they state that they believe any answer would include
MacCulloch et al., 1983!.

cz 2 szggg <> , Z;jE; s

if . lii 9 51

multiple factors, the authors speculate factors that observed in their subpopulation 13 sadistic of fantasizers childhood include abuse being tied up and anal assault! and/ or adolescent experiences sexual
and behavior is not a new idea. Freud in 1895 believed that hysterical
The linking of childhood sexual abuse to subsequent problems

4 /T . ~%;;:;. / ,

symptoms of hisfemale patients could be traced an early to traumatic experience that and the traumaalways was related to thepatient s sexual The life. trauma manifested itself when revived later, usually after puberty, as a memory. However, Freud later reversed belief his in 1905 and said that the sexual seductions patients his reported were not all reports of real events, fantasies but created by the individual Masson,This 1984!. reversal created a major shift the in priorities of
psychological investigation. The external, realistic trauma was re-

placed importance in infantile by sexual wishesfantasies. and In the past decade clinicians Herman, 1981! feminists and Rush, 1980! have challenged perspective this are and now proposing that sexual abuse inchildhood may have acommon base ina wide range of social problems. propositions The based areobservations on of the prevalence of earlychild sexual abuse found in populations
of runaways Janus, Scanlon, 8: Price, 1984!, juvenile delinquents Garbarino Plantz, 8: 1984!, prostitutes 8c James Meyerding, 1977; Silbert Pines, 8: 1981!, psychiatric patients Carmen, Rieker, 8c Mills,
Groth, l979; Seghorn al., et in press!.

1984!, substance abusers Densen-Gerber, 1975!, sex and offenders

Although these studies have looked various at populations, none

has examined sexual murderers. Inan attempt to address the question

National Institute of justice #82-CX-0065!. wishWe to acknowledge gratefully
Marieanne Clark L. for contributions earlier to drafts of this article.

83

Ressler et al. /MURDERERS WHO RAPE AND MUTILATE

raised by MacCull0ch colleagues and about acting out sadistic fantasies, this article discusses results an of assessment of the relationkillers.

ship between sexual abuse in childhood or adolescence and sexual

interests, activities, and deviations in convicted sexually oriented

METHOD

Apprehension a crime of suspect is the job of law enforcement. In many crimes, this task is fairly straightforward when a motive assisting local law enforcement agenciestheir in profiling of unthe motive is not readily apparent. FBI agents became involved in solved homicide cases the in early 1970s. These crimes, often referred

robbery, revenge! e.g., been has identified. However, many in crimes

to asmotiveless, were analyzedthe byagents to includesexual a component. agents, The sensitive to crime scene information, began being organized or disorganized. This typology inferred a motivafication for the criminalaction as well

their own efforts at classifying characteristics of themurderer by

virtue ofevidence found at the crime scene. From this evidence they devised a new typology that characterized crime scene patterns as

tional framework that included expectations, planning, and justi-

postcrime behaviors. As a result, particular emphasis was placed on

categories motivational of constructs. The selection of subjects and methodology used to develop the

as hunches regarding

differencesacts in committed against the victim and suggesting sub-

the thinking patterns dominating the murderer&#39;s actions indicating organized/disorganized typology are reported elsewhere Ressler
et al., 1985!. Briefly, FBI special agents collected data in various U.S. sisted of the best available data from two types of sources:official
records and interviews with the offenders.

prisons between 1979 and 1983. The data set for each murderer con-

crime scene observations and evidence asa sexual homicide. These

To qualify for the study, a murder had to be classified through

observations included the following: victimattire or lack of attire;

exposure sexual of parts of the victim&#39;s sexual body; positioning of

victim&#39;s insertion body;foreign of objects into victim&#39;s body cavities;
or evidence of sexual intercourse. Primary analysis was conducted on information about the crime scenes 36 of sexually oriented murderers.

84