(College/Institute)
Crime scenes are studied and analyzed as if it were telling a story. In order to be able to ensure a “good ending,” that is the arrest, prosecution, and if warranted, conviction and imprisonment of the perpetrator, certain factors must be analyzed to help in the identification of the suspect. Behavioral patterns such as writing patterns, verbal and non-verbal movements, and speech instances all predict the ways that a person will act in certain situations. This distinct behavioral pattern must be consistent and is independent of the variable of the impact of the activity being done (Douglas, Munn, 1998, p. 1). There are several elements to help in determining the crime committed. Among the common elements that are analyzed is the social status of the victim, gender, how the victim was treated and controlled, whether there actions done after the death of the victim, and the circumstances attendant as to how the crime was done.
Aside from these components, there is also what is called as the “signature,” or the “presentation,” of the crime. This can be defined as the approach taken by the perpetrator in committing the crime; this also shows the level of preparation, or lack of the same, of the offender when the crime was committed. These can also be interpreted as a personal seal of the suspect, a type of “stamp” left by the offender to reveal illusory situations that are embedded in the mind of the perpetrator (Ramsland, 2013). This aspect is one of the components of “measurable and identifiable behavioral analysis,” the other being “modus operandi.” The latter can be defined as steps and quirks that are executed with three primary objectives to be accomplished.
One is the completion of the crime, to affect the escape of the suspect from the crime scene, and to evade arrest. Serial criminals change and refine their MOs as these become more adept in their actions. The signature and the MO are often interchanged in that certain actions can be regarded as the MO as well as the signature of the perpetrator. The critical factor in this instance is the consideration of the collective set of facts attendant to the crime. One example is when sexual attackers conceal their identities; this can be regarded as the signature in that the wearing of the mask during the attack heightens the pleasure derived by the attacker and the MO to hide the identity of the attacker (Razzaq, 2008).
Serial Rape
The first case discusses the modus operandi and the signature of the perpetrator. The modus operandi involves the sexual assault of the victims. The perpetrator targets the women who are entering their vehicles and then forces them to hand control of their vehicles to their attackers. After forcing himself on his victims, the victims are driven back to the place where these were taken. The MO involves taking the women by force, driving them to a secluded area and then assaults them there. The signature is that the victim collects trophies from the victims and that the women are not killed.
The preparation in the planning and strategy of the rapist is far from the simplistic actions taken in the second case of the arsonist. Here, the MO is primarily to clandestinely destroy the homes being built by the developer, Mr. Durham. Also, this is an instance, as mentioned earlier, that the MOs and the signature of the perpetrator can be interchanged in their application. The MO of the perpetrator is to set fire to the targeted buildings and developments; the signature is that the targets are burned and destroyed by the application of accelerants to the targets, igniting the same, and then allowing the fire to destroy the buildings.
The last scenario seems to be misplaced in the set. The victim, Mr. Ayers, is in fit shape, one who religiously stays in shape, save for the fact that the Ayers has contracted cancer. Given that the police investigation has turned up a large insurance policy in the name of the victim, the only person that could have benefited from the policy, has a solid alibi for the case. In this case, it can be said that the victim was a suicide, and could have contemplated the act rather than experience excruciating pain as a result of the condition. Hence, there is no discussion of MO or signature that is warranted.
References
Douglas, J.E., Munn, V (1998) “Violent crime scene analysis: modus operandi, signature, and staging” Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume 61 number 2
Ramsland, K (2013) “Serial killers signatures” Retrieved from <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/shadow-boxing/201312/serial-killer-signatures
Razzaq, N (2008) “Modus operandi v offender signature” Retrieved from <http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/16342-modus-operandi-vs-offender-signature
