jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 25, 2012 22:29:39 GMT -5
OK SOJ - lets take it to step two, you work the crime clues to about a two square mile area of a major city and then what do you do? Arrest a hundred thousand people? Set up road blocks? Check for baddies - Hauptmann was clean. Just start shooting everybody out after dark hoping you'll get the right guys? This is a legitimate question. Lt Finn, a police officer worked the crime right down to handing out posters himself at gas stations and apprehended Hauptmann. Police work, although he was very interested in Shoenfeld. He pinpointed BRH by patterns of passing bad money, and by the way that changed drastically through it's duration - non-being of Fisch?
|
|
|
Post by sonofjack on Jul 25, 2012 22:59:07 GMT -5
I agree with you Michael, but just don't think it's anything new. I worked for a construction magazine and there was rule at the time that contractors usually bought things within 90 miles of their home base. Smaller things to buy were closer so they wouldn't go across state to get a hammer, but might to get a backhoe - but only so far. Same is true of everybody, basically we're lazy, even murderers. BTK is a good example. He picked out people he saw while driving around but he stayed within his area when picking them out. Of course Hauptmann/Lindbergh would be way out of BRH's general area, but it's an exclusive crime, and as SOJ says the other events were well within his confines. It just seems to me like nothing new, but something to talk about I guess. So far I have heard two arguments from you: 1) Geo is not needed by LE because they have successfully solved crimes without it; and 2) analyzing behavioral patterns is nothing new. I think we can all agree that Geo is not absolutely necessary just like DNA is not absolutely necessary to solve all crimes. Nonetheless, DNA analysis can help solve certain crimes. Also, behavioral psychology has been around for a long time. Thus, I think we can all agree that what you have said is true, and you have succeeded in stating the obvious. However, I don’t see how your points have any relevance to the real issue: whether my Geo methods can add some value as a tool to helping us better understand the Lindbergh case. We are getting sidetracked here a bit. Where are you going with all this?
|
|
|
Post by sonofjack on Jul 25, 2012 23:13:42 GMT -5
OK SOJ - lets take it to step two, you work the crime clues to about a two square mile area of a major city and then what do you do? Arrest a hundred thousand people? Set up road blocks? Check for baddies - Hauptmann was clean. Just start shooting everybody out after dark hoping you'll get the right guys? This is a legitimate question. Lt Finn, a police officer worked the crime right down to handing out posters himself at gas stations and apprehended Hauptmann. Police work, although he was very interested in Shoenfeld. He pinpointed BRH by patterns of passing bad money, and by the way that changed drastically through it's duration - non-being of Fisch? Jack, Geo gives us a close proximation for where the perp lives and allows LE to focus on a particular area. This can produce an indefinite number of advantages that LE would not have without it. But how is this relevant to the real issue? Here, you are questioning the validity of Geo as a tool for LE, but the real issue is whether my Geo methods can help us gain a better understanding of THIS CASE. If you think it cannot, simply state so and why, and we can all move on without wasting a lot of time.
|
|
|
Post by sonofjack on Jul 26, 2012 0:09:48 GMT -5
SOJ, Thank you very much for the added details about the "Southside Strangler". It was quite interesting to me. That his crime circuit was on foot is remarkable. Years ago I lived in Richmond, VA and the place-names you mentioned were familiar to me. I appreciate the time you spent in describing it. You are very welcome.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 26, 2012 9:24:13 GMT -5
I'm not saying that it's not a beneficial tool; simply that it's always been done, just now you're giving it a name. Instead of canvassing the area around a crime scene now we'll geo it. I drive a Geo Tracker by the way - does that make me any kind of an expert on anything?
|
|
|
Post by sonofjack on Jul 26, 2012 10:41:54 GMT -5
I'm not saying that it's not a beneficial tool; simply that it's always been done, just now you're giving it a name. Instead of canvassing the area around a crime scene now we'll geo it. I drive a Geo Tracker by the way - does that make me any kind of an expert on anything? This is America. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but canvassing a crime scene is not the same as Geo. Completely different animals.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 26, 2012 11:03:47 GMT -5
Detectives work out, SOJ. They look at the close relatives, then the unclose relatives and at the same time SHOULD look at the hood. Then because they are usually overworked it drops off. The 72 Hr. BS you see on TV is in reality because police in major cities don't have enough time (with twenty murders on their desks) to adequately investigate every crime. Some high profile ones (OJ, Lindbergh) get more attention but unfortunately for police they get looked at and wondered about for years and there is "why didn't you do this or that...?" and it's just really impossible for them to go through an investigation the size of CAL or OJ for every crime. BTK is a very excellent example. He was the President of his church! He did tons of beneficial things for his community. If the police ever even looked at him he'd be quickly off the table. So if you're a detective looking at BTK you're at ground zero on day one and five years later you're still at ground zero. And you have plenty of other things to do - you gonna still keep chasing BTK? Same with TLC - it was off the table. Luckily Lt. Finn kept after the bills and the police solved at least part of the crime. But that was high profile - if it would have been the death of Amy Winslow from Boise Idaho no one would have cared after a few days.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jul 26, 2012 11:09:56 GMT -5
SOJ, has your GEO ever indicated that a crime attributed to a serial criminal was probably not his doing? It's the reason I asked about the Boston Strangler which may actually be the case of multiple criminals. Also, what does your program indicate regarding the Majestic Apartments?
|
|
|
Post by sonofjack on Jul 26, 2012 15:21:57 GMT -5
Detectives work out, SOJ. They look at the close relatives, then the unclose relatives and at the same time SHOULD look at the hood. Then because they are usually overworked it drops off. The 72 Hr. BS you see on TV is in reality because police in major cities don't have enough time (with twenty murders on their desks) to adequately investigate every crime. Some high profile ones (OJ, Lindbergh) get more attention but unfortunately for police they get looked at and wondered about for years and there is "why didn't you do this or that...?" and it's just really impossible for them to go through an investigation the size of CAL or OJ for every crime. BTK is a very excellent example. He was the President of his church! He did tons of beneficial things for his community. If the police ever even looked at him he'd be quickly off the table. So if you're a detective looking at BTK you're at ground zero on day one and five years later you're still at ground zero. And you have plenty of other things to do - you gonna still keep chasing BTK? Same with TLC - it was off the table. Luckily Lt. Finn kept after the bills and the police solved at least part of the crime. But that was high profile - if it would have been the death of Amy Winslow from Boise Idaho no one would have cared after a few days. I have some knowledge with canvassing a crime scene because I have taken some courses in crime scene investigation techniques, and of course, canvassing is part of that. So I know some of the basic LE procedures. Fascinating stuff. I think the problem that you raise here is a valid one. How much actual LE experience do you have?
|
|
|
Post by sonofjack on Jul 26, 2012 15:35:30 GMT -5
SOJ, has your GEO ever indicated that a crime attributed to a serial criminal was probably not his doing? It's the reason I asked about the Boston Strangler which may actually be the case of multiple criminals. Also, what does your program indicate regarding the Majestic Apartments? It has been several years since I looked at that case. Let me take another look. My parents are in town with my little nephews, so we took them camping and to the beach yesterday. I do have some rules that deal exactly with the issue you have raised. Sometimes, another killer is working in same area, and things get confusing. Has happened a lot in Los Angeles and NYC. The bodies dumped at Gilgo Beach on Long Island is an example. There are also copy cat killers too as you know. As for the Majestic, I used to live at 96th and Columbus and passed that apartment each day because we had to move our car for the street sweepers. What a pain that was. Parking is a premium in the city. However, Rule #1 says that we only plot an event that the perp was responsible for. Thus, I have not looked too closely at the Majestic because I was note sure that a real event too place there. I'll have to think about that.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jul 26, 2012 15:57:35 GMT -5
Thanks SOJ Enjoy the beach!
|
|
|
Post by sonofjack on Jul 26, 2012 18:00:08 GMT -5
My Memory is coming back to me now regarding the Boston Strangler case. I remember having trouble with Rule #5. Regression showed a poor correlation among all the murder sites. I tried to find the "best fit" axis, but had lots of problems. This usually means that either one killer is killing at random, or the murders are the work of multiple people who are not working together. To be continued...
|
|