2006-11-27 11:14:05 · 12 answers · asked by Ricky 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
You would compare their method of killing with other known serial killers. Serial killers fit a specific criminal profile.....this works the other way too, when polce are trying to discover who a killer is they turn to criminologists to analyse the crimes and draw up a profile of the killer.
2006-11-27 11:27:28 · answer #1 · answered by ilove1984 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that a serial killer is not the one who killed a number of times but the one who plans well for his murder with full details before committing it and then succeeds in implementing it even if he gets caught.
2006-11-27 19:19:35 · answer #2 · answered by Nancy 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They show ritualistic behavior.
The guy wearing a leather mask and symbols carved into his chest, who goes out a kills a hooker is a serial killer. The coked up robber who shoots his victims so they don't struggle when he takes their wallet, is not.
If he's got a collection of ears under his bed (even if there is just one), that's a serial killer. So, is the guy who tapes the murder so he can watch it later and masturbate.
There are certain elements that make a serial killer as opposed to your run of the mill murderer.
2006-11-27 19:18:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If they were caught after their first murder, i would naturally assume that they are in jail and therefore, not a serial killer.
2006-11-27 19:16:54 · answer #4 · answered by Danelle 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suppose it goes by what they say, if they said they have killed before yet have not gave evidence or concealed the full crime then maybe so, if they verbally say they feel like doing it again, the perhaps they have the protential to become a serial killer.
2006-11-27 19:18:16 · answer #5 · answered by lonely as a cloud 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That "someone" is not a serial killer if they have only killed one person. You have to kill more than one person to be a serial killer. Simple as that
2006-11-27 19:42:16 · answer #6 · answered by Lady_Crimsyn1986 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
serial=more then 1.
2006-11-27 19:16:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
then by definition they are not a "serial killer"
2006-11-27 19:15:47 · answer #8 · answered by Tiffany B 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You should have said 'may become' instead of is. Respecting his/her human rights, you let them out on licence and wait.
As for the human rights of the victims - they don't have any as they are not criminals or terrorists
2006-11-28 02:15:06 · answer #9 · answered by mick t 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
BY DEFINATION , LEGAL AND WEBSTERS, THERE NOT. BUT WE PRAISE GODS HOLY NAME THAT THEY WERE CAUGHT.
GOD BLESS
2006-11-27 19:16:38 · answer #10 · answered by thewindowman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋