Murders, the Media, and The Long Island Serial Killer

Since late 2010, the New York press has been reporting on an apparent serial murderer they have dubbed “The Long Island Serial Killer.”  It began with the discovery, in December, 2010, of the bodies of four women, all found in burlap bags and about 500 yards apart from one another in the thick brushy area off a Long Island beach.  The women were apparently prostitutes who used Craigslist to find their clients.  Since then, at least four, and possibly six more bodies have been found along the beach, spread out over an area of about 3.5 miles.  As of the writing of this blog, not all of the victims, including the body of a child, have been identified.  The cause of death for several of the victims has been reported as “homicidal asphyxiation” which could be manual strangulation, ligature strangulation, or smothering.

Serial murderers are rare and they always seem to stir intense interest, especially among people who, for some reason or another, seem to get a thrill out of gruesome murder mysteries.  In fact, I have to confess that these cases interest me as well for I have spend a good deal of my life studying murder in its many iterations. Each semester I teach a class called, “The Study of Murder” and each semester, sadly, there are always new cases to study.

In our class discussions on criminal profiling (I do not present myself as a trained criminal profiler, but as someone who is familiar with the process), I always point out to my students the folly of generalizing, of using inductive logic to try to solve any crime or series of crimes.  In most high-profile cases such as the Long Island Serial Killer (LISK), law enforcement officials, of necessity, always hold back as much significant information as they can.  They do not want information published in the media that might (1) aid the serial killer in avoiding detection, or (2) encourage “copycat” killers from using the opportunity to try and disguise their murder as the act of another.  In case after case, such as the Atlanta Child Killer or the Night Stalker, information that was leaked to the press and subsequently published assisted the murderer and potentially delayed his capture.  As a result, homicide detectives tend to keep sensitive information close and usually only release it when they feel it might help their investigative efforts.

Based on limited information…and speculation….and “highly-placed sources close to the investigation”…and, frankly, rumors…members of the print and television news media begin to seek out “experts” to provide their opinions.  These experts are typically retired FBI agents, some profilers, retired homicide detectives, and college professors like myself who have spent years studying homicide in all its many forms.  These experts then provide intriguing soundbites that are used to spice up the retelling and re-retelling of all of the limited information that officials have released.  While I have no quarrel with these experts and their opinions (after all, I have mine as well), the real purpose of this blog is a cautionary one.  Since none of these experts, despite some of their so-called “connections”, have all of the information that would be required for a professional criminal profile, it is important that you know that, for the most part, they are using what a former instructor of mine called the S.W.A.G. method…….the Sophisticated Wild-Assed Guess.  Retired FBI agents and retired homicide detectives present their opinions because active-duty agents and cops will not.  And that, in part, is because these SWAG generalizations can often be wrong.  Dead wrong.

Wally Zeins, a former NYPD homicide detective is quoted as saying, “He could be a copycat of the BTK killer.”  Really?  The BTK (Dennis Rader) killer did not prey on prostitutes.  The BTK killer invaded women’s homes, killed them, and left them all (except one) behind; he didn’t dump their bodies anywhere, much less along a beach.  None of BTK’s victims were found in burlap bags.  Other than that, though, he might be a perfect match.

Another uncredited report surfaced last week that “authorities” are considering that the offender might be a cop, or an ex-cop, because he appears to be familiar with police procedures and leaves no evidence behind.  Really?  BTK wasn’t a cop or ex-cop (though he was a code enforcement officer) but he did have a degree in Criminal Justice from Wichita State.  Ted Bundy wasn’t a cop, but he read everything he could find about serial killers.  Danny Rolling, the Gainesville, Florida, serial killer of the early ’90s was an organized murderer who wasn’t a cop (but his father was). The Hillside Stranglers weren’t cops, but they used phony badges to gain control over their victims by pretending to be cops.  And Gary Ridgeway, the Green River Killer who killed around 50 prostitutes and who was active for many years not only wasn’t a cop, he wasn’t what you call extremely intelligent, either.

In fact, throughout the history of organized, intelligent serial killers very few of them had any connection to law enforcement at all.

And, finally, we come to the actual criminal profile itself.  The basic profile being provided by the experts in this case is a white male, 25-45 years old, intelligent who is socially competent and not a loner.  Really?  This would be the same profile generated by any one of my college students or, quite honestly, by anyone who has been a consistent reader of John Douglas, Robert Ressler, Gregg McCrary, or other former FBI Criminal Profilers who have published their memoirs….and they did not have a 100% success rate when they were profilers.

The SWAG method of criminal profiling has been around for years and is always an interesting conversation starter.  But it is almost never accurate.  Remember the D.C. Snipers back in 2002?  The media brought dozens of high-profile “experts” to their news and talk shows for their opinions.  As I recall, however, not a single one of them said, “You know, it’s probably two black guys in a modified sedan.”  The cops caught Malvo and Muhammed, not based on the televised “expert” profiles, but because of their diligence in following the evidence they discovered and did not share with the media.

Is there one LISK, two, or more?  I don’t know.  Is he white, black, asian, hispanic?  I haven’t a clue.  Do I know what his motivation is?  Nope.  I can only hope that this guy (or these guys) are caught soon.  And when they are, the arrest will most probably have nothing to do with the efforts of the media and their “experts” but they’ll always be out there.

As always, I welcome your feedback.