◆ SpookStack

“Profiling . . . does not provide the identity of the of- fender, but it does indicate the type of person most likely to have committed a crime having certain unique characteristics.” Profilers in “think tank” session. Seated: SAs James Wright, Patricia Kirby, and Ronald Walker. Standing: Lt. Thomas Cronin, Chicago PD, Police Fellow (left) and SA R. Stephen Mar. digian (right) protocol that there was no apparent in- dication that the victim was sexually assaulted. Laboratory reports indicated that the victim had been drinking at the time of the assault, and there was no evidence of semen present in or on the victim or her clothing. From the above information, the criminal profiler advised the detective that he had already interviewed the killer. The surprised detective was presented with the following probable crime scenario. The victim was drinking with the offender prior to her death. An argument ensued, reaching a threshold where the offender could not take it any longer. Angered, he obtained a “weapon of opportunity” from a kitchen cabinet and returned to the living room where he confronted the victim face to face and repeatedly struck victim about her head and face. After killing her, the offender realized that the police would surely im- plicate him as the obvious murderer. He then washed blood from his hands in the kitchen sink and also cleaned blood and fingerprints from the hammer. He roll- ed the victim over in a face-up position and “staged” the crime to appear the way he felt a sexually motivated crime should look. He conducted the staging by making it appear that the offender searched for money or personal proper- ty in the apartment. Upon hearing this analysis of the crime, the detective exclaimed, “You just told me the husband did it.” The detective was coached regard- ing suggested reinterview techniques of the victim’s husband. In addition, the detective was further advised that if the victim's husband were given a polygraph examination, he in all prob- ability would react more strongly to the known fact that he was “soiled” by his wife's blood than to questions concern- ing his wife's murder. The detective was told to have the polygraph examiner direct questions at the husband, acknowledging the fact that he got biood on his hands and washed them off along with the hammer in the kitchen sink. About 5 days later, the detective called the criminal profiler to advise that the victim’s husband was charged with murder. According to the detective, the husband failed the polygraph and subsequently admitted his guilt to the polygraph examiner.