Serial Murder Investigation: Reactive and Proactive Approaches

Characteristics of Serial Killers

A useful starting point for this discussion is to explain the defining features of serial killers. Any individual who kills three or more victims, with emotional time breaks between such killings, is classified as a serial killer. These breaks — commonly referred to as cooling-off periods — normally range from days to weeks or even months between each killing. Serial killers are also typically psychopathic: although they are fully aware of their criminality and are not out of touch with reality, they exhibit a profound personality disorder. Street-wise, charming, intelligent, and charismatic are among the best adjectives for describing serial killers.

Because serial killers are usually mobile, they can travel any distance in search of a particular type of victim. They also generally possess the ability to persuade their victims to accompany them to a location where the killer feels comfortable or safe — commonly known as a comfort zone. Serial killers are thus equally manipulative. The experience of murder is one of great pleasure to the serial killer because they perceive themselves as holding the power of life and death, as well as a controlling power over their victims (Egger, 2001; Geberth, 1990; Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2011).

Due to the exceptional challenges that serial murders present to criminal investigators, the phenomenon has become one of increasing concern in homicide investigation in recent years. In both the criminal justice system and the wider community, serial murder is attracting significant attention. Because the serial killer typically stalks and selects victims at random and is capable of travelling long distances to kill, these offenders are especially frightening to the public (Egger, 2001; Brooks et al., 1987). How the criminal justice system should respond to these killers has been a subject of considerable debate. This paper argues that both reactive and proactive investigative approaches are necessary for investigating serial murder.

Reactive vs. Proactive Approach to Investigation

Reactive and proactive policing are the two major strategies for investigating crime, particularly serial murders. Generally speaking, when police respond to public calls for help, they are applying the reactive approach. This approach has significant merit in that it allows police to operate openly and to respond efficiently to real public demand with the public's consent. Under this model, whenever officers are not answering calls, they are expected to participate in activities that deter wrongdoing — especially patrolling. This is the traditional approach adopted by police in many countries. Furthermore, by drawing on information from members of the public and through public cooperation, police can more readily detect and report crimes. However, this method has its limitations: it can become inefficient in some situations, since it may not be possible for police to encounter criminals in the act — for example, intercepting a burglar on their way home (Wright, 2002).

The proactive approach, on the other hand, involves the targeting and surveillance of suspected criminals in order to build up profiles of potential threats and to piece together evidence of potential criminality. The aim is to identify threats and develop countermeasures for preventing or solving crime through intensive intelligence-gathering. Importantly, such intelligence may or may not come from the general public. Because this form of policing relies heavily on the analysis of crime patterns and information obtained from informants, it requires the use of specialist units such as homicide and drug squads. This approach also has shortcomings: because it is secretive, it requires less public accountability, and there is a greater possibility of selecting targets on the basis of prejudice (Wright, 2002).

It is worth noting that in practice, these two investigative approaches are often applied simultaneously, and some degree of compromise between them is common. On one hand, patrolling and reactive policing appear to be insufficient for handling serious or professional crime — the type of crime that is the proper target of proactive investigation. On the other hand, only through visible patrols and reactive policing can public tranquility and reassurance be maintained, both of which are important goals of every society (Wright, 2002).

Having outlined the concepts of reactive and proactive investigation, a natural question to ask is: which approach is better suited to serial murder investigation — or does effective investigation require both? Before addressing this question directly, it is useful to examine the databases that serve as the primary sources of information for each approach within the United States.

Key Databases for Reactive and Proactive Investigation

The first key database is the National Crime Information Center (NCIC). Popularly called the "lifeline of law enforcement," the NCIC serves as an electronic clearinghouse for crime data — a database accessible to virtually every criminal justice agency in the United States at any time of day or year, particularly during reactive or proactive investigations. Criminal justice professionals regularly use NCIC data to apprehend fugitives, recover stolen property, locate missing persons, and identify serial killers and terrorists. Beyond providing law enforcement officers with information necessary for protecting the public, the NCIC also assists them in performing their official duties more safely (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2010).

A second key database is the Homicide Investigation Tracking System (HITS), a violent crime database program administered by the Office of the Attorney General in Washington State. Using HITS, the state can effectively track homicides and rapes, particularly those involving Washington and Oregon. HITS also receives crime and homicide data from at least three other U.S. states as well as from Canada. Through this database, law enforcement agencies can access information on over 6,000 murders and 7,000 sexual assaults. In some cases, agencies can even receive advice and assistance on ongoing investigations through the HITS system (Office of Attorney General, 2007).

Conclusion

Broadly speaking, U.S. crime statistics show that only a small proportion of all recorded murders are serial murders. However, historical evidence indicates that serial murders within the United States have been increasing. Due to the complex and protracted nature of these cases, the investigation of serial murder is among the most demanding challenges facing the criminal justice system. This means that police investigators must remain flexible in their approach — embracing both reactive and proactive methods — in order to effectively identify, investigate, and apprehend serial killers.

Bibliography

Brooks, P. R., Devine, M. J., Green, T. J., Hart, B. L., & Moor, M. D. (1987). Serial murder: A criminal justice response. Police Chief, 54(6), 40–45.

Egger, S. A. (2001). Killers among us: Examination of serial murder and its investigations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Publishers.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2010). National Crime Information Center. Retrieved May 23, 2011, from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ncic/ncic

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2011). Serial murder. Retrieved May 22, 2011, from http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/previous%20series/proceedings/1-27/~/media/publications/proceedings/17/halloran_et_al.ashx

Geberth, V. (1990). The serial killer and the revelations of Ted Bundy. Law and Order, May 1990, pp. 72–77.

Office of Attorney General. (2007). Homicide Investigation Tracking System. Retrieved May 22, 2011, from

Wright, A. (2002). Policing: An introduction to concepts and practice. Devon, UK: Willan Publishing.