Making a Killing off a Murderer: An Analysis of the Crime and Documentary - Part Three

While not all criminals are psychopaths and not all psychopaths are criminals, certainly a good portion of criminals have personality disorders and a good portion of psychopaths commit crimes of one sort or another. But, first I want to talk about what crime is.

A crime is something that society has deemed illegal, as something you should not do because it is harmful to others or the community. Drug use is often included as a crime because it is believed to not only harm the individual, but to bring blight and crime to the neighborhood, but let's put drug use aside and talk about other crimes; drug dealing, burglary, robbery, fraud, arson, rape, and murder. These are crimes that when an individual commits such acts he has done so in a premeditated fashion, knew he was going to break the law, knew he was going to cause harm to another person, and, yet, went ahead and committed the act anyway. There are only two reasons for stepping over that line: desperation (benefit triumphs harm) and selfish desire for power and control (what I want is more important than your rights; my ego needs to fed). Desperation might be something like stealing food to feed your child or committing a theft to pay for medicine for your very ill wife. You know it is wrong but you believe committing the crime is the only way to save a life and the harm it does is minimal in comparison. A person who commits this kind of crime may not be a bad guy or have a personality disorder; he just can't think of any other way to deal with a bad situation. Sometimes a drug dealer could fit in this category if he cannot find a way to earn legitimate money and he lives in a houseful of starving siblings. If he shows up on the corner with a lot of bling and is driving a BMW, probably he is not dealing out of desperation.

And most crime is not committed out of desperation. It is committed out of selfishness. I am more important than you and I will get mine. Even shoplifting is an act of selfishness; thrill seeking or a ha-ha to big business or desiring instant gratification rather than working to earn money to then purchase what you want. When shoplifting isn't about stealing food for your family, it is about selfishness. The reason criminals are so often repeat offenders is because they LIKE committing crime. Since the majority aren't committing crimes out of desperation, they are doing it because it make them feel good, it makes them happy. And since they don't care too much that they are harming others, there is no reason for them to stop unless they feel the punishment isn't worth it. If they don't get caught or don't mind the time in jail, they will repeat offend until the punishment is severe enough to keep them off the streets forever or until they get tired of incarceration or until they become physically unable to commit crime.

So by the time you get to repeat offenders - especially violent repeat offenders - you are usually looking at psychopathy or another serious personality disorder. Serial rapists and serial killers are always psychopaths...you just can't commit that kind of heinous premeditated crime without being a psychopath.

Steven Avery, as I pointed out in the previous post, has all the traits of a psychopath. He has all the traits of a serial killer. His claims about desiring a quiet life with a good woman is a lie; he would find that boring; he needs to have a much higher level of power and control and excitement. The police were well aware of his criminal capabilities which is why he was on their radar. When the sexual assault was committed on the beach and the woman gave a description that matched Avery, it is no surprise they thought it was him.

The mistake the police made was immediately thinking it must be that guy: there is often not a shortage of violent sexual offenders in the radius of any town or city. Attacking a female jogger is a very common crime for a rapist or serial killer. In fact, the majority of serial sexual crimes involving strangers are just this sort; few actually involve kidnapping and imprisonment and torture. Hollywood tends to make people think all serial killers are deranged geniuses who plot intricate crimes but this is simply not true. Most serial killers just see an opportunity (read: woman walking or jogging alone) and jump out and brutalize her. Consequently, there isn't much that looks different from one of these crimes to the next. There is no "signature," some calling card that would point to a specific guy. Pretty much any violent sexual offender could have done the crime, so you need physical, circumstantial, or witness evidence to link him to the crime. Unfortunately, the police just went with a witness ID from the victim and used this to put Avery away. It was unfortunate for Avery that he looked enough like the guy who really did the crime to be misidentified. Since there was DNA left in the crime, if it happened today, Avery would not have been charged, but at that time, DNA was not so advanced. However, even today, the right guy might not have been charged either because the police might have no clue who he is; they might just have to put his DNA into the CODIS system and hope he was previously a felon and get a lucky hit.

Now, to the Halbach crime. I am not going to detail all of what makes Avery guilty. If you want to examine each issue in depth, here is a fabulous analysis of each and every segment of "Making a Murderer" by a non-profiler - broadcaster Dan O' Donnell.

http://www.newstalk1130.com/onair/common-sense-central-37717/rebutting-a-murderer-14280387/

What I want to do here is just point out the basic profiling and crime analysis issues relating to the Halbach crime.

1) Where victim's body is found

The body was found on Avery's property. This is why the police went to Avery and talked to him. He wasn't targeted. You have the corpse of a murdered individual on your property; you are going to become a person of interest.

2) Where the victims' vehicle is found.

That was on Avery's property as well. Again, police are not targeting Avery. They are doing their job which is to investigate where the vehicle was found and who could have put the vehicle at that location. Since it was hidden on Avery's property, he is going to become a person of interest.

3) The last place the victim was seen

That was on Avery's property. Anyone who lives on the Avery property is going to become a person of interest; this includes Steven Avery

4) The last person to have contact with the victim

That would be Steven Avery. The police are obviously going to investigate the last person who was in contact with the victim or was with the victim.

5) Where physical evidence of the crime exists

That would be in the Avery fire pit, in the Avery burn barrel, in Steven Avery's house, and in the victim's car on Avery's property. All the physical evidence implicates Steven Avery (his DNA in the car), the victim's body parts, DNA, and personal items in the firepit and barrel, and the key and his DNA in his house.

6) Witnesses

The only people that claim to have seen Teresa Halbach right before or after her disappearance are Bobby and Brendan Dassey. Bobby Dassey states he say Halbach photographing a car and then heading toward Steven Avery's house. Brendan Dassey states he saw Halbach tied up in Steven Avery's house, saw Steven Avery kill her and saw Steven Avery burn her. There are no witnesses saying they saw Teresa Halbach anywhere else or with anyone else.

So, it comes down to this. Overwhelming evidence that Steven Avery is guilty of the murder of Teresa Halbach. Unless he was framed.

Framing Steven Avery would require:

Someone knowing or getting lucky that Halbach was coming out to Avery property that day.
Someone getting lucky that there are two witnesses to say she was with or near Steven Avery that day
Someone getting lucky that a witness can describe the crime in detail so that most of it matches the evidence
Someone has to kill Halbach for some reason and burn her body on the property right under the nose of Steven Avery (or bring her burned body parts (this did not happen) to the property and mix them in with the stuff Steven Avery had already burned.
Someone had to hide the victim's car on the Avery property
Someone had to hide the victim's car key in Steven Avery's house
Someone had to plant Steven Avery's DNA in the victim's car and on the key

So either law enforcement found out Halbach was going out to Steven Avery's house and just as she was leaving, they kidnapped her, killed her, burned her up, and spread all the evidence and DNA around Avery's property and house OR someone else saw the opportunity to kill Halbach, killed her, burned her up somewhere and spread her cremains and personal items around the Avery property and then law enforcement saw a great opportunity and jumped on board by planting Avery's DNA and the key.

Or maybe Steven Avery is just guilty as hell and all the evidence proves it.


Part Two 

Part One


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

January 21, 2016

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: How Behavioral Profiling is Done

One aim of criminal profiling is to identify the kind of person who would have committed a crime in order to narrow the investigation focus and the pool of suspects. The behaviors exhibited by the perpetrator at a crime scene are but examples of behaviors the perpetrator will exhibit in the other areas of his life. In other words, we are all creatures of habit and comfort and we cannot radically change our thinking and actions just because we are now involved in an illegal activity.

The murder of UNC student president, Eve Carson, is a very good example of this truism. I was asked to profile the suspect recenty on a CNN Headline News and I said this offender would undoubtedly already be in the criminal justice system with a long record of crimes and likely include a number of crimes committed as a juvenile. I further said he would have committed a variety of crap crimes (as I call them) including such things as burglaries, robberies, and drug offenses. In other words, he is a lowlife and a hood, with impulsive, stupid, and violent behavior, and the police and the courts would be very familiar with him.

How can one determine this? Let's look at the behavior this offender used in the killing of Eve Carson. First of all, he is roaming around in the middle of the night which means to me he doesn't have much useful going on in his life. Secondly, he appears to have no car of his own because after he finished committing his crimes that night he pretty much drove back to where he started....he didn't feel like walking home. He no doubt is a menace to his own neighborhood or any neighborhood on a bus or metro line.

He killed Eve Carson over a few hundred bucks. He needed or wanted the money and apparently couldn't wait to get it. This shows impulsiveness and desperation which means he probably isn't working nor is he willing to think through a plan that could bring him cash without violence. This makes him a thug of the lowest degree.

Next, he drives to the ATM and sits with his face in full view of the camera with that extremely identifiable ballcap sitting on top of his head. This means he is stupid and arrogant and uncaring about his own freedom. He doesn't think or worry about tomorrow and the inside of a jail cell is not a foreign or frightening idea to him (probably he will just feel at home when he gets there). This behavior shows he has graced the inside of an institution or two in his short lifetime and his carelessness indicates his crimes will be of the down and dirty type, those not requiring anything more than audacity.

When 17-year-old Laurence Alvin Lovette Jr. was arrested this week for Carson's murder, sure enough he had a criminal past including larceny, breaking and entering, car theft. He is also suspected of a homicide during a robbery. He was on probation at the time of Carson's death. His accomplice, 21-year-old Demario James Atwater, was also on probation at the time of his arrest and his criminal career included convictions for drug possession, breaking and entering, larceny, and felony possession of a firearm. Considering these two had these extensive records at their young ages, their juvenile records no doubt are lengthy as well.

Crime is a part of the normal rhythym of a criminal's life, not an aberration within it. Even so-called crimes of passion or one-off crimes committed by people with no criminal record are reflections of the perpetrator's mindset. This is why it is so important to not simply guess the offender's background and lifestyle by assigning him to some statisitical group but to really look at what he is doing when he is committing his crime. This is behavioral profiling and a study of behavior can be illuminating and useful within the context of a police investigation.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: "Call the Cops! There is a Woman in Psychological Trouble in Aisle Three!"

I was introduced to a new concept while doing Nancy Grace last night (hmm....that doesn't sound quite right, now does it?). One of the other guests aired the view that a woman who was caught shoplifting (at 38 years old and her tenth arrest) doesn't need jail time but counseling. Clearly, this expert declared she has psychological problems and we shouldn't be taking up space in the prisons with this woman when there are pedophiles who need to be kept inside. Interesting argument....

I am trying to wrap my head around this thinking. We have laws on the record and police to catch persons who break these laws, but this is really only a psychological screening process set up to identify citizens in need of mental health counseling? Considering the woman's lawyer actually said she had already been in counseling and was already on probation for another crime, at what point do we decide that the woman is actually a criminal as opposed simply an emotionally disturbed individual?

At what point do we decide breaking the law is actually deserving of punishment and removal from society as opposed to a free offer of psychological services? Couldn't a pedophile be just as emotionally disturbed as a shoplifter? What about a murderer? Isn't he so emotionally distraught that he can't help himself from striking out?

I have no problem with criminals receiving mental health care. I just think they ought to do their time as well. After all, what is the point of even having laws if breaking them is only considered a cry for help? If this is what the law is all about, I think we should take all laws off the books and set up a system of emotional guards instead of security guards. The next time this woman tries to walk out of a store with hundreds of dollars of stolen goods, one of these guards can get out his megaphone and shout, "Lady in need of counseling! Lady in need of counseling!" Maybe she will get the message and stop by customer service and pick up her free counseling coupon to be redeemed at any counseling counter at her local Walmart store.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Update on Alien Apples and Offending Oranges

Rodolfo Godinez has just been arrested in connection with the Newark homicides. He is a legal U.S. resident and there goes the immigration argument in this criminal issue. Again, the problem isn't about the legality of the residency status but the fact that we let violent criminals back on the streets even when we know for sure they are dangerous to the community. Godinez got bail for stabbing two men in a robbery. Then he vanished.

Bail should be for nonviolent offenders. Yes, they have committed a crime and they should be prosecuted for it. But, you are more of an annoyance than a physical danger to the community. However, if you are the kind of guy who has no problem choking, stabbing, or shooting people, I really don't want you walking around on the streets while we decide what to do with you. Let's make sure the public is as safe as possible and then make sure we apply proper justice.

Having said all of this, it is important to look at the some of the kind of folks that sneak into the country. They are clearly not doing all that well in their own. Sometimes it is because economic opportunity is near nonexistent; sometimes it is because they are not the kind of people folks want to hire. In other words, they may be losers and they may be dangerous losers. The governments of their countries will be more than happy to get rid of them.

Many illegal immigrants are nice people trying to survive. But, some are scum who we should be keeping out of the country if we can. We have the right to refuse such folks entry and to track them down if they make their way in. However, moving from a general argument to this one incident is not useful as we can now see that one of the alleged killers is an actual legal resident. Let's focus on the most important aspect of this heinous crime: let's stop bail for violent offenders.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Shirking Responsibility for Criminal Behavior

In Virginia, another drunk teenage driver has killed herself and her three friends who were riding in the car with her. One of the fathers of the passengers made this statement: "A drunk driver killed my kid." I beg to differ, sir: a drunk driver and her drunk enabling passengers colluded to kill themselves. You can't blame the driver without blaming the passengers. There was an open gallon of vodka in the car, half of it gone, when the car crashed. This isn't like a drunk pilot killing his unsuspecting passengers. Every one of those kids knew the driver was drinking and likely passed the bottle to her while she was behind the wheel. In doing so, everyone shares the blame for the car crashing and the resulting deaths.

A while back, a Minnesota girl survived such a crash that killed her friends. Because she was the driver, she ended up getting charged. She admitted she was wrong but she stated that all of her friends knew darned well what they were getting into when they got into the vehicle with her and passed the bottle around. She got a lot of angry feedback from that statement; folks thought she was blaming the victims of her mistake. But, I agree with the girl. She was wrong but her friends were just as wrong.

In another horrifying Virginia story, a man left a cache of weapons around his mentally deranged son, took him to practice shooting at the gun range and gave him drugs. The son ended up taking his daddy's guns and murdering two police officers. The father ended up getting a few years for aiding and abetting, a sentence I thought was far too low, although I was happy to see him get nailed for something (unlike most of the parents of school shooters who get off scott free after their children take their father's or grandfather's guns and mow down their classmates).

Nancy Grace got sued by the family of Melinda Duckett for grilling her over the disappearance of her son. After Melinda made herself look really guilty with her poor answers, she went home and blew herself away with Granddaddy's shotgun. Her grandfather, however, instead of blaming himself for leaving his weapon around for his mentally unstable granddaughter to do herself in with, attacks Nancy for making his squirrelly grand kid feel bad about herself.

And let's not forget Madeleine. Her parents left her and their two little babies alone in a strange hotel room while they went off drinking. Now, they have collected two million dollars from caring people to find her. While I understand they are hurting, many parents have had their kids kidnapped through no fault of their own. Madeleine's parents should have been charged with child neglect.

What do all these cases have in common? Folks taking no responsibility for their behavior and blaming someone else for the results of it.

I would like to see people speak out and say, well, you brought it on yourselves and you need to either live with that fact or go to jail for your involvement with the crime. Let's stop making excuses for these individuals and expect and demand that they accept responsibility for their actions.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Defective Adults need to Grow Up

There is a new game coming in September to Toronto: Street Wars. This is a video game gone real time involving idiots posing as adults stalking each other on the streets until they can commit an assassination by water gun. Now, I will have to admit I can see the fun in it. Essentially, what these folks are doing is called "tailing" in the, private investigation industry. They are tracking down information on where the mark lives, works and hangs out, and then the mark is tailed until he can be "killed." The big difference is private detectives have a license for this because without one, it is rather concerning when one person stalks another.

The claim by the creator of this stupidity is that it is all in fun and no one is getting hurt. I beg to differ. While each contestant pays forty dollars to get in the game and knows he is the assassin or the target, the game is not being played on private grounds where no one else is being affected. This is not paintball at the paintball range or laser tag inside a laser tag facility. This game is being played out among other human beings who have no clue to what is going on.

If I see one of these fools skulking around acting suspicious, I am going to call the police. And, if one of these morons pulls out a water gun in a crowded location and aims it at me or someone near me, God help him, if it looks to real; he may get shot. These players by acting like criminals are going to cause fear in other people's lives and that will make their behavior no longer just pretend. They are crossing the line into true criminal behavior. In return, they may get treated like criminals.

I agree with the game creator that this game could be amusing, but so what? Lots of illegal things are fun and I don't do them. There are some things that are not illegal but morally or ethically questionable and I don't do these things either. As an adult member of society, I am supposed to be mature enough to figure this out. Apparently the game creator and his players aren't. Grow up, for God's sake....please.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown