thoughts on the recent shootings

[plural]

I just read the CNN report on this
and I have a couple of problems/questions

Generally people who commit crimes
either care or do not care about getting caught

Those who do not care about getting caught
are generally caught pretty quickly because they fail to plan or respond

Those who do care about getting caught are separated into two groups
the idiots and the rest
the idiots also get caught quickly because they cant cover their tracks
the rest take longer to get caught or never do because they are smart enough to hide the trails
[there are far more of the former than the latter]

Generally people who kill multiple people without a personal reason
can be divided similarly

those who just want to kill as many as they can
and are generally suicidal
these are the school and workplace shooting types
they go in blazing and keep shooting til it is over

and those who had some other need
which killing satisfies
i.e. serial killers

Since these people take a planned shot
and move on, we can assume they are not the former
but the latter
otherwise they would have just kept on blazing
until they were caught or killed

these people have some desire to continue life
and not get caught

my first problem comes with the time line

to go through the time line

#1 10/02 6:05pm
forward 816 minutes
#2 10/03 7:41am
forward 31 minutes
#3 10/03 8:12am
forward 25 minutes
#4 10/03 8:37am
forward 81 minutes
#5 10/03 9:58am
forward 682 minutes
#6 10/03 9:20pm
forward 1030 minutes
#7 10/04 2:30pm

then we have almost two days
between the next attacks
which either suggests that the killers
took the weekend off
or that we have not discovered other victims

now if we look at the timeline
we have an immediate problem with our definition
you have large gaps of time between some shootings
which suggest the later typing
[i.e. serial killer typing]
and then rapid bursts of shootings
which suggest more of former typing
[i.e. the postman complex]

To commit three shootings close in time and space to each other
[Patrick can you let me know approximate travel times between sites]
within 56 minutes timeframe shows recklessness and lack of planning
that there are shootings spaced at twelve or more hours
shows caution, planning and patience

such things are generally mutually exclusive
personality traits when it comes to psychotic behavior

so either they are incredibly smart
and varying their M.O. to fuck with the cops
or these killings are being done by different people

next
the question of the white van

from what I have heard on the radio
the police suspect the shooter has military training
he is using a .223 caliber rifle
which suggests an AR-15 or M-16
which would provide a little support to the military training argument
but from what I understand
the angle and distance involved in some of the shots
shows a proficiency with the weapon

so if we assume the proficiency was gained in the military
we can take a set of premises from this

a person with military training
even if they did not receive sharpshooter distinction
should be able to hit a target using only the sights on the weapon
at a hundred yards
call this basic competency

a person with the same basic competency
and a scope mounted on the weapon
should be able to hit a target a couple hundred yards away

a person with a proficiency, i.e. more than basic competency
can increase these distances profoundly

there is a reason for this training and equipment
distance is your friend
the farther away you can be from your target
when you kill them the safer you are

so if we assume the police are correct
and this person knows how to use this weapon
then he would take advantage of the properties of the weapon
i.e. range

since he is selecting individual targets
there is no reason for him to decrease the range
and many reasons for him to maximize the range

especially if the targets are indeed completely random
which I do not buy
I am not saying the targets are connected
just that the killers have a criteria by which they select their targets
if there is a criteria, then it is not completely random
[although they may not care specifically about an individual target]
[instead it may just be a set of conditions which the target unknowingly fulfilled]

If we assume that they pick an area, determines a good firing location
shoots the next person who enters the kill zone and leaves
then they would maximize the range
as it decreases the chance of a witness identifying them
and/or linking them with the shooting

so what's my point
well if you have a weapon with considerable range and the skill to use that range at least to some degree
you would pick firing locations that would be out of the immediate vicinity of the target zone

which was done in several of the shootings
but the post office shooting
was either done from a van in the parking lot
i.e. minimal range
which again is a break in the M.O.
or
the white van has nothing to do with the shooters
my guess is the latter

If I were to carry out a plan of this sort
I would evenly space out the acquisition of targets
taking time to locate, scout and observe firing locations before each shot
maximize the range in each situation
and finally arrive and leave in a casual manner
as to not attract attention

I would abort at the slightest sign of complications
and set up at another location

what is the answer here?
I do not know

but some things do not add up

granted it is easier to poke holes in theories
than create airtight ones of my own
but
I think these particular questions
are big enough to warrant raising them

I would love to hear any thoughts or problems
with the deductions and ideas I postulate here

yet another nickel

Comments

Plural, Consulting Detective

[bookfoole.livejournal.com]

I ended up here through your comment in

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<lj="budhaboy">') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

I ended up here through your comment in <lj="budhaboy">'s journal. I'm adding you to my list --because I like thoughtful and interesting comments. This entry reminded me of a Sherlock Holmes story. I have to admit I was a bit disappointed that you didn't name killer(s) at the end of it.

Kidding aside, those are interesting observations. I hope the police have though this through as much as you have --though, I don't think they can ignore the van. They have to cover themselves just in case.

Catching someone like this would rely mainly on chance --though releasing your profile (or a similar one), might get people noticing vehicles that aren't normally around. I don't think they have the man power to go around staking out likely firing locations.

[plural.livejournal.com]

I agree that they should not ignore a potential lead, I just think it is unlikely to be the suspects
and
Actually I am having a difficult time accepting that this is indeed one person

If I was to pull a completely
unsubstantiated wild guess out of my ass

it feels like this is some sort of game
with two teams competing to score points
[i.e. kills]

Couldn't be Geeks

[iamjosh.livejournal.com]

I don't know that many geeks, that are that cold blooded, and want to take their little online game to the real world, what would be the sport of it. Then again, its the same idea, no real personal danger, multiple weapons, multiple targets, Highly removed really.. i guess its a possiblity, but that would be some intense setup, you'd really need to trust the other "players" you'd all need to take the same precautions, to avoid being called a "Copy Cat". And what determines the end of the game? Getting caught? do you then confess? tell them your team lost? or is it only celbrated by the winning team?

could go on but I wont.

-j

Game does not necessarily = geeks

[mselfie.livejournal.com]

well, though you are right that most geeks won't participate in things outside their computer realm, not all people who play games are geeks. nor, for that matter, do all geeks play games.

if there are two teams, maybe its a larger, more deadly version of paintball. or, of the assassin game that is popular in on and off spurts.

in which case the criteria for who gets the shot would be relative to what the rules of the game are. for such widely diverse people, there may have been an identifying factor (ie a yellow hat) or a picture that was assigned (such as in assassin). there doesn't have to be any specific criteria.

taking the thought that it is a deadly game of assassin slightly further, perhaps the groups involved didn't need to do any scouting (which is being discussed further down in the comments). don't most games of assassin involve some general information, such as job and home address, so that you're not wandering the city at random?

Re: Game does not necessarily = geeks

[iamjosh.livejournal.com]

Sounds like a rather interesting game.. it would be scary to say the least if this is truly what is happenin'

-j

[circumambulate.livejournal.com]

Since they know the caliber of the weapon, they can pretty accurately measure the range, based on the depth of penetration, and the shape of the bullet. If they're saying that the van was involved, it's probably a pretty safe bet that they determined that that shot was close range, not just from the witness accounts.

The whole thing is pretty spooky. People tend to forget how easy it is to get away with something, if you're not a complete idiot.

[plural.livejournal.com]

that is quite correct
which raises the question
why would they change their M.O.

in the other cases
ballistics reports showed that the bullet
had expanded before hitting the target
which suggests a longer range shot

if this was the same crew
then why change the M.O.?

[circumambulate.livejournal.com]

Target of opportunity, perhaps.

perhaps

[plural.livejournal.com]

but that doesnt make sense
unless they have an agenda
with regard to specific individuals

obviously they are restraining
from simply taking pot shots
at every individual walking about
or they would have gotten caught
and we would have many more deaths

they to some extent plan each shot
taking a random target
is a break in the M.O.

not saying it isnt possible mind you
just that it doesnt fit with the picture

then again
three kills inside of an hour
bothers me as well

Re: perhaps

[jmichiko.livejournal.com]

i haven't seen a map of the
area with targets on it, but
the four morning attacks seem
to function as a group. perhaps
the later one was heading out
of the area? there are also
no overnight attacks, suggesting
sleep or a safe place to hide.

Re: perhaps

[jmichiko.livejournal.com]

alright, just looked at the map,
and the first six are all pretty
well grouped, but the last one
in virginia is a ways off, and
was unsuccessful to boot. still
the same type of bullet though.
curious.

[dew.livejournal.com]

There is also the possibility that the shooter or shooters have chosen multiple locations and prepared/scouted them in advance. That could explain the varying time tables. I do however agree with your MO theory distance vs. close-ups.

In any event, scary as hell.

[plural.livejournal.com]

choosing firing positions in advance
for rapid target acquisition and engagement
was something I considered

but I do not like the idea
on the surface it seems like good planning
but too much can change
small changes such as traffic flow
or a commercial delivery
could make a site less than ideal
deny you your intended field of fire
or perhaps even block your escape route

That isnt to say
scouting is a bad idea
quite the contrary
but when they rushed the timeline
they basically eliminated the benefit
of a prepared site
because they would not have the time
to thoroughly evaluate the kill zone
and the lines of retreat at each firing position
with the timeline of three kills within an hour

[thoughtgolem.livejournal.com]

perhaps they had a preplanned route of travel and potential target sites
when they reach a potential site, check for potential victims and potential problems (perhaps info provided by a surveillance team in separate vehicle(s))
and they were just lucky enough to find an area open and safe enough for 3 kills within an hour

[plural.livejournal.com]

you have an excellent point
they did not get caught
so at the very least they were very lucky

the concept of a surveillance team is possible
although an unecessary risk.

there is no need to perform such rapid fire motions and adding people to the operation increases your exposure.

I consider the speed in which those three shootings took place either the work of seperate teams or a grevious error on the part of the shooters.

Judging by the maps, the would have needed at a minimum 10-15 minutes to travel between firiing positions, this would only leave them about ten minutes to verify a lot of information and leads to being hurried and sloppiness

side note, I am hoping budhaboy will provide more detailed information as to the distances involved.

[budhaboy.livejournal.com]

You make excellent points, but you seem to have excluded the class one class of killer:

the soldier.

what if this guy is a terrorist bent on creating as much havoc as possible?

It would explain the randomness of the victims, his extraordinary skill with the weapon, as well as his seemingly inhuman patience (only a very patient man could set up kill zones, but walk away if there weren't a perfect shot).

Perhaps the two day break is expained because he didn't think he could make it through is first cluster of kill-zones, did, and had to do some recon work.

[plural.livejournal.com]

I had not forgotten it, but you are correct I did not address it

As you said a soldier/terrorist would have the skill and discipline to set this all up and walk away if something wasnt right.

However I find it unlikely if it is a sole person, as a soldier would also have a more relaxed time table. There is no need to rush, and rushing only causes mistakes, mistakes which get you caught. Any way you look at it, three kills in an hour at different locations is rushing, even if he had it all preplanned, I am writing my next post which will address the planning and strategic issues, it should be finished in an hour or so.

[budhaboy.livejournal.com]

Generally a soldier would have a more relaxed schedule, unless he wanted to make two points:

1) the murders were related, and a sniper was definately on the loose
2) he is a remarkable killer.

[plural.livejournal.com]

perhaps
but rushing is not need to make either point
spreading out the killing by atleast an hour or two would still get that message across and greatly minimize the risk.