That's the context I want to get at; in addition to questions of warning vs. not warning we have the complexity of the evolving patterns: When is a rape (or any other horrible crime) seen as part of a series of crimes by the same individual. I agree it's not fair in the early going to retrospectively place blame on anyone except the rapist. It's helpful to us inquiring minds to know what factors play into seeing a series of crimes as perpetrated by one individual or group. LE can't say there's a serial rapist about if they shouldn't, don't or can't connect the dots; however, most of their interpretation is retrospective like we are doing here, except with much more information to decipher. I'm trying to get at the rules they use, however fuzzy, to decide to look for one person.
This is not a question leading to assigning blame; on the contrary I'm trying to better understand LE's thought processes so I can learn from them.
Crypto6
I think that the key to connecting crimes simply boils down to good investigators. While there are amazing tools that they have such as DNA databases, the biggest Databases and the fastest most powerful computers will never be able to do the job that a sharp eye for detail and experience will do. That is why I give a lot of credit to Reno LE for in a sense admitting that they are over their heads and calling for the FBI and any extra help and for the public to donate to expedite the process of looking through the backlog of DNA etc...
I think that there is a mindset that wants to see a pattern and rationalize a sick mind running loose by saying, "well, it is a twisted person who has something against petite brunettes and can only strike on Thursdays in the middle of the month"
It makes it less scary to rationalize it that way rather than to admit that there is a guy who can be anyone in the community who strikes against anyone who is vulnerable and has gone as far as going into the sanctity of a home to take what he wants. That is Terrifying, however that is the reality.
I said it before but I think it is going to be an Edwin Hall. There is absolutely nothing remarkable about him and nothing that anyone could have looked at and decided that he was someone who could commit the type of crime he is responsible for. I think it is terrifying because his victim was out doing what all of us do and in the blink of an eye, he took her from this world. It is a horrible sobering thought to realize that there really is no rationalization for it, and while it would be human nature to think that someone like that should have been noticed or caught committing other crimes before it got to that point, the reality is that until we get to the point of reading other peoples' minds and putting them away for future crimes or "thought crimes" there is no way anyone knows who, when, or why.
I am the father of a beautiful little girl, and I could not even imagine the terror of sending your daughter into the world with all of the normal issues that young women face, let alone something like this!
There is a book that I read that one of the big FBI profilers (Douglas I think) talked about a lot titled "Protecting the gift" and that author also wrote another book on the same lines about trusting your instinct. If someone gives you bad vibes, you are probably justified. Essentially he was saying that almost every survivor of some horrific crime had a "feeling" about the person who committed it. My point is that someone like John Douglas has seen some of the most horrific things a human can do and still he has to let his children go out in the world and do what they need to do. It is his hope that he taught them to be smart and make the right choices.
Sooooo My point is that there is no way to predict who is going to commit a crime, linking crimes is something that good investigators do, but it takes a lot of factors for them to link crimes 100%. It has become easier with DNA, but a good example of how DNA is just starting to make the job easier is here in my state of Missouri. In the past month or two they linked one man to several cases that took place in the 60's and 70's in St Genevieve Mo and Southern Illinois, and for one no one really even knew there was a serial killer that struck back then, people had their suspicions that some of the cases could be linked but there was nothing solid until DNA. There was no definite signature in the killings, and the MO was different each time.
I think that in this case, while it may seem painfully slow, this perp is not experienced enough to keep suspicion away or to avoid scrutiny from a lot of other sources. I said it last week, but I think that there is going to be a break in the case very soon. I think that LE has people that they are looking at, and there is always the fact that they are waiting for him to do something suspicious so they can move in and have probable cause and not have to tip their hand and have the perp lawyer up and make it harder to nail him.