Mouse
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2004
- Messages
- 230
- Reaction score
- 84
I have a friend who studied criminal justice in the Pacific Northwest, and I asked her about this once. This is what she said she remembered from her classes [paraphrased by me]:
The Pacific Northwest has statistically more than its share of serial killers, etc., because of several things:
1. Highly transient population: I don't mean that "transients/hobos" are more likely to commit a crime. What I mean is that Seattle, Portland, etc., are considered very desirable places to live, with a high quality of life. So you get a lot of people moving there from other places. (There are some cities where it's rare to meet someone who was born and bred there.) When you have a place with a lot of strangers moving in and out, without life-long family ties there, it's easy for a stranger to get "lost" in the crowd and go undiscovered for a longer time. It's easier to be "anonymous." Also, the climate is relatively mild year-round, so you also get a lot more people who do fit the "hobo" definition of "transient." A homeless person can't survive a midwestern winter as easily as a winter in Seattle or Portland. I'm not saying that homeless are more likely to commit crimes, but this does mean that someone who acts oddly or suspiciously is more likely to be dismissed or overlooked on the streets of Portland than on the streets of, say, Butte, Montana.
There are also a lot of military bases in the PNW, which adds to the "strangers come and go" factor.
2. Culture: the Pacific Northwest cultivates a kind of "individualistic" air, in the same way that Austin, Texas, does. There are some places where being an odd duck is embraced as part of the ethos. This also contributes to the tendency to overlook someone who might appear "slightly off" or "suspicious."
The Pacific Northwest also has a higher concentration of "outdoorsy" people and hunters. Access to things like 4-wheel drive trucks with gun racks (outside of the larger cities, at least), or having the alibi that a ranger has found you out in the middle of nowhere with a shovel because you're "roughing it" is more likely to pass muster in the Pacific Northwest. After all, communing with the wilderness is the whole reason a lot of people move there. I'm not saying that hunters are more likely to kill; what I'm saying is that it's easy to say, "I'm camping/hunting/fishing/whatever" as a reason to go to or be in a remote area, or to have the kind of equipment that could also be used for killing and disposing of humans. People camp in the redwoods; they don't camp in a soybean field or a desert.
3. Geography: Without being too grisly, there are lots of places to hide bodies in the Pacific Northwest--you don't have to go too far to find someplace that is rugged enough to hide a body, often to be undetected for years, if not forever. (Just reading about the blackberry brambles is enough to convince me of this.) Additionally, animal activity due to wild areas close by, as well as how wet the climate is, means that evidence will decompose more quickly than someplace else. Plus, there are a lot of bodies of water nearby for evidence disposal.
4: Economy: The Pacific Northwest has a high immigrant population. This means that there's a proportionately higher level of low-paying, entry level jobs. For someone who is trying to fly under the radar and not leave a paper trail--or who has a criminal history already--these is how someone on the fringes of society supports himself. Those are the kinds of jobs that have "faceless" employees--no trail of credit history, mortgages, college transcripts, professional certification, professional standing and recognition, business ownership, etc.--they're the kinds of jobs that just want a body to fill a space behind a counter, and they could care less who you are inside. But ironically, you often have more contact with the public than you do in a more specialized, highly skilled job like "research scientist." I would imagine that's exactly that "just looking for a warm body" kind of jobs are exactly what someone hoping to remain unnoticed would want. There are exceptions, of course (John Wayne Gacy, for example). But if you're tracing a missing housewife, you're going to remember if a college professor was acting weird, or if someone in her literature discussion group was absent that day. Nobody's going to notice or remember that the frycook at the nearby McDonald's was shifty-eyed that day when she dashed in there for lunch.
Pretty much all of these factors apply to Florida, as well:
Transient population (snow birds, service-industry workers, immigrants, spring breakers, etc.). Plus, there's a lot of agriculture, so there's a lot of seasonal farm workers coming in and out. It can often feel rare to meet a native Floridian.
Culture: Florida is also "outdoorsy," and as part of the southeast, has a prevalent "gun rack" atmosphere, and therefore, easier to have a built-in alibi and/or reason to have weapons or go "camping" and disappear for a few days. Also, people are more likely to be outdoors in Florida through much of the year, as they are in the PNW, and this means more access to victims.
Geography: Florida also has tracts of wilderness (and bodies of water) handy, high animal and insect activity, and a very wet climate.
Economy: modern Florida is pretty much all service-industry jobs--it's all about the theme parks and beaches, which means lots of low-qualification/low references needed jobs; these are the only jobs you're likely to get if you're a RSO. Zoning laws in Florida also mean that there are more trailer parks, which may be attractive to registered sex offenders because they're cheap to live in, and easy to put in an unincorporated area if you're bound by a "so many feet away from a church or school" restriction. Other states have much stricter zoning laws.
All of these things relate to California, as well. Plus, California just has a huge population, comparatively--as does Florida. (No politician ever crosses his fingers that he gets the crucial New Mexico or Wyoming vote on election night.) So, just based on numbers and probability, you're going to get more crime. And perhaps you're more likely to go undiscovered for a longer time because of the "larger population=easier to be anonymous" factor. Of course, John Wayne Gacy and Jeffrey Dahmer kind of mess with my "We don't hold with no serial killin' in flyover country" theory. But they were both in cities. In a small rural area like I live in, everyone will gawk and point at, "OMG, that's that creepy Berglund kid that got caught peeping in granny's window." Not that we don't have rape and murder in rural areas. But to both continue AND escalate criminal behavior for a longer time undetected, it's easier to do that in a big city. A lot of the population of midwestern states is spread out over a lot of small towns that aren't that far down the road from each other. But California, Washington, Oregon, and Florida have very dense population centers surrounded by rugged natural areas. So the set-up is just different, and more conducive to a longer criminal career, maybe.
So, it's not your imagination that the PNW and Florida seem to have a statistically higher rate of certain kinds of crimes. Why not other places? New York City also has lots of strangers and is easy to be "anonymous" in--but there aren't huge tracts of wilderness nearby to dispose of bodies. And it would draw attention to be driving around NYC with a rifle and camping gear, or walking around with a shovel. Or the chains and concrete shoes you need if you DO want to make a body disappear in NYC.
Maine has an "individualistic" and outdoorsy atmosphere, and appropriate geography--but not a highly transient or large population. Alaska does have the individualistic and hunter/trapper atmosphere, plus a highly transient population--but the weather isn't conducive to being outside kidnapping and disposing of bodies for much of the year.
West Texas and New Mexico have a fairly ingrained "gun rack" culture--but while bodies can and do go undiscovered in the desert, it's harder to explain disappearing into the desert for days while you dismember someone. It's too dangerous to try to survive in the desert (outside of designated camping areas) for such a thing to go unnoticed. Unless you're a survivalist--and they have their own agenda. Same thing goes for Las Vegas--it should be a serial killer's paradise, what with the highly transient population and people "off their guard" because they're on vacation. But nobody wants to dig a grave in 112-degree temperatures, and people would know you were up to something, since you don't really go out into the desert with a rifle and a shovel to "Commune with nature" in the same way as in a forest (because people who do that usually dehydrate and die). Plus, bodies don't decay very quickly in the desert--they dry out and mummify, instead, which leaves more evidence than in the PNW and Florida. In the midwest, we have enough heat and humidity and insect activity to destroy a body--but not as many places to hide them for the needed amount of time. Every so often a body will show up in a cornfield--but in that case, the chances of discovery too soon are great, because of harvest time. A body won't likely go for years without being found; at most, it will be within one planting-and-harvesting cycle when the farmer finds the evidence. A place like Minnesota has plenty of lakes to dispose of evidence, but only in the summer--lakes are iced over in the winter and the ground is too frozen to dig, and if you hide a body in a snowbank, it's going to be discovered by spring (and snow is a good insulator--evidence will likely still be there).
Of course, no place is free from crime, and the #1 danger factor--that you're far more likely to be hurt by someone you know--isn't influenced by any of the above factors.
*Sorry for rambling--this is something I've thought about quite a bit.
