'No guilt, no remorse, no empathy.' Criminal profilers say Jake Patterson case stands out
From the same article linked first by poster
@Ragnarok , I'd like to quote what I think we suspected, but couldn't know absolutely until Jayme escaped.
Note: Copyright laws and WS Rules for copying info are upheld in my short quote of a page long very good article.
"Christine Sarteschi, associate professor of social work and criminology at Chatham University in Pittsburgh.
“This is someone who was highly motivated,” Sarteschi said. “It wasn’t revenge; it wasn’t money. He had a goal and he did what he wanted. He wanted something, and he went and took it.
A lot of people would not be willing to kill in this manner.”
“
I think it’s very unique. ( still according to Sarteschi).
Although other major crimes share aspects of Patterson’s case — premeditating, planning, avoiding detection and erupting in deadly violence — the combination of these behaviors in the Jayme Closs abduction is outside the norm.
All of these things have happened in other cases, b
ut this one is different because he did so many of them,” she said."
END QUOTE
My notes:
Could all reading here please stop for a second or two and recall your life and activities when you were 21 years old, if you have reached or surpassed that age at present?
You, I, and most of the world at 21 years old were just learning about some adult responsibilities and expectations of others for our behavior and goals as we entered adulthood. 21 is usually a good age, a stepping off point into a career, maybe marriage, maybe a gap year to travel, but not to kill and kidnap. Why couldn't he just have gone to the most remote island in the world as a thrill?
Most of us likely enjoyed simple things such as a walk alone in the woods we loved, a movie and a date. Patterson wanted to kill 2 strangers in their home for the purpose of kidnapping their only child.
IF he hadn't gotten caught, he would have been a voracious serial killer in a short period of time, IMO, especially if he learned from his mistakes ( as serial killers absolutely do) and was able to remain a loner. and
return to his house a bit after he'd killed the next girl,or maybe
used those survivalist skills he read about and camp, move, kill a young girl just within a day's drive of his house, then, camp, steal food, find, stalk and kill another young girl in a distant state. That's how most serial killers escalate, from their comfort zone close to home, to far- reaching places far from their original " base camp" in order to avoid detection.
DNA evidence at the crime scene is very helpful in finding a repeat killer once he's on the radar, of course, but Patterson didn't have any DNA on file, LE has told us, and we do not know what DNA of his, if any, was left at the Closs's house. ( I'm sure at least saliva and some perspiration were left, because he was so frenzied but that doesn't mean it was in quantity to be recovered). Of course, his DNA was collected but I'm referring to what he likely might have done if he'd not been caught.
JC likely not only saved herself but several to many girls in the future. I believe he would have starting killing (
or tried to kill) other young girls after watching JC and possibly starting to understand some things about the actions, likes, and so forth of girls that age. I think he studied her like she was a bug. So he could experience the thrill he got from the violence and control of surprising a total stranger and shooting them. I believe, because there are so many things about him which are extremely immature for his age, that his targeted age group would remain young teen girls.
Bottom line: I'm so very thankful all over again that JC survived and escaped despite great odds against it. Most kidnapped victims are killed within 24 hours of abduction. I'm so glad Patterson has confessed to at least the 2 murders several times, it appears.
Because of her bravery and not giving up after so long, and knowing her parents were dead, she probably saved other young girls' lives as well as her own.
Sociopathic killers don't stop killing until they're caught,in most cases.
It's likely that aspects of Patterson's total confession, most of which we do not know, will be used either anonymously as a historical case study or maybe by name in teaching forensic science, psychology, criminal profiling, and other fields of study where the "weird ones" are important to learn about, and to teach the fact that this type of killer absolutely cannot be anticipated in the absence of previous arrests or prior deviant behavior reported to LE.
Respectfully, IMO, except for quoted and attributed sentences which are marked as such.
