That's done sometimes, an a means of excluding those who will claim to be the killer, especially if they feel the letter contains something only the killer would know.
I'm not sure why they wouldn't show some of the handwriting, Im not sure however how often handwriting is a reliable tool in generating a suspect either. I know its used a lot once there's a suspect to compare
Ok So lets look at the case :
First I in NO way think this crime has anything to do with the Zodiac crimes, the Signature aspect of the Zodiac crimes, doesn't match with what personation is left at this scene.
Ive seen MANY MANY crimes, are listed as potential Zodiac crimes, but so many of them have NO similarities. In many ways it seemed that it was an easy "out" to label crimes, that of the Zodiac, even perhaps by law enforcement
Ill go one further, and say unless there's something on that the letter that police are holding to exclude potential claimants, I have a pretty strong feeling the letter is a hoax , I don't believe it was 2 people either.
Now That doesn't mean the offender didn't write the letter, and or desecrate the grave, , there's always a possibility , but it seems somewhat unlikely in this case .
Evident by the fact the Police didn't respond or send the letter to the media , yet none of the actions taken by the writer ever materialized.
MO is a crime scene dynamic it changes, and evolves over time, sometimes it devolves depending on circumstance.
What also happens is that it is also sometimes copied, from popular incidents in the media , which I felt was the case here when writing the letter. Some will take it to the extreme that will actually commit crimes, in the vein of another which we call "copycat crimes"(NY Zodiac for instance)
Ill refrain from going in depth on the Zodiac crimes, but its my belief that there's no evidence to support beyond coincidence, any relation between this case and the Zodiac case .
When investigating a homicide, the BIGGEST mistake you can do is try to link them without 1st investigating each victim thoroughly.
I see that in a lot of posts, people shoot right for the Serial Killer theory, and many attempt to link cases, you have to first understand what happened to the victim, then see if there any sign of personation at the scene coincides with any other cases, which then becomes known as "signature" .
And a note on Serial Killings, they re disgusting, intriguing , and fascinate a lot of people, and they are also very rare, they comprise roughly 1% of the homicides reported.
The Victim:
A victimology analysis is tough without the proper materials and interviews. but a lot of questions need to be asked before an investigator can proceed
though some of these questions seem pointless, (maybe even distasteful to some) they all help generate a victim profile :
-Last known location, and last contacts
-Physical traits
-Education
-Has she ever been in trouble with the law ?
-Anyone in her family immediate or otherwise ever been in trouble with the law
-Any medical history (psychological or physical)
-How was her relationship with her husband ?
-Did they have any problems?
-Did she have ay problems?
-Was she on any meds?
-For What ?
-How was her (their) financial situation?
-Any problems at work?
-Did anything recently happen or change in her life ?
-Was there anything in her lifestyle that would make her a target ?
-Was she or is there any indication she was involved, with anyone either professionally, or romantically?
-Did she keep a diary, or any writings?
-Any drug or alcohol use , if so has it increased, recently?
-Was she afraid of anything or anyone? (stalking?)
-List of friends especially anyone who visited recently
-any unusual occurrences prior to the crime ?
-Past employment history
-Would anyone be willing to help with the investigation? Names ?
Its also important to talk to any of the victims children if they are able to communicate thoroughly (due to age or distress)
Next we assess the why:
Why was this particular person targeted?
How were the person targeted, or was the person a victim of opportunity?
What are the chances of the person becoming a victim at random (and therefore opportunistic)?
What risk did the offender take to commit the crime?
How was the victim approached, restrained and/or attacked?
What was the victim's likely reaction to the attack?
This helps assess risk, both to her, and the amount the offender took in choosing her as a victim.
I cant say whether or not , she was high risk or low risk, but by all appearances, she lived a low risk lifestyle. Which would make her high risk for the offender.
What was the motive?
a robbery seems possible but nothing was taken, a burglary(or even a fetish burglary) seems unlikely unless she walked in on one, but there were no signs of forced entry, and again nothing of value (or intimate items) was taken .
They state they feel it was possibly a sexual attack though she wasn't sexually assaulted, however they don't state why, which would be EXREMELY valuable in assessing this crime.
This leads me to believe that there was at least some evidence of an attempted rape.
So lets look at it from the sexual assault perspective.
Why wasn't she raped? they believe he had a weapon of his own yet she was apparently killed by a knife from her own kitchen.
yet there was NO overt appearance of an attempted rape , at least not listed.
Why didn't he rape her ?
-Was he interrupted?
-Sexual dysfunction?
-Was he horrified by the murder?
-Why was she stabbed so many times ?
-Was this someone who was exhibiting rage to her ?
-Or perhaps he wasn't he able to because she was beating the **** out of him fighting back.
therefore if we look at it as a rape attempt, gone awry we need to try to classify the rapist.
Ina case in Philadelphia in 2002, a student named Shannon Scheiber was killed in a rape attempt gone wrong , by a Serial rapist named Troy Graves (AKA the Center City Rapist) . Graves was classified as a "Power reassurance rapist".. which happens to be the most common type as well. The power reassurance rapist In the attack on Scheiber, it was determined she fought "like a wild animal" in which the rapist escalated his level of violence to force victim compliance, which lead to the death of Scheiber .
The power reassurance rapist is usually a sexual dysfunctional , who is a stranger to the victim, usually conducts surveillance on his victims, either immediately prior to or shortly before the crime (she stated she saw someone watching her)
His method of approach is surprise (Possibly while she was taking in the groceries he may've even offered to help her with them)
The victim is usually alone or with young children at the time of the attack (she was alone)
He most likely uses a weapon of opportunity, but may bring his own to initiate victim compliance. (her knife was used as well as his possibly)
Now the part I struggle with is that this type is also the lest likely to harm their victim, is usually "gentle" if you will with the victim, and wont usually use force, what is necessary to force victim compliance, but as evidenced in the Philadelphia case, it can and does happen
The disarray in the house seems to indicate some kind of struggle, he may've been armed with a knife of his own, but lost it in the struggle and was forced to arm himself with the knife from the kitchen
That being said stabbing someone 11 times, in the neck seems more indicative of a interpersonal crime (IE someone who knew the victim)
Another possibility is that it was someone who knew the victim who she was comfortable letting in the house. This individual was most likely not a visitor by happenstance, he knew she was alone, and he was possibly armed with his own knife as well
Its possible this was a argument that exploded, once they were in the house together , in which I would tend to believe that ANY sort of sexual assault was actually staged, to throw off the investigation. Stabbing repeatedly is usually some type of a manifestation of rage and anger .
These weren't wounds to injure and force compliance, these were to kill the victim, deep penetrating stab wounds to a high lethal area.. He wanted her dead
Now depending on the nature and extent of that rage, this offender may or may not feel the need to desiccate her grave later on.
However if it were a case of hatred to that extent, I would think someone around the victim, would most likely have some prior knowledge of at least some discord between the victim and someone else.
Stalker:
Another possibility, however, stalking generally begins with victim/offender interaction, these usually a defined, period of interaction between the 2 sometimes, romantically, sometimes, simply perceived as such by the offender.
Though it can begin with little more than a "Hello" in some cases .
If it was the case of her being stalked Id expect to see phone calls, of any kind, possibly letters, things left on her car, unexpected "coincidental" run ins. She would seem him places, see a car that resembles his often enough to worry her , she would've confided in others most likely.
However beyond the incident where she saw someone looking through her blinds, there seems to be no indicators , and nothing listed of her being "stalked" in the traditional sense.
She was however targeted.
