getting away with murder

[gaara]

hello....

 

im not sure where this is supposed to go..

 

but im jus wondering... im like a teenager right... an i was just thinking...

 

like if i go to another state at 4am in the morning in the middle of some city's CBD... and go down a dark alley.. an there happens to be a single person walking the opposite way to me. just say for some reason i stab that person in teh throat > jump in my car > travel 400km's back to my home. no one knows what i did an i will never tell anyone.

 

in this situation.. can i be caught for murder? like ive heard of cases where they kill somone an hide the body an somehow the guy still gets caught.. i dont see how thats so possible

[ecoli]

well, let's say, for the sake of argument, you didn't notice that there was an ATM machine across the street from the alley. Now, the police have a tape of your car. If they're lucky, they'll be able to see your car's liscense plate number, linking your car to the scene of the crime. They can get a warrant to look for evidence in your house. So, they come to your home, find the knife you used to stab the guy, and match the DNA from the blood on the knife and the dead guy. Or let's say you ditched the knife. They can look for other evidence, clothing fibers, hair, or other evidence from the victim in your house or person.

 

It's true that not every murder gets solved, but luckily there are often eye witnesses, or cameras around to catch the bad guy. It helps that usually, crimes like this are commited by the individual, but are solved by a team of people. The numbers are against the guilty.

[intothevoidx]

hello....

 

im not sure where this is supposed to go..

 

but im jus wondering... im like a teenager right... an i was just thinking...

 

like if i go to another state at 4am in the morning in the middle of some city's CBD... and go down a dark alley.. an there happens to be a single person walking the opposite way to me. just say for some reason i stab that person in teh throat > jump in my car > travel 400km's back to my home. no one knows what i did an i will never tell anyone.

 

in this situation.. can i be caught for murder? like ive heard of cases where they kill somone an hide the body an somehow the guy still gets caught.. i dont see how thats so possible

 

Yea...you're going to jail.

[gaara]

so .. in nearly ALL cases... there is somesort of evidence that leads you to a suspect.

 

 

just say i do leave hair at the scene. how do they trace that back to me..

 

and shit like that..

 

also..

 

you see those stories on the news.. where they find a body in a remote bushland... how do they find those bodies?

[CPL.Luke]

a hunter is out with his kid and runs into a body, if you don't bother to bury the body then eventually its going to be found, beyond that over the course of say 20-30 years the body may be uncovered by a rain storm or some such, and then there may still be some evidence on the body

 

I've heard of people finding bodies in their backyard as they were putting in a pool, and sometimes they are still able to find the killer.

[Sisyphus]

What you've described is a killing without a motive, which does make things a lot harder for police, since for any crime, the first question you ask is, "who profits from it?" However, there are lots of other ways. In that example you'd probably be caught pretty quickly, since the body would be found within a few hours, and the time of death could be pinpointed pretty exactly, and there would almost certainly be something showing that you were near there at around that time, if not a human witness or camera, then any number of different kinds of forensic evidence.

[aj47]

Recently where I live there was a nasty incident when a man got into into an argument in a pub and ended up being stabbed to death by one of a group of teenagers.

 

The funny thing is there was about twenty witnesses and as where I live is such a small place, everybody knows who it was. Yet apparently they don't have enough evidence to charge him because they got so many conflicting statements from the people there. I imagine he'll get caught soon though I guess these things just take time.

[gaara]

so its forensic evidence that would catch this hypotheical person i have described (whom is not in association with me at all). because im talking about australia... an we dont have cameras in many places... an im more talking about a situation with no witness'... because numerous times i have been in 'town' clubbing and been in a situation where i could say with 95% certainty there are no persons anywhere... but yeah.. so

 

 

what is a really good way to hide/get rid of a dead body? [if this is illegal to say then im sorry no one answer it... but im just wondering ]

[Bluenoise]

so its forensic evidence that would catch this hypotheical person i have described (whom is not in association with me at all). because im talking about australia... an we dont have cameras in many places... an im more talking about a situation with no witness'... because numerous times i have been in 'town' clubbing and been in a situation where i could say with 95% certainty there are no persons anywhere... but yeah.. so

 

 

what is a really good way to hide/get rid of a dead body? [if this is illegal to say then im sorry no one answer it... but im just wondering ]

 

You're really starting to scare me.

[tomgwyther]

Your 'Getting away with murder' question has kinda answered itself, the next time there's a murder in an Australian city, your name's going to be TOP of the police suspect list!!

[Bignose]

Have you ever watched an episode of CSI or Law & Order or virtually any other crime drama today? There may be no eye-witnesses, but if you left a hair or a fingerprint, that crime may very well get linked back to you. Perhaps a fiber from your clothing, or a rock from your shoe. A murder is a messy act, there is always some evidence somewhere. Oh, and there are probably many more cameras than you think in every city in the world today -- consider just how many people have cell-phone cameras now. They are so cheap and so small, virtually any business owner who wants to protect their store has several up. You are videotaped 10s maybe even 100s of times a day and you probably aren't even aware of it.

[Ndi]

CSI is a SF series. Period. If you want reasons I'll make a list. It doesn't work that way.

[swansont]

I read "Dead Men Do Tell Tales" by/about William Maples (and co-authored by Michael Browning), and it's a very interesting read. An amazing amount of evidence can be gleaned from a body.

[Bignose]

CSI is a SF series. Period. If you want reasons I'll make a list. It doesn't work that way.

 

I understand it is just a crime drama and has been greatly simplified for TV. The point is that they often find just a hair or a fiber and that is enough to give a starting direction in the investigation. It may be a false start, but it enough to start. That is the point -- no matter how hard you try, you are always going to leave some evidence behind.

[ChemicalEuda]

It all depends on your area, who you kill, and how smart you are.

 

I've heard from local LE that roughly 1/3rd of murders are solved in my county. The forensic techniques you see on Court TV and CSI are rarely applied in a lot of murder cases unless the victim is someone high up (sad, but that's how things work).

 

I'd imagine it'd be pretty easy to get away with a random stabbing if there are no witnesses, no cameras, and the place is frequently traveled and if you don't leave any solid evidence behind (such as a knife with your fingerprints on it).

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

It is, however, amazingly easy to leave evidence behind.

[gaara]

CSI is a SF series. Period. If you want reasons I'll make a list. It doesn't work that way.

 

could you please list them.. but how simplified does CSI make the procedures... its seems pretty tech what they GO ON about.

 

 

It all depends on your area, who you kill, and how smart you are.

 

I've heard from local LE that roughly 1/3rd of murders are solved in my county. The forensic techniques you see on Court TV and CSI are rarely applied in a lot of murder cases unless the victim is someone high up (sad, but that's how things work).

 

I'd imagine it'd be pretty easy to get away with a random stabbing if there are no witnesses, no cameras, and the place is frequently traveled and if you don't leave any solid evidence behind (such as a knife with your fingerprints on it).

 

thats what i was thinking.. like ive watched like stupid CSI once or twice.. an like i wasnt sure that much effort would go to every murder case. e.g the one i HYPOTHESISED!!!!!!!

 

 

and.. no one has really told me how to hide a body.. is burning the body a good solution?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I think bluenoise was right.

[Bluenoise]

and.. no one has really told me how to hide a body.. is burning the body a good solution?

 

Oh oh... Looks like it's no long a body. But has become the body now...

 

I think bluenoise was right.

 

I sure hope not:-(

[gaara]

oh man.. this is a science forum.. not a girl scout meeting. im just curious.

[Genecks]

This is so kewl.

 

Well, I don't see how much of this thread is scientific. It's more of a forensic science, and it depends on what you do before and after the murder. If no one knows who you are and where you went, and there is no trace of evidence of your existance after you've done the murder, then you get away. Of course, you need to destroy the weapon and so many other things. Doing that, of course, begins to involve science. That's when forensic scientists start to reverse engineer things you've done.

 

Anyway, this doesn't seem like a scientific thread.

 

I've heard many people talk about criminal investigations not going far because people didn't have the resources or enough care. Of course, that's when things become cold cases. And murder doesn't stop being a cold case. When they get enough resources, they'll reopen the file, relook the evidence, and fry you.

 

These days most advanced killers research forensics. They'll study how evidence could be left behind, and they'll prevent leaving evidence behind. It's all about being a ninja. It really comes down to that, Gaara.

 

 

There is one more thing, though.

 

I've always wondered how people in the past would get drunkards, fill them to the brim with alcohol, and later turn them into cadaavers. I'm pretty sure if you used some old-school killing methods, you might be able to dispose of a body or at least make it disappear. Of course, most people have research old-school tactics. Someone who likes studying history and biology will eventually notice.

 

Most killers try to lure the prey instead of attacking it. random murders sometimes work wonders. There's no motive. Yet the law enforcement agencies have wised up to these kind of killers. It's all about stealth these days.

[Ndi]

I understand it is just a crime drama and has been greatly simplified for TV. The point is that they often find just a hair or a fiber and that is enough to give a starting direction in the investigation. It may be a false start, but it enough to start. That is the point -- no matter how hard you try, you are always going to leave some evidence behind.

 

Indeed you do. You always leave evidence behind, heck, looking a mirror leaves some very faint imprint on it, as light modifies the metal behind. We are hundreds of years too early for the technology to extract such info. One day, buried mirrors will show us how pharaos looked like.

 

Passing by a wall leaves a thermal imprint that decays with age so in theory one could track you by that imprint and know how long ago you were there.

 

Such technology is way beyond us and even if we *have* the tech to inspect such data it's not portable, lightweight and can be used in the sunlight.

 

could you please list them.. but how simplified does CSI make the procedures... its seems pretty tech what they GO ON about.

 

Indeed. It's as realistic as Star Trek in a way. We have the technology to build a powerful laster, a force field, we have handheld computers and with a little pushing we could build a spaceship. Yet far away it is.

 

A picture I inspected was 400x250, at the highest possible quality (it was generated, no noise). A lady in this picture is taking all the space (I trimmed the pic to eliminate the waste). Her eye is roughly 10x6 and the iris that reflects image is 4x4 pixels.

 

In order to recognize ANYTHING, let alone writing, you need at least 120x120, something along the lines of thumbnail view in XP/2k. That's all you get, distinguish. Now. To get 4x4 to a resolution of 120x120, you need to store 30 times the data density. Meaning, the original pic must be 30x the original in every direction. 400x250x30x30, that is 20.000x7.500 pixels, roughly 150 MegaPixel camera. Some of the best there are in studios go as high as 12. Remember, this is a no-noise, no distortion, no compression scenario. I happen to know someone at Playboy and discussed digital imaging solutions. The pictures they take have a 11.7~ish megapixels and a standing person is so defined you can count eyelashes. Yet there is no retina/iris/whatever reflection. It's laughable even if you use a professional camera, in a perfect light, off a sunglasses reflection. Let alone iris.

 

They also have those nearly-instant fiber recognition, printer that prints DNA in a colord Excel style table with plain writing that says 'NO MATCH'. DNA tests are very, very expensive for the resolutions they need to match. You can barely touch one in a paternity suit, and all they need is a few genes.

 

There is no database containing employees and DNA at a traceable resolution. DNA is over 300 MB per person (uncompressed) so it's unlikey they have the storage to do that. They might do now but it would be 2-3 years old.

 

There is no such thing as pinpointing the machine that did a rope because you don;t have a subsystem that does that.

 

What happens in reality is the police narrows it down to a few, maybe one suspects then does a DNA as a confirmation. There is no DNA printer.

 

Also, you can't trace DNA from a single cell that's been there for days, it decomposes. Also, tracing a single cell is very, very hard, as the DNA needs to be multiplied (replicated) in order to have enough for a test.

 

Also, once you sprayed clothes with Luminol for blood, it glows because it reacted with the blood and formed a different compound. Once it did that, it's no longer blood, you can't test the same stain for 11 different tests. Nor can you use a fiber in 14 different ways.

 

Some of the episodes are quire realistic, others are way off. Some of the techniques employed are way beyond our capabilities, others aren't, but are greatly exaggerated. Like the IR camera that prints out the impression of a person's back and position, IN THE SUN and heat, humid weather, to the resolution where you can see the bandage. The bandage is very slim and has the same temperature as the body, it doesn't stay cold. Nor do we have that resolution in a portable camera, NOR does it work in the <relatively> extreme conditions of a sunny day. A sensitive camera that measures 100th of a degree does not work in the sun.

 

I could go on, but you get the idea. You watch Star Trek and you think "use the scanner. it DOES scan for gamma beta teleshiganny!" or "teleport! teleport!". We understand and are immersed in the logic of the series but it doesn't make it real.

 

It's a great series, I watch it too but sometimes a sigh is in order. Nobody tests different sides of a stain nor do they "ping" every 2 cm to determine that a drop of someone's blood was in there. And contrary to what they say, you CAN wash blood off something. Blood is meaningless without blood cells and cells are large. You can't fully wipe chemicals because it's molecules, but cells? Sure.

 

There are loads of things that don't work. Sand doesn't keep a good enough impression of a tire to match cracks, nobody has a slot for every PDA, cell and memory device in a school and real-time downloads the contents at the center (mob episode). Any of you synced your phone to the PC? Was that painless?

[Genecks]

Also, you can't trace DNA from a single cell that's been there for days, it decomposes. Also, tracing a single cell is very, very hard, as the DNA needs to be multiplied (replicated) in order to have enough for a test.

 

Polymerase chain reaction.

 

Also, people are getting better at creating technology (DNA electrophoresis technology) to quickly compare DNA strands.

 

The shows CSI and the such have been criticized because the chemical and biological forensic processes take a long time to do. People don't obtain results at the snap of their fingers. CSI shows distort chronological historicity, or else they simply ignore the fact it takes a while to do a forensic analysis of something.

 

You might be able to kill someone, but they'll use old police tracking methods to find you. Afterwards, they'll have used forensic analysis to find out more about you. From there, they'll combine old-school police tactics and science to track you. If you can outsmart both of those, they probably won't catch you until a later date. If you're a smart criminal, you'll have changed your identity or location by the later date. Otherwise, you'll have disappeared.

 

I understand it is just a crime drama and has been greatly simplified for TV. The point is that they often find just a hair or a fiber and that is enough to give a starting direction in the investigation. It may be a false start, but it enough to start. That is the point -- no matter how hard you try, you are always going to leave some evidence behind.

 

Did you know ancient Egyptians would shave all the hair off their body? They considered this a way to stay clean and increase life longetivity.

 

It's not that hard for someone to buzz all the hair of his or her body, use Nair, and shave what is left.

 

I assume going to Wal*Mart, buying some basic jeans and a popular t-shirt would make it hard to be found. Popularity and conformists allow evil people to easily blend in.

[Ndi]

Polymerase chain reaction.

 

Thanks

 

Which reminds me, files stay with samples and evidence. I remember some shows (real) that showed some cases in which a killer went free because the blood type could narrow it down enough. About 5 years down the road, DNA testing was admissible in court, so they reviewed the file, did the test and locked him up.

 

So basically even if you DO get away, you could get arrested next year as technology evolves and they can see into the past.

 

It's not all that hard to get away with murder, what's hard is to do a perfect crime. While getting away with murder means nobody saw you, the perfect crime means that the whole police tries to catch you and there's nothing they can hold on to. Quite a different Holy Grail.

[gaara]

wow.. thanks for all your time to write that. it was awesomely knowledgable.

 

 

haha thanks Genecks for referrig to ninjas.. i can understand much easier now haha.

 

also, just say "someone" kills someone an no one saw the incident, apart from the follwoing left behind FROM the killer : hair, clothe fargments, the murder weapon, blood. what else could be left behind to find the killer.

 

and.. is this correct to saY: "america utilises more advanced crime solving techniques than australia"

 

if that statement is true... does that mean its easier to get away with a murder here compared to U.S and A.