getting away with murder

[Genecks]

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.

 

Skin cells can be left behind. A variety of things can be left behind.

 

As said before, there are plenty of hypothetical killing possibilities. Because there are so many ways to kill someone, there are so many more ways to leave evidence. This evidence could be from a puncture wound to the way someone killed the person.

 

The evidence left behind, as said before, depends on what happened before, during, and after the murder. As the plot unfolds, evidence becomes created. It truly is up to the killer to figure out what could be left as a scrap of evidence.

 

It's because of the critical thinking required in killing, that someone has to inquire about every action occuring. It's like playing a large game of Chess and thinking about every move.

 

I don't really know that much about various countries and their ways of dealing with crime. I know America will find someone if solving the crime is highly important or the person killed was important. In other words, if the killer isn't found, positions of power in society begin to change. It's like finding Macbeth.

[swansont]

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.

 

CODIS

 

Also, you can't trace DNA from a single cell that's been there for days, it decomposes.

 

DNA fragments have been extracted from remains that are millions of years old. A 400k year old sample has been sequenced. Neandertal DNA has been recovered and compared to modern humans. So you'll need to back this up.

[gaara]

. This evidence could be from a puncture wound to the way someone killed the person.

 

if i go to wherever you are now an "puncture" you.. how can they possibly link that to me? how does the method of killing someone allow you to narrow down to a group of people with no previous convictions

[Ndi]

CODIS

 

Total number of profiles: 4,023,655. They find every one of them. I think they missed one or two DNAs in a hundred of episodes. True, my phrasing was lacking. There is no such database to the extent they use.

 

9:39 am PT, Thursday, Mar 2, 2006

Oregon State Police Forensic Lab Reaches Milestone DNA Database

 

Salem, Oregon - The Oregon State Police Forensic Lab reached a milestone this month when the DNA unit announced its 1,000th DNA database hit, [...]

 

1.000 hits in 10 years a series does not make.

 

Also, CODIS is not an employee database. I know there is a criminal database. I'll track back the episode if it's really that important.

 

 

DNA fragments have been extracted from remains that are millions of years old.

 

They weren't decaying in the sun. The extracted DNA from what was preserved inside fossilized bones, frozen animals, etc - all preserved.

 

I can't seem to find any references to DNA decay timeline in the human corpse, especially single cells left lying around - but decomposition implies breakdown of chemical structure. I know one of the effects of age of samples is DNA breakdown, through fragmentation, where the info exists, but there are gaps/order is wrong.

 

I sincerely doubt you can use cells that have been staring at the Miami sun for days. While I found no timeline, it appears drying and heat are Bad Things.

[swansont]

Total number of profiles: 4,023,655. They find every one of them. I think they missed one or two DNAs in a hundred of episodes. True, my phrasing was lacking. There is no such database to the extent they use.

 

I don't think they do. I seem to recall the phrase "not in CODIS" being used more than once, though I'm pretty sure it's for the drama more than for realism. You need storylines other than getting a DNA match every time.

 

Ironic, though that you mention Star Trek. Once of the exec producers of CSI was a writer for ST:TNG We went to high school together. I've pitched him a few ideas to use in the show, but he hasn't used them...yet (using a body with situs inversus, where the organs are flipped in the body, and the discovery that some biometric scanners have been spoofed with casts using Play-Doh)

[Ndi]

They do use CODIS, and they *do* have realistic stuff, like translating analog scans from bit copy color to a blurred grayscale which, ironically, does seem better not because they extract info but because we are a lot more accustomed to recognizing blurred shapes as opposed to pixelated images. It's what anti-aliasing does, with no extra information other than the image. Nice touch in documenting. This is a later episode than the thing that made me smile "Get those pictures by here, I have this software that extracts images from eyes". Yyyeeeeahh...

 

I have virtually no experience in forensics so I'm buying everything the say about matching tire irons to a skull bump, but the IT stuff Ihave opinions about

 

I've got some taped episodes from someone and I'm now viewing the older stuff at a rate of 2-3 at a time, instead of one per week. The increase in realism is noticeable. I'm just starting season 3.

[YT2095]

how about a .223 with frangible glaser rounds at a 1Km distance from the stranger?

 

I bet you`de get away with it then

 

 

Edited to add, Killing people is Very Very naughty! and the staff here at SFN do not condone this action either (unless performed by a fully qualified member of staff).

[tomgwyther]

One way me and a friend discussed (After quite a few beers!) was to push someone over board.

 

We were on a ship going from Portsmouth U.K, to Le Harve in France.

We sat on-deck with a case of beer at about 3:00am halfway across the English channel, and wondered

'If one of us were to push the other overboard; who would know?' All the other passengers were asleep.

The body may not have been found for months, if at all. there would be no witnesses, no murder weapon and indeed no motive.

If questioned by police, one could claim to have been sleeping on a couch away from other passengers, or passed-out in the toilet from drinking too much.

 

Needless to say, we both arrived in France alive, albiet with severe hang-overs.

[swansont]

One way me and a friend discussed (After quite a few beers!) was to push someone over board.

 

We were on a ship going from Portsmouth U.K, to Le Harve in France.

We sat on-deck with a case of beer at about 3:00am halfway across the English channel, and wondered

'If one of us were to push the other overboard; who would know?' All the other passengers were asleep.

The body may not have been found for months, if at all. there would be no witnesses, no murder weapon and indeed no motive.

If questioned by police, one could claim to have been sleeping on a couch away from other passengers, or passed-out in the toilet from drinking too much.

 

Needless to say, we both arrived in France alive, albiet with severe hang-overs.

 

But you knew each other and presumably there was some evidence that you were both aboard at the same time, and possibly a witness that saw you together, that could place you as the last one to see him alive. I think that makes you "interesting" to the investigators.

[Phi for All]

Killing people is Very Very naughty! and the staff here at SFN do not condone this action either (unless performed by a fully qualified member of staff).

Ditto. For instance, the way to avoid those clever homicide detectives is to make it look like an accident. No murder, no murder investigation.

 

There was a great Columbo episode where the killer almost got away with it by waiting for his victim at the end of his nightly swim before bed. When the guy was stepping up out of the pool the murderer brained him with a chunk of ice. He made sure the guy sank and then tossed the ice in the pool (no murder weapon was found). It was assumed by by all the investigators that the guy slipped on the diving board and drowned after hitting his head, total accidental death.

 

All the investigators except Columbo....

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I have that on DVD

[gaara]

I think that makes you "interesting" to the investigators.

 

but do you honestly think that they will eventually get arrested? the scenario is tho, that no one saw the actually pushin. except the two friends.

 

an the two friends said they were asleep or something similar.

[Ndi]

In real life, you get away with it. In CSI, a palm print is found on his clothes. Also, a bruise on his back with the shape of your hand will pop out a few days later. Also, they will find his hairs on your shirt, some fibers from his clothes that pointed that he tried to grab something. Then, they will find that your reflection in a pool of water casts a shadow that was picked up by a camera on the other side of the ship. Additionally, they will solve another case in parallel because you're too boring.

[swansont]

but do you honestly think that they will eventually get arrested? the scenario is tho, that no one saw the actually pushin. except the two friends.

 

an the two friends said they were asleep or something similar.

 

In reality, there's probably not enough evidence to convict you. (and similar events have gone unsolved) But that's a different scenario than originally, where you aren't even a suspect.

[1veedo]

I haven't read the whole thread but in response to the op, you only need $6000 to kill an average person. Where I live, the going rate is less then $2000.

 

So it's really easy to get away with murder. Drive up, shoot the guy, no witnesses, no way to trace the weapon (cause it was smuggled), no evidence, drive away. It appears random. If the guy gets caught, there's no connection back to you.

 

As long as there's a demand for a service, someone, somewhere, will do it (given a little bit of cash). Gangs are wonderful for things like this.

[gaara]

ive also thought about that...

 

i have a crazy friend who i could pay to bash someone.. not kill.. but its a similar concept...

 

BUT the problem with my friend is.. that he isnt loyal. an no doubt if he got caught by the police in regards to the severe beating he administered he would explain to the law enforcers that i paid him to do it, an then i would prob get in trouble.

 

wont that just happen with these gangs? why would they take the whole fall for a murder? how do you get insurance that they wont dob you in.

 

or can you just deny it all

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Who is it you want to kill, anyway?

[GutZ]

hehe, don't ever delete this thread, it may become evidence one day.

[gaara]

how would it get tracked back to me?

 

veedo answer my question from above!!!!!!! :)

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

A subpoena to us and your ISP?

[Phi for All]

an no doubt if he got caught by the police in regards to the severe beating he administered he would explain to the law enforcers that i paid him to do it, an then i would prob get in trouble.

Ya think?

wont that just happen with these gangs? why would they take the whole fall for a murder? how do you get insurance that they wont dob you in.

Make sure you use a gang that has a no-payback policy. And get a receipt.

or can you just deny it all

If the police believe you the gang certainly won't. Guess who the gang targets next? At the very least you will be blackmailed for the rest of your life.

 

Don't forget about all those undercover cops who nail people looking to hire a hit. Asking around about stuff like that is what pays an informant's rent. They'll snitch you out in a heartbeat.

[John Cuthber]

The simple answer is that you could probably get away with it. Most people commit crimes for a reason and that fact makes things much easier for the police. They just start by working out who wanted the victim dead. If you killed an unknown stranger for no real reason then, unless they were lucky (and, BTW, has anyone noticed that on CSI they are always lucky and the perpetrator always leaves a single hair behind? He's never shedding like a mangy cat) the police wouldn't know where to start.

This idea was used as the basis for a murder story "strangers on a train"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strangers_on_a_Train

where 2 people agree to commit murder for the other one. neither has a motive for the killing he undertakes.

It turns out not to be that simple.

 

On the other hand, in my experience, it's much easier to get away with murder if it looks like an accident or a suicide. If the police don't think there's a murder they don't look too hard at who might have committed it.

(And I was joking about "in my experience")

[jackson33]

in short, i will just agree with John. now days however, the excuse for limited investigation seems to be "drug related", when motive and close relation are not productive.

 

G. Gordan Liddey, has commented many time on this issue saying just about whats been described using a gun.. criminal elements and the real drug related murders often go unsolved. i am not sure what the current figures are but even at the best act/caught/convicted, racial in major crimes 10 or 15 percent are not ever found.

 

DNA will now play a big roll and it would be hard to do that act and not leave some. if ever picked up, or for some reason DNA test is given, the liability will follow you for life. since you infer random, many miles from home etc, you will leave a paper trail as well. one this week was released having been found innocent of two murders, but picked up simultaneously for another murder, all based on DNA..

[MyThai]

In your scenario, you could possibly be linked to the murder (although unlikely) however, a conviction would be out of the question.

 

 

This hypothetical has brought back memories of the Novel Crime and Punishment. By the end of the novel the police absolutely know who committed the murder but knew they could not convict him.

[Ndi]

(and, BTW, has anyone noticed that on CSI they are always lucky and the perpetrator always leaves a single hair behind? He's never shedding like a mangy cat)

 

a) sometimes they do

 

b) "why is the thing you miss in the last place you are looking". Because once you find it you stop looking. Besides, they dust the entire area, roll all the hairs, and do a DNA. IIRC, they can do an analysis on DNA even if 2 samples are mixed. So in the end, it's "one hair" even if it's a whole wig.

 

c) If you found 3 hairs at the crime scene, you only use one for DNA, keep the others for physical comparison, future reference, exhibit A, etc.

 

d) if they cut the high-speed chase to show me that a lab assistant found a SECOND hair on the scene I'd be pretty upset.