Debate and Discussion

Forensic Science vs Movie Criminals from old films
Lonnehart at 3:25PM, Sept. 17, 2008
posts: 2,853
joined: 3-16-2006
I remember watching a film called “10 to Midnight” (a Charles Bronson film). In it was a serial killer who was able to baffle the police by sneaking into his victim's place, stripping totally nude, then stabbing his victim with his butcher knife without physically touching them. Afterwards he'd wash the blood off of himself, get dressed then leave the place. The police couldn't catch him easily, and even when caught he could argue his case. The forensics at that time would be able to show that he was where his victims were, but they couldn't prove that he killed them.

That movie was made at a time when we didn't have all this neat forensics technology that we use to catch killers today. I was thinking though… Would todays forensics catch this guy and prove he was the murderer? I would like to know. Several facts make it seem impossible though.

He never touched his victims when stabbing them. So his fingerprints are never found on the body or anywhere else. You could get his footprints to prove he was there as well as hair samples and such, but he could argue that he was at that place for a different reason. And because he kills his victims in the nude there are no blood spatters on his clothes so testing for that would not work. And he's very thorough at washing the blood off of himself; he makes sure he cases his victim so he knows when to kill her and have enough time to wash that evidence off of himself. And as always he takes his butcher knife with him so it's never found with any of his victims.

What do you all think?
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:38PM
Aurora Moon at 7:58PM, Sept. 17, 2008
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
actually, if he's always carrying his butcher knife with him then he'd need someplace to store it and such. always carrying it on his person would be kind of dumb since how he'd be pretty much caught faster that way. and nowadays the police seem to be very through in searching everywhere that an killer could stash stuff. even in gutters 9 blocks away, etc….

so once they find that weapon and connect it with him…then it's game over for him. and even if they can't directly prove that it's him… he's still a major suspect so they'd proably follow him disreectly or keep an watch on him without him knowing it.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
StaceyMontgomery at 5:18AM, Sept. 18, 2008
posts: 520
joined: 4-7-2007
Neat forensics technology is way overhyped. The moreI learn about it, the more suspicious I get. the chimeras of Bullet-lead anaylsis & fiber analysis, the intentional dilution of fingerprinting, and the madness of polygraphs.

And the evidence is all around you - crimes are not dramatically easier to solve then they used to be, and justice does not appear to be dramatially more accurate. We don't really live in the world of the CIS shows yet. But perhaps we're heading there.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:55PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved Google+