Murder Call

Facet Theory (FT) offers a different solution to the problem of classifying the actions of serial murderers. The facet approach combines the following: 1.   Complementary interplay between hypothesis generation and hypothesis testing. The generation of hypotheses is facilitated by representation of complex relationships in geometric forms. The testing of hypotheses and their replicability draws upon a formal framework, with minimal assumptions. 2.     A formal system for representing sets of interrelated, multivariate hypotheses that is combined with empirical procedures for examining their validity. 3.   A set of nonmetric multivariate statistical procedures for revealing the structures inherent in complex data, together with principles for the interpretation of the products of those analyses.  There are three basic facet structures: 1) background facets; 2) domain facets; and 3) range facets (i.e., content facets). Background facets describe what may be considered the con

One of the major weaknesses of traditional classifications of aggressive behavior is the common belief and assumption that there are only two types of people: the violent and nonviolent. This is due in part to the fact that, historically, traditional studies on aggression in murder have used single homicides as case studies, without any exploration of murderers. Two distinctions are usually made about the serial murderer’s crime scene actions: 1) the actions are emotional or reactive; and 2) actions involve some sort of planning. For example, the FBI’s organized and disorganized dichotomy essentially derives from the instrumental and expressive aggression theories. In the early FBI interviews with convicted serial murderers, the offenders claimed that their crimes were reactive, with no planning involved. The planning is thought to be reflected in the crime scene actions of the killer, which tends to be methodical, and signifies ritualized behavior and careful planning w