Too Few Victims: How Lowering the Victim Threshold Impacts Our Understanding of Serial Homicide

• In Event: Rare Homicide Types

Abstract

Serial murder has been a topic of significant interest to law enforcement, researchers from multiple disciplines, and the media for decades, yet there is no clear consensus on its definition. Once associated exclusively with a sexual motive, “cooling off” period, and minimum of three victims (Ressler et al., 1988), serial murder has more recently been reconceptualized as “the unlawful killing or two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events” (FBI, 2008). Some contend that lowering the minimum victim count includes offenders who would have killed more if not for being captured. Others argue that a two-victim threshold defies the definition of a series, and that a three or four victim minimum constitutes a more appropriate lower bound. Furthermore, a potential bias arises due to the relative difficulty of finding lower-level offenders in news archives. This paper examines how changing the minimum victim count alters the profile of serial homicide. Using the Radford/Florida Gulf Coast University database of over 2,300 American serial murderers since 1970, the analysis reveals that a lower victim threshold significantly changes the statistical pattern and trend line of cases. The paper concludes by recommending an alternative definition to achieve a more homogeneous population.

Authors

• Emma E. Fridel, Northeastern University

• James A. Fox, Northeastern University