[Pete]

Like many of you, I have been thinking about this case quite a bit. The lack of information is frustrating. However, I am glad to see these 1600+ threads on FR because it means we have thousands of people who are thinking about it and maybe we can collectively come up with something.

Here are some of my latest thoughts. I don't pretend to be any kind of expert but I feel the need to contribute to the discussion.

• 1. The School:

  I think yesterday's shooting could tell us a few things. While the other shootings may have been staked out before hand, the school is the first of the shootings that does not have at least the appearance of complete randomness. While it is possible he picked which school at random, the fact that he picked a school shows intent. Instead of wanting to kill random people, he wanted to kill a student. While the killer(s) could get off the highway on almost any exit and find a shopping center, that is not the case with a school. That, to me, indicates a motive other than just the desire to kill.

  As to what that motive is, others have pointed out that the police made a big deal last Friday about how safe the schools are. It could be the motive was to taunt the police. If that is the case, I would lean away from terrorist as I don't believe their plan would change on the fly. The exception is an isolated cell acting on its own. Another possibility is that a school was always part of some overall plan of terror. As we all know, recent proclamations from AQ have mentioned schools specifically.

• 2. No shots over the weekend:

  I think it is very likely that commuter traffic is part of the escape plan. Driving patterns are typically much different and much lighter on the weekend. If true, this shows that the killer(s) have thought through how not to get caught. I think that rules out a mass murderer but does not rule out a serial killer or terrorist.

• 3. One or two killers?:

  This is important. I believe there are at least two people involved in the killings - a shooter and a driver. Early news reports had police on the look out for two men. It makes a big difference if there are one or two. Serial killers almost always work alone. For me, multiple perps leans toward terrorism rather than thrill kills but could be either.

• 4. One shot.

  That only one shot is taken shows discipline - a preconceived operational decision by a group or individual. That indicates planning which means this isn't something someone just decided to do one day and then did it.

  To me, it also indicates that the shooter is both skilled and cautious. Skilled because the shooter has the confidence that one shot will do the trick and cautious because the one-shot-and-run method makes escape much easier. Note, also, that where the victims were wounded, the shooter did not feel it necessary to take a second shot to finish the job. More on that next.

• 5. The wounded:

  The first six victims were kills on Wednesday and Thursday, all head shots on more-or-less stationary victims. The victims on Friday and Monday were wounded with body shots. Also, it sounds like the wounded victims were moving targets - a woman loading packages into her car and a student walking to school. The body shots instead of head shots could be because the targets were moving or because the shooter set up farther away. The latter indicates a cautiousness while it is not clear to me what the former indicates. It is clear that the shooter did intentionally choose head shots for some victims and body shots for others. That tells me the shooter has knowledge beyond the average citizen who would most likely not think of such things.

  It might also mean that the killer does not require that all shots result in death. After the Friday shooting, it would be clear to the shooter that a body shot does not guarantee death yet he took another one on Monday and, sure enough, only wounded the victim. For me, that lessens the likelyhood it is a thrill killer who would want the kill by taken a head shot even if he missed and leans more towards terrorists who inflict terror whether the victim is killed or only wounded.

I realize that most of what I have written is speculation. My hope is that by posting these thoughts, I might spark an idea in someone else's mind and contribute to the collective knowledge that could lead to the resolution of these crimes.

[ezo4]

nice job on that post

[js1138]

5. The wounded:

It is my understanding that body shots kill from shock, and that is dependent on the energy of the bullet. A .223 derives its energy from velocity. A three hundred yard shot would be far less likely to kill than a one hundred yard shot.

So is the perp getting more cautious and taking longer shots?

[GummyIII]

FYI..#94.

[dd5339]

Very well thought out and detailed.

I've been thinking much the same since this started. If I had to guess, I'd say this is a probing attack to see what the response is.

1. How do the local authorities react?
2. How do the state/federal authorities react?
3. How does the media react?

It's going to be interesting to see what finally happens with this.

Semper Fi

[NCLou]

Just some thought on how your questions might apply to non-terrorist leads.

The school - Taunt the police, more fear in the public both appeal to a lot of serial killer, the ego driven ones. Also, a serial killer usually needs to "up the ante" to keep feeling the same rush. That can be: more frequent attacks, more heinous/shocking attacts, more high risk attacks. The choice of a child/school target fits this. In this case I would expect the next attacks to continue to be more provocative - kids, outside a church, traffic cop. Or he will get the thrill by communicating with someone. I just have a feeling that if this is a serial killer, we are going to start seing letters.

No shots on weekend- A serial killer may have a family to be with on the weekend, may have a job that takes him out of town on the weekend. However, that indicates a level of social contact that makes you wonder what people that know him thought he was doing on those weekdays. If he was supposed to be at work, would he be noticed to be gone? He could live outside of the area, and has a low level blue collar job or business that gives him a reason to go into DC. He could be telling his wife he has to be in the DC area during the week for some painting or contracting job he is working on.
If this is the case, eventually friends or family will start to put two and two together.

One or two shooters – Although most serial killers do work alone, I think there are enough example of partners that this cannot be used to discount the possibility of serial killers.

Single shot- Although your analysis may be right, let me suggest one other possibility. The shooter may still be “learning the ropes”. Right now they may not feel confident in being able to get the second shot off and still get away. With success, eventually he may be confident enough in his ability to escape that he will try a second shot. Or maybe his death rate is good enough for him.

Head shot versus body- this is the most intriguing. I can’t think of a good reason to switch for a serial killer, with one possible exception. Is it possible that he has shot at twice as many people as he has hit, and no one knows it? Could he have decided that body shots were easier, that a lower kill rate was a good trade off for a higher hit rate. I don’t know enough about shooting to say, but it seems plausible, especially if one of his “misses” was part of a close call as far as getting caught.

[Freedom2specul8]

"I believe there are at least two people involved in the killings - a shooter and a driver. Early news reports had police on the look out for two men. It makes a big difference if there are one or two. Serial killers almost always work alone. For me, multiple perps leans toward terrorism rather than thrill kills but could be either"

This is the strangest part! I don't understand why the criminal justice professors did not address that issue in the article. That is another reason why I disagree with the professor...I don't think they were just "target practicing"..

[Freedom2specul8]

also see my #127

[joebuck]

"Serial killers almost always work alone. For me, multiple perps leans toward terrorism rather than thrill kills but could be either."

Although this is a common misconception, it is not true. Examples abound of serial killers working in pairs or groups. Lawrence Bittaker and Roy Norris in Cal., Bianchi and Bruno (hillside stranglers) in LA, The Manson Gang, Dean Corrill and his teenage sidekick killers in Texas, evidence strongly suggests that Larry Eyler in Indiana and David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) worked with others in their killings, Charles Starkweather and his killer bride; although not quite serial killers, Leopold and Loeb worked together and pretty much fit the Pscho-sexual sadist serial killer profile spot on. For just about every example of the lone-wolf serial killer (ie. Ted Bundy), I can give you an example of a serial killer working in pairs or groups

[revolted]

My thought is that all Muslims be rounded up and checked thoroughly. If any problems with papers, visas, etc...off they go to their respective homelands. Sorry, but I think we are at war here.