The most recent definition from the FBI is "the unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events." But strict definitions can’t address the grey area-for example, Charles Manson, an undeniably evil and maniacal orchestrator, is not technically considered a serial killer (yikes). How many killings must one amass to be considered a “serial” murder as opposed to just an avid, excited one? Should the definition address the number of locations, or should there be a specified window of time in between events? Should the definition include a psychological motive? What defines a serial killer is up for debate. They each offer a different but equally upsetting look inside the twisted mind of a serial killer, including mass graves in the Hollywood Hills, and a man's proud first murder (of 33!) committed in Culver City. Throughout the years, some of the most horrific mass killings have centered around Los Angeles (lucky us).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |