"Profiling . . . does not provide the identity of the of fender, but it does indicate the type of person most likely to have committed a crime having certain unique characteristics."
 | An image should appear at this position in the text. To use the entire page scan as a placeholder, edit this page and replace "{{missing image}}" with "{{raw image|FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin 55 (12).pdf/14}}". Otherwise, if you are able to provide the image then please do so. For guidance, see Wikisource:Image guidelines and Help:Adding images. |  |
protocol that there was no apparent indication that the victim was sexually assaulted. Laboratory reports indicated that the victim had been drinking at the time of the assault, and there was no evidence of semen present in or on the victim or her clothing.
From the above information, the criminal profiler advised the detective that he had already interviewed the killer. The surprised detective was presented with the following probable crime scenario.
The victim was drinking with the offender prior to her death. An argument ensued, reaching a threshold where the offender could not take it any longer. Angered, he obtained a "weapon of opportunity" from a kitchen cabinet and returned to the living room where he confronted the victim face to face and repeatedly struck victim about her head and face. After killing her, the offender realized that the police would surely implicate him as the obvious murderer. He then washed blood from his hands in the kitchen sink and also cleaned blood andfingerprints from the hammer. He rolled the victim over in a face-up position and "staged" the crime to appear the way he felt a sexually motivated crime should look. He conducted the staging by making it appear that the offender searched for money or personal property in the apartment.
Upon hearing this analysis of the crime, the detective exclaimed, "You just told me the husband did it."
The detective was coached regarding suggested reinterview techniques of the victim's husband. In addition, the detective was further advised that if the victim's husband were given a polygraph examination, he in all probability would react more strongly to the known fact that he was "soiled" by his wife's blood than to questions concern ing his wife's murder. The detective was told to have the polygraph examiner direct questions at the husband, acknowledging the fact that he got blood on his hands and washed them off along with the hammer in the kitchen sink.
About 5 days later, the detective called the criminal profiler to advise that the victim's husband was charged with murder. According to the detective, the husband failed the polygraph and subsequently admitted his guilt to the polygraph examiner.
