One has to wonder whether that factors into those professional profilers' analyses. But serial killers don't seem to keep accurate records.
What brings this to mind is a remark in this FBI press release -- FBI Seeking Assistance Connecting Victims to Samuel Little’s Confessions:
Five years after analysts with the FBI’s Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP) began linking cases to convicted murderer Samuel Little—and nearly 18 months after a Texas Ranger began to elicit from him a breathtaking number of confessions—the FBI has confirmed Little to be the most prolific serial killer in U.S. history.
Little has confessed to 93 murders, and FBI crime analysts believe all of his confessions are credible. Law enforcement has been able to verify 50 confessions, with many more pending final confirmation.
"The most prolific serial killer in U.S. history." That line jumped out. So he's number 1? Note that they were only able to verify 50. So if confessions without verification count in the total, how about The Good Nurse, Charles Cullen? He was convicted of 13 murders, however:
Experts have estimated that Cullen may ultimately be responsible for 400 deaths, which would make him the most prolific serial killer in recorded history.
The race is on.
Furthermore, it's possible Albert Hicks, the last pirate of New York, may be in the running, but ships full of bodies scuttled at sea don't yield much evidence.
But serial killer score keepers need to be reminded that Henry Lee Lucas conned law enforcement officers into believing he murdered 200 people -- He was America's most deadly serial killer – but it was all a lie.
Serial killers trying to break the record need to keep better records.
------
12:44 PM 12/11/2019
Comments