Thursday, June 2, 2016
The Investigation Discovery Documentary on Adnan & the Leading Cause of Death for Serial Killer Victims
A couple of days ago, several sites reported the news that Investigation Discovery will premiere a documentary about the Adnan Syed case on June 14th. The preview accompanying one of the stories features commentary by an attorney at a civil litigation firm in Texas who used to "assist[] prosecutors with complex civil procedure issues." This attorney previously took part in an article by The Marshall Project in which attorneys expressed their views on Adnan's innocence or guilt. With regard to Hae Min Lee, the attorney told his interviewer to
look at the WAY she was killed. She was strangled. Very personal. There was a relationship there. That’s why I don’t buy the whole “maybe a serial killer did it” angle.
So, what does strangulation tell us about the "maybe a serial killed did it" angle?
In 2014, the FBI released a study entitled, "Serial Murder: Pathways for Investigations." Here were their findings with regard to the "cause of death" of victims of serial killers:
____________________________
Causes of Death (COD)
Primary causes of death were:
• Strangulation (42.5%) includes manual and ligature strangulation, suffocation, and asphyxia
• Blunt force trauma (BFT) (16.3%)
• Stab wounds (12.9%)
• Gunshot wounds (GSW) (12.9%)
• Undetermined (6.3%)
• Other (2.9%)
Other causes of death include drowning, drugs, and poisoning.
In 36.9% of the cases, the offender brought a weapon to commit the murder .
The most common causes of death reflect the intimate nature of the studied serial offenders who preferred to kill by means that bring them into close contact with their victims.
____________________________
So, strangulation is actually the most common cause of death for victims of serial killers, with strangulation being likelier than the next three causes combined. The second likeliest cause of death for victims of serial killers is blunt force trauma, which was not the cause of Hae Min Lee's death but was reported in her autopsy.
Now, personally, I don't believe that Hae Min Lee was murdered by a serial killer. I think she was killed by the person who caused her to change her plans on January 13, 1999. But the fact that strangulation was the cause of death should not at all rule out a serial killer.
-CM
https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2016/06/a-couple-of-days-ago-several-sites-reported-the-news-that-investigation-discovery-will-premiere-a-documentary-about-the-adna.html
Comments
Question: I don't think that they broke it down in that level of detail.
Posted by: Colin Miller | Jun 2, 2016 7:53:19 AM
I don't have a % but just finished a book on Ted Bundy. He raped/sodomized some of them, but not all. So I'm guessing not.
Posted by: splanchnick | Jun 2, 2016 8:20:13 AM
I find it odd that they classify suffocation and asphyxia the same as strangulation. They are very different MOs not just in terms of the criminal aspect but medically too. One of the major ways to tell a suicide from a murder is that suicides almost never involve strangulation; it's physically difficult to strangle oneself (though it has been done!) So I would think it would make more sense to classify them differently.
i bring this up because I'm not sure that the lawyer who is being quoted is thinking of strangulation as including suffocation. I sure wouldn't. i wonder what the true measure of strangulation for serial killers is if one takes away the other incommensurate items that are being included under strangulation in the data CM quotes.
Posted by: Daniel | Jun 2, 2016 2:23:35 PM
Adnan was not the only person she had an intimate relationship with either.
Posted by: Cathy my real name | Jun 2, 2016 3:01:47 PM
Per Adnan, Hae wouldn’t stop for anything when she was going to pick up her cousin. So either the killer jumped into the window of her moving car, or Adnan is a liar and a murderer. The latter seems significantly more likely.
Posted by: Seamus_Duncan | Jun 2, 2016 4:04:02 PM
splanchnick: Thanks. I’m sure that there are many similar cases.
Daniel: Yes, I do wish the data were more granular.
Cathy: It also wouldn’t be too surprising for the murderer to be a friend/acquaintance. There are plenty of strangulation cases in which a friend/acquaintance was the perpetrator.
Seamus: According to Debbie, Hae would typically leave Woodlawn at 3:00 P.M. or later to pick up her cousin. According to multiple witnesses, Hae left Woodlawn at around 2:20ish on January 13th. According to multiple witnesses, Hae turned Adnan down for a ride because something came up and she had something else to do.
Posted by: Colin Miller | Jun 2, 2016 5:44:08 PM
Seamus sometimes folks do change their patterns of behavior for reasons unknown to others. This day she obviously may have.
Posted by: NavyMom | Jun 3, 2016 8:16:36 AM
"Multiple witnesses" except the most important one, Adnan, who told Officer Adcock that Hae was supposed to give him a ride, but must have gotten tired of waiting for him and left. So, somehow he never got the message that she turned him down.
Posted by: Jane | Jun 3, 2016 10:06:52 AM
"According to multiple witnesses, Hae turned Adnan down for a ride because something came up and she had something else to do."
Well, according to Adnan’s account from January 13, 1999, she was supposed to give him a ride but he was running late so she probably got tired of waiting and left. This raises the question of why he was supposedly spending 20-45 minutes talking to Asia about Hae while Hae was waiting for him in the car, but maybe Hae slipped his mind while he was talking about Hae.
Of course, Adnan’s story changed on February 1, 1999 when he told O’Shea he wouldn’t have asked for a ride because he had his own car, and that’s the version he sticks with today.
So I suppose the question should be, is it more likely that Adnan has repeatedly lied about the ride for 17 years, and by a crazy coincidence someone else managed to kill Hae without leaving a trace of evidence despite investigations by the police, the prosecution, Drew Davis, Gutierrez, Justin Brown, Koenig, and the UVA Innocence Project? Or is it more likely that Adnan lied about the ride because he committed the murder?
Posted by: Seamus_Duncan | Jun 3, 2016 10:40:47 AM
NavyMom: Right. Regardless of where you stand on Adnan’s guilt or innocence, it’s clear that Hae changed her routine on January 13th.
Jane: It’s possible that he never got the message. Becky testified at trial that Hae told her she had to leave right after school because “she had to be somewhere after school.” In her trial testimony, Becky never mentioned Adnan. So, one theory is that Hae told Adnan that she couldn’t give him a ride. Another theory is that Hae had something else come up but never communicated this directly to Adnan.
Seamus: My response to Jane applies here as well. And, again, there are multiple possibilities. Maybe Debbie has the right day, and Adnan got caught up at the guidance counselor’s office. Maybe the requested “ride” was the “ride” that Hae typically gave Adnan to track practice. Maybe Adnan mixed up events from different days, causing changes in his story, as seems to be the case with many other people involved in the case. And so on and so forth.
Under the alternate killer theory, we also can’t say that no evidence was left behind. As one example, two hairs found on Hae were not matches for either Adnan or Hae. It’s quite possible that those hairs came from her killer. Also, if we’re moving beyond the realm of physical evidence, the killer seemingly left behind a huge piece of evidence: Hae’s statement that something came up and she had something else to do.
Obviously, you think Adnan killed Hae. But if we assume that someone else killed Hae, her statement is pretty strong evidence that the person who caused her to change her plans is the killer, and that person is lucky that (1) Hae didn’t say, “I have to meet John/Jane Doe;” and/or (2) no one saw this person change Hae’s plans/got Hae’s pager records/checked Hae’s e-mail, etc.
Posted by: Colin Miller | Jun 3, 2016 11:17:12 AM
“Maybe Adnan mixed up events from different days, causing changes in his story, as seems to be the case with many other people involved in the case.”
Adcock asked him about the ride four hours after the end of school. Adnan must have a horrific memory.
“As one example, two hairs found on Hae were not matches for either Adnan or Hae. It’s quite possible that those hairs came from her killer.”
In that case it’s certainly a shame that Adnan and his lawyer stopped Deidre and the UVA IP from pursuing DNA testing.
“But if we assume that someone else killed Hae, her statement is pretty strong evidence that the person who caused her to change her plans is the killer, and that person is lucky that (1) Hae didn’t say, “I have to meet John/Jane Doe;” and/or (2) no one saw this person change Hae’s plans/got Hae’s pager records/checked Hae’s e-mail, etc.”
Why is this the one piece of information that you actually accept as true in this case? Why is everything single account a lie, or a mistake, or the wrong day, except this?
Posted by: Seamus_Duncan | Jun 3, 2016 1:02:45 PM
OMG... Seamus's proposed (false) dichotomy where "either someone jumped into her moving car, or adnan is a liar and a murderer" is just... SO perfect an illustration to the low level of cognitive sophistication which belies pretty much everything she says on this blog and reddit.
I mean wow.. Wish I could frame that post.
Posted by: Paul | Jun 3, 2016 1:05:05 PM
Colin--arguments with her are 1-sided. You read, understand, and respond to what she says, but she won't (can't?) ever do the same for you, or anyone else. It's a monologue. She's always just waiting to deliver the next rhetoric she has on her mind. It's not a discussion where both sides are showing equal consideration and respect.
Posted by: Paul | Jun 3, 2016 1:16:19 PM
Seamus: (1) Everyone seems to agree that Adnan was high as a kite on the night of January 13th. Given this, it’s not too hard to believe that he might have issues remembering the specifics of that day.
(2) It’s a shame that BPD felt safe in telling the defense in 2008 that items related to Adnan’s case had been destroyed. If this hadn’t occurred, the defense likely would have moved for DNA testing in its initial PCR petition. Now, with two other potentially viable claims for a new trial, that petition has been delayed. If the judge issues an appeal-proof ruling against the defense, I would expect DNA testing to move forward, possibly pending some nascent Brady claims. Similarly, if the judge issues an appeal-proof ruling against the State, I would expect the State would request DNA testing.
(3) The day of the final episode of Serial, I posted an entry concluding that (1) Adnan asked for a ride on January 13th; and (2) something came up for Hae that possibly prevented her from giving Adnan a ride. Both conclusions were based upon the accountings of multiple witnesses.
Paul: Lots of gray area here. Maybe Hae stopped at an ATM (uncashed check). Maybe she had car trouble (missing ignition collar). Etc.
Posted by: Colin Miller | Jun 3, 2016 1:25:00 PM
@Daniel, I think the point though is that to state that you think someone is guilty because strangulation means a murder was done by someone the victim knew is fallacious as one of the methods of murder used by serial killers is strangulation.
@SeamusDuncan - falling back on the old Adnan asked for a ride and didn't get one argument? Man that's weak.
Posted by: Sue | Jun 3, 2016 1:48:12 PM
“Everyone seems to agree that Adnan was high as a kite on the night of January 13th.”
Adnan doesn’t. He says he vividly remembers talking to Adcock. As far as I can tell the only source for Adnan being “high as a kite” is Rabia.
“Now, with two other potentially viable claims for a new trial, that petition has been delayed.”
Can you please cite some sort of source for the idea that the DNA can’t be pursued simultaneously with the other claims? If that’s the case, why did Deidre have a petition ready to go more than a year ago? Was she just wrong?
Posted by: Seamus_Duncan | Jun 3, 2016 2:44:21 PM
Off topic but relevant to this blog:
Can a parrot be a witness to a murder when the parrot hears and repeats a victim's dying declaration? A judge may soon decide.
Posted by: Daniel | Jun 3, 2016 4:14:09 PM
Seamus: (1) According to Cathy, Adnan appeared high as a kite and even asked, “How do I get rid of a high?” So, either you believe that Cathy had the right day, meaning that Adnan was really high, or you think that Cathy had the wrong day, which makes the State’s case that much weaker.
(2) DNA claims can be pursued simultaneously with other claims. As I’ve noted, that’s a big part of the reason that the DNA petition hasn’t been made yet. There are a few possible Brady claims that could potentially be made with a Brady claim if the current appeal fails.
Daniel: Fascinating. I wonder how the judge will rule.
Posted by: Colin Miller | Jun 3, 2016 5:35:54 PM
It is not clear that Adnan ever told the police that he asked Hae for a ride on January 13. This information came from the police officer's report--not from Adnan. The officer noted that Adnan told him he had asked Hae for a ride and didn't get one. This could have easily been a mistake in reporting and not a testimony to exactly what Adnan told the officer. Annan could have said that he "sometimes asked Hae for a ride" or that he "might have asked for a ride" or that he "doesn't think he asked for a ride" -- all of which could have been written into the report as "Adnan asked Hae for a ride". Adan denies making this statement and there is no proof that he ever said it. Everything written into a police officer's written report does not make it accurate.
Posted by: Mary | Jun 5, 2016 6:27:46 AM
Colin, is there any update on when the judge is going to rule on PCR?
Posted by: Kellie | Jun 5, 2016 10:48:40 AM
Regarding this case we often hear that a lot of different scenarios can't be true because she wasn't sexually assaulted.
Isn't that just one of those things that couldn't be determined, but not neccesarely ruled out.
I can't help thinking that the reason the prosecution didn't add the accusation of possible rape of the half naked girl, was that it wouldn't have fit their theory of the motive. The dispassionate preplanned murder as an act of punishment for making him a bad muslim wouldn't include a sexual component.
I think it's depressing, to say the least, that this matter is viewed upon with so much cynicism. As if to say; -"No sex. Why would anybody she didn't know commit such a pointless crime." Since motive is one of the weakest aspects of the states case, I think it would be unvise to rule out possibilities due to assumptions about motive.
Posted by: Lars in Sweden | Jun 5, 2016 2:02:07 PM
If you think Cathy had the right day, January 13, why did Undisclosed withhold her police interview?
Posted by: Seamus Duncan | Jun 5, 2016 7:39:00 PM
Mary: Very true. Police reports often contain mistakes based upon miscommunication and other issues.
Kellie: My prediction is between now and August, but that’s just a guess.
Lars: Correct. This is one of those things that couldn’t be determined but couldn’t be ruled out.
Seamus: I’m not saying that Cathy has the right day or the wrong day. Personally, as with many other witnesses, I think she’s combining things from different days. I’m just saying that, if you do believe that Cathy has the right day, you pretty much have to believe that Adnan was high as a kite on January 13th.
Posted by: Colin Miller | Jun 6, 2016 4:22:21 AM
"...and that person is lucky that (1) Hae didn’t say, “I have to meet John/Jane Doe"
According to Debbie, she said she had to meet Don at the mall. Security Square Mall is close by, in fact, right across from Best Buy.
Posted by: TerminalGrog | Jun 7, 2016 2:34:51 PM
In what % of serial killer strangulation was there also some sort of sexual contact? In other words if there was no sexual contact does it greatly reduce possibility of serial killer?
Posted by: Question | Jun 2, 2016 7:30:03 AM