An interesting case from a Forensic Pathology book, that i am currently reading.
This Lust murder happened On May 7, 1982
An interesting illustration of the classic “mixed” personality was provided to me by the Peel Regional Police Force in Brampton, Ontario, Canada. I had the opportunity to interview Inspector Rod Piukkala, who provided the following case information on a particularly brutal lust murder.42 This case presented the authorities with an “organized” and “disorganized” scenario and provides an exquisite example of why we in law enforcement must be cautious in our assessments of typology in the application of psychology to the crime. The suspect, who was 17 years of age at the time of the offense, worked as a shipping clerk in a local factory. His victim was a 16-year-old high school student.
She had just left her boyfriend’s house and was waiting for a bus when the suspect pulled up and offered her a ride. The victim accepted the ride after the suspect got out of his vehicle and opened the rear door for her. He was able to verbalize her into his vehicle and take her to an isolated location, where he sodomized and raped her. This type of activity is appropriately described as organized. However, what followed were the activities of a classic lust murder committed by a disorganized offender.
The suspect provided police with the following confession. He stated that he had pulled into the back of the 600 Group (a factory) and then put the car into park. He stated: I then lunged at her over the front seat real quick. I was beside her and I started to grab her tit. I reached over and put my hands under her knees and pulled them up onto the seat so she was laying on the seat. I told her to take her pants down and she did. I spread her legs and licked her vagina.
Then I took my pants down and got up on her and screwed her. After I ejaculated I said that’s it and she asked if she could sit up in the front seat. I said sure and then said hold on a second and I grabbed her belt loop so she wouldn’t run away…While we were walking I said I had a present for her…I reached into the car through the open window and grabbed a brick from the floor. I looked at her and then hit her with the brick over the left eye. She screamed “oh no” just before I hit her with the brick and then sort of screamed in pain. I hit her one or two more times on the side of the head and then she fell down. Then I saw a bigger brick, so I put the small one down and then picked up the bigger one and hit her in the head about seven times. Then she screamed and said, “Don’t strangle me.”
Then I looked over and seen the board and picked it up and put it on her throat and applied pressure. I released it after about a minute and she sucked some air in and she was still breathing so I saw another board that was longer so I got it and held the end against her throat and stood up and leaned my weight on it. I did this for about 2 or 3 minutes. Then I let up and threw the board away and I grabbed her by the feet and dragged her over to the field. I was dragging her by her pant leg and when I got over there I noticed her clothes were pulled up around her shoulders. Her breasts were exposed and I could see her lighter and a safety pin. I leaned over and bit her right nipple, then I got the lighter and I pulled her jeans off to her ankles and I ripped her panties off and just tossed them aside. I used the lighter and singed her pubic hair.
Then I picked up the safety pin and put it through her left nipple. Then put the lighter to her right breast. I spotted a piece of wood with a nail in it and I put the board with the nail in it on her chest and hit it with my hand and drove the nail into her chest. I did this between five and seven times. Then I saw this big brick about 3 feet away and I picked it up and dropped it on her chest. I did this probably seven or eight times. She was still quivering at this time so I put the board with the nail under her neck with the nail up and pushed her head on it. Then I pulled the lumber jacket over her head and I got the big brick beside her head and then flipped it over her head. I stood up and urinated on her and then I left.
Oh, I forgot one thing, I remember the moon shining on her necklace, which was around her neck but was broken. I took it off and put it in my pocket and the lighter too. I walked over to the car and picked up the small brick and put it on the floor of the front seat. I got in the car and drove home. I got home about 12:20 (midnight) and I went right to sleep. The next day I got up about 6:00 A.M. and went to work between 7 and 7:30. On my way to work I drove [past the location where the murder was committed to get the name of the company].
When I got to work, I phoned information and got the name and telephone number of the company. I wrote it down on a piece of paper. I wrote out this piece of paper [indicating the evidence on the desk] as soon as I got to work. At 10:20 I phoned the 600 Group and spoke to a secretary and told her there’s a body out back, she’s been killed, call the proper authorities. I told her my name was Fred Baker. I called back to see if the police had got there yet. I said, “This is Fred, have the police arrived yet?” The third time I called a man answered and I hung up. I called back again and said, “The future’s uncertain, the end is always near. And you’re gonna die too.” I hung up the phone then. I made another call a little bit later and I was trying to scare them, I had seen it in the movies. I said three sticks of dynamite set for 3 minutes. I think I said a couple of doors up. Then I hung up and called back about a minute and a half later and said, “Minute and a half to go.” Then I called up Mississauga News and the receptionist put me through to [name of the reporter].
I told him the girl’s name was Darlene that she was 17 to 19…At lunchtime I walked down the road and noticed the police cars at 600 Group. I asked one of the reporters what happened and he said there’s a murder but there’s not much information. I turned around and went back to work.
Investigative Considerations:
The suspect’s statement included information that he had gotten the victim’s name from the newspapers and placed calls to the victim’s relatives. He also called her
school to inquire about the funeral. In addition, he called the cemetery and got the location of the plot. He also wrote a four-page letter to the police, which graphically
described the murder and events leading up to the death of the young victim. The letter, which taunted the police and warned of other murders, was delivered along with the victim’s necklace and her cigarette lighter to a library with instructions to phone the police. (See Table 21.1 and Table 21.2 in this chapter. Note that there are a number of organized and disorganized characteristics in combination with one another that represent the suspect as well as the activities at the crime scene.)
The Police Investigation:
Peel Regional Police Homicide Inspectors Rod Piukkala and D’Arcy Honer were assigned to investigate the case. Detective Sergeant Geoff Hancock, Inspector Mike
Metcalf, and Inspector Frank Fernandes (now deceased) were assigned the identification duties in connection with this case. (See “Latent Prints on Human Skin”
in Chapter 20.)
The deceased’s head was covered with a 66-pound block. Her sweater and bra were pulled up, fully exposing her breasts. Her jeans were rolled down to her ankles
exposing her genitalia and her legs were positioned in a spread-eagled manner.
The officers observed a safety pin inserted into her left nipple as well as several scratches and bite marks on her breast. They also observed burn marks on her breast and pubic area. There were several puncture marks on her neck and chest along with deep lacerations on the top and sides of her skull. The board with the nail protruding was located beneath her skull. The crime scene search revealed a number of bloodstains and drag marks leading towards the body along with a smaller bloody building block. The identification officers were able to “lift” palm prints from the inner thigh of the deceased, which later matched those of the suspect Dobson. (See “Latent Prints from Human Skin” in Chapter 20.) In addition, a forensic odontologist was able to match the suspect’s dentition to the bite marks inflicted on the victim’s breast.
The suspect, David Dobson, was identified early as a result of the telephone calls to the 600 Group. The authorities had requested Bell Canada to install tracing equipment on the company’s line. As a result, the calls were traced to another factory about a block away. The authorities also learned that someone, who was later discovered to be the suspect, had made two additional calls to the Mississauga News. The owner of the factory where the calls originated was requested by police to listen to a tape recording of the suspect. The owner identified David Dobson. Court-approved audio and video surveillance was immediately commenced on the subject. Tape recordings of the subject were also played for the secretaries of the 600 Group and the Mississauga News as well as for the reporter.
The following day, an employee at the plant where Dobson worked located a piece of paper with the telephone numbers of the 600 Group and the Mississauga News on Dobson’s desk. A further search of the plant by Detective Sergeant Hancock and Inspectors Piukkala and Honer revealed a piece of paper with the phrase “the future’s uncertain, the end is always near” taped to the wall above Dobson’s work bench. The phone numbers for the 600 Group and the Mississauga News were again
observed on another piece of paper.
On Monday, the subject was shown a newspaper account of the murder by a fellow employee, who was acting under the direction of investigators. He immediately opened the paper to the appropriate page and began to read aloud to the other employees. The subject then proceeded to cut both stories from the paper and place them in his wallet. Upon his arrest, these articles were still in his wallet.
The subject was also monitored making telephone calls to people listed in the telephone book with the same last name as the deceased. In addition, authorities were able to document him calling the deceased’s school requesting information about the funeral. The authorities then recorded him calling the cemetery requesting the location of the plot. Later that same day the surveillance officers observed him delivering a package to the Mississauga Library. This package was a four-page letter addressed to Inspector (now deputy chief) Wingate detailing what had transpired on May 6 and included several taunting messages to the police. In the envelope were the victim’s necklace and her cigarette lighter.
On May 12, the subject was arrested by Inspectors Honer and Piukkala. Dobson subsequently provided the officers with a complete verbal and written account of the murder. He also provided handwriting, voice, dental impressions, and physical specimen samples, which were matched to the crime. His palm prints were matched to the latent prints taken from the victim’s legs. The bloody brick that he used to strike the victim in the face was found on the front floor of his car. David Dobson was convicted of first-degree murder and is serving life in prison with a minimum of 25 years ordered by the court before he will be eligible for parole application.
Fingerprint from the offender recovered from the victim´s dead body and skin by the use of the Magna-Brush Technique
On May 7, 1982, the Peel Regional Police Force Identification Bureau became involved in an extremely gruesome murder case. (See Chapter 21 for reference.)** The victim had been badly battered, sexually assaulted, and otherwise perversely attacked. She was found on her back with clothing partially removed, exposing her upper and lower body. The
police felt that she must have been handled by the offender and began an examination of the body at the scene with this in mind. Detective Sergeant Geoff Hancock, Inspector Mike Metcalf, and Inspector Frank Fernandes (now deceased) were the identification officers
who conducted this portion of the investigation. Initial examination was performed at the scene using the Kromekote technique; however, a limited supply of Kromekote paper yielding negative results made it necessary to go on to another technique.
At this point, the body was removed to the local morgue and prior to removal, the ambulance attendants and hospital pathologists were advised not to store the body in any refrigerated area and to ensure that none of the exposed skin areas was handled. An examination of the body for latent fingerprints was begun within an hour’s time at the morgue. From this experience, it can be recommended that a good quality portable light source be used to do this type of examination, using a large hand-held magnifying glass.
The officers had received information of a technique used successfully by the police in Miami, Florida, during their investigation of the “Spa Murders.” They had also used the Kromekote technique and when this was unsuccessful, progressed to the Magna-Brush powder technique. The identification officers decided to implement the Magna-Brush technique, using MacDonnell Magna Jet Black Powder.
It appeared at the scene that the legs of the deceased had been forced apart. Her jeans had been pulled down around her ankles so the areas of the legs we felt would have been handled were the inner knee and thigh areas. When this area of skin was dusted with the Magna-Brush powder, two areas revealed evidence of ridge detail when examined using the large hand-held magnifying glass. They were both on the inner knee areas. The officers photographed this ridge detail so that a proper examination could be made.
The photography of the ridge detail proved to be the most critical part of the fingerprint examination. A 120 camera was used, with a good quality, heavy tripod, initially using a Polaroid back, using Type 665 P/N film. The Polaroid film did not clearly reveal the ridge detail; however, it provided a good idea as to the best angle to position the lights — in this case, a single head electronic flash unit. This angle was achieved only through trial and error. To ensure correct lighting, the recommendation is that perhaps several varied light angles be used.
During the subsequent photography, the officers also used Kodak Tri-X black and white 120 film. However, they did not reveal the ridge detail as seen under magnification because of the lack of tonal separation. The black-and-white print tended to mask the ridge detail
because of light reflecting on the natural skin creases. Kodak VPS 120 was also used as well as Kodak slide film in 35 mm format.
When the color proofs were completed, a different story unfolded. The ridge detail originally seen at the morgue was quite visible on the color proofs because of the tonal separation. An identification was made shortly thereafter from the Kodak VPS 120 proofs. Although lacking a little in contrast and bearing a slight colorcast, the ridge detail, which was from the area of the suspect’s palm, was positively identified. The color slide photos also taken at the morgue revealed sufficient detail for examination as well.
Perhaps the colorcasts and low contrast can be corrected by attempting to print out the cast and trying Kodacolor 120 instead of the VPS 120. To summarize briefly the technique used, it should be noted again that the following steps should be taken:
1. Advise ambulance and hospital personnel not to handle any areas of exposed skin.
2. Do not refrigerate the body.
3. If any ridges appear as a result of applying the Magna-Brush powder, using a good light and magnifying glass, make sure that several angles of lighting are used to achieve optimum results. If possible, make an attempt to process the film prior to the start of the autopsy to ensure that you have the best lit photograph of the latent on the skin. If this is not possible, ensure that an adequate number of photographs are taken.
4. If possible, use Tungsten lighting when photographing the latent print. This should prove to be a more versatile light source than electronic flash. The latent print can be
lighted and viewed directly through the ground glass on larger format cameras and should yield better results.
5. Use Kodak VPS film and also Kodacolor. If attempts are successful and a colorcast is evident, attempt to print it out during the print processing to increase contrast.
This was the first time in the history of fingerprinting in Canada that the fingerprint of an accused on skin had been identified using this technique.
eligible for parol in 25 years pffft!! Fry the rotten son of bitch!
