Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man
I was a juror on a murder trial last year, and I was pretty impressed by the amount of analysis that was done on the crime scene. It made me think that I shouldn't ever commit a murder because there's too much evidence that gets created in the modern world.
But then I've read somewhere that most murders in the USA don't end up in an arrest, so that makes me think that I could pull it off if so inclined. I suspect that most murders are not committed by people who put a lot of thought into planning them.
But then I muse that most unsolved murders are probably random people killing random people, and killing a random person doesn't seem as satisfying as killing someone you have a grudge against, and having a grudge against someone makes you a suspect pretty quickly.
All in all, it seems like a bad bet to murder someone if you have anything to gain from it, and if you can't gain from it, why bother?
|
I think a lot of it depends on the venue, as well as who you kill. Whack some housewife in an affluent suburb, the cops will probably be all over it. Grease some lowlife in the ghetto, chances are nobody will care.
Long ago the firm I worked at shared space with an insurance agency. One of the agents was a part time coroner for Cook County, and was often called in whenever they experienced overflow, which happened quite a lot. Now, I obviously can't verify this, but he told me that the number of homicides in Chicago was drastically underreported, and that if people knew how many murders were committed in the city every year, it would absolutely scare the shit out of them. Having lived/worked there for many years, I have no trouble believing that.