Signature!

Bowler hat, mustache, too small jacket, his walk.

Ethel Merman?
Really loud voice.

Dolly Parton?
Bazombas on top of bazombas and equally oversized hair.

Think of 'signature' as the 'trademark' of a serial killer.

How do you recognize Coca Cola as opposed to 7-Up?
(Other than one comes in green and one comes in red and the lettering?) You know they are both soda pop, but if you saw no lettering, only the actual Coca Cola swirl or the red ball belonging to 7--Up, you would know which products they referenced.

Everyone knows the Mitsubishi logo. No words necessary.

Same thing with signature. Each one is unique to the product for which it was created.

Rainsong

At a crime scene, something might be present but not necessarily recognized as a trademark and certainly not at the very first victim. A pink ribbon can be present at the crime scene and maybe even tied around the victim, who might be a seamstress or a young girl preparing for a party or the like. It is possible to leave a corpse in a certain position and not have it recognized as having been 'posed' because it just might have been the result of simply tossing the corpse somewhere.

The easiest way for people to understand signature is to look at it as the trademark of a particular killer.

Too many people here seem to think finding pubic hairs at separate crime scenes is 'signature,' when in fact, pubic hairs, like white cotton fibers, are too common to indictate signature.

Uniquenss is one of the aspects that make signature the signature, just as our individual fingerprints are our own unique 'signature.'

There are also people on the internet who say JonBenet's murder is an isolated event when we do not know that as fact. Yes, she was removed from her bedroom as were so many other young children. Yes, she was found bound with ligatures just as other children have been found and yes, she had tape on her mouth--but people seem to expect an exact replica, including the note, to point to her murder being part of a series.

Doubtful.

Sometimes the only thing that links a series is the manner of death or the events prior to the death, such as torture. Not particularly torture by knife, garrote or water torture, but simply torture. In that regard, torture would be the 'signtature.' Some sadists choose to use pliers one time, a knife the next, and a hammer next time around. It's all still torture-- the trademark, or hallmark, if you prefer.

The specific label isn't important if the idea of 'trademark' clarifies what constitutes signature.

Rainsong

Rainsong

The overkill, and excessive control he exerted, seem to indicate something triggered the violence against JBR---perhaps because she wasn't cooperating. The garotte wasn't made ahead of time---but made outside the cellar room. There may be other clues such as the heart on JBR's hand....the marked up magazine article. There could be fantasy involved, because of the note, and the excess words and references to movies or it might have been done to misdirect the investigation---to give him time to get away. He may have killed JBR so as to not leave a living witness...because he had done time before because a witness could identify him.

I don't know how you unbundle all of this---but it appears to be a kidnapping gone bad, with an underlying jealousy/resentment of JR...or what he stood for. JBR was the perfect victim for a kidnapping attempt, as was JR.

It goes in-depth with many case examples to explain what Signature is and what it is not. You won't be confused anymore after reading this book.

If the first examples in this thread had included the element that an act committed had gone beyond what was necessary to commit the crime and was done for the personal satisfaction of the offender, I think it might have been clearer.

Mikie had a good quote from John Douglas on his thread that helped to explain signature.

Using the garotte as an example in the Ramsey crime, it could be called signature, but we don't know for sure. It certainly fits the profile in one sense because it went beyond what was necessary to strangle a 6 year old. What we don't know for sure is how the offender felt about it. If he did it for personal satisfaction, it is a signature element. If he did it because his hands are too weak, then it is a method of operation...the crime couldn't have been committed without it.

The ransom note could be a signature element if there was no kidnapping intended, and the offender received gratification from writing and leaving it. If it really is a kidnapping gone wrong, it is no longer considered a signature.

We can speculate to our heart's content on what was signature in the Ramsey crime, and we may just be right. However, if there were another crime and then another crime using the same elements, we could feel more certain in our speculations.