The Criminal Choice Behind Burglary

by Tom Adair author of the 2012 Crime Thriller The Scent of Fear.

As a former CSI I tried to understand how the criminal thinks. It's impossible to consider every single motivation but there are some generalities that may aid investigators in uncovering certain clues. As an author I find this insight very valuable because weaving this mindset into your storyline gives a sense of realism I think readers respond to. Everyone wants to understand motive. It's how we begin to make sense of things and challenge our world view. As a reader I want to understand the motivations of the killer, victim, cops, and others too. It helps me understand why they do what they do.

I've talked to a lot of victims that ask me a simple question; "why me?". It's not a dumb question. While it is true that some victim's may just be int he wrong place at the wrong time (like a shark attack), others increase their vulnerability to crime and criminals (like joining a gang). So it's helpful to consider what types of factors criminals may consider when choosing a victim. I thought it would be simpler to frame the discussion within the topic of burglary. In truth, some of the selection criteria can be applied to other crimes as well but let's just stick with burglary for now.

Burglars typically choose a place to burglarize for one of three reasons. These are broad categories with some cross over but they will serve for the discussion.

1. Inside knowledge (intelligence)
2. Vulnerability with reward
3. Opportunity (wrong place wrong time)

Inside Knowledge: 
In the military this is called intelligence. You'd be amazed how often a burglary can be tied to intelligence. The world war two warning of  "loose lips sink ships" actually works with criminals too. If criminals find out that you have things of value they may want to look for an opportunity to take them. I often say that many criminals want "easy" so you have to do your best to avoid helping them. Here are some of the biggest sources of "intelligence leaks" in the household.

1. Children. Children are the worst. Kids love to tell stories and brag to their friends. "We just got a new computer", "My mom just inherited a bunch of money", "I just got a brand new XBOX", etc. Even when talking to 'trusted' friends the conversation may be overheard by others.
2. Social Media. I am always amazed at people that tell the twitterverse that they are on vacation. They get on Facebook and say "Hey! We're a thousand miles away from our house and NO ONE is watching it". Many don't have the smarts to lie and say something like "Thanks God my brother is on leave from the Marine Corps and is watching the house with an attack dog!".
3. Visitors to the house. This can be anyone from your son's new "gangsta friend", ex-boyfriend, or repairmen. We often don't consider what a stranger might see in our homes like jewelry being left out, or even where we keep money (when you pay a serviceman).

Vulnerability with Reward:
I link these two together because the burglar is more likely to exploit a vulnerability if they know there is a reward for their risk. One of the biggest vulnerabilities is easy access to the residence or business. Some of the biggest culprits are;

1. Open garage doors
2. Open windows or unlocked doors (houses and vehicles)
3. Items of value with easy access (like a purse or wallet left on the front seat of your car)

Other things can include ladders propped up against houses (for easy access to second story windows that are usually left unlocked) or newspapers or fliers piled up outside (indicating you're on vacation). The reward/risk issue is equally important. Wanna guess a percentage of how many homes displaying signs like "Dangerous dog", "Video Surveillance Used" or "Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again" get burglarized compared to ones not displaying butterfly flags? Most criminals want "easy". Now all of this changes if your house is the only place to get what they want. So if you have a rare and valuable item (like the Hope Diamond) then the motivated criminal will look for a way to get it but, that is usually not the case. However, the higher the value of the item being sought, the more risk one may take to get it.

Opportunity:
This embodies the "wrong place, wrong time" meme. Obviously, the best way to avoid being in the wrong place is being more selective about the places we visit. I spend a fair amount of time in the back country of the Rocky Mountains. I feel much safer walking through the woods at midnight than an alley in many metropolitan cities. Some places are "wrong" for some folks no matter the time of day. Your characters may increase their risk of being attacked (mugged) because they are forced to go places they wouldn't normally choose. Maybe your PI has to go into a seedy bar or maybe somebody gets arrested and goes to jail for a few days. These exposures put them at increased risk. They may survive without incident but the tension is still there. From a criminal perspective it is literally the fly in the spider net. They simply wait for some unsuspecting victim to cross paths with them. The single attractive woman or suburban teenager with the iPod that has to ride a subway through the bad part of town at midnight.

Considering these factors when developing your plots, characters, and dialog will help explain the motivations of your characters and give a perspective for the reader when digesting the story. Remember, the motive has to align with the risk/reward calculus to be believable. A criminal won't rob a homeless man with a shopping cart full of old smelly clothes, empty liquor bottles, and a dead fish ;).

A Day in the Life of a CSI

A few days ago a young student contacted me about a paper she was writing. What is a day in the life of a CSI like? It was an excellent question with a not so simple answer. You see, the job of a criminalist is largely reactionary. We have to wait for crimes to occur before we spring into action and criminals are never courteous enough to send an RSVP. The only things scheduled in our lives are meetings, courtroom testimony, and vacations, all of which can be upended in the blink of an eye. Knowing that, I wasn't sure how to answer her question because there never is a "normal" day in the crime lab. You walk in the door each morning with no idea what you might find. The day may be dull or you may get called to the worst mass murder in state history.  I suppose that CSIs have to remain emotionally and physically fluid. Like a race car ready to switch gears from neutral to red-line in seconds.We tend to go with the flow and accept change easily.  So I thought it might be best to describe both a "slow" day and a "busy" day while admitting that most days have elements of both.

The "Slow" Day:
I wish I could say that every day is like an episode of CSI: Las Vegas but I'd be lying. We don't even get a soundtrack. CSIs have a lot of boring duties. First, there's report writing. As writers, you may not fully appreciate how boring this can be but report writing is dull and unimaginative. It has to be. As Joe Friday loved to say we just want to convey the facts and rarely do we inject opinion. Then there are the meetings...ugh. Some productive, most a waste of time, and all of them mandatory. You may be stuck in a four hour meeting on verbal conflict resolution or a lecture on the proper investigative response to a nuclear detonation (which surprisingly to me was not run like hell). Some training is by request. These are the specialized schools or classes where we learn to apply the skills of our trade. Sometimes a good school feels more like a vacation but in the back of your mind you recognize that lab requests are piling up in your inbox..

Court can be a mix of both good and bad.  You never know what an attorney will ask you so that keeps you on your toes and presents a bit of intrigue to the proceedings. That's assuming you actually make it into the courtroom. Since there is no way to tell how long any given testimony will take you often have to wait around for your turn. This may be hours or even days. The magazines are old, the coffee sucks, and the television is permanently turned to either the weather channel or Judge Judy. It's kind of like hell without the culture.

When you aren't tied up with those fun activities you'll likely be working on laboratory requests. These too can run the spectrum from interesting to mundane. Let me tell you...after processing three hundred documents with Ninhydrin the shine of the assignment rubs off a little. Sometimes you get something fun like a gun or knife used in a serious crime or something requiring a novel or unique processing technique; but you're more likely to be processing trash or beer bottles from a stolen car or gang party. The good news is that there is never a shortage of lab requests from detectives all of which will be labeled "RUSH". It doesn't matter how petty the crime is, they needed it yesterday.

The "Busy" Day:
I think it's safe to say that every CSI lives for the busy day. Whether you are running from call to call or at one of the biggest scene of your career, the adrenalin rush and excitement seem to know no limits. Some CSIs in large crime ridden cities may disagree with that last part because they go from call to call every shift of every day but most CSIs don't experience that. You may go from a burglary, to a bank robbery, to a rape, and then a suicide; all before lunch! I've had seven deaths and an aircraft arson all in a twenty four hour span. Yes, it can be tiring and taxing on your body but it beats the hell out of report writing. You may be running on little or no sleep. If you're lucky you can stop by a drive thru window or a patrol officer will run and grab you something to eat. Oftentimes you're too busy to care. Of course, almost every busy day is followed by a slow day of paper work and report writing but, in that moment, out there running from call to call, you feel alive. You feel needed.

There is something about being a CSI I can't really put into words. Being entrusted with the responsibility of chasing bad guys is worth all the tedious aspects of the job.  Of all the people in the city or county, they called you. It's your turn to make a difference. The busy day is where we learn to be better CSIs. There is no college course that can compare to an actual crime scene. This above all else, is probably why I love the busy days. I learn, I grow, and I build my confidence in a career filled with criticism and doubt. So, what is a day in the life of a CSI? It's a spin of the Roulette wheel, a roll of the dice. You never know where your number will land but you know that no matter what...you'll be playing again the next day.

In some ways it's comparable to writing a novel. I have an outline but my story develops organically, much like you I would guess. There are times I write a scene that I love; a scene I never envisioned when I sat down to type that morning. Other days I just read and research. Sound familiar? If you're writing a scene with a CSI try to imagine what kind of day they are having. How will the activities of that day affect their demeanor, their dialog, judgement, or their critical thinking? Will they be physically taxed or ready to spring from the starting gate? No matter how you write it, a day in the life of a CSI is never the same. Whether slow of fast a CSI's day is just waiting to be written.

Written by Tom Adair, author of the 2012 crime thriller The Scent of Fear. Tom also blogs at forensics4fiction.com.

Calling All CSIs!

Each post, I try to demystify some aspect of forensics or crime scene investigations as it relates to crime writers. Recently I was reminded that some writers are interested in things that I would otherwise regard as too mundane. It's a failure on my part to assume that writers understand those things I and others in law enforcement take for granted due to their ubiquity. So in that light I decided to explain one of the most common occurrences in a criminal investigation; the call out. Let me begin by saying that every agency can have it's own call out procedure and that procedure can change from one administration to the next. However, in my experience most call out procedures will relate to one of two CSI schedules. Both of these schedules, in and of themselves, are important for crime writers to recognize because they affect how your characters respond to scenes.

All CSIs work in shifts and the number of shifts is largely dependent on the size of the organization. Large organizations like the New York City or Denver Police Departments have 24 hour (or near) shift coverage. Typically these consist of three shifts; days (banker hours), mids (late afternoon to late evening), and graves (late evening to early morning). The specific hours vary from agency to agency but the key aspect of this type schedule is that CSIs generally work scenes only in their shift hours. So if your character is on days they won't be responding to a call at 10 PM. The popular CSI television series regularly stretches this reality as the main characters work the graves shift but always seem to be out working during the day too! That's a lot of overtime. CSIs can work over-shift if they have a major crime scnee but everyone has to sleep at some point so keep that in mind.

The second type of shift is a day shift with after hours on-call rotation. This is the type of schedule I worked throughout my career. So I would work during the day and then if I was needed at night I would get called out. There are limits to this system as well so there is generally another criminalist called the back-up who handles the next call out should one come in or if I needed extra help. With this type of schedule your character can be realistically working at any hour of the day across any shift. This gives you a bit more flexibility when writing scenes because you're not limited by the ending of a shift.

Now that we have that spelled out we need to look at the mechanism of a call out. CSIs are a finite resource. As such, their time and efforts are (should be) carefully regulated. In the real world an agency doesn't want to call out a CSI after hours unless their skills are really needed. You don't want them burning the midnight oil on a recovered stolen vehicle when there might be a homicide call out a few hours later.  In truth, I have been called out for some ridiculous tasks like putting a pair of underwear in a bag or making a photocopy (I kid you not) but most of the time the calls were legitimate. To prevent unwarranted call outs most CSIs can only be called out by their supervisors or detectives on scene. Patrol officers must request a CSI though their supervisor and that supervisor has to call the CSI supervisor. Here is where is gets interesting for you as a writer. Many times, the CSI is called out by someone who is not at the crime scene. This may seem counter-intuitive and it is but it is a function of reality. If the person calling out the CSI (Dispatcher, Sergeant, Bureau Chief, etc) is not on scene then the information your CSI gets will be second or third hand.

When a CSI gets a call we take notes of the pertinent information. What time did we get the call, who called, the crime scene location, what is known of the crime, etc. The dispatcher calling your CSI may not be handling the actual call so the CSI may get less than accurate information.  This is a really important fact because CSIs don't usually carry every piece of equipment they may need at a crime scene. It can be really frustrating to ask simple questions like "was the victim shot or stabbed?" and receive "you'll find out when you get there" type answers. If I got a call of say a gunshot homicide I would spend the commute time thinking about the various evidence I may encounter and what tasks I may need to perform. I built a picture in my mind based on previous scenes I've worked. So if I show up and it's a suicide by overdose I have to shift gears dramatically. Not the end of the world but, certainly a source of tension. Your character may wonder what else have they failed to tell me? 

Inaccurate information is more a result of fluid changes occurring during the interviewing of witnesses and cursory search of the crime scene, than incompetence. But as an author you can use that uncertainty and misinformation to your advantage. I wrote about a staged death scene in The Scent of Fear in which a homicide was made to look like an accident and the investigator saw what they wanted to see. Just as an author frames a scene or storyline, the initial call out frames the response from the CSI. That is why we like to ask a lot of questions before we ever turn the ignition and begin our response. A patrol officer may think a death is very suspicious (alternatively not suspicious) whereas a seasoned detective or CSI asking the right questions may realize they need more help or specialized equipment.

This may seem like a lot of inside baseball type stuff. I guess it is but, you may be able to use this insight to create conflict and tension between your characters while throwing a few curves to your reader. As a reader I like being kept a little off balance. I love being surprised and unsure of where the story will lead and I'm sure most of you do too. Just like real CSIs, we like to predict expectations based on the available information and when that information changes we have to quickly reshuffle our thoughts. That can be very frustrating to a real life CSI but it makes for great reading in my opinion.  


By Tom Adair
Author of The Scent of Fear and  Planning Your Career in Forensics a guide for prospective students and teachers. Tom also blogs at forensics4fiction.

Real Challenges for Cold Case Investigators

by Tom Adair
Investigating cold cases is, in some ways, like searching out your family genealogy. New technologies have helped us mine data from public records but the data has to exist in the first place right? I have worked on many cold cases; some old, some not so old. They can be very challenging. Some might think that the greatest challenge is the passage of time. While that can be a major obstacle affecting things like memory, there are other issues that can be far more damaging. Cold cases can languish in archives for decades (even longer). They may be passed among dozens of detectives over the years and reside in multiple buildings and locations (as agencies relocate or reallocate space). They may transition from a state of acute institutional knowledge to one of complete unawareness. Like family lore that dies with the passing of a generation.


These issues can lead to massive frustration for the investigator. As authors we should consider how these challenges may influence our storyline and character evolution. Even the most advanced forensic analyses  may fail to provide meaningful answers. It's hard to comprehend future environments. Laws can change, rules can change, people can change. Knowing what critical issues will arise decades from now is an impossible task for criminal investigators. There are some cardinal principles, of course, but rarely does a case boil down to those broad points. The devil is in the details as they say and details have a stubborn habit of getting lost in time. Here are some of the most frustrating.

1. Illegible Reports: Old police reports were largely hand written. Some officers have very poor (illegible) handwriting. If you can't read the report, or the language is unclear, then it may as well not exist. Sometimes you luck out and the deputy is still alive, or perhaps a child can read it but other times you can't. The chicken scratches just taunt you. Do they hold the missing key or are they just redundant case data?It's not just reports either. Notes, crime scene measurements, even the reporting officer's name may be illegible! How do you get a writing standard from someone you can't even identify?
2. Outdated Storage Devices: This is a big one. Since the 1950's police agencies have been utilizing various technologies to store data. In the early days it was microfiche. Today we have terabyte imaging drives. In between these two technologies are a vast number of devices. Some had mass market appeal and others were a flash in the pan. How does a modern agency "read" a 5 1/4" floppy disk? Even if you could find the hardware do you have the software needed to open the file? Imagine a crime scene sketch and measurements done with a program written by some detective's neighbor's kid. How do you open it now? How about old cassette drives or processing 110 formatted photographic film?  Let's say you could find the correct device. Do you have the cables and connections necessary to link it to modern equipment?
3. Evidence Handling: This is huge. DNA didn't exist thirty years ago. Fingerprints weren't recoverable from surfaces that today we can process. I have seen numerous old crime scene and autopsy photos of individuals handling evidence bare handed. I know that sounds terrible but it was just how things were done back in the day. Prosecutors, detectives, officers, doctors, even the media sometimes handled items without gloves. Knowing that, how valuable will any DNA or fingerprint evidence be? Can you even get standards from the old employees and how do you know who even touched the items? This situation also raises concerns about the chain of custody for these items when they are eventually submitted at trial. 
4. Incomplete reports: I hate these. As writers we love to depict the detective taking the case file home and spreading it out all over their coffee table or kitchen counter. Today, we don't do that stuff but forty years ago was a different story. Most of the time the missing data is obvious. You may open a suspicious death inquiry with no autopsy photos. They had to take them but they aren't there! It may be that the Coroner was the custodian and when they left they took their "records" with them. Sometimes old documents are just purged to make space. It sounds crazy but it happens. You may have crime scene photos that were taken but filed under an incorrect case number (maybe the photographer is dyslexic). You can use your imagination because virtually anything that could happen, has happened somewhere. 
5. No trail: Cold cases are called cold for a reason. Time has a way of hiding the trail as they say. Today we can track and identify people much more easily than we could forty years ago. People today leave an enormous data footprint. Back then, everyone in town may have know "Old Man Hitchens" but today it's not much to go on. Phone numbers don't exist and police may have never jotted down things like a date of birth or social security number. A detective on the case may have been able to look at a photo and tell you exactly who was in it. No need to write that information down right? Thirty years later however there may be no one left who is familiar with the case or is able to identify who certain witnesses are. Then there's the issue of identity theft. You can run commercial database searches for "Tom Adair" in Colorado and come up with a dozen different records, many of which are not me. That's a lot of leg work to track all those people down and figure out who is who. 

I wish I could tell you that cold case investigations are hampered only by faulty memories but the truth of the matter is that administrative "systems" and decisions made decades ago can have devastating effects to a case file. Today, many police agencies see the benefit of doing a yearly audit of cold case files. They can identify what "gaps" may exist in the information and try to get them filled. Likewise, investigators working active unsolved cases realize how important it is to dot the "i's" and cross the "t's".  If you are writing about a cold homicide case you should try to incorporate some of these obstacles into your storyline. The average reader may not identify with the frustrations but and cop that reads it will give you a thumb's up.

Invisible Inks on the Fly

by Tom Adair

Invisible inks have been around for centuries; used by good and bad forces alike. Spies use them to report home and prisoners use them to pass messages to the outside. All along, CSI (types) have endeavored to uncover these secret writings so that the truth will out. Secret messages have great value to the writer and the reader. Sometimes even more to the unintended reader. Such was the case with British spy Benjamin Thompson in 1775 Boston and such is the case today with other unmentionables. I bring this up because using invisible inks might come in handy for your protagonist or the bad guys they are chasing. But in order to use invisible inks you have to know a little about them.

For our purposes let's assume that the best "inks" are the ones readily available and don't leave significant staining or odor once dried. These are most commonly organic in nature. Some common types include diluted urine, vinegar, sugar water, lemon juice, and milk. You're probably conjuring up images at this moment of how a character might use these inks. Maybe they are in a public bathroom with a killer outside. Maybe they are in a restaurant staring at the man that wants to abduct them. You may even imagine a prisoner sending a letter out through his attorney or mother.

The clever writer chooses a location that enhances the "invisibility" of the message. It might be on the back or in the margins of a letter written in colored ink. It may be on the inside of an envelope. It could even be under several layers of rolled toilet paper. CSIs learn to search for these messages without actually "seeing" them. There are two basic types of methods used to detect simple organic invisible inks. The application of heat or the use of a chemical reagent. The application of heat is one of the oldest methods. Heat will generally darken the writing making it visible. Some inks like urine can also be seen with an ultraviolet light without applying heat. To apply heat the most common methods are the use of an oven (low setting) or steam iron (without the steam). Documents can even be left in the sunlight but the development process may take hours or days depending on the temperature.

The use of chemical reagents obviously is a bit more involved in that obtaining the reagents requires more effort. Lemon juice can be developed with iodine and very diluted blood can be developed with Phenolphthalein or Ninhydrin. Some of the chemical reagents are hazardous and may require special handling procedures which is why CSIs typically use them more than others. Acquiring these reagents often leaves a "trail" that police or others can follow.

So if your character needs to pass a secret message I advise following the K.I.S.S. model. Keep it simple and use materials and methods that any third grader has access to. Don't be afraid to get creative in the hiding place either. Sometimes the most effective location is in plain sight. There may even be a "system" for delivering messages such as the third napkin in the dispenser on a given day. Some of that depends on the sophistication and circumstances of your character but as long as it makes sense to them the reader will follow along.

 

Biography of My Dear, Dead Friend 31-01

Guest blog by Jon Jefferson, the writer half of bestselling crime-fiction duo Jefferson Bass

Forensic fans are cut from a different cloth from ordinary folks—specifically, I suspect, from the rubberized fabric of body bags. When ordinary folks find out I write a series called the Body Farm Novels, they look squeamish and quickly change the subject. Forensic fans, on the other hand (and you know who you are, people!) tend to get a gleam in their eyes and say, “Cool. Can I take a tour?!” Unfortunately, the answer is “no,” except to people who have compelling scientific or law-enforcement reasons to go; not enough staff and too many liability concerns.

Eleven years ago, I was lucky enough to go; in fact, I spent two months there at the Body Farm — the University of Tennessee’s Anthropology Research Facility — with a television crew in tow. I was writing and producing two one-hour documentaries for National Geographic. The plan for the first one, which we titled “Biography of a Corpse,” was to follow a research subject, a donated body, through the entire decomposition process. Once we’d gotten permission — not just from the university, but from the partner of a recently deceased man — we started shooting.

In his old life, our star had had a name; in his new life as a research subject, he took on a new identity, known only by a number: he became “31-01”: the 31st body donated to the Anthropology Department in the year 2001. He was one of four bodies being studied, over the course of a year, by a graduate student who was researching how the presence of clothing changes the decomposition rate of bodies, an important question, since most of the facility’s decomp studies had been conducted with nude bodies.

We began filming 31-01 the moment he came out of the cooler at the morgue at UT Medical Center. The body bag was laid on the ground, unzipped, and carefully tugged from beneath him. He was a white-haired man in his seventies, but he had the body of an athlete, a pentathlete, to be precise. One of the photos his partner gave me showed him hurling a javelin, his arm and shoulder looking as chiseled as a statue’s. Lying on the ground beneath the oaks and maples at the Body Farm, he appeared almost to be napping. But that peaceful appearance would change, and change fast. Within seconds, a blowfly alighted on 31-01’s face. It would be followed, in the minutes, days, and weeks to come, by many thousands more, as nature’s recycling crew began reclaiming him.

The process wasn’t going to be pretty, so why had 31-01’s partner agreed to let us film it, and broadcast it worldwide? “He loved science, he loved the human body, and he loved teaching people about the body,” she told me in an interview. He’d actually made other postmortem plans for himself —he’d arranged to donate his body to a medical school — but the school wasn’t able to take his body, so he’d come to the Body Farm as a way to honor the spirit of his last wishes. And the donation came just in the nick of time for our National Geographic documentary. “I think he would have really liked this,” she added with a sweet, poignant smile.

Besides making frequent visits to 31-01 with the video crew — daily at first, when the changes to his body were most rapid — I also rigged a 35-millimeter camera to take stills of him at regular intervals. By the time he was down to nearly bare bones, I had hundreds of photos. We pieced them together to make a film, eight weeks of decay, compressed into a 30-second movie. There’s no dialogue, and 31-01 doesn’t stir from the spot where he was laid, but there’s plenty of movement: his abdomen swells from bloat in his first week, then collapses, his belly going slack and hollow; insects come and go in waves; his facial features dissolve, and the skull beneath the skin emerges. In my favorite frame of the film, a leaf hangs in darkness above 31-01 for a thirtieth of a second, its fall halted in midair by the camera’s flash: a freeze-frame snapshot of mortality, both corporeal and arboreal.

In the years since 31-01 shuffled off his mortal coil before my eyes — my wondering, watchful, grateful eyes —I’ve seen that 30-second film dozens of times, maybe even hundreds of times. Just now, in fact, I took a minute to watch it again. It always ends the same for 31-01, just as it will end for us all, sooner or later.

But I remember another ending, too: the ending I put on the documentary that chronicled his decay. It was a montage of other photos, taken when he was alive, intact, and vigorous. In these, he seems to be an action verb: he is hurling his javelin; posing in his swimsuit by a canoe, his arms akimbo, muscles flexed; perching atop of his woodpile, his face propped on his hands, a big grin on his face.

Today the bones of 31-01 are tucked beneath Neyland Stadium at the University of Tennessee, where the Anthropology Department is housed. He dwells in a city of the dead, kept company by nearly 1400 other specimens in the William M. Bass Donated Skeletal Collection. But in my mind, he’s very much alive, and I’m proud to consider him, in some strange and blessed and life-changing way, a friend for life.

Jefferson Bass is the pen name of Jon Jefferson, writer, and Dr. Bill Bass, renowned forensic anthropologist. Dr. Bass, founder of the University of Tennessee's "Body Farm," is an author on more than 200 scientific publications. Jon Jefferson is a veteran journalist and documentary filmmaker; his two National Geographic documentaries on the Body Farm were seen around the world. Jefferson and Bass have collaborated on two nonfiction books and six crime novels; their seventh novel, The Inquisitor's Key, was published yesterday. Read an excerpt.

For more on Jefferson Bass, find them on Facebook, read their blog, and follow along on Twitter. For current book-tour & blog-tour schedules, click here.

Things that make you go hmmm...

By Tom Adair;
Author of The Scent of Fear

Criminalists are a strange bunch. We see the world differently than most others. Early in your career you make an effort to look for clues but after a while subtle things just seem to set off your radar. Such was the case the other day when I met an old colleague for lunch. He's a really good CSI as well as a Vietnam War veteran. We met at his favorite burger shop Smashburger (if you're not from Colorado you're missing out!) to get caught up on the grand kids, life, and "shop talk". While we were eating a guy dressed in fatigues walked in with a woman. There are a number of military bases in the area (as well as recruitment centers) so seeing a soldier is not uncommon. But there was something about this guy that grabbed my attention. Not having served in the military I have only a passing knowledge of uniform protocol. I casually began paying attention and noticed several things that seemed odd to me. First, his hair was longer than mine but still less than shoulder length. Some SPEC OPS soldiers are allowed longer hair and beards but it was more the length and style which seemed wrong. The camouflage pattern didn't seem right either. The elements were larger and showed no signs of sun fading. He was a "buck" Sergeant according to his arm patch but a tab below the patch labeled him as a sniper. Now I'm no expert but sniper's don't typically announce their abilities like that. A sniper is a target to the enemy so announcing your skill is kind of like putting a target on your head.

At some point I looked at my buddy and asked him to take a look. Without hesitation he said with a smirk "the guy in the 'sniper' uniform?" Turns out he had seen the guy too and done much of the same assessment. Obviously, we never approached the guy and said "what gives?" but both of us were convinced the guy was a fraud. Beyond the uniform the guy just didn't have that "look" in his eyes. You can see it in the eyes of many police and military. They are always aware of their surroundings, even if just giving a subtle glance around. Combat veterans have a very "hardened" look about them which I have a hard time describing but an easy time spotting. Not a mean look, or a paranoid darting of the eyes, just a look of extreme confidence mixed with a pinch of caution. We were both staring at this guy and he never once looked our way. It was like his radar was completely shut off.

I was reminded of this experience when I recently read yet another story of stolen valor where a man claimed to be a US Navy SEAL sniper. Apparently, this is a common tactic to meet women. Capt. Larry Bailey (former SEAL) famously stated "there were about 500 active duty SEALs during the Vietnam War and I've met all 20,000 of them". I don't know how these guys think they can fool the real SEALS. Seeing as how heroes like Brandon Webb trained many (if not most) of the SEAL snipers today it's a wonder how these con-men think they can get away with their lies.

SEAL segue aside, the point of this post is that CSIs and others are trained to notice small details which seem out of order. Even if we don't have an expert knowledge of a subject (like me and military uniforms) something still catches our eye. This is an important attribute to consider when you are writing a police procedural. Any of us can make mistakes and overlook something small but the more inconsistencies we see the more likely our inner alarm will sound. My friend and I silently took in the same details about the same guy without ever alerting the other.  We found nothing "suspicious" about the other patrons.

These "alarms" are often called "red flags" and are shaped by our life experiences and interests (hobbies, past occupations, etc). The training CSIs receive simply helps refine our ability to filter the information. Ultimately, it means that we're tougher to fool. So if your bad guy is staging the crime scene or simply offering a fake alibi you should consider how your character will evaluate that information. There is a saying among interrogators..."little lie, big lie" which simply means if suspects are willing to lie about small inconsequential things then maybe they are lying about bigger issues too. When auditing your scenes or developing your characters pay close attention to their interests and life experiences. How will these experiences shape the filtering of information in their environment? Are they lying about something they have great knowledge or experience with? Are they making up a story based on a false perception (like the plot to a movie or book in their home). Fooling a good detective or CSI will be difficult so you'll need to think about how to construct the lie or ruse in such a way that is plausible. Someone once said the best lies contain 80% truth. That may be accurate but a good detective or CSI will sniff out the other 20%.

How to Spot a Stolen Car

Criminals generally steal cars for one of two reasons; chopping or driving. Cars destined for the chop shop don't stay on the road long enough to matter so I'll focus on the latter. In this categories cars can be stolen to drive for short distances (i.e. escape a crime scene by car jacking) or long distances. Believe it or not some criminals steal cars simply because they don't want to buy one and maintain it. If they have the keys to the vehicle the car is hard to spot but when they don't there are some tell-tale signs. These signs correspond to the entry, operation, and identification of the vehicle.

Entry:
Car thieves vary in sophistication and this is apparent in their method of entry (assuming the car is properly secured). Some just break out a window, but that is hard to hide. If they break out a window they have to cover it with plastic or it will stand out to others more than if it is left broken. If any of the windows are left slightly open the thief may just force it down far enough to get their arm in or a coat hanger. Another popular method is slipping the lock with a coat hanger or tool called a "slim Jim". In both cases there may be holes or damage to the rubber weather seals around the window or door frame. Other damage may be seen to the lock mechanism (where you insert the key). They may use a screwdriver or skeleton key in an attempt to open the door. This damage can be seen by close inspection of the lock although it is tougher to spot than a broken window.

Operation:
Assuming the crook doesn't have a key they usually have to force the ignition. In these cases it is common to remove the steering column (plastic housing) in whole or in pieces (notice how I avoid telling you how to steal a car :)). Obviously this is hard to hide. You see, crooks that want to use the car for weeks or months don't want it to be obvious that the steering column is damaged so a passerby doesn't call the cops. One way to hide this is to wrap the area with a bandana or t-shirt (see photo). Most people don't "wrap" their steering column so this is a tell-tale sign of a forced ignition.

Identification:
Stolen cars can be identified by either their license plates or VIN (vehicle identification number) and in some cases distinctive damage, mismatched paint, or bumper stickers. Changing license plates is pretty easy and if they drive within the law and don't act crazy it's unlikely a cop will run the plates. Some will change them. However, one giveaway is when the condition of the plates is inconsistent with the rest of the vehicle. For example, if the new plates are dirty and the vehicle is "clean" then one has to wonder how one could clean a car and miss the plates right? Another sign is plates missing a number of screws to hold it on or screws that aren't tightened all the way. So a screw sticking out a 1/4" is unusual and stands out to the CSI. Most of the time though they will forge a "Temp Tag" like the one in the photo. It's really not that hard and since they are taped onto the inside window they can be harder to spot unless you really examine them closely. Another source of identification is the VIN. The VIN placard is located on the dashboard on the driver's side near the front. Most criminals will simply put some papers or a hat on the dash to cover the plate making it impossible to read from the outside. When you combine that with mismatched plates and a wrapped steering column and you might as well hang a neon sign saying "Stolen Car".

Spotting a stolen car is a handy trait for your detective or CSI character to possess and the above are all good indicators.

Interview with Former CSI and Author Tom Adair

It’s Tom’s day to post, but he’s been shy to talk about his first novel, so I prompted him with a bunch of questions. If you haven’t heard, Tom released The Scent of Fear recently, and based on his background as an exceptional forensic scientist, it’s no surprise his novel is pretty special too. Here’s more in Tom’s own words:

LJ: Did a specific event or crime inspire this story?

Tom: They say that you should write what you know. While the story is fictional, many of the events are inspired by actual cases I’ve worked. I’ve changed many of the details but a number of colleagues have commented on the similarities. I think it adds tremendous realism to the story by keeping it within the property line of my experience. In some ways writing this novel was therapeutic too. The crimes I saw in my career were not the types of things you can talk about at the dinner table. My family knew what I did but they never had a clear picture. It was my way of protecting them from the evils I saw. In The Scent of Fear I had the opportunity to shed some baggage I had been holding on to. It gave me permission to unburden myself.

LJ: Who is your protagonist modeled after? Because you’ve had the same career as your protag, is it difficult to keep her actions/thoughts distinctly separate from yours?
Tom: I don’t want them to be separate. Put simply, she’s the girl next door that can kick in the door. Sarah Richards could be compared to so many young professional self confident women in law enforcement. I love the depth her character offers me as a writer. Sarah has a wonderful mix of strength and vulnerability I couldn’t create with a male protagonist. She is young and impulsive and that makes for some hairy situations she finds herself in, but that can be said of so many young professionals. Sarah was created as a franchise character and I can’t wait to see how she develops with age and experience (just as I did).

LJ: Does the novel have a theme or message you want the reader to come away with?
Tom: Be fearless! So many of us let fear run our lives and it usually makes us miserable. Fear also keeps us from reaching our full potential. Sarah has fears but she must rely on her inner strength and morality to persevere (physically and spiritually). That is her story. In the end she only has herself to rely upon (metaphorically speaking; that was not a spoiler).

LJ: What else do you want readers to know about this story?
Tom: On a serious level I wanted to give readers a peek behind the curtain of crime. Evil does exist in our world. I’ve met it, spoken to it, even been threatened by it. We tell our children that monsters exist only in bedtime stories but they don’t. Monsters are out there; among us. Be prepared to meet them.

LJ: At what point in your law enforcement career did you realize you wanted to write instead? What was it like to make the transition?
Tom: The novel (trilogy) has been rolling around in my head for over a decade but I always figured I’d just write it when I retired. I never thought that day would come so quickly. I guess, like a lot of folks in that business, I hit a saturation point. I never saw it coming. Apparently the dark events in our lives can ferment until our soul can bear them no longer. I just wanted out. The problem was that my particular skill set is not very applicable in the civilian world. I had been a technical writer, not a fiction writer but it seemed like the right fit. Looking back I think it was fate.

LJ: Are you able to use specific incidents from your career in your fiction?
Tom: I’ve heard the term faction thrown around and I like it. A blend of fiction and reality. I’m very careful not to betray and confidences or divulge anything that might complicate any open investigations but that still leaves me a broad range of experiences to tap into.


LJ: What’s next for you? Are you working on another novel?
Tom: The Scent of Fear is the first in a trilogy and I am busy working on the second portion of the story which delves deeper into the motives of the serial sniper. I don’t want to give away too much but just as in The Scent of Fear there is a parallel story line of murder. I’ve always liked stories in which the protagonist must juggle different problems. I have to be careful not to overwhelm the reader with minutiae but real CSIs have to deal with many professional and personal distractions so why should our characters be much different?

FYI, Amazon Prime members can now check out The Scent of Fear free!

Dead Stuff

By Andrew E. Kaufman

I’m in the process of finishing my new novel, a psychological thriller that centers on the case of a three-year-old boy who was kidnapped and murdered more than forty years ago.During that time, I really had to dig down deep in order to portray the depth of emotion parents feel when this kind of tragedy occurs. It hasn’t been easy.

And several times while doing this, I also found myself asking the same question: why do we find murder so entertaining when really, there’s nothing entertaining about it? An odd question from someone who makes a living writing about it, but I'd never really given it much thought—until now, that is.

One look at the primetime television lineup clearly illustrates the point. Shows like CSI and Criminal Minds are more popular than ever, as are books of the same genre. It seems serial killers—and killers in general—are the villains we love to hate.

But why? Why are we so fascinated with the thing that should horrify us the most? After much introspection, I came up with a few theories:

We love a good puzzle

And is there any bigger puzzle than a murder? Crime solving has always been fascinating business. Even more intriguing are the modern-day advances in forensic science. It never fails to amaze me how much they can determine from so little. For me, the best mysteries seem to be ones that appear the most confusing—that is, until the investigator cleverly pulls it all together in the end. It’s the aha moment that’s the payoff.

The “Good to Know that Somebody has it Worse than me” Theory

Death is the ultimate dose of bad luck. It really doesn't get much worse than that, and no matter how bad things are in our own lives, we can always look at the guy who got whacked and think, “Wow, and I thought I was having a bad day.” It’s a form of relief, something that helps us put things into the proper perspective. Also, I think, humans are for the most part a compassionate species, and many of us feel a certain degree of sympathy for the victim, thus drawing us in even more

Justice, Media-Style

We love to hate the bad guys, but we also love seeing them pay for their deeds, and quite often in the world, that simply doesn’t happen. It makes us angry. Seeing justice served on the screen or the pages in a book tends to fill that void. We know it’s not real but still get to sample that emotion on some level,which restores a sense of decency to our world.

Morbid Fascination

Having said all that, there is a dark side to all this. Simply put: we like morbid. I'm not sure why, but we do. We may cringe or cover our eyes (then peak between our fingers) but there seems to be something about the truly bizarre and grotesque that fascinates us. Maybe it's as simple as this: it's human nature to be curious, and the more disturbing something is, the more curious we seem to become. We don’t really want to know, but we sort of do. It's the reason people slow down to look at a car wreck on the side of the road.

What about you? As always, I'm interested in hearing any theories you may have on this. Comments?