May 20, 2024 • 32 mins
Former detective inspector, Steve Keogh, shares 10 mistakes killers make that leads to them being caught.
If you enjoy these podcasts, you may wish to join the online community at https://steve-keogh.thinkific.com/pages/landing-page where you can meet and talk with fellow authors, take part in regular Q&As with Steve Keogh and make use of the online courses, all designed to help you achieve authenticity in your storytelling.
You can learn more about all of Steve's work at https://stevekeogh.com/ and find out about the two books Steve has published and his TV series, Secrets of a Murder Detective.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Steve Keogh (00:02):
Welcome to Murder investigation for crime Writers, the podcast where we delve
into the dark world of murder to help bringauthenticity to your stories.
I'm your host, Steve Keogh, a former ScotlandYard detective inspector.
So grab your notebook, sharpen your pencilsand prepare to embark on a journey into a
world few get to see.
This is murder investigation for crime
(00:23):
writers.
Hi and welcome to episode two of murder
investigation for crime writers.
I'm your host, Steve Keough.
I was a former police officer, spent twelveyears investigating murder since leaving the
police, written a couple of books, present atv show, Secrets of a Murder detective, and I
(00:46):
run the online community murder investigationfor crime writers.
All of which you can find out about on SteveKeough.com.
So today we're going to look at some reasonswhy your baddie, your villain, might get
themselves caught.
Now I'm going to look at ten.
Now, they're not a top ten, they don't go fromone to ten, they're just a ten.
They're in no particular order, but they areways I've seen throughout my career where
(01:13):
murderers have let themselves down.
Well, they've got caught by not thinking
things through, doing things after the murderor before the murder that indicate that
they're the suspect.
So we're going to look at those.
And what I'm not going to do, I'm not going toinsult your intelligence, is not going to be
they left a fingerprint at the scene or theirblood was all over the murder weapon.
It's going to be things that are slightlydifferent that you may or may not have heard
(01:36):
of.
But the idea is that it gives you some ideas
for your storylines to introduce somethingthat's a little bit different.
Just some things to you to think about.
So let's crack on, then.
First off with number one, and this is CCTV.
Now, you might be thinking CCTV.
I know all about CCTV.
We know that CCTV is an integral part of
(01:57):
murder investigations.
But there's one aspect of it that really does
catch killers out and it's something that theydon't think about before and after they've
committed a murder.
It's not the CCTV that's near the scene, it's
not the CCTV that might be on the route, it'sa CCTV.
That's where they live.
(02:17):
Now, today, it's not like a few years ago
where CCTV cameras tended to be focused in onbusiness premises.
Nowadays, CCTV is everywhere.
Private homes have it.
We have video doorbells.
You walk down any street, you're going to walk
past plenty of those.
There's dashcam footage in cars, there are
(02:39):
buses that record as they're driving around.
And it's that CCTV that's in and around a
killer's home that will quite often catch themout.
And I've seen it many times.
So put yourself in the position of a murderer
and this is a murder you've planned.
You're travelling somewhere with the intention
(03:01):
of killing a person.
At some point, you're going to become quite
aware of the fact that you don't want to getcaught, you don't want your face on some CCTV
in and around where this murder takes place.
So you're probably going to start to do things
to mask your identity.
(03:23):
You might wear a cap, a hood, hide your face,
do something, sunglasses.
You will try to obscure your face from the
camera.
So later on, somebody can't point at a bit of
footage and say, there you are.
Look, you're close to the scene, but at what
stage when you've left the home and you'regoing to commit this murder do you start to
(03:45):
think about that?The murderers that I've come across, the vast
majority, they start to think about that asthey're nearing the place where the merger is
going to take place.
They're not thinking about it.
As soon as they open their front door and walkout into the world, and it's that CCTV that
can catch them out.
And in what way can it catch them out?
(04:05):
So, first off, what it's going to show istimings.
The time you left your home and the time youcame back.
And that can be really important if you aretrying to say, well, I was nowhere near a
murder, I was at home at the time.
CCTV showing you leaving your home and coming
back at times which could fit in with when amurder took place, can be really powerful
(04:27):
evidence.
Then it's got the actual image itself.
So on the image, it will show your clothing.
What clothing were you wearing?
And just as importantly, not just the clothingwhen you left the home, but when you came
back.
When people commit murders, especially ones
involving knives or excessive violence,there's going to be blood.
(04:50):
And killers know that they don't want to getcaught with a victim's blood on them.
So they'll do things that probably, if they'renot in a position to do what we call a wash
up, where they clean themselves, if theirclothes are covered in blood, the easiest
thing in the world to do is either discardclothing or change your clothing.
If you've left your home in the morning in oneset of clothing, and you've come back in a
(05:14):
completely different set again, that's goodevidence.
I've seen it happen and it's a very difficultthing to explain because not many of us leave
our home wearing one set of clothes andreturning something different.
So when it comes to CCTV, rather than justconcentrating in and around the crime scene,
police will look at the CCTV around asuspect's home and it really can produce some
(05:37):
really quite powerful evidence.
Number two, Internet searches.
Now, these become really relevant when a crimeis planned.
If you think nowadays, where we get mostinformation from, it's from the Internet.
And if you're planning a murder, there'sprobably not a lot you can't find on the
(05:58):
Internet somewhere that's going to help youwith that, help you identify ways to carry out
your crime in the most efficient way, ways toavoid detection, ways to avoid leaving
evidence behind.
So you'll carry out these Internet searches
quite often.
They're on Google.
Google tell me the best way in which I cankill my neighbour.
(06:21):
That kind of thing.
Now, you might think I'm joking, but I've seen
this play out in real life and actually, I'veseen it a few times.
But one that sticks in my mind from themurders we investigated was a really sad case.
It was an arson attack on a family home and itwas in the middle of the night.
There was the mum, two sons and two daughtersthat lived at this address.
(06:46):
And really, sadly, two of the daughters diedas a result of the fire.
And we were.
I'll be honest, we were struggling, trying to
identify a motive, trying to identify who itwas that carried out the attack.
And we got some information from the familythat the youngest daughter, who was 15, had
been in a sort of a childish relationship witha 14 year old boy and she had ended it.
(07:11):
She didn't want to see him anymore.
We carried out loads of investigations into
various different hypotheses of why the crimemay have taken place, why this home was
attacked.
But we didn't have anything more than that.
The fact that this 14 year old boy had beendumped, essentially by the 15 year old.
But in these sorts of cases, you don't alwaysneed huge amount of evidence to arrest.
(07:36):
Arresting has quite a low bar when it comes tothe evidence you need.
So we arrested him, went to his home and Iarrested him, looked him in the eye, as I
always tried to do, and he wasn't givinganything away.
There was nothing in him or his demeanour thatwould suggest that he had carried out this
horrendous crime.
So we brought him in and as a result of the
(07:58):
search, we looked at all his.
His bedroom and we took his computer, his
laptop, and we sent it off to the lab and wegot a phone call one afternoon, an excited
phone call, saying, we've looked at hisInternet history.
And the day before the arson attack, hegoogled how to burn somebody's house down.
So we went from not being sure whether or notthis was the person that carried out the
(08:23):
attack to being pretty sure, almost certainlyjust as a result of a Google search the day
before an arson attack, asking how best thatshould be carried out.
What you'll also see from murderers is thatthey will do Internet searches on the crime
afterwards.
(08:43):
Now, this is this evidence taken on its own?
Definitely nowhere near as strong as searcheshad done before a murder.
But if the searches go beyond mild interest inwhat has gone on, then potentially it could be
something that you could put before a jury,but it's open to interpretation.
(09:05):
But killers do Internet searches, try and findinformation on the crime they've carried out
for good reason.
I mean, if you imagine, if you'd committed a
murder, you'd want to know what the policeknow.
Are they close to identifying me?What information are they putting out in their
news appeals?It's this kind of thing that the killers are
trying to identify, trying to set their mindat risk.
(09:28):
They're not going to be caught anytime soon.
So, yes, Internet searches after a murder are
important, but they're definitely not asimpactful and they're not as good evidence as
those Internet searches that happen prior to amurder.
Number three.
Now, scrapings from the victim.
So when you go to a post mortem, the forensicpathologist is going to take a number of swabs
(09:54):
and samples from the victim.
And one of those that is most likely to yield
results are nail scrapings.
Essentially what they do, I call them
scrapings, but they will cut the nails fromthe victim's hand and they will be sent to a
laboratory to be examined and they canpotentially yield fantastic evidence.
(10:18):
Think of the scenario where a killer goes tocommit a murder and they're forensically
aware, so they may have gloves on, wear a hoodto stop their hair falling out.
Whatever methods they use and they believewill prevent DNA evidence being left at the
crime scene, one thing they can't cater forare the actions of the victim.
(10:41):
Now, if a victim fights back and they scrapetheir nails across the skin of the suspect,
across their cheek, for instance, which isn'tcovered across a bare arm, whatever it is, and
then they leave their own DNA, tissue sample,etcetera, under the nails.
(11:03):
That's fantastic evidence, particularly incases where there is some kind of connection
between a victim and a suspect.
If I were to shake your hand, I'd have your
DNA in my hand.
It might be a bit more difficult to explain if
I've got pieces of your skin under my nails.
(11:23):
So no matter how forensically aware a killer
is, if a victim scratches a suspect and getsblood, hair particles, DNA underneath their
fingernails, that can be really impactfulevidence.
Right, number four relates to telephones.
(11:45):
There's two here where we're going to relate
to telephones.
You are going to get used to me whenever it
comes to the subject of evidence from mobilephones, I get a little bit giddy because it
was far and away my favourite evidence when itcomes to mobile investigation.
But this one is very specific and this one isto do with broadband routers.
(12:07):
Now, this is something that killers don'treally think about.
Just think of this scenario.
You having been in a friend's house, you
having been in a restaurant or a pub, youhaven't been at an airport and have connected
your phone to the broadband router there.
In order to gain access to the Internet, your
(12:29):
phone will register on that router.
And then the next time you're there, there's a
good chance your phone will automaticallyconnect to that router.
Now, you don't know anything about this, andyou probably wouldn't know that unless you
picked your phone up, looked at it and sawthat little Internet connection symbol at the
(12:50):
top of your phone screen.
Now, imagine if you're a murderer who's going
to a location where you've done that in thepast, be it because it's an associate, family,
friend, et cetera, home, or it's a businesspremises where you've used their Internet.
When you go back in order to commit the crime,your phone connects to that router.
(13:14):
And what will happen is the router will storewhat's known as a Mac address.
Mac.
Mac stands for media access control.
It's essentially, it's an identificationnumber on your phone.
And when your phone connects to the router,the router will store that Mac address.
Then if the police are switched on enough,they're savvy enough when they go to the
(13:38):
murder scene and they're aware that there's arouter there that's got Internet, they can
access that router and download from it thelog, the activity log, to see which phones
have connected to that router.
And if they get a Mac address, they can.
Then if they get that phone, can marry up theMac address and the phone.
(14:03):
There's one complication to this, is that youhave to have the phone to get the Mac address.
When police make applications to phoneproviders such as o, two and three, etcetera,
some of the information they get will includethe phone's IMEI number.
That's a unique number to that phone.
(14:23):
But what they won't get from the network
providers is that Mac address.
You physically need the phone to map to the
router's Mac address log.
But when you do get the phone and you do that,
just think how good that evidence is for youto connect to a broadband router, you can have
(14:45):
to be pretty close to it, aren't you?And what that log will do, will say, this
phone log to this router between these times.
So not only is it putting you very close to
the router, it's putting you there at a veryspecific time.
And if that router's in a merger address andyou're the killer with your phone in your
(15:07):
pocket connecting to that, good evidence,isn't it?
Number five, while we're on the subjects ofphones.
So there's a pattern that I always used to seeamongst murderers when it comes to their
mobile phone.
So many of them do this.
Once the murder's committed, they get rid oftheir phone.
(15:29):
In the police, we call it dropping a phone.
So when you're doing your writing, if a police
officer is talking about this, they would say,dropping a phone, murder happened, they
dropped their phone.
Now they think they're being clever.
They trying to distance themselves from thatphone.
Nothing to do with me, that phone.
And they will probably connect to another one,
(15:51):
get a new phone, etcetera.
Now just imagine if you've been using that
phone for a period of time.
You've been using it for weeks, months, even
years.
A murder just happens and you just happen to
just stop using your phone.
Looks suspicious, doesn't it?
So, as clever as they think they're being whenit comes to presenting evidence to a jury, it
(16:13):
is something that the prosecution will use asevidence.
Members of the jury, the defendant here hadbeen using this phone for six months.
2 hours after the murder happened, he stoppedusing it, never to use it again.
Coincidence?We say not.
I've seen this as actually really impactfullyplay out.
In one of my trials, we had a murder wherethree defendants, gang related, attacked and
(16:40):
killed a victim.
And it was outside where the victim works.
And he was coming out at the end of the dayalong with some work colleagues.
And one of those colleagues identified one ofthe suspects on an id parade.
Now, during the trial, the trial judge failedto adhere to some of the things laid down in
(17:03):
law that he has to follow when directing ajury when it comes to identification evidence.
He didn't do that.
All three defendants were found guilty of
murder.
The one that was identified by the witness
went to the court of appeal and made anapplication that this evidence, the
identification evidence, should be thrown out.
(17:26):
And if the identification evidence isn't
there, then the evidence against thisdefendant isn't strong enough and the case
should be thrown out, retried, whatever.
Now, in my career, this was the closest I ever
came to losing a case at the appeal stage.
And if I'm honest, half of me was expecting
(17:47):
that if we lose the identification, that'sreally going to really put a dent in our case
against this defendant.
I think there's a good chance that the appeal
may be successful.
But it wasn't.
It was thrown out.
And the appeal judge used this type of phone
evidence to support her decision.
(18:07):
This phone had something like 40,000 different
events, be they text messages, phone calls,etcetera, over the course of a year.
Half an hour after a murder, the phone wentdead, never to be used again.
And in her summing up of how she came to herdecision of dismissing the appeal, she placed
(18:28):
heavy emphasis on the fact.
Well, why would this person, who's been using
this phone so heavily for a substantial amountof time, just drop the phone just after a
murder has been committed?Clearly, he did it again.
He thought he was being clever, but in theend, it was his undoing.
Number six, confessing your crime to somebody.
(18:50):
Why would somebody tell another person they've
committed a murder?Well, they do.
It happens.
And there are a number of reasons why it may
happen.
A lot of it is dependent on the type of
killer.
Not all killers are the same.
To most of us, murdering somebody, takingsomebody's life, would be a huge event and
(19:10):
something that would take a lot of trying toget your head around of what you've just done.
And it's during this emotional distress, ifyou like, having I've just committed this
murder, I'm feeling distressed myself, I'mfeeling overwhelmed by what has happened.
And there'd be a number of reasons whysomebody might then go and confess.
(19:32):
It might be that they're looking forvalidation.
Look, I've committed this murder.
This is the reason why.
Oh, actually, no, I think you're right.
I think I've probably done the same in your
circumstance.
That makes me feel better.
Or it might just be they've got this secretthey're carrying out, they have to share it
with someone.
It's such a burden on me.
(19:53):
It's weighing me down.
I need to share this secret with somebody.
I need to tell you.
Or it could be in the immediate aftermath of
the murder, when it's just happened and thoseemotions are most raw and they're not
thinking.
They're not thinking about the consequences of
what they're doing and I'm telling you.
And then later on, they may regret the fact
that I've shared this, but at those earlystages, when my mind's all over the place,
(20:17):
I've shared it with you.
Or in some circumstances, it might be a brag,
particularly if you're talking amongst, say,gang members, etcetera.
Look what I've done.
I've taken out the opposition and they're
telling people about it.
Some of them make songs about it.
So there could be all sorts of reasons whysomebody would confess to a murder, but it
(20:38):
happens.
Number seven, and this one relates to where
fire is used.
An arson.
The arson is the act that kills the victim, orit could be something that's used in order to
destroy evidence after.
And that's when it comes to fires.
In murder investigation, it's probably morelikely to be the second scenario where fire is
(21:05):
used in order to destroy DNA, fingerprints,evidence, etcetera, like that.
But when people set these fires, they're notprepared often for what's about to happen.
When you set fire to petrol, for instance, itisn't the liquid that's going to burn, it's
the vapours that have mixed with the air, sothe vapours from the petrol mix with the air
(21:30):
and it's those vapours that ignite.
Now, if you've poured a lot of petrol on
something and there are a lot of vapours, it'sgoing to create a fireball, essentially, which
could engulf the person that set the fire.
Now, it may be that these cause burn injuries,
obvious to the eye.
Person gets arrested, gets examined by the
(21:51):
police doctor or police nurse, and they've gotburns on them.
Great evidence.
We say you were there at the scene of this
fire, you've got burns on you.
That's an obvious one, isn't it?
So that's not what I'm going to be talkingabout.
Now.
What I'm going to be talking about is
something that's less obvious less obvious tous, less obvious to the person that's received
these, and that's singed hairs.
(22:14):
Now, if you're close to the seat of a fire and
you're close to that intense heat, what canhappen is your hairs, be it the hairs on your
arms, eyebrows, etcetera.
At the microscopic level, there can be damage
to the outer layer of that hair.
(22:35):
Now, that might not be obvious to the naked
eye under a microscope, that can be seen.
We use this evidence in a case of mine where
somebody was shot in a car and then they setfire to the car.
And one of the people we arrested, we used arazor scraped across the back of his arms to
(22:56):
remove the hairs from his arms, sent them forexamination, and under the microscope, the
damage to those hairs could be seen, provingthat this person was close to a fire.
And with the other evidence we had available,it was enough to charge and convict him.
(23:19):
So if you're writing a story where fire isinvolved, this is the kind of evidence that
would not be obvious to your detectives,wouldn't be a quick result.
That is, it takes a time to first get thesample, submit them to the laboratory, get
them examined, etcetera.
(23:39):
But if they have been close to a fire when it
started, it's really good evidence to put themthere at the scene of that number.
Eight, telematics.
Now, this relates to information that's held
in your car.
So modern cars have essentially the same as
mobile phones.
They have, like, a SIM card in there that
(24:00):
connects to a mobile network.
Now, this can provide really good evidence to
the police.
For instance, it can precisely locate where a
car was.
It's also possible to do real time tracking,
which can be important if you're looking at amanhunt.
If somebody's wanted for murder and you'retrying to locate them, having these vehicle
(24:23):
telematics can be really helpful.
It may be that within a car, there is sat nav
satellite navigation, and if that's been used,that may provide evidence of where a car's
been, what routes they've taken, etcetera.
Some cars are set up, so individual drivers
have their own profiles.
(24:44):
When you get in a car, the seat is set to how
you like it, etcetera, the radio stations.
So, again, the police can access that,
potentially be able to identify not only wherea car was at a particular time, but who the
driver was as well.
And this is something that's really sort of
(25:04):
its infancy, I would suggest, when it comes toevidence.
Many police officers don't know about this.
Many criminals don't know about this?
I've seen this play out.
We had an investigation where a murder took
place and the killer got his girlfriend tocome and pick him up.
And the telematics from the car showed herdriving to the location where the murder took
(25:29):
place, sitting, waiting and eventually drivingoff and taking him back home.
Fantastic evidence, when laid out on a map andput in front of a jury, leaves no doubt,
really, as to what's gone on.
So telematics in a modern investigation can be
really important in pinpointing a person in acar to a particular location at a particular
(25:52):
time.
See number nine.
And this relates to DNA, but in a veryspecific way.
When somebody's carrying out a murder, formost of them, it's going to be quite an
emotional event.
It's going to lead to a massive increase in
the release of adrenaline.
(26:12):
The killers are essentially entering that
fight or flight response and with that comesan increased heart rate, increased breathing,
increased perspiration, which can lead todehydration.
So imagine a scenario where a murder is takingplace in a home, and it's one of these more
(26:36):
brutal type of killings that take place over acertain amount of time.
Think of Jack the Ripper, with the victim,Mary Jane Kelly, in a premises for a
substantial period of time.
That killer is going through that adrenaline
burst, that fight or flight, becomingdehydrated.
(27:00):
They're in a home, they're thirsty.
What could happen?
They want to quench that thirst.
How can they do that?
Drinking from a tap, going to a fridge,getting a can of drink, getting a bottle of
milk, whatever it is, bottle of water.
If you're writing about a murder that takes
(27:20):
place in a home and it happens over a fairlysubstantial amount of time, and your killer's
there and they're getting thirsty, this iswhere they could let themselves down because
they're in that fight or flight mode.
The side of the brain that's logical isn't in
control.
(27:41):
So they may find themselves even thinking
about it, going to the fridge, getting abottle of milk, drinking from it.
And as we know, if you're drinking from abottle, a cup or anything like that, your DNA
is going to be left on it.
And if the police are savvy enough and if
they're thinking about this kind of scenario,they're checking and they're submitting
(28:05):
bottles, cups, etc. For DNA examination, it'snot going to be quick.
Sometime down the line, they're going to getresult back and say, well, actually we've got
a DNA here, we've identified a suspect theydrank from a bottle of milk.
There you go, fantastic evidence.
And number ten, the final one, again relates
(28:26):
to DNA, but completely different, a differentanimal from dogs.
It's now possible to obtain a DNA profile fromdogs.
And in actual fact, one of the investigationsI was involved in was the first one in the UK
to use DNA from a dog in a murderinvestigation, in a court trial, just very
(28:49):
briefly, it was a. It was a gang fight insouth London, in a park in south London, and
one of the attackers had his dog with him, apit bull type dog that he set upon this young
boy that they were killing.
In the melee.
In the fire, the dog got injured and it bled.
I was first on scene from the murder
investigation team and there was a trail ofblood that we followed and made sure it was
(29:15):
all cordoned off as a crime scene.
At the time, I had no idea that this blood
belonged to a dog.
It could have been a person, it could have
been anything.
But we submitted it to the laboratory that
came back and said, actually, it's not humanblood, it's canine.
And then, for the very first time, a DNAprofile was raised from this blood and we
(29:36):
seized the dog from the suspect and theymatched the two.
The blood from the scene matched the bloodfrom the dog.
So how can that fit in with your writing?Well, if your killer's got a dog with them.
I'm not a dog owner myself, but I know thatdogs can be quite slobbery.
They can leave saliva, they may chew things,they may bite things.
(29:58):
So there's a possibility if you're at a crimescene, you're committing a murder and you've
got your dog with you, there's a possibilitythat your dog may leave behind its DNA.
And what they can also do nowadays, theseclever scientists, is if they've got DNA from
a dog, but they haven't got the actual dogitself.
(30:18):
From looking at the markers within the DNAprofile, it is possible to identify the breed
of dog.
So we don't know the killer, but we know what
type of dog they've got.
If you've got that information, it can lead
you to identify who the killer is.
So, again, just a different way of approaching
(30:40):
a crime scene.
Something different potentially, to introduce
to your story.
We didn't identify the killer straight away.
We identified them via their dog, justsomething a little bit different.
So there you go.
Ten different ideas that I've come across in
the past where killers have made mistakes orleft a trail that led to their identification.
(31:08):
I hope that's useful if you're part of thecommunity and you've got any questions you
want to ask about that, pop them in the forumor ask me at the next live Q and A I've been
Steve Keough and this is murder investigationfor crime writers.
Take care.
Thank you for joining me on another episode of
murder Investigation for crime writers.
(31:29):
I'm your host, Steve Keough, and it's been a
pleasure delving into the world of murderinvestigation with you.
Authenticity is key for crime writers, and Ihope this podcast has provided you with
valuable insights and inspiration for yourstorytelling journey.
If you found value in what you've heard today,I encourage you to share this podcast with
your fellow authors.
Together we can elevate the standards of crime
(31:50):
fiction and bring realism to the forefront.
If you have a moment, I'd also appreciate if
you could leave a review on your favouritepodcast platform.
Your feedback helps others discover thepodcast and join our community of passionate
crime writers.
Thank you for listening.
Until next time, keep writing, keepinvestigating, and keep bringing your stories
to life.
(32:11):
I've been Steve Keogh.
Welcome to Murder investigation for crime Writers, the podcast where we delve
into the dark world of murder to help bringauthenticity to your stories.
I'm your host, Steve Keogh, a former ScotlandYard detective inspector.
So grab your notebook, sharpen your pencilsand prepare to embark on a journey into a
world few get to see.
This is murder investigation for crime
(00:23):
writers.
Hi and welcome to episode two of murder
investigation for crime writers.
I'm your host, Steve Keough.
I was a former police officer, spent twelveyears investigating murder since leaving the
police, written a couple of books, present atv show, Secrets of a Murder detective, and I
(00:46):
run the online community murder investigationfor crime writers.
All of which you can find out about on SteveKeough.com.
So today we're going to look at some reasonswhy your baddie, your villain, might get
themselves caught.
Now I'm going to look at ten.
Now, they're not a top ten, they don't go fromone to ten, they're just a ten.
They're in no particular order, but they areways I've seen throughout my career where
(01:13):
murderers have let themselves down.
Well, they've got caught by not thinking
things through, doing things after the murderor before the murder that indicate that
they're the suspect.
So we're going to look at those.
And what I'm not going to do, I'm not going toinsult your intelligence, is not going to be
they left a fingerprint at the scene or theirblood was all over the murder weapon.
It's going to be things that are slightlydifferent that you may or may not have heard
(01:36):
of.
But the idea is that it gives you some ideas
for your storylines to introduce somethingthat's a little bit different.
Just some things to you to think about.
So let's crack on, then.
First off with number one, and this is CCTV.
Now, you might be thinking CCTV.
I know all about CCTV.
We know that CCTV is an integral part of
(01:57):
murder investigations.
But there's one aspect of it that really does
catch killers out and it's something that theydon't think about before and after they've
committed a murder.
It's not the CCTV that's near the scene, it's
not the CCTV that might be on the route, it'sa CCTV.
That's where they live.
(02:17):
Now, today, it's not like a few years ago
where CCTV cameras tended to be focused in onbusiness premises.
Nowadays, CCTV is everywhere.
Private homes have it.
We have video doorbells.
You walk down any street, you're going to walk
past plenty of those.
There's dashcam footage in cars, there are
(02:39):
buses that record as they're driving around.
And it's that CCTV that's in and around a
killer's home that will quite often catch themout.
And I've seen it many times.
So put yourself in the position of a murderer
and this is a murder you've planned.
You're travelling somewhere with the intention
(03:01):
of killing a person.
At some point, you're going to become quite
aware of the fact that you don't want to getcaught, you don't want your face on some CCTV
in and around where this murder takes place.
So you're probably going to start to do things
to mask your identity.
(03:23):
You might wear a cap, a hood, hide your face,
do something, sunglasses.
You will try to obscure your face from the
camera.
So later on, somebody can't point at a bit of
footage and say, there you are.
Look, you're close to the scene, but at what
stage when you've left the home and you'regoing to commit this murder do you start to
(03:45):
think about that?The murderers that I've come across, the vast
majority, they start to think about that asthey're nearing the place where the merger is
going to take place.
They're not thinking about it.
As soon as they open their front door and walkout into the world, and it's that CCTV that
can catch them out.
And in what way can it catch them out?
(04:05):
So, first off, what it's going to show istimings.
The time you left your home and the time youcame back.
And that can be really important if you aretrying to say, well, I was nowhere near a
murder, I was at home at the time.
CCTV showing you leaving your home and coming
back at times which could fit in with when amurder took place, can be really powerful
(04:27):
evidence.
Then it's got the actual image itself.
So on the image, it will show your clothing.
What clothing were you wearing?
And just as importantly, not just the clothingwhen you left the home, but when you came
back.
When people commit murders, especially ones
involving knives or excessive violence,there's going to be blood.
(04:50):
And killers know that they don't want to getcaught with a victim's blood on them.
So they'll do things that probably, if they'renot in a position to do what we call a wash
up, where they clean themselves, if theirclothes are covered in blood, the easiest
thing in the world to do is either discardclothing or change your clothing.
If you've left your home in the morning in oneset of clothing, and you've come back in a
(05:14):
completely different set again, that's goodevidence.
I've seen it happen and it's a very difficultthing to explain because not many of us leave
our home wearing one set of clothes andreturning something different.
So when it comes to CCTV, rather than justconcentrating in and around the crime scene,
police will look at the CCTV around asuspect's home and it really can produce some
(05:37):
really quite powerful evidence.
Number two, Internet searches.
Now, these become really relevant when a crimeis planned.
If you think nowadays, where we get mostinformation from, it's from the Internet.
And if you're planning a murder, there'sprobably not a lot you can't find on the
(05:58):
Internet somewhere that's going to help youwith that, help you identify ways to carry out
your crime in the most efficient way, ways toavoid detection, ways to avoid leaving
evidence behind.
So you'll carry out these Internet searches
quite often.
They're on Google.
Google tell me the best way in which I cankill my neighbour.
(06:21):
That kind of thing.
Now, you might think I'm joking, but I've seen
this play out in real life and actually, I'veseen it a few times.
But one that sticks in my mind from themurders we investigated was a really sad case.
It was an arson attack on a family home and itwas in the middle of the night.
There was the mum, two sons and two daughtersthat lived at this address.
(06:46):
And really, sadly, two of the daughters diedas a result of the fire.
And we were.
I'll be honest, we were struggling, trying to
identify a motive, trying to identify who itwas that carried out the attack.
And we got some information from the familythat the youngest daughter, who was 15, had
been in a sort of a childish relationship witha 14 year old boy and she had ended it.
(07:11):
She didn't want to see him anymore.
We carried out loads of investigations into
various different hypotheses of why the crimemay have taken place, why this home was
attacked.
But we didn't have anything more than that.
The fact that this 14 year old boy had beendumped, essentially by the 15 year old.
But in these sorts of cases, you don't alwaysneed huge amount of evidence to arrest.
(07:36):
Arresting has quite a low bar when it comes tothe evidence you need.
So we arrested him, went to his home and Iarrested him, looked him in the eye, as I
always tried to do, and he wasn't givinganything away.
There was nothing in him or his demeanour thatwould suggest that he had carried out this
horrendous crime.
So we brought him in and as a result of the
(07:58):
search, we looked at all his.
His bedroom and we took his computer, his
laptop, and we sent it off to the lab and wegot a phone call one afternoon, an excited
phone call, saying, we've looked at hisInternet history.
And the day before the arson attack, hegoogled how to burn somebody's house down.
So we went from not being sure whether or notthis was the person that carried out the
(08:23):
attack to being pretty sure, almost certainlyjust as a result of a Google search the day
before an arson attack, asking how best thatshould be carried out.
What you'll also see from murderers is thatthey will do Internet searches on the crime
afterwards.
(08:43):
Now, this is this evidence taken on its own?
Definitely nowhere near as strong as searcheshad done before a murder.
But if the searches go beyond mild interest inwhat has gone on, then potentially it could be
something that you could put before a jury,but it's open to interpretation.
(09:05):
But killers do Internet searches, try and findinformation on the crime they've carried out
for good reason.
I mean, if you imagine, if you'd committed a
murder, you'd want to know what the policeknow.
Are they close to identifying me?What information are they putting out in their
news appeals?It's this kind of thing that the killers are
trying to identify, trying to set their mindat risk.
(09:28):
They're not going to be caught anytime soon.
So, yes, Internet searches after a murder are
important, but they're definitely not asimpactful and they're not as good evidence as
those Internet searches that happen prior to amurder.
Number three.
Now, scrapings from the victim.
So when you go to a post mortem, the forensicpathologist is going to take a number of swabs
(09:54):
and samples from the victim.
And one of those that is most likely to yield
results are nail scrapings.
Essentially what they do, I call them
scrapings, but they will cut the nails fromthe victim's hand and they will be sent to a
laboratory to be examined and they canpotentially yield fantastic evidence.
(10:18):
Think of the scenario where a killer goes tocommit a murder and they're forensically
aware, so they may have gloves on, wear a hoodto stop their hair falling out.
Whatever methods they use and they believewill prevent DNA evidence being left at the
crime scene, one thing they can't cater forare the actions of the victim.
(10:41):
Now, if a victim fights back and they scrapetheir nails across the skin of the suspect,
across their cheek, for instance, which isn'tcovered across a bare arm, whatever it is, and
then they leave their own DNA, tissue sample,etcetera, under the nails.
(11:03):
That's fantastic evidence, particularly incases where there is some kind of connection
between a victim and a suspect.
If I were to shake your hand, I'd have your
DNA in my hand.
It might be a bit more difficult to explain if
I've got pieces of your skin under my nails.
(11:23):
So no matter how forensically aware a killer
is, if a victim scratches a suspect and getsblood, hair particles, DNA underneath their
fingernails, that can be really impactfulevidence.
Right, number four relates to telephones.
(11:45):
There's two here where we're going to relate
to telephones.
You are going to get used to me whenever it
comes to the subject of evidence from mobilephones, I get a little bit giddy because it
was far and away my favourite evidence when itcomes to mobile investigation.
But this one is very specific and this one isto do with broadband routers.
(12:07):
Now, this is something that killers don'treally think about.
Just think of this scenario.
You having been in a friend's house, you
having been in a restaurant or a pub, youhaven't been at an airport and have connected
your phone to the broadband router there.
In order to gain access to the Internet, your
(12:29):
phone will register on that router.
And then the next time you're there, there's a
good chance your phone will automaticallyconnect to that router.
Now, you don't know anything about this, andyou probably wouldn't know that unless you
picked your phone up, looked at it and sawthat little Internet connection symbol at the
(12:50):
top of your phone screen.
Now, imagine if you're a murderer who's going
to a location where you've done that in thepast, be it because it's an associate, family,
friend, et cetera, home, or it's a businesspremises where you've used their Internet.
When you go back in order to commit the crime,your phone connects to that router.
(13:14):
And what will happen is the router will storewhat's known as a Mac address.
Mac.
Mac stands for media access control.
It's essentially, it's an identificationnumber on your phone.
And when your phone connects to the router,the router will store that Mac address.
Then if the police are switched on enough,they're savvy enough when they go to the
(13:38):
murder scene and they're aware that there's arouter there that's got Internet, they can
access that router and download from it thelog, the activity log, to see which phones
have connected to that router.
And if they get a Mac address, they can.
Then if they get that phone, can marry up theMac address and the phone.
(14:03):
There's one complication to this, is that youhave to have the phone to get the Mac address.
When police make applications to phoneproviders such as o, two and three, etcetera,
some of the information they get will includethe phone's IMEI number.
That's a unique number to that phone.
(14:23):
But what they won't get from the network
providers is that Mac address.
You physically need the phone to map to the
router's Mac address log.
But when you do get the phone and you do that,
just think how good that evidence is for youto connect to a broadband router, you can have
(14:45):
to be pretty close to it, aren't you?And what that log will do, will say, this
phone log to this router between these times.
So not only is it putting you very close to
the router, it's putting you there at a veryspecific time.
And if that router's in a merger address andyou're the killer with your phone in your
(15:07):
pocket connecting to that, good evidence,isn't it?
Number five, while we're on the subjects ofphones.
So there's a pattern that I always used to seeamongst murderers when it comes to their
mobile phone.
So many of them do this.
Once the murder's committed, they get rid oftheir phone.
(15:29):
In the police, we call it dropping a phone.
So when you're doing your writing, if a police
officer is talking about this, they would say,dropping a phone, murder happened, they
dropped their phone.
Now they think they're being clever.
They trying to distance themselves from thatphone.
Nothing to do with me, that phone.
And they will probably connect to another one,
(15:51):
get a new phone, etcetera.
Now just imagine if you've been using that
phone for a period of time.
You've been using it for weeks, months, even
years.
A murder just happens and you just happen to
just stop using your phone.
Looks suspicious, doesn't it?
So, as clever as they think they're being whenit comes to presenting evidence to a jury, it
(16:13):
is something that the prosecution will use asevidence.
Members of the jury, the defendant here hadbeen using this phone for six months.
2 hours after the murder happened, he stoppedusing it, never to use it again.
Coincidence?We say not.
I've seen this as actually really impactfullyplay out.
In one of my trials, we had a murder wherethree defendants, gang related, attacked and
(16:40):
killed a victim.
And it was outside where the victim works.
And he was coming out at the end of the dayalong with some work colleagues.
And one of those colleagues identified one ofthe suspects on an id parade.
Now, during the trial, the trial judge failedto adhere to some of the things laid down in
(17:03):
law that he has to follow when directing ajury when it comes to identification evidence.
He didn't do that.
All three defendants were found guilty of
murder.
The one that was identified by the witness
went to the court of appeal and made anapplication that this evidence, the
identification evidence, should be thrown out.
(17:26):
And if the identification evidence isn't
there, then the evidence against thisdefendant isn't strong enough and the case
should be thrown out, retried, whatever.
Now, in my career, this was the closest I ever
came to losing a case at the appeal stage.
And if I'm honest, half of me was expecting
(17:47):
that if we lose the identification, that'sreally going to really put a dent in our case
against this defendant.
I think there's a good chance that the appeal
may be successful.
But it wasn't.
It was thrown out.
And the appeal judge used this type of phone
evidence to support her decision.
(18:07):
This phone had something like 40,000 different
events, be they text messages, phone calls,etcetera, over the course of a year.
Half an hour after a murder, the phone wentdead, never to be used again.
And in her summing up of how she came to herdecision of dismissing the appeal, she placed
(18:28):
heavy emphasis on the fact.
Well, why would this person, who's been using
this phone so heavily for a substantial amountof time, just drop the phone just after a
murder has been committed?Clearly, he did it again.
He thought he was being clever, but in theend, it was his undoing.
Number six, confessing your crime to somebody.
(18:50):
Why would somebody tell another person they've
committed a murder?Well, they do.
It happens.
And there are a number of reasons why it may
happen.
A lot of it is dependent on the type of
killer.
Not all killers are the same.
To most of us, murdering somebody, takingsomebody's life, would be a huge event and
(19:10):
something that would take a lot of trying toget your head around of what you've just done.
And it's during this emotional distress, ifyou like, having I've just committed this
murder, I'm feeling distressed myself, I'mfeeling overwhelmed by what has happened.
And there'd be a number of reasons whysomebody might then go and confess.
(19:32):
It might be that they're looking forvalidation.
Look, I've committed this murder.
This is the reason why.
Oh, actually, no, I think you're right.
I think I've probably done the same in your
circumstance.
That makes me feel better.
Or it might just be they've got this secretthey're carrying out, they have to share it
with someone.
It's such a burden on me.
(19:53):
It's weighing me down.
I need to share this secret with somebody.
I need to tell you.
Or it could be in the immediate aftermath of
the murder, when it's just happened and thoseemotions are most raw and they're not
thinking.
They're not thinking about the consequences of
what they're doing and I'm telling you.
And then later on, they may regret the fact
that I've shared this, but at those earlystages, when my mind's all over the place,
(20:17):
I've shared it with you.
Or in some circumstances, it might be a brag,
particularly if you're talking amongst, say,gang members, etcetera.
Look what I've done.
I've taken out the opposition and they're
telling people about it.
Some of them make songs about it.
So there could be all sorts of reasons whysomebody would confess to a murder, but it
(20:38):
happens.
Number seven, and this one relates to where
fire is used.
An arson.
The arson is the act that kills the victim, orit could be something that's used in order to
destroy evidence after.
And that's when it comes to fires.
In murder investigation, it's probably morelikely to be the second scenario where fire is
(21:05):
used in order to destroy DNA, fingerprints,evidence, etcetera, like that.
But when people set these fires, they're notprepared often for what's about to happen.
When you set fire to petrol, for instance, itisn't the liquid that's going to burn, it's
the vapours that have mixed with the air, sothe vapours from the petrol mix with the air
(21:30):
and it's those vapours that ignite.
Now, if you've poured a lot of petrol on
something and there are a lot of vapours, it'sgoing to create a fireball, essentially, which
could engulf the person that set the fire.
Now, it may be that these cause burn injuries,
obvious to the eye.
Person gets arrested, gets examined by the
(21:51):
police doctor or police nurse, and they've gotburns on them.
Great evidence.
We say you were there at the scene of this
fire, you've got burns on you.
That's an obvious one, isn't it?
So that's not what I'm going to be talkingabout.
Now.
What I'm going to be talking about is
something that's less obvious less obvious tous, less obvious to the person that's received
these, and that's singed hairs.
(22:14):
Now, if you're close to the seat of a fire and
you're close to that intense heat, what canhappen is your hairs, be it the hairs on your
arms, eyebrows, etcetera.
At the microscopic level, there can be damage
to the outer layer of that hair.
(22:35):
Now, that might not be obvious to the naked
eye under a microscope, that can be seen.
We use this evidence in a case of mine where
somebody was shot in a car and then they setfire to the car.
And one of the people we arrested, we used arazor scraped across the back of his arms to
(22:56):
remove the hairs from his arms, sent them forexamination, and under the microscope, the
damage to those hairs could be seen, provingthat this person was close to a fire.
And with the other evidence we had available,it was enough to charge and convict him.
(23:19):
So if you're writing a story where fire isinvolved, this is the kind of evidence that
would not be obvious to your detectives,wouldn't be a quick result.
That is, it takes a time to first get thesample, submit them to the laboratory, get
them examined, etcetera.
(23:39):
But if they have been close to a fire when it
started, it's really good evidence to put themthere at the scene of that number.
Eight, telematics.
Now, this relates to information that's held
in your car.
So modern cars have essentially the same as
mobile phones.
They have, like, a SIM card in there that
(24:00):
connects to a mobile network.
Now, this can provide really good evidence to
the police.
For instance, it can precisely locate where a
car was.
It's also possible to do real time tracking,
which can be important if you're looking at amanhunt.
If somebody's wanted for murder and you'retrying to locate them, having these vehicle
(24:23):
telematics can be really helpful.
It may be that within a car, there is sat nav
satellite navigation, and if that's been used,that may provide evidence of where a car's
been, what routes they've taken, etcetera.
Some cars are set up, so individual drivers
have their own profiles.
(24:44):
When you get in a car, the seat is set to how
you like it, etcetera, the radio stations.
So, again, the police can access that,
potentially be able to identify not only wherea car was at a particular time, but who the
driver was as well.
And this is something that's really sort of
(25:04):
its infancy, I would suggest, when it comes toevidence.
Many police officers don't know about this.
Many criminals don't know about this?
I've seen this play out.
We had an investigation where a murder took
place and the killer got his girlfriend tocome and pick him up.
And the telematics from the car showed herdriving to the location where the murder took
(25:29):
place, sitting, waiting and eventually drivingoff and taking him back home.
Fantastic evidence, when laid out on a map andput in front of a jury, leaves no doubt,
really, as to what's gone on.
So telematics in a modern investigation can be
really important in pinpointing a person in acar to a particular location at a particular
(25:52):
time.
See number nine.
And this relates to DNA, but in a veryspecific way.
When somebody's carrying out a murder, formost of them, it's going to be quite an
emotional event.
It's going to lead to a massive increase in
the release of adrenaline.
(26:12):
The killers are essentially entering that
fight or flight response and with that comesan increased heart rate, increased breathing,
increased perspiration, which can lead todehydration.
So imagine a scenario where a murder is takingplace in a home, and it's one of these more
(26:36):
brutal type of killings that take place over acertain amount of time.
Think of Jack the Ripper, with the victim,Mary Jane Kelly, in a premises for a
substantial period of time.
That killer is going through that adrenaline
burst, that fight or flight, becomingdehydrated.
(27:00):
They're in a home, they're thirsty.
What could happen?
They want to quench that thirst.
How can they do that?
Drinking from a tap, going to a fridge,getting a can of drink, getting a bottle of
milk, whatever it is, bottle of water.
If you're writing about a murder that takes
(27:20):
place in a home and it happens over a fairlysubstantial amount of time, and your killer's
there and they're getting thirsty, this iswhere they could let themselves down because
they're in that fight or flight mode.
The side of the brain that's logical isn't in
control.
(27:41):
So they may find themselves even thinking
about it, going to the fridge, getting abottle of milk, drinking from it.
And as we know, if you're drinking from abottle, a cup or anything like that, your DNA
is going to be left on it.
And if the police are savvy enough and if
they're thinking about this kind of scenario,they're checking and they're submitting
(28:05):
bottles, cups, etc. For DNA examination, it'snot going to be quick.
Sometime down the line, they're going to getresult back and say, well, actually we've got
a DNA here, we've identified a suspect theydrank from a bottle of milk.
There you go, fantastic evidence.
And number ten, the final one, again relates
(28:26):
to DNA, but completely different, a differentanimal from dogs.
It's now possible to obtain a DNA profile fromdogs.
And in actual fact, one of the investigationsI was involved in was the first one in the UK
to use DNA from a dog in a murderinvestigation, in a court trial, just very
(28:49):
briefly, it was a. It was a gang fight insouth London, in a park in south London, and
one of the attackers had his dog with him, apit bull type dog that he set upon this young
boy that they were killing.
In the melee.
In the fire, the dog got injured and it bled.
I was first on scene from the murder
investigation team and there was a trail ofblood that we followed and made sure it was
(29:15):
all cordoned off as a crime scene.
At the time, I had no idea that this blood
belonged to a dog.
It could have been a person, it could have
been anything.
But we submitted it to the laboratory that
came back and said, actually, it's not humanblood, it's canine.
And then, for the very first time, a DNAprofile was raised from this blood and we
(29:36):
seized the dog from the suspect and theymatched the two.
The blood from the scene matched the bloodfrom the dog.
So how can that fit in with your writing?Well, if your killer's got a dog with them.
I'm not a dog owner myself, but I know thatdogs can be quite slobbery.
They can leave saliva, they may chew things,they may bite things.
(29:58):
So there's a possibility if you're at a crimescene, you're committing a murder and you've
got your dog with you, there's a possibilitythat your dog may leave behind its DNA.
And what they can also do nowadays, theseclever scientists, is if they've got DNA from
a dog, but they haven't got the actual dogitself.
(30:18):
From looking at the markers within the DNAprofile, it is possible to identify the breed
of dog.
So we don't know the killer, but we know what
type of dog they've got.
If you've got that information, it can lead
you to identify who the killer is.
So, again, just a different way of approaching
(30:40):
a crime scene.
Something different potentially, to introduce
to your story.
We didn't identify the killer straight away.
We identified them via their dog, justsomething a little bit different.
So there you go.
Ten different ideas that I've come across in
the past where killers have made mistakes orleft a trail that led to their identification.
(31:08):
I hope that's useful if you're part of thecommunity and you've got any questions you
want to ask about that, pop them in the forumor ask me at the next live Q and A I've been
Steve Keough and this is murder investigationfor crime writers.
Take care.
Thank you for joining me on another episode of
murder Investigation for crime writers.
(31:29):
I'm your host, Steve Keough, and it's been a
pleasure delving into the world of murderinvestigation with you.
Authenticity is key for crime writers, and Ihope this podcast has provided you with
valuable insights and inspiration for yourstorytelling journey.
If you found value in what you've heard today,I encourage you to share this podcast with
your fellow authors.
Together we can elevate the standards of crime
(31:50):
fiction and bring realism to the forefront.
If you have a moment, I'd also appreciate if
you could leave a review on your favouritepodcast platform.
Your feedback helps others discover thepodcast and join our community of passionate
crime writers.
Thank you for listening.
Until next time, keep writing, keepinvestigating, and keep bringing your stories
to life.
(32:11):
I've been Steve Keogh.
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com