>Mikie, the two things to remember about signature are these;
>unique to the series of crimes (thus to the criminal), and
>not necessary for the commission of the crime.
>
>Rainsong
>
>I would like to add that the gratification of the offender
>must be a motivation.

Yes, I agree, but until people understand how to determine what constitutes 'signature,' the motive aspect won't mean a thing to them. When something is unique and does not assist in committing the crime, it will stand out and then a person can step back and ask, "why." Why would a killer need to do this (signature aspect)?

Rainsong