Could somebody please point out the section where it is supposed to tell you how to stage a crime scene? It really does not seem anything like a "how to" manual to me, more like a personal recollection of his career in criminal profiling. I have read half the book but maybe I have not read far enough.

I thought we had established that there was not a copy of the book Mindhunter in the Ramsey home, that was just hearsay and erroneous rumour. But between you, me and the fencepost, I can't see how it would have been an incrimination even if they had a copy of the book!

Now that I have two books by Douglas, does that mean that I am potentially a criminal? If I read more, does that mean that my chances of committing a violent crime are escalated? How many must I read before I can commit the perfect murder? What is the correlation here?

I would welcome your comments in a timely fashion as I am just about to embark on further detailed research of Jack the Ripper and Lizzie Borden. I have a macabre side to my personality that led me through my psychology degree and onto the subject of serial killers. If I am in danger of becoming one by my research I would love to be forewarned..

HELP!

"I have started reading Mindhunter by John Douglas...Could somebody please point out the section where it is supposed to tell you how to stage a crime scene?"

CHAPTER 15, Why we hurt the ones we love?

"It really does not seem anything like a "how to" manual to me..."

This chap. tells how spouses or parents try to stage a murder to point away from themselves and how FBI profilers can tell that this is happening.
No, it doesn't say "Do this, this way' anywhere in the text. However, if you copied the exact manner of staging described in the book, that of a parents staging a cover up, and then "called" the FBI in with a kidnapping ruse, how do you suppose they would view the staging? They would think, "Why, this is a classic case of family member trying to cover up a murder of a "loved" oone.

""I thought we had established that there was not a copy of the book Mindhunter in the Ramsey home..."

The police, or a police detective, reported that the book was in the home...It and several more are listed in Schiller's PMPT, reference the evidence part of the forum under "mindhunters".
John claims they never had the book or read it. Apparently, it's not in the police evidence. If it was it vanished.

"I can't see how it would have been an incrimination even if they had a copy of the book!"

I have to agree with you completely.

"Now that I have two books by Douglas, does that mean that I am potentially a criminal? If I read more, does that mean that my chances of committing a violent crime are escalated? How many must I read before I can commit the perfect murder? What is the correlation here?"

I have a copy. In fact I have read three of his books. I have never murdered anyone. You and I have read them and we are perfectly normal.

My theory is that the person who did this wanted police to think the Ramseys were guilty and used this chapter 15 information to try to duplicate the "staging". But why duplicate something that points the finger right back at you? That's stupid! And you would be correct. The only person to benefit from this arrangement would be an intruder trying to set the Ramseys up.

The kidnapping 911 call put the "icing on the cake" and pulled the FBI in long enough to correctly advise the BPD based on their "profiling" expertise. Read their reactions in PMPT: there's something "hinky" here, this RN is too long, the ransom amount isn't rounded off and is a wierd amount, uh oh, we have a body in the home, that probably means this isn't a kidnapping, it's a murder, and so on. They were set up to react that way.

Whether or not the intruder left a copy of "Mindhunters" in the home so that investigators would have a little "help" making the connection, I don't know. It wouldn't surprise me if he did, it matches several other items left by him with the same purpose in mind.

"I would welcome your comments in a timely fashion as I am just about to embark on further detailed research of Jack the Ripper and Lizzie Borden."

I thought his take on these crimes was very interesting. I had to stand up in the book store for a couple hours to read the book so you know I liked it. I almost bought it.

"I have a macabre side to my personality that led me through my psychology degree and onto the subject of serial killers. If I am in danger of becoming one by my research I would love to be forewarned..

HELP!"

Interesting...I have a psych degree with a sociology (criminology) minor. It's a good thing I don't like to read all these murder mysteries either. Now I'm starting to worry about myself! I mean you!!!

I believe the name of the chapter is something like, "God wants you to join Shari Faye." The man who kidnapped and killed Shari Faye was contacting her sister and suggesting she might be next.

Craig Silverman actually suggested that Patsy's motive for the killing was that chapter.

The theory is that Patsy was reading the book, that chapter, Shari Faye and JonBenét rhyme so....

No lie!

There is no blueprint in the book.

The Ramseys didn't own the book and didn't know who John Douglas was until after the murder.

But the BORG loved the story so it became an urban legend in the Ramsey case.