P1 Q1
200 word response 1 reference/intext citation
Due 1/17/2025
Jean
In this hypothetical case, two state police agencies who form an arson task force are at odds with the perpetrator’s motives. Motives are classified into two classes; robbery, rape, and burglary are considered first class, which doesn’t usually have a motive attached due to a universal motive. Second-class motives like arson, homicide, and assault can have motives that can then deduce the relationship between the suspect and victim(s) (Osterburg et al., 2019, pg. 174). The lone-wolf serial arsonist committed the acts for over a year across state lines, with the targets being home Insurance board members. The state police in their home turf where these arsons started believed the motive to be financially revenge-related; according to their evidence, the suspect might have been highly disgruntled with how his home insurance treated him once his home burned down. He took it upon himself to target the board members of that insurance company. The neighboring state police, where the arson also occurred, differ from that rationale, believing that this was a lone wolf directed by the Mafia to target insurance board members because of money being owed. Early on in the investigation, both state agencies worked together to figure out that the Mafia angle was accurate and the arsonist’s home being destroyed was their attempt at insurance fraud. According to the Office for Victims of Crime, these hypothetical state police agencies and real agencies need to develop protocols and decision-making practices to ensure the sustainability of task force efforts in the future (Office for Victims of Crime, 2025). It is also essential to center an investigative unit, which my hypothetical task force did, to broadly focus on collecting, aggregating, and analyzing criminal operations. The broader the view of the possibilities, the wider the net cast to draw in Mafia criminal operations. The home state where the attacks occurred was where the evidence was housed, a unanimous decision that the Office for Victims of Crime points out (Office for Victims of Crime, 2025).
