“As a kid, he may have been cruel to animals, or he may have gotten into trouble for killing them. As a young man or teen, he may have had some psychological problems. Those problems may or may not have been diagnosed. He has an addictive personality, but he’s good at hiding his compulsion. He’s a classic psychopath. He’s egocentric. He probably has a large collection of pornography, particularly S&M-type stuff. He’s probably into bondage and may have movies or video on his computer. He spends a great deal of time fantasizing before he actually commits the act. He enjoys the planning stage. Once he’s done the murder, he spends a good bit of time reliving it.”

If we were dealing with any other case, I might agree with the profile. I might even be impressed. But none of his profile points describe Daniel Lapp.

Tomasetti hands me the pages. “It’s all preliminary and subject to change.”

Nodding, I turn my attention to the profile. A chill passes through me as I read the particulars.

• Subject is physically strong. He may have a job that requires strength or he may work out regularly.

• He has a controlling personality and may act out in anger when things are out of his control.

• He wants to be seen as attractive. He is meticulous with regard to his appearance and makes an effort to appeal to women.

• He presents himself as charming and nonthreatening.

• He is comfortable around women. He interacts with women and was probably raised with females in his home e.g. mother and/or sisters.

• He is in a stable relationship, but the relationship is troubled. He is angry about the failing relationship, but feels as if saving it is out of his control.

• He can be spontaneous if an opportunity presents itself, but prefers planning.

• He is a newshound and follows the case closely. He enjoys media attention.

Once again I find myself thinking of Daniel Lapp. “I don’t think we should limit the investigation by excluding possible suspects who don’t meet this criteria.”

“Usually this is where people tell me I’m pretty good at what I do.”

“I didn’t mean to offend you.” I hand him the sheet.

“You didn’t.” He takes the paper. “What don’t you agree with?”

“I just don’t think we should exclude anyone this early in the game.”

He gives me an odd look, as if he’s trying to figure me out. I avoid his eyes by looking down at my notes. “This guy is obviously in a period of escalation,” I say. “Do you think there was some kind of trigger?”

“I would guess something difficult for him has happened in his personal life. Possibly involving a woman. A wife or girlfriend. He doesn’t deal well with rejection and could be retaliating.”

“He hates women?”

“He hates them, but he desires them. In deviant ways.”

“How does he choose his victims?” I say.

“A woman catches his eye. He spends some time watching her. A few days. A week, maybe. He learns her routine. He figures out when she’s vulnerable. When he can get to her.”