wondergirl9847 wrote:Is it for sure OCD or could he have Tourette's or something? Just speculatin'.
Somebody in the CBS boardroom shouda done the math and figured the 100th day ahead of time.amyvil wrote:Nah, they won't do a "we join the show already in progress" because it's sweeps season. They'll just start it a bit late. Hopefully not too late. Of course, it's going to mess up the ratings. But somebody will figure it out one way or the other. Last night's 10 p.m. CM got over 13.5 million viewers and that was about 4 million more viewers than the repeat which aired in its regular time slot of 9 p.m. The CM fans will follow this show and they will be watching. Plus all of us will be watching so the numbers should totally RAWK THE HOUSE!!!
I'm smelling a little CBS time shifting experiment ahead of the fall season. CBS played with its Tuesday night schedule this week by moving back NCIS and The Mentalist an hour each and last night they showed a new CM at 10 p.m. Both the Mentalist and CM performed very well in the 10 o'clock hour. I'm thinking they will sandwich in one of the new shows in the 9 p.m. hour between NCIS at 8 and The Mentalist at 10 p.m. I think TR would be a perfect fit at 9 p.m. Just think of all that Tuesday night hotness. A little Tony-Ziva heating up our screens at 8, hopefully a lot of Alex at 9 and then just to finish off the night the charming Simon Baker at 10 p.m. I think that would be the perfect slot. What do you think?
Amy V.
I like him too but if he so much as utters such words as blaming violence on TV for social ills in our country, we're toast.francis wrote:Oh, no. I really liked Obama. Now I'm not so sure. Doesn't he have people who tell him about such things as etiquette and not to anger the fans of certain people? I'm thinking his likeability factor just dropped in half...
VAsusieQ18 wrote:Drawing again here on professional experience, for a serial killer of this type, he's going to have to "connect" with the victim. Something from his past is going to resonate with the would-be-victim. It unlikely he made any type of familiar connection with his other victims. They don't want their kill "personalized". They rarely want to know their names or anything about their lives. They don't want to hear what they are taking away from this person, their prey, or their prey's loved ones. So I'm thinking at some point in the show, someone is going to "reach" Vincent. The Vincent before he started killing. A connection will be made, thus making it extremely difficult for Vincent to be impartial about the kill. But he knows he can't stop himself, thus his reaching out to the BAU for help. Just a theory. This is, after all, TV and anything can happen.
/Susie wonders if she really really just bungled that thought up there
Serial killers are a different breed and again, there are all kinds. I think in Vincent's case, they will find when they profile him that he can feel remorse, which is ultimately what will get him caught. Some other killers, such as Ted Bundy, never ever showed remorse. Well, remorse for getting caught, but none for their victims.
This is very interesting, Susie. I always thought bringing the media in would in fact put the victim in more danger, as it puts pressure on the killer and he can see that they are looking for him. But what you say makes lots of sense.VAsusieQ18 wrote:I know that in the case of missing/kidnapped children, law enforcement will try to get the parents or a liaison rep in front of the camera and use the child's name, talk about them in great detail, all to make them seem human, a person. This is done because the kidnapper or whomever has the child may see the piece and the impersonal nature of the act may somehow become humanized. The experts believe that if the victim can be given a name, a face, a history (of caring by family and friends), it makes harming the victim harder. Not that it won't happen, because some killers just cannot be stopped no matter what you try to do. But like humans, serial killers come in all types and you're hoping to find some chink in his armor, some remorse, some level of consciousness that you can reach to perhaps influence the killer, either to let the victim go, or to confuse them enough to give you enough time to find the victim. Sadly, I think the stats for missing kids abducted is that 90% are killed within hours of the abduction.
Well, if not President Obama, then surely the First Lady. I mean if she's ever seen him at all, then she's just got to be a fan!bluedahlia3 wrote:We'll just have to hope Mr. Obama is a fan. Maybe he'll do his press conference and then skip out, head to the residence and watch CM. Hey...he could be a AOL fan too!
francis, what you said is actually how things used to be handled. The police didn't want to make the victim real to the kidnapper, thinking they would do exactly what you're saying, "get rid" of the child. But in recent years, the stats show that a very high percentage of the abducted children are killed within 24-48 hours of being abducted. So the thought is that perhaps humanizing the victim would perhaps make the abductor remorseful, or see than as a human being and thus potentially save the child. Thats why you see so much on the news these days about abductions and the press putting a face on the victim. Its also another reason why you see so many of the parents put on TV, with pics of their kids and stories of their life....again, putting a "face" to the abducted child.francis wrote:This is very interesting, Susie. I always thought bringing the media in would in fact put the victim in more danger, as it puts pressure on the killer and he can see that they are looking for him. But what you say makes lots of sense.VAsusieQ18 wrote:I know that in the case of missing/kidnapped children, law enforcement will try to get the parents or a liaison rep in front of the camera and use the child's name, talk about them in great detail, all to make them seem human, a person. This is done because the kidnapper or whomever has the child may see the piece and the impersonal nature of the act may somehow become humanized. The experts believe that if the victim can be given a name, a face, a history (of caring by family and friends), it makes harming the victim harder. Not that it won't happen, because some killers just cannot be stopped no matter what you try to do. But like humans, serial killers come in all types and you're hoping to find some chink in his armor, some remorse, some level of consciousness that you can reach to perhaps influence the killer, either to let the victim go, or to confuse them enough to give you enough time to find the victim. Sadly, I think the stats for missing kids abducted is that 90% are killed within hours of the abduction.
I don't really like the way the media press a sob story out of anything, but if it actually helps the victim I can understand it.
susie,VAsusieQ18 wrote:francis, what you said is actually how things used to be handled. The police didn't want to make the victim real to the kidnapper, thinking they would do exactly what you're saying, "get rid" of the child. But in recent years, the stats show that a very high percentage of the abducted children are killed within 24-48 hours of being abducted. So the thought is that perhaps humanizing the victim would perhaps make the abductor remorseful, or see than as a human being and thus potentially save the child. Thats why you see so much on the news these days about abductions and the press putting a face on the victim. Its also another reason why you see so many of the parents put on TV, with pics of their kids and stories of their life....again, putting a "face" to the abducted child.francis wrote:This is very interesting, Susie. I always thought bringing the media in would in fact put the victim in more danger, as it puts pressure on the killer and he can see that they are looking for him. But what you say makes lots of sense.VAsusieQ18 wrote:I know that in the case of missing/kidnapped children, law enforcement will try to get the parents or a liaison rep in front of the camera and use the child's name, talk about them in great detail, all to make them seem human, a person. This is done because the kidnapper or whomever has the child may see the piece and the impersonal nature of the act may somehow become humanized. The experts believe that if the victim can be given a name, a face, a history (of caring by family and friends), it makes harming the victim harder. Not that it won't happen, because some killers just cannot be stopped no matter what you try to do. But like humans, serial killers come in all types and you're hoping to find some chink in his armor, some remorse, some level of consciousness that you can reach to perhaps influence the killer, either to let the victim go, or to confuse them enough to give you enough time to find the victim. Sadly, I think the stats for missing kids abducted is that 90% are killed within hours of the abduction.
I don't really like the way the media press a sob story out of anything, but if it actually helps the victim I can understand it.
Okay, my apologies for going so far
Oh, don't feel guilty nayp. It balances out just a tiny bit how horribly we felt last year. It's the ying and yang of life. And darn it, we deserve it after the hell we went through last year.nayp wrote:I can not imagine want the posts here are going to be like after the CM episode, I am starting to feel like a kid at Christmas. The discussions are going to be amazing and we are all going to have such different feelings about this. I almost feel guilty about feeling this good right now.
SusieQ, loved reading your analogy..fascinating and well written. I work and deal with these types of personalities for a living, and it's quite terrifying to say the least. I can hardly wait to see how Alex manages this type of facade. I'm sure this will most definitely become a character that Alex won't ever forget he portrayed and an episode long remembered by him and the watching audience as well.VAsusieQ18 wrote:The one thing I've learned at work about serial killers, is that once you think you've figured them out, another one comes along and blows the theory all to hell. Their minds just don't work like "normal" peoples'. I have no degrees in psycology or elevated education, but I can tell you that even they are sometimes stumped about the behavior of any given killer. Its very difficult for a "sane" person to ever understand an "insane" or psycotic person. We just can't understand why someone would derive pleasure hurting or killing another. I gave up a long time ago trying to figure these people out. I take the advise of the experts, apply a bit of common sense and good detective work, and try to do my job. Thankfully, for my own peace of mind, recent work has me trailing terrorists, which are a different breed entirely. And I can't say I miss working the "darker side of force", as some of the guys refer to it at work.
