How do you commit the perfect murder?

This has always fascinated me (no I am not planning on whacking my OH over the head with a frying pan) but I'd love to hear some people's theories or ideas on this?

I read once that if you got on a train, in disguise, at night after leaving your bed without anyone knowing, and travelled to a remote place and killed a complete stranger with your own kitchen knife, (say, a homeless person), then got back home the same way, then you could probably get away with it.

"They" do say that only after you have:

1)Planted a tree
2)Had sex with a member of the same sex
3)Written a poem
4)Killed someone

Have you done everything.


What do others think?

I think way more murders go unsolved than we like to believe, so they're in a sense "perfect" enough in that the murderer wasn't punished ...

Your scenario is pretty air-tight. The only thing that could improve upon it, I think, would be to establish a good alibi. The best would be a big party; you come, introduce yourself to a few people, and slip out to commit the murder. Then you come back and make sure people see you going home. That way, you not only have nothing connecting you to the crime scene, you have witnesses saying you weren't near it.

Have you ever seen a bureaucracy at work?  The police are simply another bureaucracy.  Of course many get away with it.  Bureaucracies make mistakes big time.

And it is not just the police.  You should see the mistakes and neglect that go on in the courts.

People set goals for themselves, and those goals have little to do with the goals of the institution (justice).  Police and judges have a stack of files...goal number one is to reduce the stack.  Anything that moves a case along, or closes a file, is considered a victory for bureaucrats in the justice system. It doesn't matter how it's done, as long as you keep the numbers moving.

How many things are passed over or pushed aside...let your own experience with, say, the unemployment office, be your guide.  You shouldn't let Law and Order, or any other TV show, serve as the model.  It ain't so.

Damn good points Quill! Everyone I have ever known had goals or aims that had little to nothing to do with the institutions they work for. I think this is universal and one of the reasons I say that nobody associated with any group should be assumed to have the same intent as that group.

To use myself as an example -- I'm employed by an organization whose actions I often disagree with, whose business model I think is ludicrous, and whose priorities I think are so far removed from logic as to be insane. But I work for that organization because it pays me (both in money and in lifestyle) in a way no other organization will, without me being required to uproot myself and move away from my friends and family; I know it would take a lot more than my wishes or values to change the way it operates, and frankly I'm more than halfway through my life and this is what I know how to do well.

Damn fine post quill!
But can you outline for me, the perfect murder?

eddie wrote:Damn fine post quill!
But can you outline for me, the perfect murder?

OK, you're just making fun of me ...

eddie wrote:This has always fascinated me (no I am not planning on whacking my OH over the head with a frying pan) but I'd love to hear some people's theories or ideas on this?

I read once that if you got on a train, in disguise, at night after leaving your bed without anyone knowing, and travelled to a remote place and killed a complete stranger with your own kitchen knife, (say, a homeless person), then got back home the same way, then you could probably get away with it.

"They" do say that only after you have:

1)Planted a tree
2)Had sex with a member of the same sex
3)Written a poem
4)Killed someone

Have you done everything.


What do others think?

To me to obtain the perfect crime would be one where no trace is left back to the person behind the murder, which would be very hard to do a you would have to account for if anyone else knows or are involved and thousands of factors that point back to you.
It has me thinking though what would be though the perfect murder.

So will have a think Eddie and come back with some ideas, but I doubt any will be the perfect solution.

I think murdering a random stranger is probably the best way. No link to the victim. And preferably from a distance to avoid dna contamination.

If the Beltway Snipers had just killed 1 person, I think they would have gotten away without being caught.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:I think murdering a random stranger is probably the best way. No link to the victim. And preferably from a distance to avoid dna contamination.

If the Beltway Snipers had just killed 1 person, I think they would have gotten away without being caught.

correct. and therein lies the conundrum. killers who aim or think they have carried out the perfect murder - I take it perfect meaning undetected and not anything else - will seldom but satisfied with just the one time, leading them on to kill again and increase their chances of getting caught.

eds first idea is too long to finalise and increases the probability for more witnesses or being captured on camera.

ben - too many witnesses again
Zack's is probably closest. shooting and stabbing are out.....garrote?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Damn fine post quill!
But can you outline for me, the perfect murder?

OK, you're just making fun of me ...

I actually wasn't!!

When have I ever made fun of you!!??

Fuzzy Zack wrote:I think murdering a random stranger is probably the best way. No link to the victim. And preferably from a distance to avoid dna contamination.

If the Beltway Snipers had just killed 1 person, I think they would have gotten away without being caught.

Yes it only has to be one person. And if there's no link to you then it would nigh on impossible to prove it was you and DNA only if you've ever committed a crime??