“Modus Operandi versus Signature of the

Offender” (Hansika Sahu, 20120162)

The rising field of criminal profiling is regularly depicted as energizing, quick paced, and impressive
in the sensationalized stories we see on TV and in Hollywood motion pictures. From the splendid
FBI profiler Will Graham in Thomas Harris' novel, Red Dragon, who gets the notorious Hannibal
Lecter, to the always fashionable team from the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit depicted on CBS's
Criminal Minds, profilers appear to instinctively know each move that a serial killer makes, up to
and including what they had for breakfast the day of the crime. However, real-life investigations
are barely ever that straightforward.

Most crime scenes tell a story. And like most stories, crime scenes have characters, a plot, a
beginning, a centre, and hopefully, a conclusion. However, in contrast to authors who lead their
readers to a predetermined ending, the final disposition of a crime scene hangs on the
investigators assigned to the case. The investigators’ abilities to analyze the crime scene and to
decide the- Who, What, How, and Why govern how the crime scene story unfolds.

During the course of police investigations, numerous aspects of forensic psychology, criminology,
and crime theory are used to identify suspects of violent crime. Criminal profilers use the
behavioral details found at the crime scene to develop a picture of what type of person could have
committed the offence to narrow down the pool of possible suspects. Instead of distinguishing a
specific individual as the culprit, profilers take a gander at the physical proof not for DNA or
fingerprints, but rather to peruse the pieces of information abandoned to comprehend the
inspirations of the guilty party and build up a framework of the particular personality type who
could have done the crime.1
The two most elementary aspects of quantifiable and identifiable criminal behavior in the field of
forensic behavioral analysis are modus operandi (MO) and offender signature.

1
Torres, A. N., Boccaccini, M. T., & Miller, H. A. (2006). Perceptions of the Validity and Utility of Criminal
Profiling among Forensic Psychologists and Psychiatrists. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 37(1), 51-58.
In order to execute successful investigations of violent or serial crime, investigators should have a
fundamental understanding of these basic profiling concepts. 

It becomes confusing for people to differentiate between a criminal’s signature versus the
criminal’s modus operandi when they commit a specific crime. 

Are they similar?

No, they are distinctly different because one feeds on emotional desires, while the other is a
procedure.

 Modus operandi is the technique that is used to commit the crime and signature behavior is
what helps to serve the criminal’s emotional and psychological needs.

A modus operandi or MO refers to the method or procedure that a criminal uses when
committing a crime. It comes from the Latin phrase meaning “mode of operation”. It is the
description of all of the behaviors and actions that are necessary for a particular offender to
successfully commit his or her crime.2

It doesn’t tell criminal investigators about someone’s motivations, but rather simply about their
actions. In this way it is the concrete evidence at a crime scene. MO has great significance to
investigators. Identifying the similarities among methods of operation is a critical step in crime
scene analysis that provides the “resulting correlation that connects cases” 3

A few examples of a criminal’s MO are:4

2
Turvey, Brent E. (2012). Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis.
Burlington, MA: Academic Press. P. 334.

3
Douglas, J. & Munn, C. (1992). Violent Crime Scene Analysis: Modus Operandi, Signatureand Staging.
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, February, 1-10. P. 3.
 The type of restraints used on the victim, wound patterns, and type of fiber of the
restraints.
 Type of weapon used, such as knife, blunt object, or gun.
 Tools used to gain entry to victim’s home.
 Attack could be from when the victim exits their vehicle or walks through a dark parking
garage.
 Time of day that the offender chooses to commit the crime, such as nighttime or early
morning.

An offender’s MO can be simple or highly complex depending on the degree of sophistication

indicating the experience, motivation, and mental aptitude of the offender. 5

Offender MOs are dynamic and subject to change throughout the course of an offender’s criminal
career. The danger of getting caught may become more or less present, causing an evolution of
methodology and technique in order to evade capture. This is a result of gaining skill and
knowledge, natural maturation, and perhaps education. If a perpetrator gets caught, he will learn
from the mistakes he made and refine his methods so as not to have the same actions give him
away a second time.

Modus operandi is significant to a criminal profiler’s work because it provides several key pieces
of information about an offender. In addition to the choices, procedures, and techniques used by
violent criminal offenders, MO can likewise indicate a man's specific aptitudes or calling, both in a
criminal and in a non-criminal sense. Subtle elements that demonstrate a more profound level of
foresight can likewise uncover if the culprit led earlier inspection of the victim or crime scene
before the crime was done.6

In spite of the obvious value in recognizing a MO, criminal profilers and agents should dependably
be mindful so as not to put an excessive amount of weight exclusively on a criminal's MO in light of
the fact that, as already specified, that there is significant opportunity for an offender’s methods
to change over time. Much more specific to an individual violent offender is the signature that
they leave at the crime scene.

A signature refers to the distinctive behaviors that help to serve the criminal’s psychological and
emotional needs.  

Signatures are critical to the offender personally. Torment, mortification, repeated stabbing,
postmortem mutilation, and the takings of souvenirs are a few case of criminal signatures. These
activities are frequently depicted as the "calling card" of a offender and cover the unique

4
https://authorjenniferchase.com/2011/06/22/offender%E2%80%99s-signature-vs-modus-
operandi/

5
Hazelwood, R. R., & Warren, J. I. (2003). Linkage Analysis: Modus Operandi, Ritual, and Signature in
Serial Sexual Crime. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 8(6), 588.
6
Turvey, Brent E. (2012). Criminal Profiling : An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis.
Burlington, MA: Academic Press. P. 335.
combination of behaviors that emerge across two or more offenses. 7 These actions are unique to
each culprit and provide psychological understanding into the person’s underlying motivational
behavior for committing their crime. The signature aspects go beyond what is necessary to commit
a violent criminal act, playing into the fantasies of the offender.

An example of signature behavior a rapist may display are acts of domination, manipulation, or
control during the assault of his victim and using exceptionally vulgar or abusive language, or
preparing a script for the victim to repeat. The use of excessive physical forces and the order of
activities a rapist may engage in with all of his victims is also an example of signature behavior. 8
While a criminal’s signature may develop over time, it will never change.

Signatures may not show up in every crime scene. Offenders may get interrupted, or
decomposition of a homicide victim can erase the traces of the ritual performed during the crime.
When the signature is present, though, it can provide the most valuable clues to linking several
similar cases to one offender.

Now suppose if you rob a bank at gunpoint, the gun is part of your M.O. True signature, on the
other hand, is the aspect of the crime that emotionally fulfills the offender, and so it remains
generally the same. Torture, for example, is almost always a signature. Regardless of what crime
an offender is committing, he doesn’t need to torture a victim to pull it off. He does so because of a
twisted sadistic need. So, if an offender uses a gun to capture a victim so that he can torture her,
you’ve got both an M.O. and a signature.

Signature is the more important of the two in an investigation as it leads to the offender’s
personality and motive. It describes the aspects and behavior of the offender. 9

A simple way to remember the distinction is that a criminal’s MO refers to the way the crime is
committed and the signature is what is beyond that it takes to commit the specific crime.

Another fundamental legal difference between MO and signature is that a criminal’s MO alone is
not admissible as evidence in court.

The two criminal markers are very valuable when used in combination during an investigation to
profile a suspect, but MOs are not generally as unique and individual as a signature. An offender’s
method of operation can be thought of to be class characteristics of physical evidence at a crime
scene, while the signature can be thought of to be an individual characteristic.

The MO of serial crimes may adjust and change as the criminal becomes more skilled, but the
fantasy that drives these behaviors is stationary and unchanging from crime to crime. It is this
fantasy that characterizes the serial offender’s signature. Psychologically speaking, it serves the

7
Hazelwood, R. R., & Warren, J. I. (2003). Linkage Analysis: Modus Operandi, Ritual, and Signature in
Serial Sexual Crime. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 8(6), 591.

8
Douglas, J. & Munn, C. (1992). Violent Crime Scene Analysis: Modus Operandi, Signatureand Staging.
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, February, 1-10. P. 3.

9
https://sonjahutchinson.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/signature-vs-modus-operandi/
purpose to replay childhood trauma into a situation where the criminal has control over the
situation in order to bring conquer to their mental suffering. 10

TV and comics such as Batman have also inspired a lot of serial killers. They have tried to adopt
the same modus operandi and signature as used by the villains in Batman. The most famous of
which are Jack the Ripper and the Zodiac Killer, who both sent multiple messages to the police
daring them to catch them just like Riddler in Batman.11

Most of them have also started leaving their own personal stamp or non-instrumental signature
on the crime scene.

This is also believed to be inspired by Batman, as Joker, who one of the main villains, used to
always leave a playing card after committing a murder, declaring his ownership of the crime. 12
10
Kocsis, R.N. (2006) Criminal Profiling: Principles and Practice. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press. P. 78.

11
http://www.ranker.com/list/top-6-real-life-versions-of-batman-villains/michael-gibson

12
Travis Langley, Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight. John Wiley & Sons, 22-May-2012.
An excellent case study on MO versus signature is that of the murders caused by Jack the Ripper.
Between 1888 and 1891, 11 female victims were murdered in the Whitechapel area of London,
England. One of reasons for the fascination with his crimes is that no suspect was ever been tried
or convicted. Although there is much debate about which and how many of the murders can be
linked to one individual, many experts agree that at least five of the victims can definitively be tied
to one killer.The MO of the Whitechaple killer changed from one murder to the next as the
perpetrator learned more effective techniques. The actions that went above and beyond what
were necessary to kill the victims were the unique criminal signature of Jack the Ripper. It is the
combination of those signature behaviors that several of the victims can be linked to one
offender.13

13
Keppel, R. D., Weis, J. G., Brown, K. M., & Welch, K. (2005). The Jack the Ripper Murders: A Modus
Operandi and Signature Analysis of the 1888–1891 Whitechapel Murders. Journal Of Investigative
Psychology & Offender Profiling, 2(1), P. 19-20.
There was likewise the instance of the "Mad Bomber" who struck New York City in the mid 1950s
and went undetected for very nearly 16 years. So for this situation, rather than taking a gander at
simply the techniques with which the culprit completed the bombings, the police dove more
profound into the signature aspects of the crimes that allowed an assessment of the mental
motivational factors behind the crimes.14

Therefore, since, a serial offender’s modus operandi can and often does change, it is not the most
useful method of linking cases together. Looking instead at the criminal’s repeated ritualistic
behaviors at the crime scene is often more important in connecting several crimes to the same
person than considering only his criminal techniques. 15

The common challenge in distinguishing the MO from offender signature lies in the fact that
certain offender actions committed in the act of the offense may satisfy both the offender’s MO
and his or her signature. The key to determining which behavior falls into what category lies in the
totality of the circumstances surrounding the offense.16

Hence, while both MO and signature offer profitable understanding to the identity of a criminal,
the signature is a more special personal identifier. A well-trained criminal profiler will consider
both the strategies used to carry out the crime and hidden inspirations that appear in the culprit's
signature behaviours. By utilizing both inductive and deductive criminal evaluation systems, crime
investigators can bring all the pieces of the crime scene riddle to accomplish a successful criminal
personality profile and ideally provide an accurate suspect for the serial crimes.

References:

 Holmes, R. M., & Holmes, S. T. (2009). Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool (4th Ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

 John E. Douglas & Corinne Munn, Violent Crime Scene Analysis: Modus Operandi, Signature, and
Staging, FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, February 1992. See also-

 http://crimeandclues.com/2013/01/26/violent-crime-scene-analysis-modus-operandi-signature-
and-staging/

 https://authorjenniferchase.com/2011/06/22/offender%E2%80%99s-signature-vs-modus-
operandi/

 https://sonjahutchinson.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/signature-vs-modus-operandi/

14
Schlesinger, L. B. (2009). Psychological Profiling: Investigative Implications from Crime Scene
Analysis. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 37(1), 74-75.

15
Schlesinger, L. B. (2009). Psychological Profiling: Investigative Implications from Crime Scene
Analysis. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 37(1), P. 82.

16
http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/16342-modus-operandi-vs-offender-signature.
 http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/psychological-profiling.html

 http://oncriminaljustice.blogspot.in/2012/05/modus-operandi-versus-signature-in.html

 http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/16342-modus-operandi-vs-offender-signature