“Thanks.”
“He was a good man.”
“Yes. He was.”
For a moment he let the words, the grief, sift through the air, then he greeted Margaret. “EAD Wellington.”
“Lieutenant. Thank you for not being late.”
“You too,” he said.
We shared a look, an almost-smile, then he took a seat. I set my phone to vibrate, slid it into my pocket, and Margaret clacked over to the podium to get the seminar underway.
6
“Good evening,” she said. “I’m Executive Assistant Director Margaret Wellington, and I’d like to begin by thanking you for your attendance this evening. As you know, emerging research is reshaping the way criminal investigations are structured and carried out. Tonight we will be discussing the integration of technology into criminal investigations in the twenty-first century.”
A pause. “We are honored to have Washington DC Metro Police Lieutenant Doehring with us.” She gave him a nod. “And Patrick Bowers, one of the Bureau’s most experienced criminologists. I’m sure you’ll find his insights scintillating.”
Her comment about my scintillating insights was completely devoid of sarcasm, which in itself seemed to be a new and novel form of sarcasm.
“Tonight promises to be an engaging and thought-provoking discussion.” She added a few more opening comments and announcements, then gave Lieutenant Doehring the floor.
Doehring took the podium and began describing ways in which the Washington DC law enforcement community was implementing the use of cell phones equipped with touch screens that also scanned fingerprints so that suspects’ prints can be run through AFIS within seconds of apprehension.
Currently, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, a little-known branch of the defense department that I consult with on behalf of the FBI, had given me the prototype of a new phone, still in development, that included the function Doehring had just mentioned, as well as defense satellite mapping capabilities and a 3-D hologram projector for mapping and analyzing crime scene locations. Amazing stuff.
Doehring listed advancements in using microwave emitters for non-lethal crowd dispersal, Israeli-developed guns that can shoot around corners, ways to x-ray crowds to determine if armed assailants are present, three-dimensional orthodigital photographs to help with bite-mark analysis, and so on-all devices we’d been using at the Bureau for the last several years.
“However,” he said, “you can have all the high-tech gadgets in the world, but unless you stick to time-tested, proven investigative procedures, you’ll come up short every time. Good investigations always focus on uncovering the perp’s motive, means, and opportunity.”
And this is where our views began to diverge.
I don’t look for any of the above.
And I definitely do not use the word perp.
Doehring went on to detail a few cases that had “gotten bogged down in technology” until “good old-fashioned gut instincts” broke the case wide open. I sensed his tone shifting, becoming slightly antagonistic. From where I sat on the stage, I could see the attendees’ faces, and most of the people appeared to agree with him that the classic approach was best.
Great. That would make my job so much easier.
Twenty minutes passed, Margaret encouraging Lieutenant Doehring, occasionally asking for my input, never questioning his assertions. I was careful to keep my comments focused on the valid points Doehring was making. No sense diminishing his authority in the eyes of the attendees.
At last he finished, and Margaret turned to me and said simply, “Agent Bowers.”
My turn to use the podium. “Well.” The mic squealed and I backed away from it, tried again. “Recent advances in technology have allowed us to utilize geospatial intelligence, or GEOINT, from the defense department’s satellite array and apply it to law enforcement. By analyzing the locations related to serial offenses and studying the timing, location, and progression of the crimes, we can work backward to find the most likely location of the offender’s home base, a geographic region we typically refer to as the hot zone.”
“A geoprofile,” Margaret interjected, possibly with a slight note of derision, it was hard to tell.
“That’s right.” Before I moved into the technical aspects and algorithms, or demonstrated my cell phone’s geospatial hologram capabilities, I needed to lay out some theoretical groundwork. “Geospatial investigation builds on research in environmental criminology, sociology, routine activity theory, crime scene analysis, and environmental psychology, and is based on four basic principles concerning criminal behavior.”
Blank faces in the audience.
Fantastic opening there, Pat. You’ve got ’em in the palm of your hand.
I took a breath. “First, even though it seems self-evident, all crimes occur in a specific place at a specific time; nearly all are committed in locations with which the offender is familiar, or along the pathways between these areas. Understanding those geospa-tial and temporal aspects of the crime leads us to a better understanding of the offender’s travel patterns and cognitive map of his surroundings.”
Even though she was near the back, I noticed Tessa yawn.
It might have been a subtle joke. I couldn’t tell.
“Essentially, the distribution and timing of the crimes show us how the criminal understands and interacts with his environment,” I explained. “Secondly, despite conventional wisdom that many crimes occur randomly, most of the current research supports the conclusion that people commit crimes only after a series of rational decisions shaped by environmental cues.”
I paused, and Margaret asked me, cordially enough, to clarify the decision-making process I was referring to.
“Well, an offender’s past, familiarity with the region, desire for seclusion during the abduction or attack, awareness of and availability of exit routes, and a lack of visible law enforcement presence all affect his choices regarding the commission of his crime. Offenders choose the time and location of their crimes in order to avoid apprehension.”
“In other words,” Margaret interjected, “their motive is to get away with it?”
Oh.
That was clever.
With one tiny comment she’d found a way to agree with me while bringing up my biggest pet peeve-motive. I glanced at her. She was smiling in a Margarety way.
“Yes.” Follow up on that later, just get through the four points for now. “Thirdly, offenders attempt to save time and money, put in the least amount of effort for the most possible benefit. This affects the routes they take to and from-”
One of the eight doors on the right side of the auditorium edged open. Even though most of the attendees didn’t seem to notice, the movement caught my attention. A woman entered. Naturally beautiful face. Frizzily curled red hair. Coy smile. Wearing a dark green National Academy polo shirt.
I did a double take.
It couldn’t possibly be her.
But it was.
Detective Cheyenne Warren from Denver.
A National Academy shirt? That doesn’t make sense. She’s Cheyenne gave me a slightly embarrassed look for interrupting, then held up her palms in a small sign of surrender, mouthed the word “Sorry,” and headed for the nearest seat.
Margaret cleared her throat slightly, jarring me back to the discussion. “Agent Bowers? You were saying? Motives?”
Motives? Was I…?
I struggled to regain my train of thought, but Cheyenne’s smile had at least momentarily derailed it.
Over the last year I’d served on a joint violent crimes task force with the Denver PD, and Cheyenne and I had worked seven cases together. From the start, we’d both been attracted to each other, no question about that, but first my grief over Christie’s death and then my relationship with one of the profilers here at Quantico had kept us from dating.
Then last month, when Lien-hua and I broke up, Cheyenne hadn’t been shy in letting me know how she felt about me. However, at the time I realized that seeing her would have been, at least initially, a way of dealing with the breakup, and I couldn’t stand the thought of using her, so I’d pulled away even though I knew it had hurt her.