The controversy of defining serial murder: Revisited

• Efforts made to attain uniformity in the use of “serial murder” have proved futile.
• This term continues to remain elusive, ambiguous, and amorphous in the literature.
• Some disagreements exist on a number of defining criteria in recent efforts.
• The current paper aims to revisit several key definitional issues.
• Subsequently, a more comprehensive serial murder definition is proposed.

Over the years, researchers and law enforcement professionals have tried to achieve uniformity in the use of the term “serial murder,” but such efforts have rather proved futile. Endeavors aimed at achieving a consensus on the definition of serial murder have potentiated its precarious applications. Though the term continues to remain elusive, ambiguous and amorphous in the literature, recent efforts are suggestive of a trend towards the attainment of a standardized definition of serial murder. However, a review of both current research and legal definitions of serial murder revealed some discrepancies in how the term is defined. Built upon Skrapec's (2001) definition, the current article aims to revisit several key definitional issues and to propose a more comprehensive serial murder definition with three key elements: (1) Two or more forensic linked murders with or without a revealed intention of committing additional murder, (2) the murders are committed as discrete event(s) by the same person(s) over a period of time, and (3) where the primary motive is personal gratification.