Rural Home

Case Analysis #1: Robbery of Rural Home

Deputies respond to a 911 call to the 7200 Block of state route 163 Sunday, January 15th at ten p.m. The crime reported was an armed robbery in a rural area. The stolen goods included several pieces of jewelry, gold coins, and cash missing from the victim’s safe. The victims included a husband and wife of the residence. The suspects were allegedly two white males. The suspects are believed to be armed and dangerous. The conclusion was that the suspects were to have headed east due to dropped jewelry in that direction. Deputies observed that the back door of the residence is kicked in, supporting that this is the suspects’ entrance. The wife and husband reported that they were tied up with a phone cord,

The suspects seemed to know the exact location of the victim’s safe and what the safe contained. The fact that the suspects intended to use the victim’s truck to carry their bodies further supports a personal relationship between the suspect and victim. Rural areas tend to have very close-knitted communities because of the smaller population. The suspects supposedly having a relationship with the victims and the intention to carry the husband and wife’s body with their truck can support that this crime was voluntary and planned beforehand. Based on the case facts given, I deduce that the suspects could be the victim’s children or their children’s friends due to the seemingly apparent knowledge of the victims the suspect possessed.

Weaknesses of Theory

Assuming the victims knew the suspects based upon the rural area crime scene location would be a sweeping generalization and using inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning can be too broad to be used for an individual crime. Drawing conclusions from the insufficient evidence is using false precision. The case facts cannot possibly support an absolute conclusion. Deductions are almost impossible to make with mostly circumstantial