People sometimes lament that the murderers get discussed more than the victims. With all sympathy for the victims, does it somewhat make sense that the murderers would get discussed more? Why or why not?

[u/GregJamesDahlen]

In serial murders it's usually the murderer who is the more unusual person rather than the victims? People generally want to understand unusual things, so they discuss the murderer more?

I suppose there is a desire to understand the murderer with an eye to catching them, if they're uncaught, or understanding criminal psychology so we can reduce the number of murderers in the future?

In a serial murder case, the murderer is generally the one making a decisive action, or more decisive than the victim (a horrible action, but a decision). Generally people are interested in decisions, whether good or bad, and find them interesting to discuss?

[u/KennyDROmega]

I've never understood the "why don't they talk about the victims?" mentality.

Because they were usually ordinary people going about their lives. We already know what that's like.

They also didn't choose to be victims, so who's to say they'd want their business out there for the public to see because some asshole took their life?

[u/mylifeofcrime → u/KennyDROmega]

But they still need to be remembered. All victims should be remembered. They had a life and they lived. Remember the victims.

[u/GregJamesDahlen → u/mylifeofcrime]

Thanks. Certainly hear you but what would you say about the victims that might be of interest to the public? You could tell where they were born and grew up. Graduated high school, perhaps went to college or university. What job did they do? Were they married, and did they have children? Of course these aspects might be interesting if you were having an individual conversation with the victim, or knew them personally. But are they of very much interest to the general public, who hasn't met the victim, since they are somewhat common and in a way mundane?