You are here:

Private Investigations and Personal Security/How Hard is it to climb up over houses (on the Rooftop to reach a winder on the 2nd or third story)?


I remember a back in September of 2012, I watched a documentary about various criminals on the loose and wanted.

One of the criminals was an African American rapist who's been terrifying a part of DC for the last decade.

The profilers stated that he's probably very physically conditioned because evidenced showed he broke into his victims houses through a window on the second floor (or higher depending on the house) or finding some opening on the roof of his victims.

I am verrryyy curious now. The profilers stated it takes someone in fit shape to do that.

Movies and TV always portray climbing on to the roof of a house as very easy. So many characters on TV could do it without a ladder including a nerdy teen. With ease....

So how hard is it to do a task as simple as climbing on the top of a house? I know a nerdy waste doing it is far fetched but it TV portrays its as so easy that I refuse to believe someone who's at least in shape to play school sports can do it.

The documentary implies to take on the criminal is dangerous because of his physical conditioning. Would he really be so fit as to be in better shape than the average high school athlete?

I know this isn't a home security question per say but I'm quite curious because the stereotypes of burglars is that they are physically weak and cowardly to more hardcore criminals such as your Aryan Brotherhood convict and thus fighting them to prevent theft from homes would be easy provided they don't have a knife or gun. Can't tell you how many movies or TV shows portrays Burglars falling down from one hit with a bat (in addition to showing nerdy out of shape guys easily climbing to the rooftoop of a home).

Bottomline, I don't care how good shape someone is, a bullet will penetrate his/her flesh.

Now having said that, as a generalized statement, being in better physical shape increases your chances of surviving being shot.  Young and healthy, better chance of survival IF medical attention is reached in time. This is a huge issue of time and targeting. A shotgun blast to the heart you don't make it no matter who you are or how good of shape you're in.  A wound that will turn fatal in three hours? Well if you're young, in good shape and you get medical treatment in 15 minutes your odds are good. If you're 65, a smoker and overweight, that 15 minutes might not be enough. You'll be dead in an hour.

I tell you this because if you turn your head a certain way and squint, what the profiler said is correct. But for the rest of us, the answer would be, "It depends."

If the home owner had a gun and wasn't afraid to use it, the fit, serial rapist would be a wet spot on the floor. If however, the homeowner didn't have a gun and wasn't accustomed to physical violence then the fucker is dangerous -- no matter how good of shape he's in. (And that is where the profiler was kind of misleading.)

First off do you know the difference between theft and robbery? And why robbery is a 'greater crime?'

Theft is the unlawful taking of property. That means burglary (nobody's home), stealing and grab and dash. Robbery is theft using violence or the threat of violence against a person. That makes robbery a crime against a person, not property.  

Now overwhelmingly violence comes with instructions how to avoid it. 'Social violence' has a very specific script. Conflict, threaten/warn, offer a way out -- and if that isn't taken -- attack. "Shut up or I'll kick your ass." The attack is a consequence of not taking the deal. Whereas robberies have the same dynamics, but in different order. Pretend everything is normal, start the attack, stop, and then offer a way to avoid the attack completing. "Gimme your wallet."

That's a super short summation of a complex process

One of several ways you can tell a situation is veering off into process predation is the attacker moves the target to a 'secondary location'

Experts disagree about the percentage of bad things happening in secondary locations. Some say 95% other say 98% of all being moved to secondary locations result in rape, beating, killing or torturing.  Yeah, like that 3% fuckin' matters.

The reason home invasions are so dangerous is your own HOME is the perfect secondary location.

The guy was dangerous because he was doing home invasion rapes, not because he was in good physical condition. In fact, I'd argue that he was technically speaking LESS dangerous because he wasn't carrying a weapon, but he was still a serial rapist.

Oh, I have a female friend that helped nail a serial rapist because when he broke into her home while she was sleeping (her husband was away) she bit off a chunk of his cheek. He ran, and the flesh allowed them to do a DNA match. The fucker is in now serving 99 years.  

Private Investigations and Personal Security

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


©2017 All rights reserved.