For this week's #TuesdayTip, I thought it might be interesting to look at some of the language we use in crime fiction. Often these terms are bandied about with a somewhat sketchy understanding of their true meaning.
These terms below are typically used in English/Welsh law or are taken from various sources on the internet. I've done my best to distil them into an easy to use form, but I make no claims about the accuracy.
Enjoy!
Common terms for killers
Serial killer - 3 or more victims (some say 2), with a cooling off period between them.
Spree killer - 2 or more victims, perhaps in multiple locations, over a short period of time. There is debate over what constitutes a short period of time.
Mass killer - multiple victims, over a short period of time and in close proximity. Typically occurs in a single location.
The definition of a Spree killer vs a Mass killer can overlap, but as an example, a person who opens fire in a crowded space and kills multiple victims would be a Mass killer. One who kills people in several bouts as they escape police or go on a rampage might be a Spree Killer.


Offences in English/Welsh law
Murder - the act of unlawfully killing another person, with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, whilst of sound mind. (Note that as with any other crime, self-defence is a complete defence)
Manslaughter - a partial defence to a murder charge when all the elements of murder are present (sometimes including an intention to kill). There are several types of manslaughter.
Voluntary Manslaughter
The offence must fulfill one of the following criteria.

Diminished responsibility - an abnormality of mental functioning (at the time of the offence) or a recognised medical condition. In both cases, it must be determined if this substantially impaired the defendants judgement, understanding of their conduct or ability to exercise self-control.
Loss of control
Suicide Pact
Involuntary Manslaughter
Unlawful Act Manslaughter - an intentional unlawful act (not an omission) that a sober and reasonable person would believe subjects the victim to the risk of harm. Note: This does not include the supply of drugs or the helping preparation of drugs. The law assumes free will in this circumstance.
Gross Negligence Manslaughter - the breach of a general duty of care that could reasonably be conceived to result in a serious and obvious risk of death.
Corporate Manslaughter - a specialised form of Gross Negligence Manslaughter with separate guidance.
Honour-based killing - where a person is killed, sometimes by or on behalf of a family member/member of the community, because the victim is perceived to have brought shame on their family/community.
Euthanasia/Mercy Killing - the killing of a person who is suffering or in pain. Currently illegal in England/Wales.
Capital punishment - legalised use of the death penalty.

Deciding the icide.
We are all familiar with the most common words on this list, but here are a few more that you may not be familiar with. There are dozens out there!
Homicide - to kill a person
Suicide - to kill oneself
Matricide - to kill your mother
Patricide - to kill your father
Parricide/Parenticide - to kill your parents or a parent-like close relative
Fratricide - to kill your brother
Sororicide - to kill your sister
Siblicide - to kill a sibling/half-sibling
Infanticide - to kill an infant
Aborticide - to kill a foetus - more commonly known as an abortion
Foeticide - the killing of a foetus/embryo
Neonaticide - the killing of a newly-born baby. This can vary between one day and a month, depending on the jurisdiction
Uxoricide - killing of one's own wife
Mariticide - killing of one's own husband
Filicide - killing one's own children
Familicide - killing one's spouse and children - sometimes these people are colloquially known as a 'family annihilator'
Regicide - killing of a ruler (eg King or Queen)
Genocide - the systematic extermination of an entire national, racial, religious or ethnic group
Mad or Bad?
There are far better sources on the web than I can provide, but here is a simple primer to get you started.
Psychopath vs Sociopath - these common terms are not medical diagnoses. Instead they are regarded as traits that may be seen in those with AntiSocial Personality Disorder. They are often used interchangeably in popular fiction, but there are some differences. Generally speaking, sociopaths tend to act more impulsively and erratically. Sociopaths generally struggle to maintain a job or family life, unlike psychopaths who are more likely to be able to do so. Psychopaths generally struggle to form attachments, whilst sociopaths may, with a like-minded individual. Psychopaths may be better able to dissociate from their actions and feel less guilty than sociopaths.
In both cases (and commonly accepted in fiction), they are likely to disregard the law, act impulsively and deceitfully or irresponsibly. They can often be easily provoked or aggressive and fail to feel remorse.
Many psychopaths can act with a superficial charm and may be promiscuous. They can be manipulative, fail to accept personal responsibility and have a sense of grandiosity, yet lack (realistic) long-term goals.
Interestingly, it is believed that many long-running serial killers are not psycho/sociopaths, because the degree of organisation required to successfully keep ahead of the law is not common in those with Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Huge Caveat. Despite what some lazy journalists would have us believe, being a psycho/sociopath does not make one likely to be a violent offender. Studies have shown that many of these traits are found in successful business leaders and politicians (one in particular springs to mind!) who have never demonstrated violence. One can see how some of these characteristics might be beneficial in a competitive environment.
Narcissist - another commonly used term is narcissism. In its simplest terms, it is an excessive preoccupation with oneself and one's own needs, sometimes to the detriment of others. Most people are on a spectrum, but some are extreme and can be regarded as mentally ill (Narcissistic Personality Disorder). The same caveat as above applies.


Have I missed any words that you think should be here? Have I made any mistakes? As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time,
Paul
If you are a writer with a tip to share, or fancy writing a fictional interview between you and one of your characters, please feel free to email me.

Welcome to this week's Tuesday Tip. This time, I want to talk about seeking new audiences.
One of the pleasures of writing a long-running series is that you get to know what your readers want. Fans of my DCI Warren Jones series are looking for detailed police procedurals with lots of twists. My books have moderate profanity (exclusively in dialogue, not in the narration), not too much gore and much of the violence takes place off the page. There are limited references to sex and some dry humour.
But, the downside is that it can sometimes restrict the stories I tell. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. Many very successful series have avid followers who enjoy the fact that they know exactly what they are getting. That doesn't mean a lack of creativity, or a formulaic approach to writing - nobody could accuse authors such as Michael Connelly of such things. His two main series, Harry Bosch and Micky Haller, give readers exactly what they want, but each book goes from strength to strength, with inventive and innovative plot lines and stories.
But sometimes writers want to expand the scope of their writing and do something a bit different.
From a purely commercial point of view, writing new books in a different style can bring in different readers, who may then seek out the author's other work. Not all your current readers will find the new series to their taste, but done well it can be a tremendous benefit. I imagine that if one were to draw a Venn diagram of the readership of the Harry Bosch series and the Micky Haller series, there would be a significant overlap of readers who enjoy both (like me), some additional readers who adore legal thrillers and skip the Harry books, as well as some who stick with the police-based Harry books. Of course, Connelly has cleverly intertwined the two characters in recent years to capitalise on both readerships (and really delight fans of both series!).
The same arguments can be made for the decision to write standalone thrillers alongside series. An increasing number of authors of popular series are also stretching their wings with standalones. Steve Cavanagh, writer of the Eddie Flynn legal thrillers, is an excellent example. In addition to that ongoing series, he also has some very popular non-legal thrillers. I reviewed Kill For Me Kill For You in my #RecommendedRead blog.
So What Should You Consider?
A new series in a similar genre with different characters:
Liz Mistry has two series set in the police procedural genre. Her DI Gus McGuire series features a male protagonist, whilst her DS Nikki Parekh series features a female detective of Asian heritage. Both involve the structure of the police procedure, but have very different characters and a different 'feel' to them. I look forward to seeing what she does with her upcoming Solanki and McQueen series, the first of which, The Blood Promise, is due out in May.
Write in an entirely different sub-genre.
Leigh Russell writes the extremely popular Geraldine Steel series of police procedurals. Now numbering over 20 entries, plus related spin-offs from one of the secondary characters, the books are well-grounded, 'traditional' police series. However, she has also branched out into 'cosy crime' with her Poppy series, featuring Emily and her pet dog, Poppy. On the face of it, these target two very different sets of readers, but in practise crime readers are an open-minded bunch who are very loyal to authors and many existing fans of Russell will doubtless try the Poppy series, whilst fans of cosies (or dog-lovers) may try these and decide to give the Geraldine Steel series a go as well.
Use the opportunity to change your voice.
We are accustomed to writers having a particular 'voice'. But that voice, whilst reflective of the author's personality, is often only a glimpse of the person behind the words. Perhaps a new series or a standalone is an opportunity to write in a different way? Maybe you fancy exploring characters that are less serious, or want to inject more humour into the narrative? Or switch from dry humour to more overt or even farcical prose? I once had a review that complained that having laughed out loud at my acknowledgments, the reader was disappointed that my DCI Warren Jones books weren't a laugh-a-page comedies. A harsh criticism perhaps, but I know that when I write short stories as an exercise, they almost always end with a punchline and a gag. Two sides of my personality, I guess.
Similarly, you may have an urge to write books that are more/less violent. Perhaps you have an idea for a character that demonstrates a creative and innovative use of profanity that would shock your usual readership? And then there's sex. Feedback on a draft of one of my earliest Warren Jones novels included the suggestion that I cut a sexually explicit scene. It wasn't titillating (quite the opposite) but it felt out of place and may even offend some of my existing readers. It was a good suggestion, and I duly removed it. Perhaps different books might explore sexuality differently?
What do you think about writers seeking new readers through doing something a bit different? Have you any recommendations for authors that have reinvented themselves?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time,
Paul
If you are a writer with a tip to share, or fancy writing a fictional interview between you and one of your characters, please feel free to email me.

This week's Tuesday Tip looks at the thorny issue of conspiracy theories and the potential pitfalls of including them in a novel.
For the purpose of clarity, I'm talking about real-life conspiracy theories, such as Paul McCartney dying in a car crash and being replaced by a body double, rather than a fictional conspiracy within a story, such as several characters plotting to kill another.
It sometimes seems that we live in a society that is increasingly in thrall to ever-more outlandish conspiracies. This is not a new phenomenon of course; the numerous theories surrounding the shooting of JFK, and debate over whether the moon landings were real (spoiler: they blatantly are) date back to the 60s and there were no shortage of other strange theories before then. But social media (and I suspect pandemic-induced boredom) seem to have massively amplified the discourse around even the most outlandish claims.
A few months ago, our regular pub quiz even featured a novelty round about conspiracy theories. Much to the surprise of my teammates, I managed to get 13/14 questions correct, on topics ranging from Avril Lavigne being replaced by a body-double, QAnon, Chemtrails and the Pizzagate scandal (a particular favourite of mine, concerning claims that there is a paedophile/cannibalism ring being run out of the basement of a Washington DC pizzeria, attended by Hilary and Bill Clinton - the fact that the restaurant in question doesn't have a basement hasn't dissuaded radical Trump supporters from sharing and amplifying the story).
For those interested, I lost the final mark when I couldn't remember the name of the unproven (and rather toxic) alternative treatment for Covid (Ivermectin).
To dispel any doubt, I should make it absolutely clear that I don't believe ANY of these theories, I just spend more time in the madder corners of Facebook than is perhaps healthy.
In an amusing twist, there is a conspiracy theory that the more outlandish conspiracy theories are being propagated by hostile states such as Russia to sow division and influence elections. Ironically, I find that particular theory far more persuasive than nonsense such as Covid was a hoax, that 5G masts cause cancer and that autism is a result of 'vaccine injury'.
Of course these crazy theories have fantastic story-potential. Dan Brown has made a tidy sum merging genuine historical fact with fictional theories in his Robert Langdon thrillers, most notably The Da Vinci Code.
But there are pitfalls that you need to consider.

• Most obviously, you run the risk of validating and amplifying these theories, many of which are harmful. The surge in preventable, serious childhood illnesses due to misinformation about vaccines is one such example.
• The topics are very divisive. You could argue that having people arguing about your books is likely to boost sales. But at what cost?
• Your Amazon ratings might take a hit. People who disagree with the way you have treated their favourite pet theory may take revenge by means of a 1 star rating. The more organised may even summon like-minded conspiracists to join them. Of course this isn't a phenomenon limited to conspiracy theories. My fifth DCI Warren Jones novel, Forgive Me Father, which involves abuse centred around the Catholic church, has a lower average rating and more 1 and 2 star ratings than most of the rest in the series. The first written review appeared within hours of the book becoming available (far quicker than anyone could have realistically read it) and objected strenuously to the book's theme. I strongly refute the characterisation "Catholic-bashing posing as literature" - I have never written literature in my life!
• "Interesting" correspondence. Years ago, letters from those with a somewhat tenuous grasp on reality could be immediately identified by the writer's use of a green felt tip pen. These days, emails, direct messages on social media, and Amazon reviews are sometimes (but not always) written in ALL CAPS.

Of course, none of this should dissuade you from writing the story that you want to write. Self-censorship is sometimes the worst form of censorship. But forewarned is forearmed, as they say.
Alternatively, you can always embrace the controversy and turn it to your advantage. Judging by the numbers of members on some of the more extreme Facebook groups, a novel that provokes discussion amongst folks who believe that the 2020 US election was stolen because Donald Trump was about to expose a plot to use chemtrails from aircraft to seed mind-altering substances into the atmosphere to hide the fact that the moon landings were faked by Democrats who were scared that they would expose that the Earth really is flat, and reveal their secret base hidden behind the Arctic ice wall where they sacrificed small children for the Lizard people who actually rule the planet, should generate some sales.
What is your favourite conspiracy theory? Have you ever been tempted to turn it into a story? As always, feel free to comment here or on social media. (ALL CAPS optional).
Until next time,
Paul

This week's #TuesdayTip is a TV Review for Forensics: The Real CSI, available on BBC iPlayer (https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/m0004p7f/forensics-the-real-csi).
Now in its fourth season, the documentary focuses on West Midlands Police's Forensic Science Service. Each episode focuses on a single investigation, with footage following the technicians around the scene, body-worn camera footage from officers, and shots of the scientists in their paper suits in the laboratory.
The detectives are featured, with video of them interviewing suspects etc
But the thrust of the show focuses on the Crime Scene Investigators and technicians, with face-to-face interviews with various forensic experts, some of whom are in most episodes.
The series features a wide-range of different crimes, not just murders. Highlights of the current series have involved episode two, Time of Death, which utilised phone analysis, DNA evidence and witness testimony to close the net on the murderer of a young woman. Episode 4,  Confession of a Killer, opens with a man phoning the police to admit to killing his flatmate. He subsequently claims self-defence and the police use blood spatter analysis, retrieved data from phone handsets and CCTV to probe his claim.
Probably the most unusual - and frankly scary - episode is episode three, Untraceable Guns, which involves the retrieval of a haul of illegal weapons, including versions of the assault weapons commonly used in US mass shootings. The investigation takes a frightening turn when it emerges that the guns are homemade, using a commercially bought 3D printer and widely available plans from the internet. This episode gives a fascinating insight into the work of NABIS, the National Ballistics Intelligence Service. The experienced officers and technicians are visibly shaken by the potential ease with which these untraceable weapons can be manufactured.
Episodes from previous series include online grooming by paedophiles, indecent exposure, armed robberies, arson attacks and rapists.
The programme is a goldmine for writers of crime fiction and a fascinating watch for anyone interested in how modern UK police forces use cutting-edge techniques to solve a wide variety of crimes.
I highly recommend it.
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time, all the best,
Paul.
If you are a writer with a tip to share, or fancy writing a fictional interview between you and one of your characters, please feel free to email me.