“One of the Biggest Arson Cases in American History”

In 1992, there were more than 75 suspicious fires set in Seattle, Washington within a 6-month time period. 

The case was eventually solved with the help of behavioral profiling, hypnosis, and a piece of art. 

August 9, 1992: 3 churches were engulfed in flames within a few miles of one another.

  • Arson dogs found no flammable liquids or accelerants 
  • No vandalism
  • Motive appeared to be “thrill seeking”
  • All started the same way; ground floor at waist level

Over the next several weeks, 8 more churches fires; 6 of them Lutheran.

Eventually moved to businesses and homes.

In a single night, there were 12 different arson fires; none of them used accelerants.

August 1992 – January, 1993: Nearly every night there was another arson fire.

Despite all-night patrols, the fires continued.

Fires were often set in different parts of town near different fire departments.

Criminal profile: 

  • White
  • Late teens / early 20s
  • Alcohol / drug problems
  • Intelligent
  • Underachiever
  • Major life trauma
  • Salesman / delivery man

Fire #28: Two fingerprints were found on a window left by the arsonist; did not match to anyone in criminal database.

Fire #42: Urine found in snow near the fir; unfortunately, there were too few cells for DNA profile.

September 22, 1992: Fire at senior citizen home; 3 women died.

Tip line was then opened. Woman called in saying she bumped into a man near the fire who smelled like alcohol and was very well dressed. Said he was talking about the fires but she could not remember a distinct description of him. Forensic hypnosis was then used, for one of the first times in history; woman could then recall 4 digits from the license plate. 

She was also able to provide a composite drawing of the suspect with the help of a forensic artist.

Composites were then sent to be published in the local newspapers.

Once he saw the sketch, a man named George Keller called the police to tell them he believed the arsonist was his son, Paul. Upon comparison to the sketch, the two looked strikingly similar. 

His father also said he matched every characteristic from the criminal profile.

Paul Keller was 27-years-old; the oldest of 3 children in a deeply religious Lutheran family.

He was a salesman who crossed all areas the where the fires were set.

Paul’s father said that he had always been obsessed with fires. He set his first fire at 9-years-old, and at one time had applied to be a firefighter, but was eventually rejected. 

He also had done poorly in school, had problems with alcohol, and was in the midst of a divorce at the times of the fires. 

Moreover, the first three numbers of his license plate matched the numbers said by the hypnotized woman. His fingerprints also matched the ones found at the window at fire #28. 

Later, Paul admitted he was sexually molested by a volunteer firefighter at the age of 12.

Paul Keller was convicted of arson and murder, and was senteced to 99 years in prison. He won’t be eligible for parole until he’s 113-years-old.

East Area Rapist / Original Night Stalker

  • Years Active = 1976 – 1986
  • Rapes = 50
  • Kills = 10


  • White man
  • Average height
  • Slim/athletic build
  • Early 20s (time he started)
  • First victim’s description: The assailant wore a light colored dirty white or gray mask with as noticeable seam down the front. It had holes only for the eyes. It was tight fitting. He wore a black T-shirt. He was not a large man, about 5 foot 9 inches, lean. He weighed about 160 pounds. He might have had dark hair, as the hair on his legs was dark. His legs were muscular, but lean muscular. His penis was unusually small. The gloves were dark. He never took them off in her presence. She estimated he was about 20 to 25 years old. He spoke as though he had laryngitis: angry whisper through clenched teeth, barely moving his lips under the mask.


  • Stalked his victims to learn routines/living situation
  • Broke into home beforehand when no one was home
  • Prepared for the break in by unlocking a window or door
  • Left behind/hid tools (i.e. shoelaces) to later tie down/secure the victim(s) 
  • Night of the crime, walked or biked to the home, sometimes after hopping the neighborhood gate; once inside, acted “like an unassuming, ‘normal person’”
  • Broke into homes in the middle of the night when victim(s) were sleeping
  • Aggressively confronted victim(s)  either a single female or both a man and woman 
  • Shone flashlight into the victims’ eyes upon entering the room
  • Wore ski mask 
  • Armed with a gun or large butcher knife
  • Always wore gloves  was careful about fingerprints
  • If a male was present, he insisted that the female tie up the male
  • Would then bind the female himself and reinforce the restraints on the male
  • Would persuade the victim(s) that he was only there to rob them
  • Would ask where the money was, where the female’s purse was, etc.
  • Would request that the female accompany him in order to find those items
  • Once separated, would tie up the female in another room and stack dishes on the male’s back so the crash would alert him if he tried to get away
  • Male was then forced to lie there and listen to girlfriend/wife get raped and potentially killed; thrived off emasculating the male and having total control over female
  • Often toyed with victims by stopping mid-attack to eat their food or search for things that were personally meaningful to the victims (and not necessarily of high monetary value) for him to take with him (possibly as trophies)
  • When finished, would leave victims tied up/blindfolded to wait in fear while he slipped out 
  • Was always highly prepared with a foolproof escape route
  • Sometimes would call the victims days after the attack to torment and threaten them.

Tongue Prints

While fleeing the scene after a bank robbery, an unknown woman attempted to run out of the building, but couldn’t get the door open fast enough, and accidentally ran into it face first. The part of the door she hit, however, had a clear surface, which left behind distinct residue from her face when the two made contact.

Security cameras showed that her mouth was open when her face hit the door, leading detectives to conclude that the residue left behind was actually from her tongue. After careful analysis, experts confirmed that her tongue print could be lifted from the surface of the door, which like fingerprints, are completely unique, and exclusively tied to just one individual.

After tracking down other leads on the case, detectives narrowed down their suspect list, and compared their tongue prints to the print left on the door. Low and behold, one suspect’s tongue perfectly matched the print from the crime scene, which ended up being the linchpin in court that led to her conviction.