Psych(o) Files

Hybristophilia: Killer Love

2012-01-04T16:37:00.000-05:00

Most people have heard to those strange people who marry prison inmates, who write fan letters to serial killers, and those who pair off with killers and commit horrible crimes with them. For the most part these women (most, if not all, are so we'll stick with that assumption in this piece) are regarded as sick, but never given a specific name to their illness though there seems to be one. Hybristophilia...though sometimes it's given the more casual name of the Bonnie & Clyde Syndrome. It is, essentially, being sexually aroused or attracted to people who have committed an outrage or a gruesome crime. And, like any thing else, there seem to be various versions in which this "philia" can present itself...some more deadly than others.

The Fans

The most common and least dangerous are passive hybristophiliacs, also known as the fans. (All other forms to be discussed fall under the category of aggressive hybristophiliacs.) They are the women - more often it’s women that have this condition - who write to convicts in prison, confess to finding serial killers attractive, or marry men imprisoned for violent crimes. It's hard to say the reasoning behind these types save for the possibilities that they are, for the most part, just taking their bad-boy fascination to the next step.

Doreen Lioy had a BA in English Literature and a fascination with serial killer Richard Ramirez. She wrote approximately 75 letters to him before they met, but when they did her love for him seemed only to grow and deepen. On October 3, 1996 Doreen married the killer making her Mrs Richard Ramirez.

Throughout Ted Bundy’s trial in Florida girls showed up with long bronw hair parted in the middle to emulate his preferred type of victim type. Included in this crowd was Carol Ann Boone who became his girlfriend and moved from her home-state of Washington to Florida in order to be closer to her man. A man she repeatedly and continually claimed was innocent and being railroaded even after he was convicted. Then, during the penalty phase of his 1980 trial, Bundy took advantage of an old state law that allowed his proposal in the court and her joyful acceptance to be legally binding as a marriage. Sometime after that, in a way that’s still debated, Carol became pregnant with Bundy’s child...it took eight long years after her marriage to him for the woman to seemingly realize who, what, Ted Bundy truly was and leave him.

There are numerous possibilities as to why these women took their bad-boy enjoyment to the next level. With Doreen and Carole it seemed to be that they were suffering from deep denial and even a delusion of sorts...they could not see Ramirez and Bundy for the killers they really were as they had developed their own idealized fantasies about the men. And, in truth, these women don’t truly know the men they’ve entered a relationship with; they share letters, short phone conversations, and meet with them for one to two hour jail visits, which doesn’t allow these women to get a real glimpse behind the sociopath’s mask of normalcy. Instead these woman spend their time fantasizing about what their relationship would be like if their other half was not imprisoned, which is never going to be accurate.

Other reasons for Serial Killer Groupies, as they are sometimes referred to, might be sympathy for someone who they feel (correctly or not) has had a hard life and/or perhaps a belief that their love can redeem the man convicted of armed robbery or murder. A fear of rejection also likely plays a part as it’s unlikely a convict will rebuff a fan and the women may believe that only these types of men will love them for some reason. There’s also the assurance that a man in prison isn’t about to up and leave because he can’t. These women, possibly the first time in their lives, have more power in the relationship. Often times women who fall into this category have poor social skills, not many close friends, and a history of being abused.

The Angry Teen Girls

More prevalent than the fans and more dangerous as well thanks as much to the ages of these ladies as to anything else. In the teen years the hormones run wild and rebellion is common…toss in a beau that’s bad news and it’s a recipe for disaster.

The clearest, and possibly the most famous, example of this is Charles Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate. After 14-year-old Caril’s parents refused to allow their daughter to date the 19-year-old Charles the young lovers decided to kick off an eight day killing spree by murdering Caril’s parents and infant sister. For five of the eight days the young couple stayed in Caril’s home, having sex and playing house, as they made up excuses to keep relatives away. While she didn’t kill anyone herself Caril was very much an accomplice – following him on the road, collecting newspaper clippings about them, holding guns on hostages as Charles took naps. Despite her claims of being a hostage herself, of being forced to go along, it was clear to all those around them (including a jury) that Caril was a willing part of Starkweather’s eight day crime spree.

Wendy Gardner was a A and B-gaining, flute-playing 13-year-old girl when she met bike-stealing, cat-killing, 15-year-old James Evans. Despite the seeming differences the two hit it off, finding a connection in violence - Wendy’s mother was a drug-addict, her father boasted his own father dropped dead during an argument between them, and Wendy herself wrote in a diary about the desire to tear the flesh off an ex of hers. By Christmas 1994 Wendy was virtually living with James and his mother, but then her grandmother and legal guardian, Betty Gardner, ordered her home and the violent talks the two teens shared took a very serious turn. The two decided to kill Wendy’s grandmother so that they would be free of her and Wendy would no longer be subjected to Betty’s corporal punishment and emotional abuse (such as Betty telling Wendy she’d end up just like her mother and making the girl watch as she knelt in prayer to curse God for leaving Wendy with her). On December 28, 1994, the two put their plans into action and, with a kite string, James strangled the woman as he said, “Remember this, bitch, you’re never going to be able to hit her again” as Wendy ran and hid upstairs. Later the two teens had sex in the same room as Betty was murdered in, stuffed her body in the trunk of her car, and spent the next few days hanging out, having sex, and taking the occasional trip in the car (body still in the trunk) to spend Grandma’s money on video games, candy, sneakers, lingerie, and bowling. It was Wendy’s 11-year-old sister, Kathy, who turned them in...either tied up in the house or dragged with them as the young couple went on shopping sprees throughout the ordeal she finally escaped to a neighbor’s house three days after her grandmother was murdered.

In some cases it would seem these young women are simply seeking out a hero of sorts to save them from unhappy, sometimes abusive, homes. Other cases involved girls that are looking not just for a savior, but a violent avenger. Those already freed from the misery of their home life may take a while longer to seek out their violent lover, but when they find them they are no less turned on by the terrors committed on the unfortunate victims they and their men come across.

The Compliant Victims

Sadly these women are not as rare as one would hope and, while the heinousness of their crimes depend greatly on their significant other, they tend to end up with pretty terrible men as their partners.

After approximately four years of subjecting his wife, Janice, to his sadistic desires Cameron Hooker convinced her to help him kidnap a woman to be his own personal bondage slave in March 1977. The couple picked up 20-year-old hitchhiker Colleen Stan and held her prisoner for the next seven years. During the first eight months of her captivity Colleen was held in a series of coffin-like boxes 23 hours a day, taken out only to be tortured by Cameron. When finally released from the boxes Colleen was forced to a sign a contract of servitude to “The Company” - a fictional group pulled from a porn magazine that Cameron claimed was composed of rich, omnipotent, sex-slave traders that were everywhere and knew everything - after which the rapes began.

For the rest of her time as the Hooker’s prisoner Colleen was forced to be Cameron’s sex slave and general servant for the family as a whole, including nanny for the couple’s two children. It wasn’t until Janice felt jealous at the perceived closeness her husband had with their captive and Cameron’s mentioned the desire to make Colleen a second wife then get more sex slaves for himself that the woman finally spoke up. She confessed to Colleen that Cameron was not part of “The Company” and that the girl was free to leave and then, three months later, called the police on her husband for a separate crime (the murder of a missing girl from 1976) that he was never to be charged with. However, in November 1984, he was arrested, charged, and convicted of all crimes concerning Colleen Stan. He is currently serving 104 years. And Janice? She was granted full immunity for testimony given against her husband, left the man for good, and got herself a new name so that she could live in relative anonymity as she worked on repairing her own self-esteem.

Still the question remains...what kind of women are these? At first glance it would seem these women are poor-unfortunates, overpowered by the man in their life and helpless to stop what is happening around them. However these women engage in these relationships willingly to start; they don’t leave after their mates confess their dark fantasies or the first act of aggression from these men and they agree to aid in the kidnapping and torture in others rather than refuse. On the surface they aren’t evil or aggressive themselves, true, but they allow the men in their lives to do truly terrible things to other women without complaint. Even when given opportunities to do the right thing, to help those desperately in need of it, they tend not to until it somehow effects them. (Such as Janice only acting to help free Colleen once she began to grow jealous of her husband’s affection for the young woman.) This suggests that, on a level they themselves might not even be conscious of, these women are accomplices and okay with the way their partners treat others. It is a “better them than me” scenario as well as a way for these compliant victims to feel powerful themselves - something they may have the need for even more after spending years with their naturally sadistic counterparts. These types of hybrisotphiliacs may start off loving their men despite the terrible things they do, but they end up loving them for it...as long as it’s done to someone else.

The Superman’s Girl

Some just think they’re rare and special, which is the case with The Superman’s Girl category. They aren’t though and while they prefer to work with a male counterpart these women are heinous in their own right. Unlike Janice Hooker who would never have considered committing a crime had she not met her husband, Cameron, The Superman’s Girl has an egotistic, criminal, mind all its own.

Myra Hindley was of average intelligence and spoiled by her grandmother, but she was also troubled and aggressive before she ever met her mate. With violence in her home and being rewarded for it outside (her father once threatened to beat her if she didn’t knock out a boy who’d picked on her when she was eight) Myra was primed to seek out and enjoy violence from an early age. It was hardly surprise when she was attracted to Ian Brady, who had a criminal record and interest in Nazism, upon meeting him in 1961. Together they would picnic at Saddleworth Moor in England as they discussed the Marquis de Sade, their Nazi heroes, and how to commit the perfect murder before putting their ideas and plans into action in 1968. Throughout the murders of five teens and children Hindley was an active participant, not a bystander. It was Myra who got the van they used during their crimes, it was her who lured their victims into the van, and it was her photographing and audio-taping the brutalization of them.

Also to be included in this group is Charlene Gallego who, while highly intelligent and having great potential as a child, grew to seek out a sexually sadistic man with whom she could share fantasies about having young, virginal, sex slaves with. Once she found her seeming equal in longtime sex offender, Gerald, the two raped and murdered ten girls together. Charlene participated with equal, if not sometimes greater, fervor in the violent sexual assaults on the girls...once she even grew angry and took a shot at her husband when he began to rape two victims without her.

These women already feel superior to everyone around them so, naturally, their man has to be the same. He has to be the Übermensch, Nietzche’s Superman, a man above all others she’s ever met or will meet in order to even interest her. After they’re caught these women will paint themselves as a compliant victim, they will say their men owned them and ruled over everything they did, but that’s never the case. Like male serial killers these woman believe they are entitled to rape, torture, and murder others and, with their men being kings, they are queens deserving of the right to rule over the life and death of others.

Brides of Chucky

Overall they’re likely the most rare, but unfortunately they’re also the most extreme in violent aggression. Often they present as sociopaths all on their own and their predatory nature is as aggressive and constant as their male counterparts. They don’t so much seek out a bad man as instinctually find that connection of the predator within from the men they pair up with. Once partnered these women create a folie a deux with their men in which they fuel one another’s sadistic tendencies.

Carol Bundy’s man, Douglas Clark, liked to shoot his female victims in the head while they gave him oral sex and she was fine with that. When he first confessed to killing Carol called the cops only to get details from them that might confirm Douglas’ claims of responsibility. In one instance Carol even dolled up (did the hair and put on fresh make-up) the severed head of a victim so that her boyfriend could better enjoy having sex with it. But Carol’s true nature became most clear when, in desperate attempts to regain Douglas’ presumed lost interest in her, she found her own victim to decapitate in the form of a former lover named John “Jack” Robert Murray.

A Thin Blurry Line

Even though these hybristophiliacs have been categorized the groupings are not solid since, often times, the issues that cause a woman to be one kind of killer-lover can also cause her to be another. Many, most, will stay fans adoring and fantasizing from afar or just through letters. They will not grow violent themselves and, once they accept the truth and gravity of what their imprisoned men have done, many will also eventually cuts ties with the prisoners. This is not always the case all the time though; sometimes these fans become accomplices to the dangerous men they love.

Jennifer Forsyth Taylor was working as a nurse in a prison when she met prisoner George Hyatte, a longtime criminal with a history of escapes throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. The two began their romance when George was asked to watch over and protect Jennifer from other inmates who were making aggressive sexual overtures in May 2004...by August 2004 she was fired for sneaking food in and having an inappropriate relationship with Hyatte. Nine months after her firing the two were married in a visitor room at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution where George was housed after Jennifer’s firing and, after that, they were not allowed to even see each afterwards due to visitor policy at the prison. Aside from the first few months of face-to-face contact this beginning along with Jennifer’s history of non-violence and clean criminal record would settle her into the passive hybristophiliac category, but what she did next switched her to an aggressive kind.

Upon the pressing from her new husband Jennifer agreed to help him escape from the Roance County Court House after a hearing he was to attend in August 2005. With an illegally obtained gun Jennifer waited outside the courthouse for her husband to intercept him and his guards as he was escorted back to prison. She approached with gun in hand and opened fire hitting both transport officers and killing one, Wayne “Cotton” Morgan, before she fled with her husband. The day after the shooting the couple was caught and arrested for first-degree murder; both pleaded guilty and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.

Sadly hybristophilia, despite it’s prevalence and potential dangers in the aggressive form, is a vastly understudied condition. It’s hard to say what factors contribute to creating which kind of hybristophiliac for certain, or what might make one kind develop into another, though in all likelihood it’s a combination of several nature and nurture based aspects working together. Someone with this disorder generally doesn’t seek treatment unless required by law and even then it is far more likely that the hybristophilia is being treated as a secondary issue to other mental problems - mood disorders, personality disorders, and other such issues - that a fair number of these women have in addition to the philia.

The Family That Slays Together...

2010-11-23T12:20:00.000-05:00

Despite what movies and TV shows might suggest families killing together, as a unit, is fairly rare. True there are many instances in which couples or two family members getting together to kill others but a whole family working to take others lives is not so common. ...But it's not unheard of either. There was at least one such case in the 1800s wherein, working together, the Bender family would rob and kill unsuspecting travelers who made the mistake of choosing to stay at the family's inn. When their crimes were discovered they became known as "The Bloody Benders".

The Family

The Bender family consisted of John "Old Man Bender" Sr., Marli "Ma" Bender, John Jr, and Kate "Professor Miss Katie" Bender. It seemed that, though the youngest in her early 20s, Kate Bender was not only the bait but something of the brains of the operation. Despite the current legend of being a great red-headed seductress in truth Kate was something of a red-faced girl with manly features who would hold seances and claim to be a faith healer. Not that the rest of the family appeared much better. John Sr was 60, Marli was 42 with cold eyes and the appearance of a hag, and John Jr was described as a dim-witted hulk of a man.

The Crimes

Set upon a long, lonely, stretch of road in Labette County, Kansas and being just short of a nearby railway town it's not too surprising that the family would turn their home into a makeshift inn for other frontier folk looking for a hot meal and warm bed. Though unlike H H Holmes' complex hotel of horrors created in the same century (1893, Chicago's World Fair) the set-up of the Bender family's inn was rather simple, just like their murder tactics. It was little more than a single large room divided in half by a canvas with one side being the family's living space and the other for their guests...assuming the family let them live.

It was Kate who, if she noted a traveler that appeared wealthy, would invite the person to come inside, enjoy a nice meal, a drink, and perhaps stay at the family's inn for the night. Were they to accept they were brought inside where Kate would set them at the head of the table nearest the curtain that split the Bender household into two. As she distracted them with conversation, and quite possibly a little flirting, either her father or brother would lie in wait on the other side of the curtain with a hammer. When their prey would lean back against the curtain they would be struck with the hammer hard enough to crack the skull. After that the victim would be dragged off to be stripped of their money and clothes before being dumped through a trapdoor to the basement where their throat would then be slit to ensure death. Later on the body would then be taken out and buried in a pasture.

The Discovery

It wasn't until 1873 when Dr William York went missing on his travels (from Fort Scott to his home in Independence) that any kind of alarm was raised at all. A posse lead by Dr York's brother began to search for the man and came upon the Bender home where they asked the Benders' about the missing physician. The Bender family denied all knowledge the missing man...then fled the area completely a few days later. It was only after this, after word got out that the family had vanished, that the search posse grew truly suspicious and returned to the Bender farm to conduct a more thorough search. In the search the rather horrific discovery of several shallow graves containing the family's victims was made...one victim included an 18-month-old little girl who'd been traveling with her father and the family simply tossed in and buried alive with her murdered father. It is believed that the family killed approximately 8-11 victims together before they disappeared and while there had been a number of different believed sightings in the 50 plus years that followed the Bender family was never officially considered found and/or brought to justice.

The Questions

Because the Bender family was never caught, never truly questioned, it's left a lot of questions unanswered. Who in the family first thought of their wicked scheme to murder and rob? Was the entire family in agreement on the murders or were some simply passive accomplices? How, exactly, did the dynamics of the family work within what they did? It's hard to say...but it's pretty clear that, if they had been brought to justice, it's deeply unlikely any would've been found innocent. And that, for the Benders, the family that slayed together stayed together.

Scary Truth About Satanists: Halloween Special!

2010-11-01T15:03:00.000-04:00

The concept of those who worship Satan is hundreds and hundreds of years old and so is the fear associated with those who might be those people. Often Satanism is connected to torture, murder (serial or otherwise), and child abuse all of which are scary prospects but what's just as frightening is the idea that, under the guise of this "religion" many are excused, and convicted, of crimes they never committed. From the Salem Witch Trials in 1692 to the West Memphis Three of today there is an almost uncontrollable terror in the idea of possible satanism occurring and, more often than not, it leads to a hysteria that destroys innocent lives.

When In Doubt, Blame Satan

Many people know the general start of this case. A few young girls in Salem begin to behave strangely and, because they can find no other reason, people in the town turn to the concept of witches casting spells in the name of Satan. After that happens the concept of Satanists living and cursing among innocent citizens grows into a frenzy of terror that sends 19 people to hang at the gallows, one elderly man to be crushed to death, and numerous others to have their lives ruined.

The possibility of this happening is relatively understandable given the time that this occurred in. During Puritanical times, times in which God was truly, deeply, believed as real and ever present it's not a surprise that his counter-point, The Devil, would be too. And, if Satan is believed in, then he care be feared as having the potential to do great harm to others...like God he could, presumably, be worshiped and have followers to do his work. Add to that the lack of real, scientific and forensic, knowledge then it's hardly surprise, short of any other obvious explanation, the work of The Devil and his followers causes a hysteria that ends up ending lives in towns during the 1600s.

Satanic Ritual Abuse Scare

Satanic Ritual Abuse, SRA for short, goes by a number of different names (ritual abuse, ritualistic abuse, organised abuse, sadistic ritual abuse, among others) is all boils down to the same idea. From the 1980s-1990s, across the US, and eventually other parts of the world, people seemed panicked over the concept of horrifyingly strange abuses occurring in pre-schools and daycares. Numerous caretakers were accused, charged, and even convicted, of sexual abuse of small children based on little more than panic and stories told by small children who were given leading interviews by parents and psychiatrists.

While it's understandable, when someone hears of a young child being abused somewhere they should be safe it strikes fears in the heart of every parent, looking back it's hard to believe many of the stories. Children's stories included "magic rooms", secret tunnels, flying witches, hot-air balloon rides, and, in one case, even Chuck Norris was fingered by a child as the abuser. Add to that, almost none of the children in these preschools and daycares came out saying they'd been abused on their own...it tended to be the parents (untrained in how to properly interview a child concerning these sorts of crimes and likely already convinced something terrible had happened to their child) who would ask the children about whether or not they were abused, frequently using leading questions or otherwise - no matter how unintentionally - manipulating them into saying they had been abused and then come forward. ...Even in the relatively modern 1980s and 1990s it seemed that, even though the more devil-oriented aspects were a touch more in the background (the focus, of course, being more on the abuse of small children), Satanism was still feared and lives were still destroyed through the panic it caused.

The West Memphis Three

When cases of torture and murder are discovered frequently people must search for a reason behind it...they're almost desperate to understand why such a terrible thing was done. This is never more true when the victims are three eight-year-old boys. The trouble is, sometimes, the fear of some mad killer running around taking, mutilating, and murdering children can cause a reactionary move of arresting the wrong people. ...This is exactly what happened in West Memphis, Arkansas in 1993.

After the murdered boys were found in a creek in the woods the police seemed to immediately want to close the case - refusing the help of state professionals and others in favor for going after what they felt was the most likely suspect to them...a then 18-year-old young man by the name of Damien Echols. Echols came from a troubled background and, in a conservative and Evangelical Christian-based city, he stuck out rather plainly in his dark clothes, love of "dark" music and fiction, and occasional run-ins with the law. Within a month the local police arrested Echols and two others, Jessie Misskelley Jr. (then 17) and Jason Baldwin (then 16) claiming that the teens had killed the children as part of a Satanic ritual.

This case has been a disaster from the start with evidence being poorly treated, stored, and processed, testimony being clearly false or otherwise coerced (including the confession of Misskelley who not only immediately recanted his confession was a minor at the time he was interviewed and has an IQ of 72 making him borderline mentally disabled), and, seemingly, jury misconduct. Yet these three young men are still in prison today - despite new evidence that clearly shows their innocence, despite some of the young victims' own family members now coming forward saying they believe the men to be innocent and would like the case reexamined to know who truly killed their children, and despite what seems like a great injustice.

Don't Be Afraid

...Sadly nothing can be done about the Salem Witch Trials except for us to learn from those mistakes. More sadly, however, is that it doesn't seem that always happens as proven by the Satanic Ritual Abuse cases and the West Memphis Three. It's natural to fear bad things happening to you and your loved ones, to search for any reason that a terrible thing might happen outside "just because", and to go after those you feel are evil in some way. But it's unwise, and even dangerous, to fear the concept of Satanism (or anything else) to the point that you ignore facts and/or your own logic.

Author's Note: The West Memphis Three (and the families of those three eight-year-old boys) are still trying to find justice. Please go to Free The West Memphis Three and read the whole story. Understand how carelessness, presumptions, and fear can railroad others...can railroad the very concept of fairness and justice.

Back to School Safety Part 2: School Shootings

2010-10-07T18:26:00.000-04:00

School's here folks! Time to learn new things and get a refresher course in the classics for those of every age. This also means that new and old safety concerns arise from a few different directions depending on the grade level you or your child is going into. In order to keep things rather simple I'm going to stick mainly to lists to cover each of these potential issues. Lists for books, school supplies, classes, and now safety. Second on this list is an issue that, for the most, is considered a "modern" issue exemplified by one word...Columbine. Even the thought of a school shooting occurring is terrifying. No one wants to think about it. But they happen and, sometimes, it's better to be prepared, to know what to do to increase your (and others) chances of survival before and during, than to have it happen and be completely lost in the chaos.

Before I go on I have a major, key, rule of thumb: If you hear someone talking about planning or wanting to plan a school shooting tell someone! In the end, more than anything else, this will stop a school shooting before it ever happens. So many times, after the fact, survivors have come forward with claims that the shooter had mentioned previously of his/her plans...Imagine if someone had acted beforehand?

Before (assuming you've gotten no "I'm gonna pull a Columbine" style warning beforehand):

Be aware of changes or oddities in your environment. We are talking about your classroom or school hallways here, so you should know what a safe and routine environment looks like. Anyone or anything that causes ripples or changes by his or her presence, etc., should cause your Spidey Senses to throb.

Evaluate and assess what you are seeing. If something kicks off your gut feelings by the way he or she moves, looks at you, etc., take it seriously.

Always have an action plan. Ask yourself what would I do if a student or an intruder barged into my classroom with a gun?

Be willing to and prepared to act when action is needed.

Trust your gut! If something feels wrong, if that little voice in your head tells you to get the hell out of the area, then get the hell out of there! Too often people second guess their instincts and regret it in the end.

Before - spotting a shooter (body language is key here!!):

If the gun is in his waistband on his hip he will favor that side as he walks.

He will short-step on the side where he is carrying the weapon when he goes up and down stairs (because the weapon is against his hip flexor).

He will subconsciously turn away toward the side where the weapon is secreted when a teacher or security walks directly toward him.

He will hold his jacket, shirt or coat closed as he walks.

Every moment or so, he may touch or pat the area where his weapon is secreted, subconsciously reassuring himself.

If the weapon is in his coat pocket, his collar may be unusually tight to his neck, and, if the weapon is heavy, the collar will also be twisted.

He will hold the pocket where the gun is secreted when he walks or runs to keep the pocket from flying away from his body.

He will also hold that side of his coat as he sits or rises.

He will favor heavy coats, even in hot weather, to help him better secrete the weapon. (It's not a "Trench Coat Mafia" thing, it's a "trench coat helps hide my big gun" thing.)

He will often give himself away just before he liberates the weapon from its hiding place. - By opening and/or pushing back his coat and/or grabbing the bottom of the pocket with his non-gun hand to stabilize the coat as he extracts the firearm.

During (how to survive):

Run! A little obvious, yes, but there's more to it than that. Don't just turn and bolt, run in zig-zags, take sharp corners when possible, and lower yourself a little if you can. Anything to make you a harder target.

Try and keep something - a chair, a desk, anything - between you and the gunman at all times. He's either going to be shooting blindly or at the easiest targets and keeping yourself as blocked as possible will help prevent him from hitting you.

"Lock and Block". As in if you're in a classroom and knows a shooters headed towards you lock that door and block it with whatever's handy. Move desks, chairs, and whatever heavy furniture's available against the frame. The idea is simple - don't make it easy for the guy (or gal)!!

Break the script. Shooters have a script in their head. Like serial killers shooting up the school has been something they've played over and over in their minds for a long while before they acted on it. And, like with a serial killer, reacting in a way they don't expect is really going to disrupt their plans and whatever roll they might already been on. So (assuming "Lock and Block" didn't work or isn't an option) don't huddle, hide, and pray like he wants...instead attack. Throw books and whatever else is handy at him. Scream at him and refuse to be afraid or controlled by the shooter. Whatever upsets his delicate mental image of a perfect attack is good.

"Charge and Barge". If possible, hold something in front of you like a shield and charge him with a phalanx of teachers, security, students. Hell even if you don't have a shield if there's a group of you in a room charge! Yes, somebody may get shot, but there's only one shooter and a large group of you so odds are high you all will be over to overpower him. You will be wresting psychological and real control from the shooter and stopping things before they get far worse. (This has, in fact, been done and worked successfully a few times, one of the most recent incidents included a pair of teachers who tackled a school shooter at Deer Creek Middle School in Littleton, Colorado on February 2010.)

Back To School Safety Part 1: Bullying

2010-09-09T15:36:00.000-04:00

School's here folks! Time to learn new things and get a refresher course in the classics for those of every age. This also means that new and old safety concerns arise from a few different directions depending on the grade level you or your child is going into. In order to keep things rather simple I'm going to stick mainly to lists to cover each of these potential issues. Lists for books, school supplies, classes, and now safety. First on this list is an issue as old as school itself (I'm sure) and, because of it's scope, it's getting covered first in its own entry...

Bullying

Always a concern in K-12 (and sometimes beyond) and, sadly, there's no magic wand or trick to get rid of this concern. It happens. Kids can both be a bully and a victim and, whichever they are, there are things to keep in mind. Things concerning prevention, signs of bullying, and things to do if you become aware it's occurring.

Prevention

Prevent your child from becoming a VICTIM:

Instill self-confidence in your child - a confident child is less likely to be seen as "weak", and thus an easy target.
Help your child establish good social skills - bullies aren't going to go after a child who is well liked by others, someone who has friends that'll stand up for them
Teach your child to speak out for him or herself - bullies tend to target those who fold easily, who run away, so a child who stands up and speaks out is less likely to be a target
Teach your child to seek help, if harassed, from you and other caring adults - at the very least someone else, someone with more power, is being made aware of the problem

Prevent your child from becoming a BULLY:

Present yourself as a model of non-violent behavior - this is simple really, children model themselves after their parents and other adults so, if you're not a bully they're unlikely to be
Clearly state that violence is not acceptable
Assist your child in finding non-violent strategies for anger management and conflict resolution - some kids just aren't emotionally mature enough to keep from lashing out so need to be taught more constructive alternatives
Seek help from mental health/school counselors to help stop bullying and aggressive behavior - sometimes things are beyond your control and seeking outside help may be the best options

Signs

A child being bullied often:

Withdraws socially; has few or no friends - bullies frequently will try and isolate a victim from whatever friends they have (often via rumors or bullying those around their key victim) in order to further dominate the victim
Feels isolated, alone and sad.
Feels picked on or persecuted - both because they are and because it's likely that others aren't sticking up for him/her even if aware of the bullying.
Feels rejected and not liked - again, because isn't unlikely others are sticking up for him/her even if aware or a witness to the bullying
Frequently complains of illness - this can be because they are getting sick from stress or just claiming so they don't have to go to school
Doesn't want to go to school; avoids some classes or skips school - they're avoiding the bully
Brings home damaged possessions or reports them “lost.” - the bully having either damaged or taken them
Cries easily; displays mood swings and talks about hopelessness.
Has poor social skills.
Talks about running away; talks of suicide.
Threatens violence to self and others.
Changes in eating or sleeping patterns.
Takes, or attempts to take, “protection” to school (a stick, knife, gun, etc.).
Displays “victim” body language—hangs head, hunches shoulders, avoids eye contact.

A bully often:

Seeks to dominate and/or manipulate others.
Enjoys feeling powerful and in control (whether real or not).
Is both a poor winner (boastful and arrogant) and a poor loser.
Seems to derive satisfaction from other’s fears, discomfort, or pain.
Is good at hiding behaviors or doing them where adults can’t notice.
Is excited by conflicts between others.
Blames others for his/her problems.
Displays uncontrolled anger.
Has a history of discipline problems.
Displays a pattern of impulsive and chronic hitting, intimidating, and aggressive behaviors.
Has a history of violent and aggressive behaviors.
Displays intolerance and prejudice towards others.
May use drugs, alcohol or be a member of a gang.
Lacks empathy towards others.

A key side note on signs of a bully...the bullies of yesteryear are on their way out. Frequently the bullies of today are popular, well-liked by fellow students and teachers, and at first glance may lack many of the signs listed above. They are not always the "bad kid" who's been in trouble repeatedly for aggressive or illicit activities; though many of the emotional and/or psychological aspects such as enjoying power and control and the lack of empathy towards others will remain the same. This is important to keep in mind when confronting the bullying problem.

It (Might've) Happened...Now What?

If you suspect your child is being bullied:

Make sure your child knows being bullied is not his or her fault - because it obviously isn't but it's normal for any victim to think, in some, they brought the attack upon themselves.
Let your child know that he or she does not have to face being bullied alone - family, school staff, and peers are all there as support (current or potential)
Discuss ways of responding to bullies - this should not include responding aggressively; fighting will likely just get them in trouble as well and, if school staff isn't aware of the situation, they may end up seeing the victim as the bully. Instead discuss the options listed below
Teach your child to be assertive - assertive people are less likely to be bullied in general
Tell your child not to react, but to walk away and get help if pursued - bullies are looking for a reaction, if they don't get one they may well move on
Tell your child to report bullying immediately to a trusted adult - once people are informed about the problem further steps can be taken
Contact the school/teacher - for the same reason mentioned above. And, no matter who they tell, remind the victim that telling is not tattling

If you think your child is a bully:

Be sure that your child knows that bullying is not acceptable behavior.
Tell your child the penalties for bullying and be sure that you enforce them fairly and consistently.
Help your child learn alternative ways to deal with anger and frustration.
Teach and reward more appropriate behavior.
Work out a way for your child to make amends for the bullying.
Help your child develop an understanding of the impact of their bullying on the target.
Seek help or counseling if the behavior continues.
If contacted by the school, stay clam; try not to become angry and/or defensive. Make yourself really listen. Remember this is ultimately about the well-being of your child!

There is one other thing I want to touch on...the newest version of bullying that's becoming increasingly popular, cyberbullying. This is a form of bullying that is done online and via cellphones which seems to include everything from . And those that do it can be different than the average bully due to the anonymity that being online or on a cell can provide. Rather than pretend to understand all it's intricacies and/or risk expanding this piece by far more than would be the "quick read" that I intended here's a few sites specifically on cyberbullying that may help for those interested. (The last covers all types of bullying and the site is split into two sides - one geared towards children and the other towards adults.)

Suburban Safety

2010-08-23T14:37:00.000-04:00

For years those towns and neighborhoods outside major cities have been considered safe and, for the most part, they generally are. But that doesn't mean they're crime-proof or that those that live in the suburbs should assume they are. Understandably things can be more relaxed - with nice backyards and friendly neighbors there's no harm in enjoying both all you can. But other things, safety measures, should still be followed even in the suburbs...three things specifically should be kept in mind no matter where you live. After all, it's better to be safe than sorry.

Doors

This one is a personal pet peeve of mine...the stubborn refusal of some to lock their doors because they live in the suburbs. Now I've actually asked people why they don't lock their doors when they should and the answer I inevitably get is "This is [insert city/town name], we don't lock our doors here". That is totally illogical to me as there is not a place in the world where crime cannot happen. I'm not saying that doors must be locked and dead-bolted at all times - if you're out in the front or back yard and people are going in and out of the house having the door unlocked is understandable and easier - but at times when the occupants are away or at night they really should be. These times are when you, your family, and your things are most vulnerable to start. If you add to that a readily available way for anyone nearby to just walk on into your home it's a recipe for potential disaster. Just because you don't live in a high-crime area doesn't mean you live in a crime free area so why not take the little bit of extra time and effort to ensure you're safe?

Windows

Elizabeth Smart was taken from her bedroom at knifepoint by Brian David Mitchell on June 4, 2002. Mitchell's seeming point of entry and exit? An open first floor window that he cut the screen of. This is, of course, an extreme case, but it serves to illustrate a point. Windows are a rather easy entry point for danger as well, even in the suburbs. Again, like with doors, I'm not suggesting that all windows need to be locked at all times. But at night, the windows that those outside might have easy access to - those on the basement or first floors or those near something that be can easily climbed (a tree, nearby ladder, or fire escape of some kind) - should be secured shut. The average criminal (even the average serial killer) is looking for the easiest mark, in closing and locking your doors and windows at night you are announcing you are not that easiest mark. In the end isn't that slight inconvenience of having to be sure your house is secured before you go to bed worth the peace of mind it brings? ...And one other act of importance: If you have a security alarm in your home, use it! You bought it, don't let it go to waste.

Just Outside Your Door

For the most part, no matter where you live, once you've settled in for the night that's it. You're not going back out. But what if someone comes to your door in seeming distress? Their car's broken down or been in an accident...or maybe they've hit a small animal and worry it's someone's pet? All they want is to come in and use your phone, theirs has died or been otherwise destroyed you see so if they could just use yours... It's these circumstances that can get the naturally trusting, helpful, person thinking "nothing bad happens in my suburban neighborhood" it a lot of trouble and danger. See, each of these little tales of woe from that person (male or female) on the other side of the door could be a ruse to get you to open your door and thus make yourself vulnerable. Now, understandably, most don't want to be so rude as to tell the person to get lost so here's a rather clever, and safe, way of dealing with these situations...Tell the person to stay nearby, outside - in their car, on your stoop, wherever is most comfortable for you - while you call the authorities from within your home. If the person really is in trouble, really does need your help, they'll stay. If they say never mind or simply vanish into the night then, first, they probably never needed your help to start and, second, you've successfully avoided serious potential danger.

Author's Note: There's been a prevailing urban myth about rapists and killers using a voice recording of a baby crying outside women's doors to lure them out their homes at night. This is a myth that has been debunked, it's never (to my knowledge or, seemingly, to anyone else's) actually been used. This being said, it's rather clever and, considering it's popularity in circling "protect yourself" e-mails and the like, has potential for usage by some creep at some point. And so, just in case, if you do happen to hear a baby crying outside in the night just call the police from the safety and comfort of your home and let them handle whatever is or is not found.

What's Your Poison??

2010-07-29T14:48:00.000-04:00

I've touched on poisoning some in Female of the Species but I'd like to take a different, slightly more in-depth, look at this method of killing by focusing on three common poisons that are used by murderers. Now there are hundreds, if not more, of poisons that could be used but there tend to be three that are used more than others: Succinylcholine (aka "Sux"), antifreeze, and arsenic (most commonly in the form of rat poison). It might cause someone to wonder...why these three? Why are they used more than others? Well there's a few reasons for each of the poisons popularity.

"Just Hit 'Em With a Little Sux"

Succinylcholine, aka Sux, is most often used as a muscle relaxant to order to help in the aid of intubation during emergencies and surgery. It is intended to save lives, not end them. And yet there have been a number cases in which this drug has been used to kill. Now the question is...why this drug? Well the first reason is that it's, generally, difficult to trace within the body after awhile...a far shorter period of time than certain other drugs. There's also the benefit that, rarely, is this drug ever suspected in a death because it's rarely available to the average person. Being a drug with a specific medical purpose it's generally only found in hospitals and, if someone outside the medical field were to go looking for it, not only would they probably be unable to get it but they'd likely raise a lot of red flags with those around them (never good when planning a murder.) That being said it's rather easily available to those in the medical field, especially those who work in emergency, critical care, and surgical departments. For those like Chaz Higgs, a critical care nurse convicted of murdering his politician wife, Kathy Augustine, it wouldn't only have been easy, it'd have been free! (And a vial being taken from the hospital would mostly go unnoticed.) The same holds true for Dr. William Sybers, Dr. Carl Coppolino, and surgerical technician Kim Hricko...all convicted of murdering their significant others via succinylcholine. There was also one other killer, one far more widely known by the public, that used succinylcholine in her murders...Genene Jones, who killed between 11 and 50 young patients during her time as a pediatric nurse.

Don't Drink the Gatorade!

James Keown was convicted of the murder of his wife in July 2008. How did he do it? By poisoning, specifically he spiked her Gatorade with antifreeze over the course of months in 2004, culminating with a fatal dose on September 4, 2008. Outside the rather obvious reason of using antifreeze because it's cheaply and easily accessible to just about anybody there are a few other reasons why Keown likely selected this liquid to spike his wife's drink. Ethylene glycol, the key ingredient in antifreeze, is colorless, odorless, mostly non-volatile, and tastes sweet...someone who drank it would likely not even know it, especially if it's slipped into a drink that's already sweet. There's also the fact that, once ingested, the immediate signs and symptoms of a poisoning resemble intoxication - dizziness, coordination issues, headaches, confusion, and sometimes nausea and vomiting...a person could be poisoned right out in the open with no one the wiser for the next 12 hours (or, depending on the dose and person, ever). There's another reason why a killer would choose antifreeze; the possibility of having plausible deniability. For the same reasons that a person could be poisoned with the liquid a murderer could claim that the victim ingested it accidently - outside it's taste, which is sweet, it's unidentifiable - or even intentionally as a form of suicide - it's easily available and, again, sweet. For all these reasons it's likely why not only James Keown chose the poison, but also Stacey Castor (convicted of killing her second husband, David Castor, and suspected of killing her first, Michael Wallace), Mark Jensen (convicted of killing his wife, Julie Jensen), and Julia Lynn Taylor (convicted of murdering her husband, Maurice Glenn Taylor, and boyfriend, Randy Thompson).

Arsenic and Old Lace

The phrase is outlived only by the method of poisoning, arsenic. The first and foremost reason it's used is because it's found in numerous household items therefore easily available and explained away by a killer - "Of course there's arsenic in my home, it's in my rat poison/pesticide/wood preservative/etc". And, if the victim is a child, it can simply be claimed that the child got into the product all on their own. Arsenic can be tested for in a victim but, the problem is, that the test is really only effective within a few days...a year at the most if there are high levels of arsenic in the body. The other possible problem with the test is that it only shows that there are above-average levels of the toxin in the body and not how, or if, the levels will affect the person...this means that it's possible a defense attorney could claim that, even if it's proven the victim ingested arsenic, this wasn't the actual cause of death. Many female serial killers of the past used this method, taking advantage of the plentiful arsenic available on their little farms...Nannie Doss (aka "Arsenic Annie" or "The Giggling Granny" who killed 11 family members), Mary Ann Cotton (who killed between 15-21 people using rat poison, which contains arsenic), and Velma Barfield (who is believed to use arsenic on about 5, killing them).

Author's Note: The quote "Just hit 'em with a little sux" came from the testimony of one of Chaz Higgs' coworkers during the man's murder trial.

It Takes Two to Kill

2010-07-17T15:12:00.000-04:00

The phrase is French, "folie a deux", which is literally translated as "the folly of two" but is much better and widely known as "the madness of two". In the field of psychology is it defined as "a rare psychiatric syndrome in which a symptom of psychosis (particularly a paranoid or delusional belief) is transmitted from one individual to another". ...However, more often than not, this definition isn't quite what is meant when the term is used in criminal profiling. With killers the term is used for two individuals who kill together when, if on their own, they likely never would have. The reasons these pairings have for killing differ, but the result is always the same...murder.

The Pursuit of Perfection

Nathan Freudenthal Leopold Jr. and Richard Albert Loeb were two bright, wealthy, young men from Chicago, Illinois. They met at the University of Chicago while still in their teens - Leopold 14, Loeb 13 - and seemed to form an almost instant bond on the principles of shared age, intelligence, and a strong belief that they were superior to all those around them. It was Loeb who preferred to commit crimes, Leopold simply agreed to it in exchange for a sexual relationship with his new friend. That being said it seemed Leopold was the one who found the pairs "right" to do their misdeeds. In his misunderstanding of the definition of Friedrich Nietzsche's Neitzchean superman...He believed, in his still childish and superficial understanding, that a Neitzchean superman had the moral freedom to violate the rules and laws that applied to ordinary people (and, of course, he considered himself and Loeb just these sorts of supermen). To start the boys stuck with petty crimes vaguely common to troubled youths - petty theft, cheating at cards, and random acts of vandalism. But, after four years and with Leopold about to move onto Harvard Law, the two decided to do something more dramatic to permanently solidify their bond...to commit the "perfect crime" in the form of the kidnapping and murder of a 14-year-old boy from their neighborhood named Bobby Franks. A "perfect crime" to prove just how superior they were to those around them - one without mercy, without clues, and without either of them ever getting caught.

Mother Issues

Pauline Parker and Juliet Hulme of Christchurch, New Zealand, were best friends...BFFs as one would say these days. They met how many teens meet, being classmates in high school, and bonded quickly over shared experiences of illness in their childhood (Parker had bone disorder known as osteomyelitis and Hulme had pneumonia), a love for writing, and their creativity in general. Interestingly, like Leopold and Loeb, the girls also bonded over what appeared to be an above average intelligence and the shared belief that they better than everyone else around them. The girls were inseparable and soon began to create their very own shared world, "Fourth World", which they spent more and more time working on and, seemingly, living in. At first neither girls' parents had much of an issue with this, in fact Pauline's mother was thrilled since her daughter frequently had trouble making and keeping friends due to a sometimes explosive temper. After two or three months though the girls' relationship with one another went from very close to super intense causing their parents to grow worried...and when Pauline's mother grew worried enough about their closeness to consider separating them, the two teens made a plan to ensure that would never happen. They would kill Pauline Parker's mother.

The Wife Problem

Stephen Marsh had a little problem...he had a wife. A wife was not exactly conducive to the things he wanted to do, like drink and sleep with other women. Not that his wife seemed to stop him from flirting or, well, indulging in liquor anyway and, soon enough, it didn't stop him from having an affair with a married woman, Rebecca Harris, either. Stephen and Rebecca's affair started where many others did, at the office. It began with shared drinks and stories about their lives, their current marriages, and soon developed into a sexual relationship. There was, however, something different than most in this aspect of their relationship...while it started out loving and sensitive under Stephen's direction and guidance it quickly turned darker and, eventually, into full on sadomasochism. While Rebecca didn't ever seem to realize it this was the start of Stephen's testing her, seeing how far he could get her to go for him. How many of his dark and violent desires would she fulfill to keep his love? She'd let him abuse her, call her names, even cut her with knives and film it all to keep him satisfied. Would she kill for him too? Apparently, yes, she would. With the promise that, if she killed his wife for him, Stephen eventually got the desperate-for-his-love Rebecca to agree to murder.

Different, Yet the Same...

Despite the differences in motive and seeming differences in relationship each of these cases have a fair number of similarities...similarities that make them each, in their own way, cases of folie a deux. The first similarity is obvious - each of these pairs did, in fact, commit murder together. Leopold and Loeb kidnapped and then stabbed young Bobby Franks to death. Pauline Parker and Juliet Hulme got together to beat Pauline's mother, Honora Parker, to death with a brick stuffed inside a stocking. And Stephen Marsh set up his wife, Jaspal Marsh, to be brutally murdered by his lover, Rebecca Harris, with the same knife he'd used in the S&M sex games with Harris. In each case there was one partner who had a slightly greater tendency towards violence - Loeb was the one who wanted the pair to commit crimes together, Pauline who had outbursts of anger, and Stephen had to press his lover into the acts of sexual violence he enjoyed so much. Also true for all these killers is, without their partner in crime, they never would've killed in the first place. Perhaps some already had violent tendencies but the ability to truly carry them out to their full potential was found in the partnering with their, well, other half. Each of these individuals were, for lack of a better word, incomplete on their own - disoriented in their lives and, mostly, unable to function. When they got together these people were completed but, sadly, this completion made them very dangerous to society...it made them murderers.

Thankfully though there is one other thing these cases all have in common. They were all solved and the murderers brought to some kind of justice. Leopold served 33 years (of a life + 99 years sentence) in prison before being paroled; he later died of a heart-attack at age 66. Loeb died at 30 as the result of a knife attack by another inmate while serving the same sentence that his partner received. Both Pauline Parker and Juliet Hulme were sentenced to five years each (due to their age) and told, after the trial, to never contact one another again which they obeyed after release. Each girl got a new name and new life after their release and neither have been in trouble with the law since. Stephen Marsh was sentenced to 18 years for, essentially, masterminding his wife's murder and Rebecca Harris got 12 years for the actual deed...they are both currently serving their sentences.

Some Tech Savvy Tips to Share

2010-06-16T16:44:00.000-04:00

As children grow up and join the ever-expanding world of social networking sites parents, naturally and understandably, begin to worry about the potential for online predators. Of course that's likely why there are about thousand different websites filled with tips on how to help limit the ways in which kids, teens, and even adults will become potential victims. That being said I've found, in my opinion, that most of these sites overlook other certain things that should be brought to the attention of parents and kids alike...and then shared with those around them also enjoying the world of social networking.

Lost My Numbers, Can I Have Yours?

On Facebook there are about a hundred thousand of these phone number collection groups, many of which are titled "new phone, need numbers" or "phone died, help me recollect numbers" or something else along those lines. While this is a great idea for the person who legitimately needs to fill in his or her phone book quickly with contacts from different parts of the country, or even world, it leaves those who choose to share their numbers through the group rather vulnerable. The reason is simple...when you share your name and number on the group's page everyone in the group can see, and thus get, it too. I'm sure you can see where the risks start to come in now, yes? Sure the person who created and runs the group (presumably) knows everyone they've invited to this group but you do not so, in essence, you're allowing virtual strangers excess to your name and number. From those two bits of information they could potentially find out a lot more about you - like where you live. ...In fact, as of recently, there's been a iPhone application specifically for getting people's names and phone numbers off these Facebook groups even if you're not party to the group the information is placed in.

Too Cool for School

It's understandable that anyone would want to share where they went or are currently going to school, there are just so many reasons to proclaim your alma mater...school pride, keeping in touch with classmates or former teachers, and maybe even wanting to continue to be an active part of the school's community. That being said there's a fair amount of information that someone can get based on where you went to school...and even more in combination with other information you might share. Certain cities only have a few high schools, some towns only have one. In some cases all predators would have to do is use the process of elimination to get an idea of what part of town you live in. In other cases, like those with pre-teens and teens, a predator could, potentially, simply show up at the correct school to gain access. ...Now I haven't heard of a case in which this has happened, more often than not an online predator convinces their prey to come to them, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility and it's important to remember that when deciding what to share with the public online. (This idea holds true for local sports teams too.)

Here's My Schedule...

There is no reason that all your online pals need to know every single thing you'll be doing over the next year. Now, on a private profile, this act is simply a little annoying but, on a public one, it's dangerous. If you leave your profile open to see for anyone, or add indiscriminately, then people you don't even really know will be abel to track you as you go about your day. It's the same idea behind the suggestion law enforcement and such suggest people shake up their routines...it's harder for people to know exactly where and when you'll be alone and thus vulnerable.

Put It Together

All on their own most of these will leave you somewhat vulnerable but, generally, won't lead to anything terrible unless you have someone that's become fixated on you. That being said, when you're sharing your name and number in groups and have an open profile complete with personal history (hometown, alma maters, birthday), a bunch of pictures, and a schedule you might as well give strangers a map to your house and then let them into your home when they arrive.

There's no reason to become paranoid, that only leads to more stress in your life, but it's important to be cautious and become more aware of what you reveal online. Do you want a friend of friend to have your name and number? Do you want someone who's passing by your page to know where you'll be and when for the next month or so? Would you tell a total stranger everything you've put on your page? If the answer is no than you need to adjust the available privacy settings and, very likely, the information on your profile...

Quick Tips:

1) Never join the names/numbers groups. Give your name and number to the group creator privately instead.

2) If you add your schools to your profile keep them hidden under privacy locks...or at least the most recent one.

3) Don't fill out the available schedule on a profile. First, there's no reason to since it's what we have calendars, datebooks, and smart phone apps for. Your schedule should be for you and you alone. If you wish to meet friends and family just contact them using private methods (text, phone, e-mail).

4) It's fine to share your birthday month and day, but don't share the whole date or allow your age to be shown while the month and day show. Why? Because a date of birth is one of the cornerstones of most security questions and, if people know exactly when you'll be turning 18, 25, or 43, then with simple math they'll know the whole date.

5) You know those public invites you can accept? (Like concerts and comedy shows.) Don't...especially if it's a specific event in a specific location at a specific time. I don't mean don't go to things you wish to, but just don't tell everyone else you'll be there. ...This really falls under the same principles as the public calendar you can fill out; just use your private calendar and tell those you really want to know about the event you're attending in private.

Philia Friday: Love For Every Age

2010-04-09T20:07:00.000-04:00

The saying goes "Age ain't nothing but a number"...this is not exactly true, especially when it comes to one's sexual desires for another. While some may simply cause raised eyebrows if discovered others, especially when acted upon, can get a person in very serious legal trouble and brand them as an outcast for life. While to the larger public the specifics of which term is most appropriate for which sexual preference may be irrelevant it is rather important to mental health professionals and law enforcement...and, in some cases, it may be beneficial to, well, know your pervert in the end.

Pedophilia:

This is the one that virtually everyone knows; a term thrown out to just about every sex predator and pervert that seems attracted to any being under the age of consent (generally 16-18 in the US depending on the state). The truth is though it's become more of a "go-to" pop-culture based word than a true term in the public these days...it's overused and incorrectly at that. According to it's definition (as found in the suggested revisions for the upcoming DSM-V, the diagnostic book used by mental health professionals) pedophilia is the sexual attraction to those aged eleven years and younger.

Keeping this more specific and more accurate definition in mind we can see that certain groups of sex abusers do not, in fact, qualify as pedophiles...such as the vast majority of online predators that seek out kids in chatrooms and social networking sites (these types will be discussed next though). It also becomes clear that other predators do qualify such as certain priests that find themselves in the news as part of the Catholic sex abuse scandals and the pediatrician from Delaware who made headlines after it was discovered he may have sexually assaulted more than a hundred of his patients - some as young as three months old (he also seems to have been a sadist, not true of all pedophiles).

Hebephilia:

The term is far less used, but far more accurate, when dealing with those whose sexual preferences come in under the age of consent laws. For this reason alone it might be why the DSM-V will likely have it listed as a specific "type" of pedophila...the fact it's been gaining increased attention and usage over the years are also likely reasons. Hebephilia, in its definition, is the sexual attraction to those aged eleven to fourteen.

Now, by the definition alone, most could see that many "pedophiles" are, in fact, hebephiles. The fictional Humbert Humbert of Nabokov's Lolita would be one and so would R. Kelly, Michael Jackson (if his sexual preferences for young boys were as suggested and rumored), and a few of those female school teachers (such as Debra Lafave and Mary Kay Letourneau) who made splashes in the news for sleeping with their then 13 and 14-year-old male students. Most of the online predators that chat up young tween and teen girls and boys, try to lure them into taking risque photos and meeting up somewhere far away from a guardian's careful eye, would also fall into the category of hebephile.

Ephebophilia:

Ephebos means "one arrived at puberty" in Greek and ephebophilia is defined as the sexual attraction to those 15 to 16 years of age. It is not currently nor is it to be in the revision of the DSM. Now part of this could be due to the fact that, in certain states, 16 is the age of consent - it could be a touch confusing to label someone with a mental illness when what they're doing is perfectly legal. Another part could be because it's a touch more socially acceptable to lust after them; frequently those in this age range are the ones jokingly (though sometimes accurately) being described as "jailbait". In pop-culture they are the tempting cheerleader, babysitter, or jock that seem to already have a sex life of their own, even if it's just developing. Naturally the parents of these teens would, in reality, rather adults (and other teens) stay far away from their 15 and 16 daughters and sons.

So who are the ephebophiles? Hard to say, there really isn't as much data on these individuals as there are for the first two discussed (studies tend to focus on pedophiles and hebephiles more). At a sweeping, completely research-baseless, guess I'd think it'd be some of those online predators again and some other teachers that have found themselves embroiled in sex scandals with their students.

Few More Age Philias:

There are a few other "philias" based on the age of the object of one's desires as well. The next in the age continuum is teleiophilia meaning the sexual attraction to those 17 and older (teleios is Greek for "fully grown"); basically it covers pretty much everyone who's attracted to the normal age range for the average individual. After that there's gerontophilia which, if broken down, is rather clearly the sexual attraction to the elderly...this one is considered very rare (perhaps Harold from the movie Harold & Maude had it though). Some are also pushing for the use of the word infantophilia to describe those with a sexual attraction to those who are under the age of six (as of now it is not classified in the new DSM, though pedohebephilia - the sexual attraction to both those under 11 and 11-14 years of age - will be).

Sex and the Serial Killer Revisted

2010-04-06T18:04:00.000-04:00

Author's Opening Note: When I first started this blog I wrote my first lengthy (and second ever) piece comparing an average male's desire for sex to a serial killer's desire to kill. Unlike other pieces this one did not go directly through additional editing and onto being turned in for an article for Serial Killer Magazine because it relied heavily on a fictional character for the serial killer aspects. But now, more than 6 months later, I've condensed, edited, and updated the piece for the magazine and so, since it's a rather different article altogether, I thought I'd share it again. Enjoy!

* * *

Serial killer Vincenz Verzeni confessed, “I had an unspeakable delight in strangling women, experiencing during the act erections and real sexual pleasure.” A disturbing thought, but a rather accurate statement as many other serial killers (male and female) have described gaining a sexual thrill in their kills. It seems, for a serial killer, it just might be the norm... their torture frequently comparing to our foreplay and their sex being that moment when they kill their victim, when they have all the power, and when they can believe they are God.

For the purposes of this larger piece sexual homicide will be broken down into stages that relate to the standard sexual interaction, using them to compare the average male to the male who commits sexual homicide (for simplicity's sake we'll stick with heterosexual males throughout the piece). There's the fantasy, the seduction, the foreplay, the act, and the aftermath.

The Fantasy:

Of course, the average person doesn't suddenly go from normal sexual appetites to macabre ones over night no matter what a serial killer might claim later. No demon enters their body, nor do they suddenly "snap" and go about getting their jollies killing others. Ever found yourself suddenly having sex with another person for no particular reason, having never thought about that person sexually before? Didn't think so. Serial killers and those committing sexual homicide fantasize beforehand just like everyone else. Fantasy is a key element to the killer throughout his life...both before, during, and after the kill and during his "cooling-off" phases.

~ In Development ~

Like a person developing a normal (i.e. not a killer's for the purposes of this piece) sexuality it's a slow, steady, process that leads up to their committing sexual homicides. That, however, is about where the similarities end. The average child, when very young, may play superhero with their action figures and, when they get a bit older, daydream about being a sports star. As they grow up and hit puberty, their attentions will likely turn to sex and the desire to be intimate with those they find most attractive.

For the serial killer the fantasy starts early and there is almost always a linkage of sex and violence and those two things forever represent the same thing to them...Power! Little boys who grow up to be killers frequently recall having early childhood thoughts about violent sex acts. They dream of dead people or force their siblings into playing death/murder games with them...something their siblings are highly unlikely to be all that excited to play. As the budding killer gets older his fantasies grow in scope, number, and specificity, as does the amount with which he is aroused by the fantasies. While the average teenage Johnny is masturbating to thoughts of Jane down the lane coming out of the pool dripping wet, serial-killer-to-be Tommy is masturbating to thoughts of Jane covered in blood weeping for the mercy he won't give her (because he has the power not to).

~ In Action ~

Now the average young man will probably spend a few days thinking and planning before asking a woman out. He'll debate how to approach her, what to say when he does, and try to figure out all the ways in which he can increase the likelihood of getting her to say yes. He'll imagine what will happen when he does ask her...Will she smile? Be flattered? Say yes, she'd love to, and really always liked him but was too shy to ask him out herself? Even for those men only aiming to sleep with a woman he met at a club the idea of fantasizing beforehand fits. The approach, what's said, ways to get her to agree, and her possible reaction are all played out in the guy's mind, there just might not be as prolonged a period between the fantasy and the seduction stages. The everyday guy will probably go through his fantasy scenario with the woman a fair amount of times, but never as much as a killer.

A serial killer is no different in thinking and planning for his kills. Bundy might’ve pictured himself walking up to his victims, maybe on a lovely day at the park, imagining what they'd be like…a trusting, young, co-ed from the nearby college, perhaps? He'd think of possible ways to lower any nerves she might have in going off alone with a stranger and consider every possible reaction she could give – the screaming, the crying – once she realized his true sadistic intentions. Will she call out for help, for her parents, or beg for her life? How long can he torture his female victims before she succumbs to blood loss and the life finally leaves her eyes? In most cases Bundy would’ve had to do some prep work as well and this would go into the fantasy stage – whether it were considering the tools he'd need for his rouse, where the best spot would be to take his victim, or how long he could torture a person before time ran out (he was spotted, the victim died, etc) – the details would need to be thought out ahead of time. Before he even steps out of his house Bundy, like other serial killers and those who commit sexual homicide, will have gone over every single detail in his mind probably thousands of times.

The Seduction:

Let's assume the average Joe has finally worked up the courage to ask out that special girl (and that she’ll say yes). For the purposes of comparison the interaction from then until the walk to the door that would normally be considered the end of a date all cover the seduction stage. The seduction starts, at its bare bones, with how the man appears. He'll be clean, well shaven, and dressed to impress, whether this is in a suit or something else depends on both the girl he's trying to attract and the circumstances of date. After appropriate appearance comes behavior and interaction. In wanting to make a good impression a man on a date may do a number of things...open doors, pay for meals, offer his coat, and walk her to her door after. ...Those more into "picking up" women than dating them may also use pick-up lines, special moves or ploys (like those involving a "wing-man"), or even wear certain clothes to vastly accentuate something they consider a good aspect of themselves and distract from more negative ones (a.k.a. "peacocking"). Whatever tactics are used the goal is ultimately the same, to get the young woman to feel comfortable, even enamored with him, enough to trust and get close to him.

With serial killers the goal of seduction stage is almost disturbingly similar, it's actually pretty much the same. A serial killer wants to lower a victim’s defenses enough so they can get close. Like the average gentleman it starts with their appearance. What they decide to look like depends greatly on what they think will work best to attract the type of victim they wish (assuming they have a preference) and their hunting grounds. A nice suit will work wonders in trolling for victims around an upscale neighborhood or in a business district where the killer can mix in with those going to and from work. Going into a lower socioeconomic part of society? Jeans and a tee shirt might just do the trick. And, if they want to get fancy, pretending to be disabled or putting on some kind of uniform (police officer, repairman, etc) can work wonders for a killer. Presuming they're not drooling, staring like a complete psycho, or making a big scene most have the correct behavior down just fine. After that there's the "pick-up" line, which can usually be any of a number of things including; "Need some help?", "Can you help me?", "Repairman!", and "Hey, wanna see my puppy?" Once the person falls for whichever ruse the killer has used and gets close enough they're frequently just a knock on the head or chloroform cloth over the mouth away from becoming a victim.

The Foreplay:

Ah, foreplay, the beginning of measurable pleasure that can last a few minutes or even hours if paced right. The main point in foreplay is, naturally, to build up the arousal between (presumably) two people...to get the juices flowing, so to speak. Which "juices" flow and why depend on if it's two lovers or a killer and his victim. In this section the average male foreplay will cover from the first kiss to sexual activity for the sole purpose of orgasm (as opposed to arousal). For the killer it'll cover the moment he reveals his "true self" to the victim and the violent activity done for the sole purpose of orgasm – which is typically the killing of the victim).

~ Average Joe ~

It starts, typically, with a kiss...that first kiss, accompanied by that first moan from his lover, is likely enough to get the heart to start pumping just a little faster than normal. Kisses, soft and sweet to start, quickly build into something more demanding from both lovers. Hearts start to pickup their pace and breathing begins to grow heavy with anticipation. Joe shrugs his jacket from his body as his female companion steps out of her shoes. By the time they reach the bed shirts have been lost and they fall back onto the mattress together, kissing and letting their hands explore one other’s bodies. His body heats next to hers and her reactions - the labored breathing, the moaning, that look of pleasure in her eyes - all work together to make Joe's blood pound through his body in excitement. As both parties shed more clothes and more access to one another's bodies is allowed Joe may begin to feel himself getting further aroused, his member swelling and hardening with desire. Noting his arousal, seeing it, feeling it, may cause his mate's own to increase to the point where she is sufficiently lubricated enough to allow him to enter her which, in turn, may increase Joe's and thus a cycle begins...a cycle that progresses with penetration and into the next stage, The Act.

Depending on the couple there may also be different methods used to arouse one another or simply to prolong the foreplay. Roleplaying (with or without costumes), sex toys (vibrators and such), changing pacing or position of the lovers, and even just starting up only to stop, cool down, and start up again during intercourse are all possibilities. And all these things that work to arouse the lovers fall under the umbrella of foreplay.

~ The Killer ~

It starts, typically, with the killer revealing his true intentions and that first reaction his victim gives when she realizes she's made a terrible mistake in trusting him and her fear begins to show. Like the first moan for the average guy the first gasp or sob from a victim can be intoxicating to the killer. The killer's heart begins to pump faster, his breathing can grow labored, and his urge to get more fearful and pained reactions grows. The victim's heart rate may also increase, her breathing may also labor, though obviously for very different reasons as she's progressing from scared, to terrified, to both terrified and in pain. If stabbed the victim may begin to scream, cry, and moan in pain, all of which, including her blood flowing and looking up at her attacker in fear, is likely to cause the killer to begin to feel himself start to swell and harden into a full-on erection. At this point, depending on the killer, he may rape the victim or simply to build up his own lust (and her terror) by torturing her with increasing cruelty and depravity. ...A word on rape: it’s really just a means to an end, another way to increase the killer's feeling of power over their victim and to hurt and scare the victim.

Depending on the killer certain techniques and implements might be used (rape, in sexual homicide, falls into this category). The Zodiac Killer used a number of different things to manipulate, terrorize, and gain control over his victims. He used a costume of sorts with his black executioner’s mask that likely served to immediately intimidate his victims (which conveniently also was used to avoid potential identification) at Lake Berryessa. There were at least two weapons he used, a gun and knife, both of which were used for a few purposes during his killer foreplay - increase the fear in his victims, gain control of his victims, and cause his victims pain. The Zodiac Killer also had his letters to the press and police, which were a way for him to exude power and control and get a rush at the expense of law enforcement and even the public at large.

The Act:

From the end of the foreplay stage to orgasm really isn't that long, just a moment or so. But that single moment is one of pure bliss, something that a person will want to experience again and again. Whether it's with the same person or not is a matter of preference. So is, exactly, what pushes the person over the edge and into orgasm. For the average male the act as a stage covers the end of foreplay up to, and including, orgasm; for the killer committing the actual murder or whatever specific act pre or post that which brings him to orgasm qualifies as the act stage. (For those that get their sexual gratification post crime, like David "Son of Sam" Berkowitz, it'll be whatever part of the crime they're thinking about when sexual release occurs.)

~ Average Joe ~

Some men can orgasm through just intercourse with their partner; some simple adjustments in pace and force of thrusts and they're all good. Others, however, might require something extra or something more specific to push them over the edge. Frequently these are things that have started during foreplay and are then done with increased frequency (and/or pressure and/or speed depending on what they are) as orgasm gets closer. For some men it's a phrase or word or even just a sound from their partner and for others it's a certain "move" - stroking or pulling of the hair, soft kiss or bite of the neck, etc - they or their partner makes that sends them over the edge. Of course it could also just be the look of love, attraction, and arousal in their lover's eyes that causes the man to climax...feeling so good that they gave their partner so much pleasure. Whatever it is that pushes them to the moment of orgasm, when it occurs, it's an incredible release of pressure that'd been building since the first stage of the fantasy.

~ The Killer ~

Similar to the average male some killers are just fine getting off with the straight up act of killing by whichever method they might prefer (the preference can be part of the fantasy or simply because one method is easier than another for the killer). Most need a great deal more than that though, probably because they have a richer fantasy stage than any normal person would. Generally they need to act out a whole scenario, one that's started (in action) in the foreplay stage. However, like the average Joe, there can still be one thing that really sends them over into ecstasy. For some it's the look of utter terror in their victims and others it's the blood and/or tears they cause to seep, ooze, or pour out of their victims. Still others it's actually something that occurs after the murder itself - like the mutilation of the victim's body or a provocative pose they put the body in postmortem, for instance. No matter what it is that brings the killer to climax it's the power they feel over their victim that's at the core...it’s this feeling of power, of control over another human being, that is so arousing to these killers. And, like with the typical male, the moment of orgasm is an incredible release of pressure that'd been building since their fantasy phase started in their youth.

The Aftermath:

Everything that occurs after sexual release for the average male and the kill for those committing sexual homicide falls under the aftermath and, whether a typical guy or a serial killer, what's felt and done in the aftermath depends a great deal on how the act stage worked out. Did it live up to the fantasy? Or was it just a great big disappointment?? (Of course it also depends on logistics as well.)

~ Average Joe ~

Much of what is done during this stage could very well all depend on whether or not the sex was enjoyable for the typical man. Let's say that it was everything that was fantasized and more...in that case, if able, the man may decide to spend the rest of the night with his lover. He may engage in sex again later or simply remain content sleeping with his lover in his arms. Should he have to leave due to logistics he's likely to call and arrange another meeting (whether it be a date or "booty call") at another time. If sex was not enjoyable he may create an excuse to leave right after or catch a nap (if he's tired and the bed's there, why not?) and then leave. Rarely, if ever, is the average guy turned off from sex as a whole after a bad experience, instead they're simply turned off from the girl herself and so move on to pursue other women.

~ The Killer ~

Let me first say that no serial killer who commits sexual homicide is completely satisfied with the act stage. The act itself can never really live up to their elaborate fantasies and this is one of the reasons they kill again and again; they're trying to perfect a fantasy and, as most anyone can tell you, nothing is completely perfect. That being said they can be reasonably satisfied enough to feel mighty good about themselves after. However, unless the murder occurred somewhere the killer was ensured privacy and it's his preference, it is highly unlikely he'll just relax by the body afterwards. Instead he might have a whole lot of practical issues to deal with – clean-up (of both himself and the murder site), body disposal, and getting himself a believable alibi are all top priorities.

How killers celebrate their triumph over their victim in a sexual homicide varies; some take souvenirs from their victims, some take pictures of their victims, some return home to remember the crime and get off on it (either again or for the first time, with or without a partner), and some just go out for a nice meal. Let's focus on the souvenirs, which are usually taken for two reasons. The first is so the killer can look at them later and relive what he did to his victim in his head, just like the average Joe might buy a souvenir if he went on vacation with a loved one whether it was something for them to display in the house or for the woman to wear some other time. As an example, a normal man may go to the tropics, buy his beloved a nice necklace from the area, and then get a little rush of excitement remembering that night of love-making on the beach whenever she wears it; meanwhile the killer may kill a woman, take her necklace from the dead body to give to his wife/girlfriend to wear, and then get a little rush remembering the kill whenever she does. The second reason for souvenirs is to show off, in which case it’s called a trophy. If the average guy puts in a lot of effort and hard work he might get a trophy for a sports activity or a nice award from his job; the killer feels he puts in the effort to make a successful kill and does a good job he might just take a trophy for himself in the form of something belonging to the victim. Like average Joe placing his trophies on the mantel or hanging up an award the killer committing sexual homicide might just show off his trophy at his home, job (the one outside his killing, if he has it), or by having his significant other wear it…the killer may also get an added feeling of power and control in having his souvenirs, his trophies, hiding in plain sight, considering himself very clever for openly displaying evidence of his kills with no one the being the wiser about it.

Vicious Valentines: The Barbie and Ken Killers

2010-02-15T16:36:00.000-05:00

Love is said to make people do "the damnedest things"...and, in some cases, that means rape, torture, and murder. It certainly did for Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo; a fairy tale couple in appearance who, in the end, became a living horror to those they victimized together.

Twisted At First Sight

In October 1987 the handsome Bernardo met the beautiful Homolka and the two were immediately smitten with one another. The lucky Bernardo also found, unlike other girls he'd dated, that Homolka would allow and even encourage his dark sides. She enjoyed his twisted, sadistic, sexual appetite and eagerly indulged his every whim in the bedroom. And, when he confessed to her that he was the man the papers were calling "The Scarborough Rapist", she didn't flee at all. She stayed and, by some reports, she even encouraged and participated with him in that. (One rape victim said she remembered seeing a woman with what appeared to be a video camera - the police, however, discounted the memory, chalking it up to hysteria on the part of the victim.)

Christmas Kill

Homolka had planned to give her sister's virginity to her beloved fiancee as a Christmas gift, as well as a way to make up for not being a virgin herself when she'd met Bernardo. (Paul had an almost obsessive desire for virgins.) So, after a Christmas Eve dinner, Paul served 15-year-old Tammy Homolka tranquilizer-laced drinks which quickly caused the girl to pass out on the couch. Paul then took his new video recorder out and videotaped as he instructed Karla to perform oral sex on her little sister, which the young woman did with giggles. Then, still in control of the camera, Bernado began to rape the girl while Karla ensured Tammy would remain unconscious by keeping a halothane (an animal sedative) soaked cloth over her mouth. Sadly the drug eventually caused Tammy to throw up and she choked to death on her vomit despite the devious duos attempts at reviving her.

The Wedding Gift

With Tammy dead, and thus no good to Paul anymore, Homolka began to grow desperate for a replacement. She would do anything to keep her man and, if that included finding a new victim for him to rape, that's just what she'd do. She found a girl, referenced only as Jane, who looked very much like the late Tammy Homolka, and decided to "give" her to Paul as an early wedding present. Doing much the same as with Tammy young Jane was given drinks drugged with Halcion tablets and, once out cold, Karla kept her out with the same halothane-soaked-rag method as before. Thankfully for Jane she neither died nor did she remember the ordeal of her rape and forced sodomy at the hands of Paul.

Shortly after Paul Bernado and Karla Homolka were married.

First Matrimonial Murder

Leslie Mahaffy was just fourteen when she had the grave misfortune of running into Paul Bernardo on June 14 1991. A spirited and slightly defiant youth Leslie had found herself locked out of her house after breaking curfew when Bernardo, on the hunt for license plates (an accountant, he had a lucrative side business in the smuggling of cigarettes from the US to Canada which required frequent plate changes to his car), spotted her. The man moved swiftly, putting a knife to the girl's throat and dragging her to his car to take home.

Karla was not in on this kidnapping to start but, after a fight over her new husband using their best champagne glasses to "entertain" his catch, she joined in. Paul, who already had the camera rolling, gave his wife detailed instructions on what to do to the girl before taking over. His brutality caused the girl to scream out and, as Bernardo finished by strangling her with an electrical cord, Homolka gave young Leslie a teddy bear to hold onto for comfort.

The Intentional Murder

Fifteen-year-old Kirsten French was lured into the couple's car by Homolka in a church parking lot on April 16, 1992. Unlike with Tammy and, possible, Leslie (which seemed to be rough sex turned murder), Bernardo and Homolka knew they'd have to kill Kirsten in the end. She'd be able to identify them and their home. However, they didn't tell her this and Kirsten, thinking it was her best hope for survival, did not fight the couple as they degraded her. The couple kept her as their own personal sex slave for the next day or two, humiliating her in numerous disgusting ways and recording it all before killing her off camera.

Wife Turns on Husband

Karla Homolka, upon the urging of her family, finally left dear Paul Bernardo in early January 1993 after he'd given her two black eyes among other injuries. (She was fine with what he did to the other girls, but when his aggressions turned to her she was not.) By February 1993 the police began to question her about Paul and, from the questions they asked, Karla realized three things: the police had connected the murders of Leslie Mahaffy and Kirsten French to the Scarborough rapes, they believed Paul was the man who committed the crimes, and that the walls were closing in fast. And so the woman did what any sociopath would, what she felt she had to. She turned on Paul and turned him in all the while claiming she was innocent, that she was just another victim of her husband's sadistic tendencies. Then she cut a deal of a lifetime.

In the End

In the end it wasn't until the trial that Homolka's parts in the murders were know, when the tapes of the husband and wife's various cruelties were played to the court and it was too late to really make her pay for her part in the rapes, tortures, and murders. Because of the deal she was able to get out in July 2005, after just twelve years in prison...a fact that caused an outcry from the public to say the least. Paul Bernardo, on the other hand, got life with the possibility for parole after twenty-five years (per Canadian law); though it's unlikely he'll ever be allowed it. As Bernardo serves year after year, no doubt cursing the day he met his now ex-wife Karla, the woman has attempted to move on with her life. She has never truly shown remorse of her victims or guilt over what she and Bernardo did. It seemed to start as a fairy tale but, in the end, Prince Charming was an cruel and depraved man and his beloved princess was even worse...a vicious blonde wicked witch who virtually got away with it.

Female of the Species Part 3: His Killer Half

2010-01-27T14:05:00.000-05:00

We've covered the typical and not-so-typical female serial killer. Now it's time to look at a female serial killer in a serial killer couple. Because there are so many of these women who claim to simply be a victim it's hard to figure out which were, in fact, abused loves who were dragged along for the ride and which were active participants in the crimes them and their significant other committed. There are, however, certain women who not only active participants but the actual killers of some of the couples' victims themselves - they were not women too scared to run, they were women too in love (with the kill) to run. It will be one of those that we'll look at here.

"Lonely Hearts" Lady

Martha Beck was part of a killer duo that murdered at least 3 (and as many as 20 individuals if rumors held true) in 1949. Her, along with her lover, Raymond Fernandez, would become known as "The Lonely Hearts Killers" for their tendency to prey upon women using the "Lonely Hearts" ads in newspapers. On her own Martha was little more than a sad story of an unfortunate childhood that seemed to lead her to make unfortunate choices. She was born Martha Jule Seabrook in 1920 in and, due to a glandular problem, was overweight and experienced puberty at a very young age which lead to her being a continual outcast and early promiscuity.

When she grew up Martha became a nurse though, to start, because of her looks, she had to take a job as an undertaker's assistant in her home state of Florida. Eventually she grew unhappy with this and moved out to California in 1942 to be an army nurse. (Unlike the Angels of Death we've covered in the past Marth was recorded as being a good nurse without any suspicious deaths of those in her care who took her job helping people seriously.) Her promiscuity caught up with her when she became pregnant by a man who refused to marry her and, so upset over this, she returned to Florida. In order to explain the illegitimate pregnancy she created a rather elaborate charade to explain the situation - she claimed that she was married to a naval officer (even bought herself a ring to wear) and, when the time came, she had a telegram sent to herself saying he'd died in action. Not long after Martha became pregnant again, this time from bus driver Alfred Beck, who married her, although the two divorced six months after.

For the next two years Martha, unemployed and single mother of two, slipped into a rich fantasy life of romance novels and afternoon movies. She dreamed of a Prince Charming to whisk her away into his loving arms. In 1946 she got a job as a nurse once more and put out a "Lonely Hearts" ad in the paper...and it was through this ad that she met Ray Fernandez who answered it. By the end of 1947 the two met face-to-face and, by 1948, Martha was abandoning her two children at the Salvation Army in order to keep Ray in her life permanently (she would not have contact with them again in in prison in 1951). She had her Prince Charming; nothing would get between her and him now.

Now previous to their meeting neither Beck nor Fernandez were recorded as having killed anyone (though one of Fernandez's former lovers died under suspicious circumstances) and neither were shown to have any tendency towards violence. That being said once they met things began to change rapidly for both of them. Martha grew to have a wicked jealous streak which led to their first murder in January 1949 when, after seeing Fernandez in bed with their (they now pulled cons together, Beck playing his sister to add respectability and lower women's guards farther) latest mark, Janet Fay, Martha lost control. She bludgeoned the woman with a ball-peen hammer and then, to finish the job, Fernandez strangled her using a scarf. The couple then wrapped the body up and stuffed it into the closet before getting some sleep. The next morning they got a large trunk, stuck the woman's body inside, and eventually buried it in a rented house.

From the murder in Long Island the killer couple quickly moved on to Grand Rapids, Michigan, where they would meet their next two victims. Again using the "Lonely Hearts" ads as a victim pool Fernandez began to correspond with a 41-year-old widow, Delphine Downing, who was the mother of a two-year-old daughter, Rainelle. For some time things went relatively smoothly; though Beck's jealous rage began to creep up once more the woman seemed able to keep it in check. But when Downing discovered that Fernandez was not the man he claimed to be (thanks to witnessing him without his customary toupee) things grew ugly quickly. Downing refused to be charmed by Fernandez any farther and accused him of deception and fraud. Hoping to calm the woman Beck convinced her to take some sleeping pills...but, while the pills did their job, Downing's little girl began to cry. An already frustrated Beck snapped once more. She grabbed the child and choked her into unconsciousness, leaving clear bruises on the tot's neck as she did. When Fernandez saw what Beck has done they both panicked realizing, when Downing woke, she'd see the bruises her daughter. So they did the only thing they could think of - using Downing's late husband's gun (and a towel as a form of silencer) Fernandez shot the woman pointblank in the head, killing her. Over the next two days they made plans to skip town before realizing they also had to kill the little girl, Rainelle. Filling a tub with water Martha drowned the small child and then buried the girl with her mother in the basement of the house. Then, oddly, rather than leave town, they went to the movies. When they returned to continue packing they were stopped by a knock at the door...neighbors, suspecting something, had called the cops and "The Lonely Hearts Killers" murders came to an end.

The two depraved lovebirds would not stand trial for the murders of Delphine and Rainelle Downing for one reason...they would stand trial for Janet Fay instead, thus opening up the possibility for the death penalty. Both of them would end up being convicted of the murder and, in the end, both receive the punishment of death by electric chair. Until the end they would both loudly, proudly, and continually proclaim love for one another.

...It's unlikely that, if they'd never met one another, neither Ray Fernandez nor (especially) Martha Beck would've ever committed multiple murders. It's the most interesting and bizarre part of killer couples like them. Alone they were both troubled individuals who simply would've continued on their own pathetic paths; but in getting together, in becoming a couple, they became a true danger to virtually anyone they preyed upon. Any morals they might've had were set aside for one another and killing became an acceptable act for both of them. And, in this specific case, it was the woman who not only participated in the violence, but began them on the terrible road that ended in death row.

Female of the Species Part 2: The Aggressive Girls

2010-01-19T13:01:00.000-05:00

As reviewed in the previous piece women serial killers tend to do things a little differently. For the most part their methodology is subtler and less overtly violent - smothering, poison - and their victims are those they know, those others would expect them to care for - family, patients if they're a nurse. But there are exceptions to every rule and, sometimes, female serial killers are just as openly aggressive and random in their kills as their male counterparts. (For the purposes of this essay I'm leaving out those females involved in "killer couples" as there are a number of other dynamics going on that might be influencing their level of violence and choice of victim.)

The Blood Countess

Elizabeth Bathory was exceptional...exceptionally beautiful, exceptionally powerful, and exceptionally sexually sadistic. It's the sexual sadism that sets her apart from her other female serial killing counterparts. True that most other women serial killers got a sadistic pleasure from the deaths they caused (orgasming as they held their victims during the final death throes of a poisoning), but they were not sexual sadists. Other women did not get a sexual release from the torturing and degradation of their victims like Countess Bathory did. Documents found concerning her trial describe a number of shocking acts of violence that she performed on servant girls under her control - biting off pieces of their flesh, burning their genitals, and literally tearing their mouths open with her own bare hands - none of which would ever be considered the norm for a female serial killer. Oddly though the one thing that was missing was what she's most frequently known for...bathing in blood. In truth it would seem that the rumor started because Bathory was so aggressive and violent in her torture of her servants that their blood got all over her clothing and body giving the appearance that she'd bathed in it.

Sadly, because her crimes occurred so long ago, her trial was actually held in secret (the fact any documents were found was a miracle in and of itself), and for about one hundred years after her crimes the people of the country were virtually forbidden to mention her, there isn't as much information on her as one would like. Most of what is believed is rumor - such as the bathing in blood - and other factors may have been overblown due to the sociopolitical influences in that time in history - she was a Protestant when Catholics were taking over the government. That being said there were at least 50 confirmed murders based on testimony and, if she started her sadistic tortures in her adolescence as appearances would indicate, and continued until she was caught, that's 35 years of torture and murder she indulged in...more than enough to accomplish the 650 murders she's been credited with.

The "First" Female Serial Killer

Aileen Wuornos is wrongly, but frequently, proclaimed the first female serial killer. There is a good reason that she earned this misnomer though, and it has to do with both her methodology and victimology, which sets her apart from other female serial killer just like Elizabeth Bathory was set apart. It also likely has to do with the horrific type of childhood she shares with male serial killers.

Born in 1956 she seemed almost doomed from the start, her life a near constant experience of abuse and abandonment. Her father (whom Aileen never actually met) spent much of his life in and out of prison before hanging himself after being charged with child molestation and her mother left her and her brother with a babysitter when Aileen was just six months old and never returned. Taken in by her grandparents Aileen was then kicked out at age 13 when she had a child of her own that, she claimed, was the result of a rape. At 20 she married a 70-year-old man, but the marriage ended after a month with both of them claiming the other was abusive. At age 22 Aileen shot herself in a suicide attempt and, while recovering, she then robbed a convenience store at gunpoint...she spent 13 months in prison for that one and, soon, other arrests for various crimes (check forgery, auto theft) followed.

Of course it's not surprising to find that many female serial killers had horrible childhoods as well - ones filled with violence, abandonment, and that caused them to be sociopaths incapable of such things as love, compassion, and trust. It's clear though that Aileen tended towards open acts of aggression such as physical altercations and the use of weapons (in her case a .22 caliber handgun) in committing some of her crimes more in line with male antisocial behavior. This more male-based way of interacting with others followed into her killings beginning with her first victim, Richard Mallory, on November 30, 1989. Mallory, like the six others that followed, was murdered via multiple gunshot wounds. Aileen also followed the more male-based act of killing those who were virtual strangers, using her profession as a prostitute to pick up and then seclude her victims before murdering them.

The Unanswerable Question

Why? That's the one question that can't quite be answered for the women who kill "like a man". By her adolescence Elizabeth Bathory already had a reputation for being excessively cruel in the discipline of her female servants, but there doesn't seem to be an indication as to where she'd have learned to be so over the top in her violence towards others. Aileen Wuornos certainly seemed to reenact the aggression she experienced in her childhood on others, but it doesn't explain why she did while other female serial killers never took the same openly violent path. It would seem, perhaps, that those killers like Bathory and Wuornos are, in fact, one of kind...an aberration even in the horrifyingly strange world of serial killers.

Side Note Trivia: There's been some debate as to whether or not Elizabeth Bathory was, in fact, related to Vlad "The Impaler" Tepes (aka Dracul, the man upon which the character Dracula was said to be based)...according to what I could find, yes, she was distantly related to him through marriage. That being said the fact that they had similar murderous personalities is coincidence and doesn't have to do with their relation to each other.

Female of the Species

2010-01-07T10:30:00.000-05:00

When people think of serial killers they think of men and that's hardly a surprise since a vast majority of serial killers are, in fact male. But it would be a mistake to think that women, "the fairer sex" as it the old saying goes, aren't every bit as capable of multiple murders as their male counterparts. They tend to go about their murders a little differently and select different kinds of victims to prey upon but they are no less guilty of their crimes and get no less of a sexual thrill in causing the death of other And, of those chosen to be their victims, they are no less terrifyingly dangerous.

Cuddly Killers

Male serial killers are well known for being abhorrently violent towards their victims. They stab, shoot, and bludgeon. Their kills are unmistakably aggressive, there's no hiding a serial murder done by a man should the body be found. This isn't the case with women killers. They kill in much more quiet, far less detectable, methods but whether they are "gentler" methods is really a moot point: Would you rather be shot in the head or smothered by a pillow?

Likely, more than even those that smother, female serial killers are known as poisoners. It's hardly a surprise...poisons are easily accessible, difficult to detect (compared to a knife wound), and incredibly effective. Nannie Doss, aka the "Giggling Granny", killed four husbands, two children, a grandchild, two sisters, and her mother between the years of 1929-1953 by slipping rat poison in their whiskey, coffee, or stewed prunes. Rat poison, by the way, generally includes the rather infamous ingredient of arsenic which is also found in wallpaper, paint, weed killer, pesticides, and tanning products. So it's almost natural that women aiming to kill should end up using arsenic, it's likely already in their home or an easily excusable purchase ("Well of course I bought a large supply bug spray, I have a garden and whole backyard to tend to!")

I Love You To Death

Another major, and somewhat frightening, difference between male and female serial killers is their victim choice. Male serial killers select victims they don't know and a great deal of their efforts go into trolling for victims that suit their needs (this is outside, of course, the few that sometimes start or end their killings with a relations such as Ed Kemper with his grandparents and mother). For the most part, if able, they tend to gear their victimology towards their sexual preference; straight male killers go for women, gay male killers go for men, bisexual killers will attack either, and pedophile killers target children. But, no matter what, they tend towards targeting strangers. None of these circumstances are true with female serial killers.

Victims of women serial killers are close to them; they're related, dating, or otherwise under the care of the killer. Because of the victims they select these killers have earned themselves rather catchy names such as Blackwidows for those women who marry, then kill, men over and over (frequently having the secondary motive of gaining life insurance money from them as with Mary Ann Cotton who killed 20-21 people, including 4 husbands) and Angels of Death for those nurses choosing to prey upon their helpless patients. One most recent Angel of Death was Genene Jones of Texas who killed as many as 46 infants and toddlers from 1971-1984. Using injections of heparin and succinylcholine to induce medical crises in her patients she would then try to revive them in order to receive praise and attention...sadly most the little ones in her care never survived that first injection.

Same Difference

So, with all these keys differences in male and female serial killers it's only natural to wonder if there are any similarities? Yes, there's one core similarity...They both get a sick, sadistic, sexual thrill out of their kills. Jane Toppan played nurse as she killed 31 people via poison from 1885-1901 and, once caught, confessed that killing gave her a "voluptuous delight". She went on to admit that her murders were motivated by "an irresistible sexual impulse" and that she would climb into the beds of her victims as they were in their death throes in order to achieve orgasm. ...Man or woman it's clear that a serial killer will have that same underlying motive of getting off. So why the differences in methodology and victimology?

It's somewhat related to the cliche of men having to "stick it wherever they can" and women needing to "settle down and nest". Male sexuality is penetration-based, it's promiscuous and rather undiscriminating and, in the serial killer, that relates to weapons that enter or batter the body, killing as many individuals of their preference (male/female/child) as possible and making whatever strangers they can their prey. Women serial killers, on the other hand, need to have a relationship with the victim before they kill. Their pleasure comes not from violating some stranger's body with a penile substitute (such a knife or bullet) but from perverting the very concept of love into a gruesome show of tenderness and intimacy.

(End Note: There is one exception to the rules above: Aileen Wuornos. But, since she's the exception and not the rule in female serial killers she'll be covered separately at another point in time.)

Have A Killer Christmas...Happy Holidays!!

2009-12-25T10:44:00.001-05:00

To my readers...Have a wonderful holiday season and enjoy this rather tongue-in-cheek Christmas video by The Killers...."Don't Shoot Me Santa".

Safety Special: Holiday Shopping

2009-12-18T17:14:00.000-05:00

As the holiday season comes into full swing the stores can go from almost barren to overcrowded in a matter of hours. With all these people about it's easy to lose track of things: that gift for Uncle Bob, where the car is parked, where little Timmy and Jane wandered off to. It's this last one that, while equally typical as the others, can turn into a potential nightmare for a family. See, it's not just other shoppers engaged in the hustle and bustle of the holiday season but also child predators and crowded, busy, malls and department stores make their "shopping" so much easier.

Child predators, like any predator, count on distractions, the presumption of safety, and a child's general tendency to wander and trust adults to separate them first from their parents and then from everyone else. Once it's just the child and the predator it can be the start of a nightmare from which the child and his or her family may never awake. But there are several safety precautions that a parent who's shopping with their children can and should take (especially during the holiday season):

Watch Your Kids

Pretty obvious, I'm sure, but if you go to a mall you'd be amazed how many parents turn their backs on their kids or go to get something leaving the child two aisles behind. But this statement goes beyond the obvious...it includes bathrooms and changing rooms. Approximately a month ago in a JC Penny in Massachusetts town a boy was raped inside a changing room when his mother left him to make a phone call. Now this is an extreme case but it makes brutally clear what can happen when a child is left unattended and there's a predator about. So, what to do?

First, never assume...never assume a child's going to stay somewhere while you go pay or look for something and never assume the child's automatically going to follow you as you continue shopping. To keep from having to constantly look around to ensure the little tike's there try holding their hand or keeping them in a stroller/cart/leash-thing/what have you. Also, always accompany your child to the restroom; many malls now have restrooms and changing areas made especially for families so parents don't have to drag their kids into restrooms of the opposite genders and such. Depending on their age it's possible to let the child go to the bathroom or change without either being directly in the stall with them...that doesn't mean you shouldn't stay close by though. While that their most vulnerable being within earshot and ignoring potential distractions (phone, other conversations, etc) is important for your child's safety and security.

Now older kids, and those mature enough to be trusted, may be allowed more freedom in going to other stores in the mall without supervision in which case make sure they check with you before they go and that they do not go to locations other than where they stated...this is where technology is beneficial, have them text you when they get to the store they're going to and again when they leave it, sharing their next plans with you. (Obviously if you try this and the child doesn't follow the rules then it should be back to sticking with the 'rents until they can be trusted.) However that doesn't mean you should give them completely free reign...have them go with some friends or siblings of about the same age and check in with you in person every so often. Plans for meeting each other should always be clearly conveyed and adhered to by everyone.

Separation Anti-Anxiety

Despite best efforts, it happens...kids can become separated from parents in the hustle and bustle of shopping. Because of this it's of the utmost importance that a child know what to do if it happens before it happens. First thing to tell them is that, if they discover they are lost, they shouldn't wander off in search of you...inevitably this only makes finding one another harder. They should also be taught to never leave the mall in search of you or the family car. Now should they get lost out in the open (i.e. not at a specific store) they should go to the mall's help/customer service desk or, because 'tis the season, perhaps the line for Santa which the child is likely to find easily and to have plenty of other mothers with their children to watch over him or her until you're reunited; that choice is up to you and your child, just make sure it's clear before you enter the mall. You should teach children to look for specific people who can help return him to her to you such as law-enforcement officers, security officers, store personnel, or another mother with children. ...Also helpful is for your child to take note of what you're wearing, your name (not just Mommy or Daddy), and being able to describe you should they find an acceptable person to assist them in finding you once more.

A special note for those who ride trains (such those of the Massachusetts MBTA): As my own mother would make clear to me...if your child gets stuck on the train as you get off they should get off at the next stop and wait until you arrive. If your child gets off at the wrong stop they should stay right there until you're able to relocate them. The last thing either parent or child wants is for the child to ride a confusing train system within a busy, crowded, city, on their own. ...These days there are also occasionally MBTA security who your child might be able to locate and request to stay with them until reunited with you but those people are few and far between.

Practice Makes Perfect

Visit the mall with your kids for the sole purpose of getting them used to the layout of the mall you'll be shopping at and having them practice what they should do while in the mall. This is when you can ensure they can use a public telephone, locate then help/customer service desk along with other help within the mall and the stores and, for older children, go to the restroom with a friend and/or obey your "text when you're there, text when you go" rule suggested earlier. ...Do this on a day when you aren't aiming to shop and can keep a continuous eye on your kids in case they aren't sure of everything yet. With enough practice the things you've taught them should come as second nature so, if and when the time comes, they won't have to panic or worry...they'll already be confident in what to do.

Anonymity Is Key

Yes, they can be cute and help you tell the kids apart at a distance but never dress your children in clothing with their names on them. That type of clothing allows a predatory person an easy way to convince you child they are not “strangers” and therefore should be trusted which could lead to disaster. No stranger should have an invitation to talk to your child and a name on a jacket or little purse gives them just that. And, on a further note, those little car decals with the stick figure families all named in row...equally bad if not worse. Now a potential predator has the name of your children and you and all they really have to do is say "Hey, are you Timmy? Are your parents Sally and John? Yes, well, they've been hurt and told me to come get you." and it's more than likely your child will follow the predator off god knows where.

Kid Friendly ≠ Kid Safe

Malls may have any number of kid-friendly places available...video arcades, movie theaters, toy stores, and even playgrounds. At first glance they seem a wonderful place to stick some whining kids while you run off to buy some presents for the season nearby. But, at a closer look, these places are clear magnets for child predators and aren't anywhere a parent or guardian should leave a child alone. These places have little to no supervision and the staff in these areas are generally not much older than your children. Frankly, most are teens more interested in just socializing with friends that stop by and picking up their checks to pay their new phone or car. They don’t really care about your kids, aren't watching for any suspicious behavior, and if even a minor problem comes up (a fight over a game, for example) they can quickly and easily become overwhelmed. ...Any child in these kid-friendly areas are rather easy targets for a predator and, in the end, there is no substitute for parental supervision.

Have a Safe Season's Greetings!

In the end, if you can’t adequately supervise your children without being distracted, stay at home or leave them with someone else while you do your shopping.

An excellent source for all manner of information regarding child safety, preventing abduction, and identifying potentially dangerous circumstances is the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (www.missingkids.com). Give them a visit and your children will be safer for it.

Killer Kiddies

2009-12-07T16:36:00.000-05:00

When most hear of children as killers they might first think of school shooters...all frequently of high school age and qualifying for the mass murder category (those who kill multiple people in one area at one time). While sad and disturbing to hear about it's not terribly shocking anymore; many schools now have metal detectors, bag checks, and other safety precautions set up just to prevent a possible school shooting from occurring. However something that really can't be prepared for by a school, or anyone, something still rare enough to shock others, is the child serial killer. Those pretty little girls and bright young boys who target, hunt, and kill other children around them just as Dahmer, Bundy, and the other adult serial killers did.

Bad Boys

Jesse Pomeroy was known as "The Boston Boy Fiend" in the papers and with good reason. At just twelve young Pomeroy seemed a full grown sociopath; a boy who delighted in the torturing of other, smaller, children. For nine months, starting in December 871, he began to lure smaller boys away with him to bound, beat, and torture. When finally caught he was sentenced to reform school until he turned eighteen...after serving just under 17 months he was paroled and then promptly killed ten-year-old Katie Curran and four-year-old Horace Millen. He was arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced to death for the murder but, being young as he was, there was controversy regarding the morality of executing such a young boy and so the sentence was commuted to life.

The youngest serial killer in the United States was Craig Price, aka "The Slasher of Warwick" of Warwick, Rhode Island, who at the tender age of thirteen began killing in the 1980s. His first victim, Rebecca Spencer, was a woman who'd he started out peeping on before graduating to breaking into her home and stabbing her to death with a kitchen knife. Two years later he killed Joan Heaton and the woman's two daughters (Melissa, eight, and Jennifer, ten), also using a knife. Price freely confessed to the murders, sentenced to prison, and is up for parole in 2019.

As of 2007 it seems the youngest serial killer on record might be eight-year-old Amardeep Sada of India. According to news articles the boy was caught when his latest victim, a six-month-old girl named Kushboo, was reported missing after she left the infant sleeping in the village's primary school. Some villagers and family of little Sada already knew to look in the young man's direction since this wasn't the first time he'd been suspected of having killed an infant. The boy had apparently killed his eight-month-old sister three months before and had started with killing his six-month-old cousin the year prior. The boy's uncle (and father of the first victim) told local media explained that some villagers and family member were aware of the first to killings committed by the boy but they were not reported since it was considered a "family matter". With this final murder though the police were called in and the eight-year-old Sada confessed saying that he'd taken the babies out to fields near the village, beat them with rocks, and then buried them in shallow graves. While he's already been arrested and confessed to the murders the authorities wished to do some investigating into his mental state and there have been no new developments reported since.

Aggressive Girls

Little Mary Bell had big blue eyes and a heart-shaped face at the age of eleven. She was downright adorable. She was also the killer of two preschoolers and without remorse for what she'd done...in fact she seemed to find it enjoyable, amusing even. Unlike the boy killers mentioned she did have an accomplice in her best friend Norma, who joined her in the assaults on four other children in the span of one day before they moved onto murder. On May 25, 1968 the body of three-year-old Martin Brown was found in an abandoned, run-down, house with blood and saliva caked around his mouth. It was little Mary who excitedly gave the boy's aunt, Rita Finley, the terrible news...she and Norma also continued to return to the woman's house with happy grins asking if she missed her nephew and cried for him until the distraught woman threw them out and told them not to return. Two months later, on July 31, another three-year-old boy named Brian Howe disappeared and, when his older sister, Pat, went to look for him is was Mary and Norma who offered the help. The little boy was found later between two concrete blocks on a stretch of industrial waste ground where the local kids were known to play. He'd been strangled, sexually mutilated with a broken pair of scissors, and had the letter "M" carved into his belly with a razor. It didn't take long for suspicions to fall on the two girls and soon they were brought in for questioning. With each girl blaming the other both were brought to trial...Norma was acquitted, Mary was sentenced to "detention for life"...she was released from jail in 1980 and has since tried to live a quiet, anonymous, life with the daughter she had in 1984.

Some Things Never Change

While these cases certainly differ from the "normal" serial killer cases in the age of the one committing the murders many other factors remain the same. All these youthful killers selected victims that were smaller and weaker than them - even Craig Price who at thirteen had the body of a large, fully grown, man and so the physical ability to kill the adult women he did - and that's a cornerstone of serial killers, to pick the easiest targets available that suit their deviant needs and desires.

Like many adult killers both Jesse Pomeroy and Mary Bell were the subject of horrific abuse; Jesse reenacted his father's torturous beatings on his victims and Mary seemed to be taking her anger at being abused physically and sexually by the men her mother sold her out to on her victims (as with her sexually mutilation of little Brian Howe). Both Jesse and Mary also started out on animals, a frequent occurrence with all serial killers no matter the age they begin to kill other humans. In Jesse's case it became so that the family was unable to keep any kind of pet at all.

Mary is also recorded as having filled out the other aspects frequently found in adult serial killers. She had all characteristics of the Homicidal Triad; cruelty to animals, prolonged bedwetting into her adult life, and vandalism (though not the more commonly seen pyromania it's the same idea, destruction of property). She also did a few other things seen in adult serial killers such as inject herself into the investigations by offering to inform the victim's family in the Martin Brown case and help in the search for her second victim. She also boasted about her kills to others in the form of peers and in leaving notes - such as one that said "we did murder Martain brown Fuckof you Bastard" - behind in a nursery she and Norma broke into and destroyed two days after the tot's body was found.

Truth Behind the Triad

2009-11-30T10:21:00.001-05:00

Most people have heard of "The Homicidal Triad" in reference to serial killers...bedwetting, fire-setting, and cruelty to animals. It's believed that a serial killer will have all of these in their childhood and that these things alone are signs of a sociopathic personality. Neither of those things are completely true, there's a little more to it than those simple statements.

Not every serial killer will have the triad show up in their past and not everyone who has these three characteristics is destined to grow up to kill (though they certainly should be watched carefully and, preferably, gotten professional help). Each of these warning signs are a touch more complex than would first seem and signify deeper issues for those that have them...and it's the deeper issues the triad represents that's consistently found in the budding sociopath.

Bedwetting

The clinical term for this is enuresis and, in small children, isn't anything to be concerned about. In fact it's a common stage in a young child and one that they usually grow out of by age six at the latest. But when a child doesn't grow out of it, when they continue to wet the bed into puberty, it becomes a problem and a sign of something far more troubling. Presuming, of course, the continued nighttime accidents aren't due to a medical disorder of some kind it's possible that they are a signal of emotional disturbances. Findings of the FBI's BAU (Behavioral Analysis Unit) state that 60% of sex-murders were still wetting their beds past age 12 and into their teens. Alton Coleman, who killed eight people in a number of states in the Midwest, would wet his pants so often that it earned him the humiliating nickname "Pissy."

Fire-Setting

This characteristic is a little more clearly a sign of trouble...but some people still seem a little confused about what's normal childhood curiosity with fire and what's true pyromania. Certain kids really are just curious by fire - the heat, the light, the fact it's somewhat forbidden (only adults should work with fire) - and are offhandedly, and wrongly, defined as pyromaniacs. A child who sets a fire once in the backyard or enjoys playing with the flame of a candle is not the child to be overly worried about...the child who frequently sets fire to things, even after gaining the knowledge that it can be destructive and dangerous, is though. In fact, frequently, it's the fact that they're aware of the destructive and dangerous nature of fire that drives the budding sociopath to set more fires. "Son of Sam" killer David Berkowitz was so obsessed with fires that he got the nickname "Pyro" from classmates and, as an adult, he confessed to setting more than fourteen hundred fires in his life. Killer of seven, Carlton Gary, firebombed a grocery store when in his teens. Carl Panzram, who killed 22 people, boasted that, at twelve, he caused about $100,000 damage when he burnt down a reform school building.

At its most obvious fire-setting in the budding serial killer is an expression of anger and aggression (as opposed to a rather benign curiosity with other children). A child would find it very difficult to organize a meeting with a realtor at an empty house as a prospective buyer as a ruse to rape and kill like Mike DeBardeleben did, but they sure could set the neighbor's shed on fire without too much trouble. There is, however, another emotion that comes to the young sociopath who sets fires...sexual arousal. Just like with killing it's generally the power they feel and the destruction they cause in setting the fire that really gives them the sexual charge. In the words of serial killer Joseph Kallinger, "Oh, what ecstasy setting fires brings to my body! What power I feel at the thought of fire...Oh, what a pleasure, what a heavenly pleasure! I see the flames and no longer is a fire just a daydream. It is the reality of heaven on earth! I love the excitement of the power fire gives me...The mental image is greater than sex!"

Cruelty to Animals

The idea of being cruel and violent towards animals is the most obvious and well-known of the characteristics in the triad. While rather self-explanatory there are still levels of cruelty...after all most people have a story from their youth about using a magnifying glass on some ants, kicking a dog, or pulling a cat's tail, either having done it themselves or knowing of another child that did it. While these obviously aren't proper behaviors for any child and should be corrected when seen some of it could be defined as a single incident or a small phase; especially in children who haven't yet developed a full sense of empathy or impulse and anger control. That being said these acts of cruelty towards weaker creatures pale greatly in comparison to the acts of torture the budding sociopath will preform. Ed Kemper was ten when he buried his first cat alive then dug it back up, decapitated it, and stuck the head on a spindle; with the next unfortunate cat to be the family pet a now thirteen-year-old Kemper sliced the top of its skull with a machete and let the dying creature shower him in blood while he held onto its foreleg.

Unlike the average child, who will look back more than a little embarrassed about the time he blew up that anthill with a cherry bomb, the budding sociopath never regrets what he's done. Cutting open goldfish to see how they work (something a young Jeffrey Dahmer did) isn't a stage...it's practice. Their cruelty to animals grows more extreme until, eventually, they move on up to other humans as targets. For instance Carroll "The Barfly Strangler" Cole started off getting his kicks from choking the family dog unconscious before he progressed to strangling women to death. And, just as with their pyromania, the serial killer in the making will likely feel that same sexual rush in torturing animals as they do in setting fires and, as adults, killing other human beings.

Killer IQ Final: What Did You Learn?

2009-11-19T19:56:00.000-05:00

So we've reviewed the intelligences according to Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences as they might relate to killers. We've found that, on some, they likely rank high and on others likely low...just like everyone else. The truth is, in the end, serial killers aren't anything special. They aren't mad geniuses or criminal masterminds; Hannibal Lector will only ever exist in the movies...and in a criminal's own mind. Lector, for all his psychotic, sociopathic, glamour is a myth and one that most killers - narcissists that they generally are - fancy themselves to be like.

Terribly Average

Most profiles of serial killers given by the FBI state that they are of average to above average intelligence. And, yes, it frequently is the case. There's a reason for this. Generally speaking one needs a vague amount of intelligence to get away with more than one murder without getting caught. Enough to think ahead some, to know how to avoid leaving a great deal of evidence behind that would lead directly to them, or at least not come stumbling out of an alley covered in the victim's blood and a knife in hand. There's also evidence (from a Radford University project collecting data on serial killers) that, statistically, serial killers tend to fall into the "normal/average" range of IQ overall. ...Both the reasoning that intelligence is needed to repeatedly commit and get away with homicide and the statistics say that at least average intelligence is generally needed to become a serial killer. Of course that does lead to another question. Why, if at least of functioning intelligence, do some of these killers do such stupid things?

Pitiful Pride

So often these killers have such a serious narcissistic personality disorder that they get in the way of their own success...in all aspects of their life, including their murders. These (most frequently) men like to consider themselves criminal masterminds, able to outwit the rest of the world which simply isn't a thought based in reality to begin with. Add to that the belief that most, if not all, others are less than human and these people take risks and flaunt the law in a way that make the average, normal, person shake their heads in utter disbelief.

Ted Bundy, once referred to as "The High IQ Killer", thought so highly of himself that he decided to be his own lawyer. Aside from the old adage that the man who defends himself has a fool for a client Bundy didn't realize something very key about himself...he wasn't charming or clever enough to hide the fact that he was enthralled by his own case. That, as he worked to defend himself, he couldn't hide the fact he was reliving the crimes from anyone, including the jury. He thought he'd done a fine job...the jury thought he needed to be put down via electric chair.

Randy Kraft (who killed 16 people throughout much of the 1970s) had a recorded IQ of 129 and made a great deal of money as a computer consultant...he also was caught after driving drunk with a strangled body in the passenger seat. Even a relatively "stupid" person would know better than to do something like that but these individuals, these serial killers, have such an inflated ego that it blinds them from basic logic and self-preservation.

Killer IQ Part 8: Is It In Their Nature?

2009-11-16T16:51:00.004-05:00

The final intelligence listed in Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences is naturalistic. This intelligence has to do with nature, nurturing and relating information to one's natural surroundings. People who rank high in this form of intelligence are supposed to having a greater sensitivity to nature, to better understand their place in it, and to be able to handle plants, crops, and animals. Noticing changes in weather, the differences in species, and other such things about their natural surroundings are also abilities those might have with this intelligence. In order to learn best they must connect a new experience with earlier information gained; collecting and analyzing, being outside, kinesthetic ways (doing physical activity), or in dealing with things prominent in nature, are all ways in which they learn best. Careers which suit those with this intelligence include scientists, naturalists, conservationists, gardeners and farmers.

It's Not Natural

I hesitate to even write on this intelligence since it wasn't originally part of Gardner's original Theory of Multiple Intelligences (it was added in 1997) and has often been criticized as and interest and not really indicative of intelligence. However, it is on the list and, for those who might live almost entirely off of nature it remains an indispensable intelligence. ...Now the question is...are there any killers who live off the land, so to speak?

Not really, no. Those people who live off the land in these modern times do so either almost completely on their own or in small (usually native) communities and neither those to ways of life make for the sort of victim pool or anonymity required to be a killer, let alone serial killer, with any actual success. The closest one might get is bomber, Theodore "Ted" Kaczynski (aka The Unabomber) when, in 1973, he moved to Lincoln, Montana, to live off the land. ...He was successful at it for the most part, even as the modern world imposed by cutting down the forest around him, but that really didn't have much to do with his abilities as a bomb maker. Even though he did use more natural pieces (plugs to the bombs made of handcrafted wood, etc) at the start of his bombings, the intelligence used in creating and constructing the bombs themselves required logical-mathematical, visual-spatial, and even bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, not natural.

Philia Friday: Fetishism

2009-11-13T16:45:00.000-05:00

Fetishes themselves are not an precursor for violence, they are simply a condition in which a person is turned on by an object or specific body part - usually feet - and are so fixated on it that the sex partner becomes secondary to the object of the fetish. But, when combined with a psychopathic personality, fetishes can get bizarrely extreme (eating fingernails off corpses rather than just enjoying them on a living woman) and the things done in order to satisfy the urges of a fetish can be unspeakably violent.

Terrifying Trophies

Fetishism in serial killers tends to account for their taking trophies. A trophy could be almost anything that once belonged to the victim - jewelry, driver's licenses, underpants, - that the killer takes to relive the crime as a fantasy, often while masturbating. This fact, that they use the trophy to gain sexual gratification from, alone makes them fetish objects. Of course some killers aren't satisfied with just taking an object that once belonged to their victims...they want a part of their victims body to relive the fantasy with. This was the case of foot fetishist and serial killer Jerry Brudos, aka "Shoe Fetish Slayer".

It's hard to say how, exactly, his fetish began but it started as early as when Brudos was five. After finding a pair of lady's shoes at the local dump and taking them home he was caught by his mother walking around in them; the woman promptly took the high-heels, burned them, and beat her son for having them. Of course that didn't stop him and, as he grew, his desires - and the acts he took to fulfill them - grew in scope and darkness. In first grade he got in trouble for stealing a spare pair of his teacher's shoes and, by his early teens, he was sneaking into women's homes to snatch their shoes and underwear (which, by this time, he had taken to wearing under his clothing). At 17 he'd attacked a young girl at knifepoint and tried to force her to strip - for this he spent nine months in Oregon State Hospital. At 23, while his young wife gave birth to his child, he broke into the home of a young lady, choked her unconscious, and then raped her before running off with her shoes. And, by his 30s, Brudos violence escalated to murder.

He killed four women total, though it was what he did after their deaths that served to shock and disgust others. Brudos would use them as sort of life-sized dolls, dressing the bodies in the underwear collection he had and then taking photographs of the results. The photographs weren't the only trophies he took however. From the first victim, Linda Slawson, he severed her left foot and placed it in a spike-heeled shoe before tucking it away in his freezer. From his second, Jan Whitney, he took one of her breasts which he kept as a macabre paperweight and the third, Karen Sprinkler, he removed both. Once caught and asked by the police why he didn't remove body parts from the final victim, Linda Salee, he explained he was turned off by her pink nipples, "They should be brown," he stated to the authorities. After each of his kills it's reported he would dress in high-heels and masturbate.

Even once in prison his fetish continued...he wrote to major companies asking for their women's shoes catalogues and used them as his own personal version of pornography. A fetish alone does not make a person dangerous or violent. But a sick and twisted mind like that of Jerry Brudos coupled with a fetish can be a terrifying and deadly thing.

Killer IQ Part 7: Feelin' Groovy

2009-11-10T19:40:00.000-05:00

Musical-rhythmic intelligence has to do with rhythm, music, and hearing. Those who rank high in this form of intelligence have a greater sensitivity to sounds, rhythms, tones, and music. They normally have good pitch; they may even have perfect pitch (the ability to identify or recreate a musical note without the benefit of an external reference). They are able to sing, play musical instruments, compose music, and (of course) tend to be those in the music field: instrumentalists, singers, conductors, disc-jockeys, orators, and composers. In addition, they may learn best via lecture and often use songs or rhythms to learn and memorize information, and may work best with music playing in the background.

Such Beautiful Music

While there are a number of instances in which killers and the music world seem to collide it's a little hard to determine if killers tend to rank high in musical-rhythmic intelligence simply from the fact that they enjoy music. It's possible, with his tendency to enjoy writing poetry (which many could consider a somewhat musical intervention), that BTK Killer Dennis Rader would rank high though. Also potentially ranking high is Charles Manson.

Charles Manson took the lyrics to The Beatles' "Helter Skelter" to manipulate a group of outcasts, his "family", to kill seven people in what was referred to as the Tate/LaBianca murders. But that was the least impressive thing he did involving music. Before (and after) he was leading a murderous cult he was not only an avid music fan but fancied himself a musician...and so did some in the music business. His first encounter within the music industry was with Beach Boy, Dennis Wilson. While their exact way of meeting is debated some - whether Wilson told him to stop by the house sometime or Manson just showed up - it seemed that the two hung out at Wilson's house enough to become friendly and for Wilson to buy studio time for Manson to record songs (ones Manson wrote and performed himself). The Beach Boy also introduced Manson to a few of his industry friends one of which, songwriter Gregg Jakobson, also paid for Manson to have time to record songs.

...About 7 to 8 months after the Tate/LaBianca murders an album of the man's music was released. As with all forms of art whether or not a piece is good is debatable (though reviews I found were generally favorable) and there were changes made by Dennis Wilson and others. But what isn't debatable, what doesn't change, is the impact that even Charles Manson's music had on pop culture at large. Famous musicians, including Guns 'N' Roses and Marilyn Manson, have re-recorded or sampled his music either in whole or part. Now maybe these artists used Manson's creations in their own work for shock value or, possibly, they recognized someone who (despite a very sick and twisted mind) shared a high musical-rhythmic intelligence like them and used the man's pieces to their own benefit - putting their own spin on his creation - which is something that happens frequently in the arts.

Killer IQ Part 6: An Eye For Killing

2009-11-04T10:25:00.000-05:00

Visual-spatial intelligence has to do with, well, vision and judgment of where things fit in space (such as where pieces of puzzles fit together). People high on this intelligence are typically very good at visualizing and mentally manipulating objects and often very skilled at solving puzzles. They have a strong visual memory, generally have a very good sense of direction, and are often artistically inclined. Artists, engineers, and architects are all careers that require visual-spatial intelligence.

Awfully Artistic

There's a number of serial killers who've shown off their creative sides in painting or drawing - John Wayne Gacy, Richard Ramirez, and Henry Lee Lucas to name a few. Perry Smith, killer of the Clutter family known from Truman Capote's famous nonfiction work In Cold Blood, was also known to be a prolific artist. And there are also many a killer that seem to consider what they do "art"...in fact frequently law enforcement will feign being impressed with what the killer has done ("it was a masterpiece!") to try and get a confession.

In one case though it's possible these two ideas collided, that a killer tried to copy art pieces in a crime scene...the infamous Black Dahlia case. While the case has never been officially solved and, like Jack the Ripper and Zodiac, so much myth has seeped into reality, one man posed a rather interesting theory that, if true, certainly shows how "artistic" a killer can be. Steve Hodel, a former LAPD detective (years served total: 1963-1986), believes it was his own father, Dr George Hodel who killed Elizabeth Short and that's not all. According to Hodel the doctor posed the body at the murder scene after two of his Surrealist artist friend, Man Ray's, pieces...Minotaur and Lovers. At first this seems a rather wild accusation but, if one were to compare the crime scene, what was done to the body of Ms. Short, it does begin to appear to be a real possibility.

Minotaur, shows a woman's bisected body, with arms posed above her head, the elbows bent at 90 degree angles, just as the killer has posed Short's at the crime-scene. Lovers, too, involves a bisected woman as well as a pair of elongated lips with a series of (faint) cuts running down on the bottom lip. According to the corner's report on Short: “There are five linear lacerations on the right upper lip which extend into the soft tissues for a distance of 1⁄2 [inches, I presume]”...It would seem that the killer switched it up some, cutting the upper lips rather than lower, but the fact there are still five cuts is a little suggestive...especially if it were Dr Hodel who enjoyed the image of the lips in Lovers so much he once painted his own version!

This is just a theory set forth by Steve Hodel but, if it were true, it'd certainly be one of the most gruesome examples of a killer's high visual-spatial intelligence - which Dr Hodel did seem to have even in just his hobbies of photography and painting - being used in a crime.

Killer IQ Part 5: Serial Self-Awareness

2009-11-02T12:42:00.000-05:00

Previously covered was interpersonal intelligence, the opposite of that is intrapersonal intelligence. It's focus is more introverted, focusing on understanding oneself. Those ranking high in this intelligence are introverts, very self-aware, and capable of understanding their own emotions, goals and motivations. They prefer to work alone and tend to be perfectionists. Their interests also lean towards thought-based pursuits such as philosophy which is why they may seek out careers as philosophers, psychologists, and theologians.

Know Thyself

This intelligence may be one that serial killers do well in overall, though better in certain aspects. Serial killers are most certainly introverted, frequently in their own head enjoying their own twisted fantasies, and generally prefer to work alone. In their kills they're perfectionists...or at least try their best to be. (For them, in the end, nothing can really live up to their fantasies.) They also tend philosophize a great on different things - especially good and evil - an activity that seems to increase once caught and jailed. Whether they all come up with any answers is a matter for debate, but then that fact holds true for the average person and their motives for their actions as well.

One that did seem to find some answers about himself, about his own ultimate motives, was "Co-ed Killer" Ed Kemper. After killing eight people, including his grandparents, it seemed Kemper realized what he'd been wanting to do all along...kill his mother. In prison interviews with FBI profiler John Douglas the killer also seemed aware of the reasons behind his other kills (the non-family-oriented ones) explaining that the co-eds were the women his mother told him he was never good enough for. True that it is illogical to then go and want to possess every part of a person, even their life, but that was how Kemper felt and he was well aware of that fact.

Other killers might not be aware of specifics, of exactly what drives them to attack and murder others, but many seem to know there is something driving them. Albert Fish, murderer and cannibal of at least three children, confessed, "I always had the desire to inflict pain on others and to have others inflict pain on me. I always seemed to enjoy everything that hurt. The desire to inflict pain, that is all that is uppermost." He had theories on why, including the abuse of young boys at the orphanage he grew up in, but it's hard to tell if it was his explanation or just his excuse. But, still, he was self-aware to know it was the pain, and most especially inflicting it on others, that spurred him to his horrific crimes.

Philia Friday: Vampirism

2009-10-31T18:20:00.000-04:00

In pop culture media some vampires are handsome young things who're deeply remorseful for what they are - Edward from Twilight, Louis from The Vampire Chronicles - while others are (at least slightly more physically) grotesque creatures who revel in the monsters they are - Count Orlok from Nosferatu, Severen from Near Dark. Whether to tell a story of love and passion or one of horror the idea of the vampire is romanticized. There seems to be two kinds of real life blood-drinkers; one kind is relatively harmless to the everyday person because they, too, romanticize vampirism and consider it simply a sexual preference or fetish. The other kind, however, are those that are serial killers with a desire to drink their victims blood and very much a danger to those who come in contact with them.

Sanguineous Is Sexy

There are some for whom vampirism is a consensual, sexualized, act that simply feeds (so to speak) their own personal preferences. Some decide to embrace the part complete with fangs - bought or created through filing down already existent teeth - and coming part of online or in-person vampire communities. But even for those who don't chose to make vampirism a major part of their lifestyle if they practice the act of drinking blood and derive sexual pleasure from it they'd be considered real-life "vampires".

Blood Drive

In serial killers vampirism is something far more dangerous...it is a sadistic act upon a victim and/or the uncontrolable drive to drink the blood of whoever (or whatever) they can get their hands on. One such killer with this drive was Italian lust-killer, Eusebius Pieydagnelle, would smell blood from butcher shops and it would arouse him so much that it compelled him to go out and kill six women in 1878. Another, Italian madman, Vincenz Verzeni, tore apart two young woman in 1871, chewing on their flesh and drinking their blood in a frenzy of vampiric desire.

Peter Kurten, "The Vampire of Dusseldorf", started early in his depravity, including vampirism. As a youth he would decapitate swans and drink the blood that would spurt out from their necks as he would sexual violate the rest of the body. As he grew into murderous adulthood he frequently drank the blood of his victims - over two dozen men, women, and children.

Fritz Haarmann, "The Vampire of Hanover", started with escaping institutionalization in the late 1800s. For a while after he remained a vagrant before he learned to butcher meat and was able to start his own business with the skill, thus getting the money to afford a place to live. While it's likely he started killing then, the home allowing him the privacy he needed with his victims, his murders really picked up when he gained himself a lover in, Hans Grans also called Graf in some places, an attractive male prostitute. (There is some debate as to how much of an accomplice Grans was but, at the very least, he seemed aware of what his lover was doing and enjoyed the clothing and money taken from the victims.) Luring them to the couple's home Haarmann would first feed his victims then, still sleepy from the large meal, he would grab the young men and bite right through his young male victims throats while sodomizing them. In fact, Haarmann was known to chew until the head was practically severed from the body in some cases and, as he tasted their blood, he achieved orgasm. He would then take the possessions of victims to sell on the black market or retain them for himself or Grans, then cut the flesh from their bodies, eat some of it, and sell the rest on the open market as butchered meat. The rest he dumped into the canal. When cops checked his house (with where the bodies were found and his past history he was a rather clear suspect) and found clothing from "missing" young men and boys and blood all over the walls Haarmann was arrested...he confessed shortly after.

Men, however, are not the only vampiric killers. Elizabeth Bathory is the most obvious example, a countess from modern day Slovakia (Hungry in her time) who killed anywhere from 50-600+ victims and reportedly bathed in their blood in an effort to stay young. There was also Magdalena Solis, "High Priestess of Blood", in 1963 Yerba Buena, Mexico, who convinced the villagers that she was a goddess and created a vampiric sex cult based around her. As a way to pay tribute to her blood rituals were orchestrated in which she drank the blood of those murdered at her behest...when the human sacrifices were discovered outside the village, police came in and rounded up the cult.

~~~~

Author's Note: Yes, this is a day late but how perfect is it to have this posted on Halloween, right? Happy Halloween all, and stay safe!!

Killer IQ Part 4: Are There Evil Einsteins?

2009-10-28T16:07:00.000-04:00

Logical-mathematical intelligence has, of course, to do with logic and math (numbers) as well as reasoning and dealing in abstractions. Those who score high in this intelligence excel in scientific thinking and investigation, they can perform complex calculations and recognize abstract patterns...they are puzzle-solvers, can think events out in advance, and tend to focus on precision. This intelligence strongly correlates with the traditional ideas of IQ and high-rankers include scientists, mathematicians, engineers, doctors and economists.

It's Highly Ill-Logical

This is another intelligence where serial killers seem to both excel and falter depending on the situation. Some killers, certainly the more successful ones, have thought out their kills beforehand, have considered how events will play out during and after the kill which immediately implies they rank at least average in this intelligence. But I think the biggest revealer of this intelligence in killer's lie in precision. Some killers are very precise, almost to the point of obsession, in their "work". Bombers, for example, would fall into this category not in the least because, without precision, they risk becoming a victim of their own creations.

Also likely to rank high on this intelligence is Zodiac and BTK. As mentioned previously Zodiac enjoyed playing with words (changing spellings of things, etc) but he also seemed to like other games and puzzles. Included in his infamous letters was his equally infamous cipher that, he claimed, held the key to he was. While I personally doubt that he'd reveal who he was under any circumstances, the self-made code was very real and an indication of his skill in logical-mathematical intelligence. For his own personal amusement, and to show off no doubt, Zodiac created his own twisted puzzle that had virtually the whole world scrambling to solve it.

BTK, on the other hand, was merely precise in in writing about his victims. On a separate piece of paper, as a sort of "P.S.", of his 1978 letter to law enforcement and media Dennis Rader (BTK) wrote about what he did - or intended to do - to victims. The comments didn't just stop with the basics either, he noted specific details such as a female victim being on a "made bed in southwest bedroom", the temperature of the house being at 90 degrees, and how much pre-planning he'd done ("some", "little", etc). Rader showed precision before the crimes by preparing for them (which included stalking beforehand at times), presumably during since he was able to control and kill a family of four (the Otero's) single-handedly, and after the crime by writing detailed accounts of his kills.

There are, however, those killers that seem to be lacking in this intelligence. Disorganized killers - those who don't plan ahead, who kill on a whim, and don't care about leaving evidence behind - fall into this category. Some blitz attackers, especially those that literally just whack victims over the head and leave them to die (and, yes, those do exist), would qualify...as would those like Ed Gein and Richard Chase ("The Vampire of Sacramento" who killed 6 people and engaged in such things as vampirism, cannibalism, and necrophilia with victims and animals alike). Now while some of these killers may get away with killing a fair number of people beforehand they are nearly almost caught eventually - they're just so sloppy and erratic - and, when asked about their kills, most give an even more twisted logic behind them than even the average serial killer. Gein wanted a woman's suit, Chase claimed he committed his atrocities because he needed to prevent Nazis from turning his blood into powder via poison they had planted beneath his soap dish.

This form of intelligence also seems in constant battle with the psychological issues these killers have. After all if it weren't for his serious narcissism BTK killer Rader might never have been caught...but he had such a drive to prove his greatness he stupidly contacted police and press again after years of staying off the radar and, from that contact, police were able to discover who he was. Bundy, likewise, seemed to let his smugness get the better of him when he allowed a cop to search his trunk when his kill-kit was still inside it. Because of their severe personality impairments killers sometimes seem incapable of thinking logically when they (and most anyone else) would which makes assigning killers a set ranking in logical-mathematical intelligence rather difficult if not impossible.

Killer IQ Part 3: A Way With Words

2009-10-26T19:12:00.000-04:00

The third category of intelligence according to Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences is verbal-linguistic which involves using words, spoken and written. Those who rank high on this form of intelligence are typically skilled at reading, writing, and in using words whether it's to tell stories or recall words and dates. Learning is done via listening to lectures, taking notes, reading, and through discussing and debating with others. This form of intelligence makes individuals that rank high in it good teaching, explaining, speech making, and persuading others through speaking...it also implies a skill at playing "word games" (understanding and being able to manipulate words, syntax, and structure).

Wicked Wordsmiths

Dennis Rader, aka The BTK Killer, fancied himself a poet...no, seriously. In one of the many letters (this one sent in 1978) he wrote to police and press he suggested "POETIC STRANGLER" as a possible name that he could be referred to as and also enclosed a poem of his. Now whether or not the poetry was any good is hard to say - art is in the eye of the beholder and all - but there's no doubt Rader was a word-oriented person and and he's not the only serial killer to use words to his own advantage.

Zodiac also did his fair share of corresponding via letters with the press and police as well and he even added his own creative spelling ("Christmass" instead of "Christmas", "Fry" instead of "Fri", the abbreviation for Friday) and punctuation (which was to not have much). Part of this could, of course, just be an effort on the part of the killer to have a flair, so to speak, but either way he's playing with words and their meanings just like a person who'd scale high on verbal-linguistic intelligence might.

But even for those killers who don't write letters to law enforcement or the press, it would seem that a great many do fairly well with activities involving this intelligence. Provided the killer isn't a blitz-attacker or simply waves a gun in the victims face with orders to obey it's likely they rate as good as the average person...and some possible better than average. Both ruses, which require the creation of a story, and being able to be discounted as a suspect after being interviewed by authorities (recalling names, dates, and explaining your whereabouts along with lying aka "story-telling" to some, etc) would require skills related to this form of intelligence. In fact it's likely serial killers' potentially high ratings in this category is what's mistaken for interpersonal intelligence (the ability to deal with/relate to others)...they talk a good enough game to the everyday person that they can seem very sociable and, well, normal, when they're anything but. They know the textbook definitions and proper uses of words yet not the true meanings behind them but, in passing, that's enough to fit in and go unnoticed.

Survivor Sunday: Avoiding "Tricks" Tips

2009-10-25T19:19:00.000-04:00

Halloween is this upcoming Saturday and so, naturally, I'd like to do the safety tips now, before the holiday. Most, of course, have already been ingrained in every man, woman, and child's head but there might be a few that either have been overlooked, needed to be be updated for the times, or people heard so often they've stopped actually taking to heart. I'll be covering five that would fit into at least one of those categories.

Tip #1: Make Your Cell-Phone Part of the Costume

Even Batman carried around a cell-phone so dressing like him, or anyone else, doesn't mean to you can't bring yours. Yes, I'm sure that having a cell ring while dressed as a ninja could be a little awkward - and totally kill those stealth moves of yours - but it's better that than being out on the town, in trouble, and having no way to call for help. My advice is to work it into your costume somehow; whether it's attaching it to your "BatBelt", sticking it into a purse already adjusted to fit your costume (ladies), or even just using a really creepy ringtone for the night. If you can get a whole big costume together than you're more than creative enough to find a way to bring your cell-phone with you for safety's sake.

Tip #2: Pre-Plan Your Route

This, of course, is geared towards Trick-O-Treaters...especially those kids that might be old enough to go off with their friends to houses. There's actually a few reasons that this is a good idea, both in and outside of safety. Outside of safety the group you're with won't ever really have to stop the expedition throughout the neighborhood to debate which street to head down next, you'll already have it pre-planned. On the safety end it's good simply because people know where you'll be so, if something bad should happen, others will know where to look - along your route - and be able to work out from there. Along with this idea have an agreed upon time about which you'll return home (or to whatever end point is chosen from which you'll call adults in charge) so people - aka parents or guardians - know when to start worrying.

Tip #3 Treats Stay Outside!

Just like any other day of the calendar do not, under any circumstances, enter someone's house or car. There is no reason to. Any candy you're going to get you can get right there on the front porch (in front of witnesses) and any offers to come inside should be refused. As far as cars...well who hands out candy to random kids from their cars without some other ulterior motive? Keep your trick-or-treating to the the front porches of well-lit houses on your route.

Tip #4 Avoid Shortcuts

Shortcuts, especially those through unlit and unpopulated areas, are never a good idea. True they can get you to the house with the better candy faster, but they're also a great place for those of ill-intent to hide in wait for a victim. Quite simply, the risk isn't worth it. The possible urge to take shortcuts can be avoided if the tip to pre-plan your route is taken...in planning your route ahead of time you can find the best and fastest routes without having to even think about using shortcuts. ...Also included in shortcuts should be yards, driveways, and (visits to/cuts through) graveyards since they are also places where you don't know what (or, again, who) might be around.

Tip #5 Use Sidewalks

Obvious most any other time a great deal of folks forget this one on Halloween night. It's understandable, in a group of costumed individuals one might feel special and not required to follow the usual rules of the road because the cars will be looking out for you and other trick-or-treaters. While most will, yes, some might be coming back from a Halloween event of their own where they've been drinking (in other words: drunk drivers are around!) and, honestly, even the most careful and sober driver might have trouble seeing a kid dressed as a goblin all in black. In the end it's better to stick to sidewalks where you know you and your friends are safe and making sure to look out for cars while crossing roads like you'd normally do anyway.

Philia Friday: Transvestism

2009-10-23T19:13:00.000-04:00

Let's first start with a firm and clear statement: transvestites are not a violent group of people as a whole, cross-dressing is not an illegal activity nor should it be. It's a personal preference that may or may not have to do with the individual's sexuality. ...Of course now you're probably asking, with that disclaimer, why am I going to cover the topic at all? Because, frequently, serial killers have had some experience in transvestism whether they've wanted to or not. For the serial killer involved in transvestism it's usually a progression of sorts, their earliest, unwanted, encounters in cross-dressing leading them both to their desire to kill and cross-dress later.

Forced Into Frills

The idea of severe childhood abuse contributing in the creating a serial killer is common, probably because it often is the case. When child abuse is mentioned in this capacity thoughts of physical violence, sexual molestation, and extreme verbal abuse are the most common to pop up. There is another form of abuse that seems to occur frequently in the male killer's childhood and that is forced cross-dressing - being made to wear dresses, being referred to by female names, and even being presented to others under these circumstances. For this "form" of cross-dressing it's less about transvestism and more about the utter humiliation caused to the young, developing, male child forced to undergo it. At its bare-bones it's simply a creative form of child abuse perpetrated by the abuser.

Charles Manson had an uncle who sent him to school in a dress, Henry Lee Lucas's mother did the same. Carroll Edward Cole, aka "The Barfly Strangler", who murdered 16 people from 1948-1980 (the earliest being when he was just ten and drowned a classmate) in a number of states, also seemed to have a mother who forced him to dress like a girl. According to crimewriter Michael Newton, after forcing her son into frilly skirts and petticoats and the like, Cole's mother would make the boy serve her and her friends at tea parties where they would all mock him, sometimes referring to him as "mama's little girl." ...It's no wonder the man grew up to despise women!

Dress-Up Turns Deadly

None of the previously mentioned killers ever continued their cross-dressing into their adult years, however some other killers did. Hadden Clark was born to two parents of wealth and privilege (his mother could date her family back to the Mayflower and his father helped to invent Saran Wrap); something that is not only rare in the cases of serial killers but also the only real difference in his childhood from others who grow up to kill like he did. Despite that "leg-up" of money and a good name Clark's parents were alcoholics who, when drunk (which was most, if not all, the time) were vicious to each other and their children. When drinking the boy's mother would dress him as a girl and refer to him as Kristen and, as a man, Clark retained the alias of Kristen Bluefin...one can only assume that the alias came directly from his mother's "nickname" for him.

As he grew up Clark was disturbed at best...continuing the early forced cross-dressing and frequently identifying himself as female as a result of the childhood abuse was, in fact, the least of his bizarre adult behaviors. Clark, who most often worked as a chef, was recorded as urinating in the mashed potatoes of customers he disliked and/or felt had slighted him, chugging down beef's blood, and masturbating in front of his little niece in 1986. It was as he packed after getting kicked out for the last behavior that his first of two confirmed kills (he claimed there were more, but none of the others were confirmed) occurred...that of six year old, Michelle Dorr. The little girl showed up looking for the niece when Clark stabbed and killed her with one of his chef knives. After failing in his attempt to have sex with the body, he ate some of the flesh before putting the child in a duffle bag and burying the cargo in a shallow grave in a nearby park.

His second kill occurred in 1992 and more closely related to his transvestism as well as his fast deteriorating mental state. This time he went after the daughter of a woman he was gardening for, a recent college grad named Laura Houghteling. In the middle of the night Clark, dressed entirely as a woman (wig, blouse, slacks, and even a purse), he snuck into the young woman's room with a .22-caliber rifle as a weapon. He woke the girl up demanding to know what she was doing in his bed and forcing her to admit that he, in fact, was Laura and she was just some impostor. At gunpoint he then made her undress and bathe before covering her face entirely in duct tape, killing her via suffocation in the process. Once dead Clark then used scissors to cut off the young lady's earlobes, carried her body and bloodied bedding into his truck, and buried her in a shallow grave.

Clark was immediately suspected of the murder of Laura Houghteling and arrested when a bloody pillowcase he'd kept as a souvenir was found with his fingerprints on it. While in prison for that murder he confessed to killing little Michelle to his cellmate and then later brought police to her body. As recently as 2000 Clark agreed to show law enforcement other sites where he claims he's committed murders...provided they bought him a wardrobe for a woman at Kmart and he could wear the clothes while helping the officers, of course. Dressed in an outfit that included bra, panties, wig, and skirt Clark escorted the lawmen over a few states (including Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts) and to land in Cape Cod once owned by his grandfather where a bucket of approximately two hundred pieces of women's jewelry - including some owned by Laura - was found. Clark claims they were all trophies of kills, whether or not that's the case is debatable though since only the remains of the two kills covered here have ever been found to date.

Killer IQ Part 2: The Empathy Issue

2009-10-23T10:53:00.000-04:00

The next category of intelligence according to Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences is interpersonal; it has to do with interacting with other people. Those who rank high on this form of intelligence are generally outgoing, sociable, people who are greatly in tune with the emotions, motivations, and sociability of those around them. They learn best working in groups, can easily be leaders or followers depending on the situation, and enjoy discussion and debate.

Fake It Until You Make It??

It's pretty clear just from the definition that serial killers aren't likely to rank at all high on this intelligence. Interpersonally intelligent people are able to empathize with others while serial killers lack empathy (which is why they can do what they do to others). There is, however, a slight catch 22 in just writing these kinds of criminals off as virtual retards in this category and it's this...serial killers are generally known to make some of the best profilers and, to do that, logic dictates you'd need to understand those around you deeply. So how can they seem to have the possibility of ranking so low and so high at the same time? It probably partly lies under the idea of faking it until you make it and partly under the fact some of these guys (consciously or otherwise) know of their short-fallings in this form of intelligence and so study extra hard to fit in.

Let's first settle on the fact that empathy is normally developed naturally, though can be taught to small children ("you'd want the other children to share their toys with you" "you wouldn't want your brother/sister to bite you") up to a point. But once a person has entered adulthood either they have it or they don't. That being said there's a reason that, so frequently, when police find a bunch of dead bodies under the crawl space of Johnny's house the neighbors seem confused and horrified, proclaiming to press and police alike, "But he was such a nice/normal guy."...sociopathic personalities (such as those that serial killers have) can show a shocking amount of emotion deemed appropriate at the appropriate time when they have to. When claiming that childhood abuse caused them to kill or that they have remorse they will cry virtually on cue and this trick of faking emotions comes into interacting with people on a day to day basis as well as in the use of their ruses. Here's the rub though, and what disproves the "fake it until you make it idea"...those who really, truly, get to know these killers will tell you they're creeps. Family, exs, coworkers will all admit that Johnny kinda gave them the willies after awhile and, even if they didn't suspect the guy was a serial killer, they aren't all that surprised to find out he is.

Even with all those emotions and interactions essentially being faked there's still one other issue to contend with...the frequently heard statement that "serial killers make the best profilers". Assuming that statement is true then the serial killer would have to be highly skilled at understanding and being in tune with the emotions of others and thus would rate high in interpersonal intelligence. This is a tricky one because while serial killers do seem to have a rather great understanding of those around them it's really not all that deep...and it frequently takes them years and years of study to understand what comes to the average person naturally. And, even if and when they do understand others emotions, they only use it to their own personal advantage - "I want to hurt someone, raping and torturing them will do that" or "She seems upset I killed her son, perhaps I should act the same way to get off on the murder charge?". All the studying in the world won't get these killers to really rate high in this intelligence because everything about them (feelings-wise) is fake, anything learned is used to their own personal advantage, to help in meeting their own twisted goals, and so it's a lost cause...when it comes to interpersonal intelligence, without true empathy, these guys are all defectives.

Killer IQ Part 1: Using Bodies to Their Best

2009-10-20T16:38:00.000-04:00

There is the belief, thanks in great part to the entertainment industry, that serial killers aren't just bright individuals but evil geniuses. It's an understandable assumption sometimes considering how long these people can go on killing over and over without ever being caught...months, years, decades even. But rarely (if ever) are there any true genius, Hannibal Lector, types in the group and their intelligence overall depends greatly on how it's being determined. A great many serial killers would qualify as bright on some levels but downright stupid on others...take Ted Bundy; IQ of 124 or so (a rating of above average/bright) but caught because he let a police officer search his trunk where his rape & murder kit were.

Because the determination of intelligence is so tricky - killer or not - it might be a good idea to use different forms of intelligence rather than just straight IQ ratings. So, for the purposes of these forthcoming essays, let's review the 8 categories of intelligence as set forth by Howard Gardner in 1983's Theory of Multiple Intelligences and see how some (or at least the "garden variety" forms of) serial killers would rate...and then maybe we'll throw in IQ for good measure.

I Like the Way You Move

The first category is bodily-kinesthetic which has to do with, well, the body, how well someone can move, and even the ability to build or create physical objects. Those rated high in this form of intelligence tend to learn through doing and have good muscle memory - their bodies recall movements easily; when you perform all the steps to a dance over and over until it grows automatic that's muscle memory.

Gotta say, in this category, most serial killers probably rate pretty high. If they didn't their killings wouldn't succeed and there'd be far more survivors than victims. Not that serial killers are muscle men, pictures alone indicate "Greenriver Killer" Gary Ridgway probably would've lost most fights with men...but then he probably knew that and chose his victims and kill method accordingly. Knowing that, knowing his limits and adjusting for them in order to get the job done, alone makes him smart for this form of intelligence. Ridgway and other killers also seem to know how to use whatever physicality they have for maximum impact and make up for what they lack. Small killers who would loose a fight even to a woman might target children or use a blitz attack (sneak up and whack the victim upside the head) first to subdue the person. Have the urge to strangle a victim but lack the upper body strength? Use a belt, some kind of pulley system, or hang the person and let their own weight work against them as you watch the life leave their eyes.

As far as serial killer builders are concerned there's no end to the different kinds of contraptions of torture these guys have created...including that pulley system previously mentioned. But there is one serial killer that really was tops in this department...H. H. Holmes. In 1893, just in time for the Chicago World's Fair, Holmes opened his self created and built hotel of horrors later to be called the "Murder Castle". Yes, he did hire teams of builders since the job was so big, but it's highly likely certain rooms - such as the ones set up to become gas chambers - Holmes had to personally work on...otherwise he'd raise some eyebrows even before he got a chance to open for business, as it were. The fact he went to medical school and, in using his skills for darker purposes, frequently dissected, stripped the flesh from, and then pieced bones together into skeleton models of his victims also all speak to a high level of bodily-kinesthetic intelligence.

Survivor Sunday: The Dangers in Daylight

2009-10-18T17:58:00.000-04:00

Most people are fully aware and prepared for the dangers that come as the sun goes down. They lock their doors, set their alarms, and stay inside until the next day arrives. It's understandable; a great deal of crimes do occur at night with all those opportunities the cover of dark gives the criminal that can't be had when the sun's out. But that doesn't mean one's risk of becoming a victim leaves with the night so here are some tips to keep in mind to remain safe even in the sunlight:

Tip #1: Beware of Dusk and Dawn

These two times of day, where it's still or getting to be light out, frequently give people a false sense of security. Those early morning and late evening joggers become prime targets for just that reason...with their iPods rocking and concentration set on the run rather than their surroundings joggers are ripe for the kill. It's true that these times of the day are great opportunities to get a workout in without the hassle of other runners, but it's also true that the potential killer simply sees it as a time in which a target is available minus all those pesky witnesses. ...The tip? Either push your run times to where there will be more people around than just you (and a potential attacker) or run with some friends. The calories burned are the same no matter the time of day or the number of people out with you.

Tip #2: Midday Murders Happen

The sun is shining and people are out and about enjoying the fine midday weather. A guy, his arm in a sling, walks up to a pretty girl and asks if she could help him in unloading a sailboat from his car...he would himself but, well, the busted arm and all makes it hard for him to do all on his own. The pretty girl agrees and heads off with him...the pretty girl is never seen alive again. That was the story of Janice Ott and Denise Naslund from Lake Sammamish State Park in Issaquah, Washington...both victims of serial killer Ted Bundy on July 14, 1974. ...The tip? No matter the time of day it's deeply unwise to follow a stranger (even a seemingly handsome and somewhat crippled one) off somewhere alone. Don't be afraid to decline to help and suggest the person go in search of someone better able to help. If you really do feel the need to help there's always suggesting someone else for them ("I'm not strong enough to help, sorry, but that friggin' huge guy looks pretty capable") or asking others in the area to go with you and Mr. Sailor-In-Need ("The more the merrier, right?") If the person in distress moves on or declines your new offers then you're off the hook from the guilt of not helping and all the safer...of course if the guy does turn you down and appears to go off to the next available pretty lil' thing with the same story you might want to notify the nearest official (lifeguard, park ranger, cop, etc) that there's a guy that might to be in search of more than just a helpful hand walking around.

Tip #3: Secluded is Secluded, No Matter the Time

The title pretty much speaks for itself. Yes, I'm sure the national park or nice country road is lovely to walk down on a nice sunny day, but that doesn't mean it has to be walked alone people! Think of it this way, while you can better see the scenery an attacker can better see you, the lack of witnesses, and what he's doing. ...The tip? Bring some friends. None of the natural beauty of where you are will be lost if some friends join you in the appreciation of it; heck having friends along might increase your enjoyment because you're sharing the experience with those you know, care for, and trust. Remember, what can be enjoyed alone can often be better, and safer, enjoyed with others.

Tip #4: Go Ahead, Make A Scene

This is something that parents frequently teach their children but forget the importance of themselves; don't be afraid to make a scene. It's understandable that people fear that, if wrong in the threat assessment (or, even if correct, the threat level not being obvious to others), they will look strange, incredibly rude, or even crazy to others nearby...but kidnappers, car-jackers (the ones where they want you to stay in the car with them), and killers likely depend on this fact for their success at times. Take a tip from yourselves on this one, moms (and other older family members), and don't be afraid to scream, yell, hit, kick, and otherwise make as much noise and fuss as possible if some creep tries to grab or threaten you in attempts to take you somewhere you don't want to go. Better safe and thought crazy than be remembered fondly by those you loved and left behind.

Tip #5: Always Be Aware!

It would seem this essay is encouraging paranoia or hyper-vigilance, but that's not the case. The idea isn't to assume every person or circumstance is a threat, it's merely to be more aware in general. For the most part criminals aren't really all that invested in one specific victim, they're just going for the easiest mark and a good way from keeping from being that is to be aware of what's going on. Look around you, keep your headphones low enough so that you can still hear people, and avoid areas that look a little unsafe (i.e. secluded). Even if you're really not taking in that much look like you are. Look people in the eye, keep your head up, and give off the vibe of being fully in charge...killers are losers looking for an easy win, if you look like the type to fight they're going to move onto the next person. Also it never hurts to bring that herding mentality so frequently used in trips to the ladies' room into other aspects of life - smoking breaks, walks to the car (the last two in the group can park next to each other), and even taking the family out to the beach or park (this one gives moms and dads the added bonus of extra babysitters and helps with that whole "it takes a village to raise a child" ideal). The more aware you are of your surroundings the safer you are, enough said.

Philia Friday: Necrophilia

2009-10-16T19:04:00.000-04:00

Necrophilia, the cornerstone of every psycho it seems...and a damn creepy idea to the rest of us. After all who in the world would want to have sex with a dead person?! Well there are a number of different reasons, some more understandable or romanticized and others more ghoulish and, honestly, stomach-turning. Whatever the reason though it's pretty safe to say that this love/sexual preference/fetish is not the norm and likely (if not certainly) indicates some serious mental, emotional, and social problems in those that have it.

Romancing the Remains

The first category of those with this philia don't so much love the dead as they love the person so much when he or she was living that they sort of just take that last kiss goodbye a little too far. Famed American author, Ralph Waldo Emerson, confessed in his journal to be being so distraught over his young wife, Ellen's, death that shortly after she was buried he dug her back up. What he did after that is anyone's guess (he never said) but should he have done more than look he'd fall into this category.

On the far more grotesque end of love gone to the burial ground is that of Carl Von Cosel in 1930's Key West, Florida. The radiologist who worked at a sanitarium he fell deeply in love with a 22 year old patient of his, Maria Elena de Hoyos, and his love carried over into her death of tuberculosis. He snatched the young woman from her burial place and brought her back to his place to keep as his love, and lover, for the next seven years or so. Even as the woman's body began to discompose. Over the years Cosel was forced to use piano wire to hold her bones together, replace rotting skin with wax and silk, use glass eyes to replace ones long gone, and even insert a tube between her legs to have a "vagina" to continue having sex with her. When his activities were finally discovered and what was left of Maria Elena was returned to rest in peace Cosel continued to love, and lust after, her using a personalized sex doll in her place...when he died in 1952 he was found clutching said doll which had a death mask of his dearly departed on it.

Loser Lovin'

The next type of necrophile has a slight more, um, "open relationship" with the dead...still not violent but certainly not one to settle down with just one corpse as it were. It's with these folks that we tend to find those misbehaving morticians and gravediggers who get busy with those they're trusted to care for by loved ones. These types do love the dead, not because they're dead per say but because they can't say no. These men (there are some cases of female necrophiles but the vast majority are men) don't do so well with the living ladies - too shy, too weird, etc - and so turn to those that they're certain won't (can't) reject them.

Viktor Ardisson was a mortician and gravedigger who supposedly had sex with over a hundred of the dead - or, in some cases, at least parts of them. He was caught when the smell of a decomposing three-year-old girl, who'd he'd been performing oral sex on since digging her up, alerted neighbors enough to call the police. Also found at his place of residence was his "bride"...the severed head of a thirteen-year-old girl that he kept on his beside table and was known to kiss from time to time. (It's important to remember, despite the ages of the two defiled mentioned, Ardisson was not a pedophile - it was the fact they were dead, not their ages, that aroused the man.)

Another such corpse loving creep, Henri Bolt, was caught fast asleep after having dug up and had sex with a recently deceased ballerina. While on trial the judge commented that what Bolt had done was depraved to which Bolt was quoted as replying, "How would you have it? Every man to his own tastes. Mine is for corpses."

Deadly Desires

The final form of necrophile being covered is the dangerous, violent, killing kind. At the core these types are the same in that they use sex with the dead as another form of power over their victims. Frequently all that comes prior to the death - the rape, the torture, what have you - is all foreplay until the main act of killing. Once the victim is dead they want that one last form of "owning" their victim in performing some sort of sexual act upon them whether it be intercourse or giving or receiving sexual pleasure in some other manner.

Some big names in the serial killer world were involved in doing the dirty deed with the dead. Ed Kemper not only would rape his dead victims but also was said to have done so after decapitating one of them. The "Sunset Slayer" Douglas Clark (with the help of his girlfriend Carol Bundy) would pick up hookers for oral sex and then shoot them in the head during the act, climaxing with the now dead woman's mouth over his member - he kept one victim's head in the freezer as a morbid sex toy. And, after strangling his victims (thus leaving them with the common "Angel Lust" erection seen in strangulation cases), Jeffery Dahmer would perform oral sex on his victims...he was also known to cut the bodies open to have sex with the victim's innards.

...While mentioned at the start of this section these killers are the same at the core, there are subtle differences that are to be made. Those like Dennis Nilsen the murder was more just a means to an end; the end being a lover they have power over and that will never, ever, leave them. Others, like Ted Bundy and Andrei Chikatilo, the raping of corpses is just an extension of their sexual sadism, another way to completely dominate their victims. It will hardly matter to the victim's families, of course, but for those in law enforcement these small differences may help in catching the killer but also possibly getting them to confess and/or convicting them of their crimes.

Oh, the Places They Will (and Won't) Go!

2009-10-14T16:51:00.000-04:00

Ah geography, it can tell you so much...the history of a continent, the political and religious undertones of a country, social growth and expansion of a society...if there's a serial criminal in your neighborhood. One frequently used method in law enforcement is geographical profiling - basically studying the crimes as they relate to, well, geography - which can help to connect crimes and victims and narrow down a suspect pool.

Connecting the Dots

A series of couples are killed - some shot, some stabbed - in their cars and it is determined that there is, in fact, a serial killer on the loose. During this time, in the same general area, a lone cab driver is shot, his wallet and keys taken, and his shirt ripped. At first glance these two crimes are totally unrelated. Then..."This is the Zodiac speaking..."and what would've been thrown aside as a possible robbery of the cabbie gone violent suddenly becomes another victim of that ever elusive serial killer that's been terrorizing lower California. Now this is a rather extreme case in which geographical profiling would've at least encouraged a stronger look at the cabbie murder (after all, the shooting was in the same area Zodiac had been hunting) but that's what makes it a good example of how important examining the geography of crimes can help to connect apparent unrelated crimes. Naturally not ever crime committed in a five mile radius will be the doing of a single person, but certain crimes (burglaries and arsons especially) that occur close together do tend to be.

No Place Like Home

Aside from the lucky few with the money or profession to travel most killers stay local, close to home and work, while killing. It is appropriately called their comfort zone. This comfort zone offers a bunch of pluses for the killer, not in the least because they know the area - which means they know the best spots to snatch people from, places that they would be able to discreetly kill, and places to hide the bodies after they're done. There's also the fact that it's an area that the killer is fairly confident he won't be suspected. Who's going to think good ol' Hank from the bank is capable of multiple rape and homicide even if all those women just happened to be his bank's customers? Not many...at least not right off the bat anyway. Still, when n a bunch of folks go missing from the same bar, 10 block radius, or people start getting attacked in the same apartment buildings there's a good bet the same person may be responsible. A likelihood that increases if the crimes are the same or at least involve similar circumstances (i.e. all disappeared walking out to their car, getting off the bus to walk home, or on a jog).

Respect the Boundaries

Everyone has boundaries, even the criminal, and they can stick within them just like anyone else in the world...even when it doesn't appear so. From 1991-1999 (though 1997-1999 at it's high point) a killer crosses not just city and county lines but multiple state lines as well in order to kill his victims; of which there were somewhere between 15 and 24. At first glance it appears this killer is without boundaries at all, that he could strike anywhere because nothing holds him to any kind of set location, and his crossing all these jurisdiction lines is his clever way of making things more difficult for law enforcement - which, offhand, would make most consider him pretty darn clever. The sad, and slightly more disturbing, truth was that the man, Angel Maturino Resendez (aka The Railway/Railroad Killer), was just following the railroad tracks he illegally rode around the United States. In this case the boundaries by which the killer was held was how far he could get from the train tracks to find his victims (which he robbed and sometimes even stayed in the homes of after the kill) but still be able to easily hop back on the train out of town before he was caught...no wonder virtually all the crimes took place very close to the railroad tracks - 100 yards is the farthest I could find documented - any farther and he'd loose his ride!

With a good geographic profile law enforcement can link crimes and significantly narrow the search for a suspect. How the victims are being targeted and where the killer feels all comfy and cozy enough to do what he does can be revealed. While this alone isn't going to catch a suspect it certainly makes things one heck of a lot easier than the generalized panicked statement, "he could be anywhere!" that could otherwise be thrown around.

Survivor Sunday: The Myth of Males

2009-10-11T19:58:00.000-04:00

So, I'll be trying a little something different and special for weekends...Sundays will be "Survivor Sundays" which will give some (admittedly sometimes tongue-in-cheek) information on how to stay just a little safer, or at least a little more aware of potential danger. For the first try at this I'll be looking at male-victimhood and how the idea that men can't, or are rarely, victims of serial killers is a big ol' myth. Beware boys!

Myth #1: Men aren't really victims of serial killers.

Au contraire mon fraire, they most certainly are! The reasons they become victims are varied, some are just the guy between the killer and the girl while others are, in fact, very much the target. Their murders just happen to be seriously downplayed or overlooked. A series of murders in which the victims are all gay men strangled to death may be attributed to a series of lover's spats or sexual encounters turned violent without a connection ever being made. And a woman who loses a few hubbies might be considered to just have terrible luck instead of being a suspect.

Myth #2: The men that are victims, aren't victims of serial sexual homicide.

It's cute to think that, but also totally wrong. Anyone remember Jeffery Dahmer? He murdered 17 males between 1978-1991; murders that included a number of sexually charged acts beside the kill itself - such as rape, torture, dismemberment, necrophilia and cannibalism. Even without those sexually charged acts Dahmer's own quote concerning what he did makes it a sexual homicide: "I would cook [the body], and look at the pictures and masturbate." He killed, it got him off, so Dahmer was very much committing serial sexual homicide and his victims were exclusively male.

Myth #3: Only gay men are victims of those types of murders.

Not at all. True Dahmer targeted gay men...but then he was a gay man himself and it was simply very easy for him to pick up a gay guy at a bar, bring him back home for sex, and then attack. Honestly the victim's sexuality has little to do with whether or not they're a victim...it's more about the sexuality, or apparent sexuality, of the killer. John Wayne Gacy, bisexual, killed straight men - straight men to keep up an appearance of heterosexuality in the community. He frequently offered his targets jobs to lure them to his place where he would then ply them with liquor and (straight) porn to get their guard down before attacking.

Myth #4: Men can fight off their attacker.

Well so can women, but that doesn't always mean they'll win. Just like the serial killer targeting women the serial killer targeting men is going to pick the guy he's pretty sure he can take. The little guy's a pretty frequent target, so's the overly drunk or drugged (which can happen before or after the victim and killer meet). A killer might also blitz attack first - it's kind of hard to fight back if you're smashed over the head with a bat beforehand - to ensure they have total control. The killer wants to be successful no matter the victim he chooses so he'll do just about anything to make sure he is.

Myth #5: Men only have to fear female serial killers who are "black widows".

One name, two words: Aileen Wuornos. She shot and killed seven men, all of whom were her "johns". Think of it this way...it's a little hard to avoid becoming the victim of a female killer with your pants down and a gun in your face.

Sex and the Serial Killer Part 5: The Aftermath

2009-10-05T17:10:00.000-04:00

Due to the topic of this essay let me first note that things may get a little graphic, please be advised. This is the fifth and final in this series of essays comparing George "The Reaper" Foyet of Criminal Minds (and other killers who commit sexual homicide) to the average male...Please remember that while I have done research on this what's written is still my rather unprofessional opinion and open for debate. For the purposes of the essay the aftermath stage will cover what occurs after sexual release for the average male and the kill for those committing sexual homicide.

The Aftermath

Whether a typical guy or a serial killer what's felt and done in the aftermath depends a great deal on how the act stage worked out. Did it live up to the fantasy? Or was it just one great big disappointment?? Of course it also depends on logistics as well.

~ Average Joe ~

It could very well all depend on whether or not the sex was enjoyable. Let's say that it was everything that was imagined and more...in that case, if able, the man may decide to spend the rest of the night with his lover. He may engage in sex again later or simply remain content sleeping with his lover in his arms. Should he have to leave due to logistics he's likely to call and arrange another meeting (whether it be a date or "booty call") at another time. If sex was not enjoyable he may create an excuse to leave right after or catch a nap (if he's tired and the bed's there, why not?) and then leave. Rarely, if ever, is the average guy turned off from sex as a whole after a bad experience...instead they're simply turned off from the girl herself and so move on to pursue another woman.

~ The Killer ~

Let me first say...no serial killer who commits sexual homicide is completely satisfied with the act stage. The act itself can never really live up to their fantasy and this is one of the reasons they kill again and again; they're trying to perfect a fantasy and, as most anyone can tell you, nothing is completely perfect. That being said they can be reasonably satisfied enough to feel mighty good about themselves after. However, unless the murder occurred somewhere the killer is ensured privacy and it's his preference, it's highly unlikely he'll just nap by the body afterwards. Instead he might have a whole lot of practical issues to deal with - clean-up, body disposal, and getting himself a damn fine alibi are all top priorities. Foyet of Criminal Minds was mighty clever in avoiding most these troubles when making himself the victim though. First, in the crime where he was the "victim", he didn't have to worry much about any those things save making sure his prints weren't on the knife and the knife wasn't still in the area enough to be suspicious...after all, his blood and fingerprints would naturally be all over the crime scene, he was supposedly a victim! And, after that crime, it's unlikely he was ever going to be suspected of the future or past murders - everyone thought him to just be the very lucky computer geek who got away and Foyet played the part masterfully, it's unlikely any officer asked brave little Foyet his whereabouts on the nights of any the crimes. Dumping bodies would've defeated his purposes of causing panic over a city, enough of a panic that he got the lead detective in the case the first go-around to fold and take a deal to stop hunting him, so that was another logistic Foyet didn't have to concern himself with much. He'd still have had to do clean-up though, even in the Reaper uniform that covers most his body, but that's still just one of three concerns he'd have had to deal with.

How a killer celebrates his little triumph over their victim in a sexual homicide varies; some take souvenirs from their victims, some take pictures of their victims, some return home to remember the crime and get off on it (either again or for the first time, with or without a partner), and some just go out for a nice meal. But let's focus on the souvenirs; they are usually taken for two reasons. One, so the killer can look at them later and relive the kill in his head...just like the average joe might buy a souvenir if he went on vacation with a loved one or even one average joe might buy for his love to wear later. (Normal: go to the tropics, buy the love a nice necklace, get a little rush remembering that night of love-making on the beach. Killer: kill a bitch, take her necklace from the dead body, give it to wifey to wear and get a little rush remembering the kill.) The second, to show off! Average guy works hard and gets trophies or a nice pen from his job, killer puts in the effort to kill and feels he does a good job he might just get himself his own trophy in the form of something belonging to the victim. And, like average joe, he might just show it off at his home, job (the one outside his killing, if he has it), or again having his significant other unwittingly wear it, and get his jollies at his seeming cleverness. Foyet seems to play with these ideas to up the ante of fear at large...He takes something from a victim which he keeps to relive the crime (he may use it as a trophy, wear something of a victim's, but that's not likely since he cut himself off from most while playing victim so he'd have virtually no one to show and he seems a bit smarter than that) until his new murder where he sort of exchanges his old souvenir for a new one, the old souvenir becoming a taunt and way of linking his crimes together to show law enforcement (and press) that he's still very much a threat.

Sex and the Serial Killer Part 4: The Act

2009-10-04T00:15:00.000-04:00

Due to the topic of this essay let me first note that things may get a little graphic, please be advised. For the average male the act as a stage covers the end of foreplay up to and including orgasm; for the killer committing the actual murder or whatever specific act pre or post that which brings him to orgasm qualifies as the act stage. (For those that get their sexual gratification post crime, like David "Son of Sam" Berkowitz, it'll be whatever part of the crime they're thinking about when sexual release occurs.)

The Act

From the end of the foreplay stage to orgasm really isn't that long; just a moment or so of pure bliss. But it is, generally, pure bliss...something that a person will want to experience again and again...and again. Whether it's with the same person or not is a matter of preference. So is, exactly, what pushes the person over the edge and into orgasm.

~ Average Joe ~

Some men can get off through just intercourse with their partner; some simple adjustments in pace and force of thrusts and they're all good. Though there's the possibility that the lovers' positions will need to be changed or even the form of sex act (vaginal, oral, anal, etc) itself must be differed. Others, however, might require an extra special something else to push them over the edge. Frequently these are things that have started during foreplay and are then done with increased frequency (and/or pressure and/or speed depending on what it is) as orgasm gets closer. For some men it's a phrase or word or even just a sound from their partner and for others it's a certain "move" - stroking or pulling of the hair, soft kiss or bite of the neck, etc - they or their partner makes that sends them over the edge. Of course it could also just be the look of love, attraction, and arousal in their lover's eyes that causes the man to climax...feeling so good that they gave their partner so much pleasure. Whatever it is that pushes them to the moment of orgasm, when it occurs, it's an incredible release of pressure that'd been building since the first stage of the fantasy.

~ The Killer ~

Similar to the average male some killers are just fine getting themselves off with the straight up act; just the kill by however method they might prefer (the preference can be part of the fantasy or simply because one method is easier than another for the killer). But most need a great deal more than that...probably because they have a richer fantasy stage than any normal person would. Generally they need to act out a whole scenario, one that's started (in action) in the foreplay stage. However, like the average joe, there can still be one thing that really sends them over into ecstasy. For some it's the look of utter terror in their victims (like with Foyet who, once seeing it, kills with the final thrust of the knife or pull of the trigger) and others it's the blood and/or tears they cause to seep, ooze, or pour out of their victims. Still others it's actually something that occurs after the murder itself - like the mutilation of the victim's body or a provocative pose they put the body in postmortem, for instance. No matter what it is, exactly, that brings the killer to climax it's the power they feel over their victim that's at the core...it's this feeling of power, of control over another human being, that is what's so arousing to these killers. And, like with the typical male, the moment of orgasm is an incredible release of pressure that'd been building since their fantasy phase started in their youth.

Sex and the Serial Killer Part 3: The Foreplay

2009-10-01T17:28:00.000-04:00

Due to the topic covered in this essay let me first note things may get a little graphic...both as I cover the average male and as I cover the killer who commits sexual homicide. (Also, at the end of this essay, the serial killer George "The Reaper" Foyet's attack on FBI Agent Aaron "Hotch" Hotchner will be posted. It, like much of this essay, is very much a spoiler for the season 5 premiere of Criminal Minds.) For the average male foreplay will cover from that first kiss to sexual activity for the sole purpose of orgasm (as opposed to arousal). For the killer it'll cover the moment he reveals his "true self" to the victim and the violent activity done for the sole purpose of killing the victim.

The Foreplay

Ah, foreplay, the beginning of measurable pleasure that can last a few minutes or even hours if paced right. That is the main point in foreplay, to build up the arousal between (presumably) two people....to get the juices flowing, so to speak. Which "juices" flow and why however depend on if it's two lovers or a killer and his victims.

~ Average Joe ~

It starts, typically, with a kiss...that first kiss, accompanied by that first moan from his lover, is likely even to get the heart to start pumping. Kisses, soft and sweet to start, quickly build into something more demanding from both lovers. Hearts start to pickup their pace and breathing begins to grow heavy with anticipation. Joe shrugs his jacket from his body as his female companion steps out of her shoes. By the time they reach the bedroom shirts have been untucked and, as she lets herself tip back onto the bed, Joe goes to remove his own shirt. He then moves to get on top his lover, return to kissing her and letting his hands explore her body. His body heats next to hers and her reactions - the labored breathing, the moaning, that look of pleasure in her eyes - all work together to make Joe's blood pound through his body in excitement. As more clothes are shed by both parties and more access to one another's bodies is allowed Joe may begin to feel himself getting further aroused, his member swelling and hardening with desire. Noting his arousal, seeing it, feeling it, may cause his mate's own to increase to the point where she is sufficiently lubricated enough to allow him to enter her which, in turn, may increase Joe's and thus a cycle begins...a cycle that progresses with penetration and into the next stage, The Act.

Depending on the couple there may also be different methods used to arouse one another or simply to prolong the foreplay. Roleplaying (with or without costumes), sex toys (vibrators and such), changing pacing or position of the lovers, and even just starting up only to stop, cool down, and start up again during intercourse are all possibilities.

~ The Killer ~

It starts, typically, with the killer revealing his true intentions....that first reaction his victim gives when she realizes she's made a terrible mistake in trusting him and her fear begins to show. Like the first moan for the average guy the first gasp or tear from a victim can be intoxicating to the killer. The killer's heart begins to pump faster, his breathing can grow labored, and his urge to get more fearful, more pained, reactions grows. The victim's heart rate may also increase, her breathing may also labor, though obviously for very different reasons as she's progressing from scared, to terrified, to both terrified and in pain. If stabbed the victim may begin to scream, cry, and moan in pain, all of which, including her blood flowing and looking up at her attacker in fear is likely to cause the killer to begin to feel himself start to swell and harden into a full-on erection. At this point, depending on the killer, he may rape the victim or simply to build up his own lust (and her terror) by torturing her with increasing cruelty and depravity. ...A word on rape: For the killer committing sexual homicide rape is really just a means to an end...it's just another way to increase the killer's feeling of power over their victim.

Depending on the killer certain techniques and implements might be used (rape, in sexual homicide, falls into this category). Foyet himself uses a number of different things to manipulate, terrorize, and gain control over his victims. He uses a costume, his "Reaper" appearance of all black and his mask that serves to immediately intimidate his victims, which often times is accompanied by a gravely voice (both are likely also used to avoid potential identification). There are at least two weapons he uses, a gun and his knife, both of which are used for a few purposes during his killer foreplay - increase the fear in his victims, gain control of his victims, and cause his victims pain. And, of course, there was also his offering of a deal which, in and of itself, was a way for him to exude power and control and get off at the expense of law enforcement.

In Foyet's attack on Hotch the comparison between normal foreplay done by two lovers and the twisted version a killer may engage in with his victim is really driven home in a number of ways. He strips himself from the waist up, proudly showing Hotch his scarred chest and asking the agent if he liked them (the scars)...though a great deal of this reads as a man showing off his body to his lover during normal foreplay. Also, rather than find a position that might make his stabbing of the agent easier, Foyet chooses a far more intimate one by straddling and laying over Hotch's body as a lover might. The stabbings themselves (outside the first two which seem more to subdue) are slow, purposeful, and rather clearly intended for Hotch to feel every inch of the blade. Each time Hotch's body is seen tightening enough that he arches some (different circumstances this would appear as a sexual act, one lover arching his/her back while the other enters them) and Foyet studies the agents face seeming to drink up the looks of pain. When Foyet speaks, more often than not, he is using a smooth, low, and almost disturbingly soft voice - one a man might use as he whispered those "sweet nothings" into his girl's ear. As the scene progresses both men begin to develop a sheen of sweat and have greater difficulty breathing; Hotch from physical strain and Foyet, presumably, from his growing arousal. Clever little deviant that he is Foyet himself brings up the fact that profilers believe stabbing is a substitute for the sex act and that done when a killer is impotent then suggests that this attack will change the way Hotch profiles before going to stab the agent somewhere on his body that is off-screen (presumably around or below the waist) giving a soft grunt as he does. At this point the scene cuts out and nothing more on the attack is shown but there's been great speculation as to what happened next. Let me say now that I have my own theories (some of which I've already shared) but, in the end, it hardly matters...Foyet is shown to be rather clearly aroused in some way during the attack and that alone makes it a sexualized attack and, should Hotch have died, it would've qualified as a sexual homicide. But, instead, Hotch did not and, I'm sure, Foyet will continue his twisted foreplay with Hotch for as long as he can - even if only vicariously (by forcing Hotch to send away his family, his son) or from afar (he's disappeared again, but I'm sure he'll keep tabs on Hotch).

The attack as it was filmed on the show (courtesy of CBS via YouTube):

Sex and the Serial Killer Part 2: The Seduction

2009-09-29T19:51:00.000-04:00

For the purposes of this paper the seduction under the normal (i.e. not sexual homicide committing) circumstance will occur in the span of one night out...because it's not like a serial killer really gets the chance to re-attack a victim once he's killed her.

The Seduction

Let's assume the average Joe has finally worked up the courage to ask out that special girl and she's said yes. For the purposes of comparison the interaction from then until, let's say, the walk to the door that would normally be considered the end of the date all include seduction. Once he begins the seduction it starts, at its bare bones, with how the man appears. He'll be clean, well shaven, and dressed to impress...whether this is in a suit or something else depends on both the girl he's trying to attract and the circumstances of date. After appropriate appearance comes behavior and interaction. Wanting to make a good impression a man on a date may do a number of things...open doors, pay for meals, offer his coat, and walk her to her door after. ...Those more into "picking up" women than dating them may also use pick-up lines, special move or ploys (like those involving a "wing-man"), or even wear certain clothes to vastly accentuate something they consider a good aspect of themselves and distract from more negative ones (aka "peacocking"). Whatever tactics are used the goal is ultimately the same, to get the young woman to feel comfortable, even enamored with him, enough to trust and get close to him.

With serial killers, Foyet or otherwise, the goal of seduction stage is almost disturbingly similar...actually it's pretty much the same. A serial killer wants to lower a persons defenses enough so they can get close. Like the average gentleman it starts with their appearance. What they decide to look like depends greatly on what they think will work best to attract the type of victim they wish (assuming they have a preference) and their hunting grounds. A nice suit will work wonders in trolling for victims around an upscale neighbor or in a business district where the killer can mix in with those getting off work. Going into a lower socioeconomic part of society? Jeans and a tee shirt might just do the trick. And, if they want to get fancy, pretending to be disabled or putting on some kind of uniform (police officer, repairman, etc) can work wonders. Presuming they're not drooling, staring like a complete psycho, or making a big scene they've got the correct behavior down just fine. After that there's the "pick-up" line which can usually be any of a number of things including, "Need some help?" "Can you help me?" "Repairman!"and "Hey, wanna see my puppy?" Once the person falls for whichever ruse (basically the killer's version of a seduction) the killer has used and gets close enough frequently they're just a knock on the head away from victimhood after that.

Foyet himself was shown using two ruses while hunting, though it's likely there was a third not shown to get into Hotch's building (I am not including his ruse of a victim since it wasn't used to get near victims but to avoid capture). For the first one he was just an average driver on the road offering help to a couple who'd gotten a flat, for the second he played at being a traffic cop pulling a couple over. The third was likely that of portraying FBI Agent Derek Morgan, colleague of Hotch, by using the man's credentials previously stolen...he later did pretend to be Morgan when dropping off Hotch after stabbing and, well, torturing the man so it stands to reason he'd have used it should he needed a way to enter Hotch's building and possibly even the apartment itself (if someone, like the superintendent or maintenance man, had let him in rather than him having picked a lock or used an open window).

Sex and the Serial Killer Part 1: The Fantasy

2009-09-27T00:36:00.000-04:00

In the premiere of the fifth season of Criminal Minds there is a scene in which a killer (George "The Reaper" Foyet) and agent (SSA Aaron "Hotch" Hotchner) face off...not a surprise, of course. What seems to be though is how quickly the interaction becomes almost disturbingly intimate once the killer is able to get the upper hand. ...However, for a serial killer, it just might be the norm...after all their torture is frequently our foreplay. And their sex? It's that lovely little moment when they kill their victim, when they have all the power, and when they can believe they are God.

For the purposes of this larger piece I'll be breaking down the sexual homicide - which, had Hotch died, would've been what Foyet committed according to its definition (it doesn't require actual, obvious, sexual behavior at the scene...all it requires is the killer to "get off" in relation to the crime) - into stages that relate to the standard sexual interaction. There's the fantasy, the seduction, the foreplay, the act, and the aftermath.

The Fantasy:

Of course, the average person doesn't suddenly go from normal sexual appetites to the macabre ones over night...no matter what a serial killer might claim later. No demon enters their body, nor do they suddenly "snap" and go about getting their jollies killing others. Ever found yourself suddenly having sex with another person for no particular reason and having never even thought about that person sexually before? Didn't think so. Serial killers and those committing sexual homicide fantasize beforehand just like everyone else. Fantasy is a key element to the killer throughout his life...both before, during, and after the kill and during his "cooling-off" phases.

~ In Development ~

Like a person developing a normal (i.e. not a killer's for the purposes of this piece) sexuality it's a slow, steady, process that leads up to their committing sexual homicides. For the serial killer the fantasy starts early and there is almost always a linkage of sex and violence....and those two things forever represent the same thing to them...Power! Little boys (for simplicity's sake we'll stick with male serial killers throughout the piece) who grow up to be killers frequently recall having early childhood thoughts about violent sex acts. They dream of dead people or force their siblings into playing death/murder games with them...something I seriously doubt their siblings are all that excited to play. As the budding killer gets older his fantasies grow in scope, number, and specificity...and the amount with which he is aroused grows as well. And, while the average teenage Johnny is masturbating to thoughts of Jane down the lane coming out of the pool dripping wet, the serial-killer-to-be Tommy is masturbating to thoughts of Jane covered in blood weeping for the mercy he won't give her (because HE has the power not to).

Using the previously mentioned Foyet from Criminal Minds as a comparison we can show the difference. Because not enough is known (yet at least) about Foyet's past it's hard to say what fantasies he had, but studies show they'd be in line with little Tommy and speculation can be fun so let's, shall we? Perhaps little George Foyet liked scaring his peers into crying and wetting themselves? Maybe he would have siblings or other children in the neighborhood join him in a (a)rousing game of psycho slasher? It's even possible that he could've hurt himself intentionally - considering the character, it's not impossible - just to fulfill his fantasies and get himself off. Once little George isn't so little maybe he began to masturbate to thoughts of stabbing young girls (I say young girls because he's defined as a hebephile meaning his sexual preference is for those about 11-14 years old) or the fear in a person's eyes if he were to shove a gun in their face.

~ In Action ~

Now the average young man will probably spend a few days thinking and planning before asking a girl out. He'll debate how to approach her, what to say when he does, and try to figure out all the ways in which he can increase the likelihood of getting her to say yes. He'll imagine what will happen when he does ask her...Will she smile? Be flattered? Say yes, she'd love to, and really always liked him but was too shy to ask him out herself? Even for those men only aiming to sleep with a girl he met at a club the idea of fantasizing beforehand fits. The approach, what's said, ways to get the girl's agreement, and her possible reaction are all played out in the guy's mind...there just might not be as prolonged period between the fantasy and the seduction stages. The everyday guy will probably go through his fantasy scenario with the girl a fair amount of times...but never as much as a killer.

A serial killer like Foyet would be no different in thinking and planning for his kills. He'll picture himself driving up on his victims, maybe after pulling them over or offering them help with a flat, and imagine what they'd be like. A trusting, young, couple, perhaps? He'll think of a possible way to lower any nerves they might have being out on that lonely highway with him so that, when the fear that he needs to see does come, it'll be that much stronger in their eyes. And, of course, Foyet will consider every possible reaction his victims might give - the screaming, the crying...will they be stunned at seeing his weapons? Will they call out for their "Mommies"? How many times can he stab (most frequently) her before she succumbs to blood loss and the life finally leaves her eyes? In many cases Foyet might have to do some prep work as well and this would go into the fantasy stage - whether it were considering the tools he'd need for his rouse, how long he could torture a person before time ran out (he was spotted, the victim died, etc), and for his attack on Hotch how to slip in and out of a victim's apartment without ringing any alarms would need to be thought out as well. Before he even steps out of his house as The Reaper, Foyet, like other serial killers and those who commit sexual homicide, will have gone over every single detail in his mind probably a million times or more.

Before There was George "Reaper" Foyet...

2009-09-20T22:09:00.001-04:00

...On CBS's Criminal Minds there were some other, real life, serial killer's making their demands in wirting as well. Some were specific, others not, some were normal in the range serial killer desires, others a little odder, but it was ALL about the power. After all, it's what these men lack most in their everyday lives...power, control, and a general "by George, I've made something of myself" type attitude. And so, by having those around him (especially those actually in power) obey them they get another form of the rush they get in killing - power!!

The first, chronologically (for these purposes at least), would be Jack the Ripper and his "Dear Boss" letters; one of which was actually a postcard (perhaps he was busy that day?). These not only mocked the police ("They say I'm a doctor now. ha ha.") but also requested in the first that police hold off sharing the letter until he'd done a little more killing..."Keep this letter back till I do a bit more work, then give it out straight." The reason isn't given, just the request. ...Of course we're going on the assumption dear Jack wrote these, because Mr Ripper was never caught and so much myth has mixed with fact the letters cannot be completely proven to have been written by him.

Now let's move onto The Zodiac Killer and his delight in suggesting that, should his demands not be met, he'd pick off those little kiddies coming off the school bus. Now he had a few different demands, wanting all of California jumping through hoops for him. Something he damn near got at times! Whether it was involving the readers of the San Francisco Examiner in what would probably be one of the more disturbing word puzzles known to man thanks to his threat of a killing rampage is his cipher wasn't printed or getting the good citizens of the Bay Area to wear his nifty Zodiac symbol buttons...imagine the rush he got from that! Not only could he see people obeying him as he walked the streets but each button worn was like an advertisement in terror...terror brought on by him.

For something just a touch more recent let's look at the BTK Killer, Dennis Rader. He was a little more with the boasting than the demanding in his letters but he still made at least one. He wanted a name...apparently, after killing seven women, he felt he'd earned one. One of his suggestions "Poetic Strangler"; the man wrote poetry which, apparently, he felt made him poetic. Of course, unlike the other two, BTK's need to babble about the wonders of his kills and the ineffectiveness of the cops ended up being what got him caught in the end, a full 30 years after he'd started (his killings ran from 1974-1991, but it was a 2004 letter he sent that did him in).

And now back to Criminal Minds baddie, The Reaper. He demanded that law enforcement stop hunting him and, in return, he'd stop killing...a rather unusual request really. Serial killers do love their power and control over others and, yes, getting those pesky Feds and cops to stop under their command would be a thrill and a half but there is a small problem. Why on Earth request something like that if it's what you love the most, the one thing that makes you feel good? It's suggested by Hotch that killing just didn't do it for him anymore and hence the deal made but, if that were completely true, it's likely he'd try something new first, see if maybe it was the MO that got tired for him; maybe give strangling a go or try hunting on one of the many Boston campuses available. He didn't, he went to deal making and then, after the deal was forfeited in the lead detective's death, the good ol' Boston Reaper skipped right back to those couples on the highway, shooting, stabbing, and bludgeoning them to death. So then...why make that deal?? Maybe Foyet's a rare (ie only found on TV and in movies) breed, that's highly likely, or maybe he expected the lead detective after him to do exactly what Hotch did - tell him to go to hell. After all that would defuse any blame on him - "I would've stopped, but that SOB didn't take the deal! Blame him!" - and make him feel he had every right to kill in retaliation, which he did after Hotch hung up on him by taking out a bus full of people. We'll probably never know, unless he explains it to Hotch while attacking the agent in his own home, but let's hope whatever Foyet wants he fails to get.