Serial killers, psychopaths etc

[pennydreadful]

Originally Posted by Prowler

What I find it odd is how people are usually quick to point the weirdest person in the room to be a future murderer or rapist, and then when you watch journalists on tv interviewing the neighbors and friends of a murderer or a rapist all of them say "I never expected this. He was such a nice guy. A great father and husband who got along with everyone!"

Originally Posted by FoxBoxKid

Yeah, sociopaths are good at faking emotion.

This - people like Bundy and Gacy were well-thought of by their peers and community because sociopaths are known for having a great deal of charm (albeit at a glib, superficial level).

On the other hand, you've got Dahmer, who was not particularly socially functional and was very quiet and withdrawn.

What's fascinating about serial killers is that there are so many different sub-categories. Some of them are highly organized - like Gacy or Ivan Milat; they're methodical in planning out their hunt, choosing a victim, the body disposal etc. Then you've got the disorganized serial killers like Richard Ramirez or Ottis Toole, where there's minimal planning, victims are chosen at random and there's little effort made to cover up the crime. Disorganized serial killers tend to differ significantly from organized serial killers in that they have lower IQs and are obviously antisocial (for example, poor hygiene and scruffy appearance, unemployed, minimal effort made to fake normal human emotions etc).

Both disorganized and disorganized types are antisocial and psychopathic, but the psychology and behaviors displayed by the two generally have significant differences.

Not only that but then you have the additional sub-categories where there's further ground for psychological exploration; you've got your necrophiles, 'angel of death'/medical killer types, sexual sadist/torture-murderers, cannibalistic murderers, black widows...

There's this myth that serial killers are all these reclusive, dysfunctional losers, and generally, they aren't - they look just like us, they hide among us. In a way, they're the ultimate bogeyman because they're the real thing.

[Prowler]

I've always assumed that most serial killers consider their actions nothing more than a mere game. And the higher their kill count gets, the more clues they'll leave so that the cops eventually identify them and their name becomes known worldwide. I guess it's just another form of humans striving for fame/infamy and wanting to leave their mark in the world.

[slashpieturtlemix]

I look at this in two contexts. It is sickening for real life serial killers but entertaining to see them in media. It is probably because we all like the thrill of seeing one on tv but we are horrified by them in real life. Most serial killers have known chemical imbalances. We all feel pity for people who are the victims and our society is designed to discourage such people. Luckily for all of us, technology has gotten to the point where they have an extremely slim chance of getting away with the crime.

[pennydreadful]

Originally Posted by slashpieturtlemix

Luckily for all of us, technology has gotten to the point where they have an extremely slim chance of getting away with the crime.

Not necessarily. Like everything else, it comes down to a variety of factors: witnesses, police work, forensic or DNA evidence which would lead back to the killer, and also who they choose as their victim/s.

The cops are no closer to catching the Long Island serial killer, and he's been at it for years. He's been successful in eluding detection because 1: location, location, location - the place where he's dumping the bodies is extremely isolated and basically deserted for at least five months out of the year; and 2: all of his victims have been sex workers - people who often don't have others to miss them and are not always seen as high-priority members of society.

Then there's also the fact that a lot of the time, police just bungle things - they don't follow up leads where they should have, and so the killers are free to keep doing what they do. Perfect example is (details under spoiler so I don't upset anyone who'd rather not read specific details of crimes):

Spoiler:

when Dahmer was actually caught with one of his victims in 1991; the youth had escaped from Dahmer and was running naked down the street. Dahmer told them that they were a couple and had just had a quarrel; the cops wrote it off as a domestic dispute, ignored the concerns of several onlookers who pointed out that the victim was bleeding, and they took the kid back to Dahmer's place. Later on, it resulted in some very bad publicity for the police department as they were on-record as having joked about having had to deal with a 'gay domestic dispute' (one of them said that his partner had to go back to the station to get deloused). If they'd run Dahmer's ID it would have showed that he had criminal convictions and was in fact on probation for a previous sexual offense. Not to mention the fact that they made no effort to verify the victim's age or identity at the time, let alone communicate with him. Instead, Dahmer remained free and went on to kill another four people.

Point being, successfully apprehending a serial killer relies on the killer slipping up. Sometimes they do... but sometimes they don't.

They never caught The Black Doodler, who committed a string of gay killings back in the 70's; in fact, there's very little information on his crimes out there at all. The Oakland County Killer, Bible John, the Seven Bridges Killer, the Freeway Phantom, the West Mesa Bone Collector, the Original Nightstalker, the Eastbound Strangler, the Alphabet Murderer, the Daytona Beach Killer, the Stoneman, the Lisbon Ripper, the Frankford Slasher, the New Bedford Highway Killer... even infamous murderers like the Black Dahlia killer sometimes never get caught.

Then there's the Smiley Face Killer, where people can't even decide if it's a real person or just an urban legend.

[slashpieturtlemix]

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

Not necessarily. Like everything else, it comes down to a variety of factors: witnesses, police work, forensic or DNA evidence which would lead back to the killer, and also who they choose as their victim/s.

The cops are no closer to catching the Long Island serial killer, and he's been at it for years. He's been successful in eluding detection because 1: location, location, location - the place where he's dumping the bodies is extremely isolated and basically deserted for at least five months out of the year; and 2: all of his victims have been sex workers - people who often don't have others to miss them and are not always seen as high-priority members of society.

Then there's also the fact that a lot of the time, police just bungle things - they don't follow up leads where they should have, and so the killers are free to keep doing what they do. Perfect example is (details under spoiler so I don't upset anyone who'd rather not read specific details of crimes):

Spoiler:

when Dahmer was actually caught with one of his victims in 1991; the youth had escaped from Dahmer and was running naked down the street. Dahmer told them that they were a couple and had just had a quarrel; the cops wrote it off as a domestic dispute, ignored the concerns of several onlookers who pointed out that the victim was bleeding, and they took the kid back to Dahmer's place. Later on, it resulted in some very bad publicity for the police department as they were on-record as having joked about having had to deal with a 'gay domestic dispute' (one of them said that his partner had to go back to the station to get deloused). If they'd run Dahmer's ID it would have showed that he had criminal convictions and was in fact on probation for a previous sexual offense. Not to mention the fact that they made no effort to verify the victim's age or identity at the time, let alone communicate with him. Instead, Dahmer remained free and went on to kill another four people.

Point being, successfully apprehending a serial killer relies on the killer slipping up. Sometimes they do... but sometimes they don't.

They never caught The Black Doodler, who committed a string of gay killings back in the 70's; in fact, there's very little information on his crimes out there at all. The Oakland County Killer, Bible John, the Seven Bridges Killer, the Freeway Phantom, the West Mesa Bone Collector, the Original Nightstalker, the Eastbound Strangler, the Alphabet Murderer, the Daytona Beach Killer, the Stoneman, the Lisbon Ripper, the Frankford Slasher, the New Bedford Highway Killer... even infamous murderers like the Black Dahlia killer sometimes never get caught.

Then there's the Smiley Face Killer, where people can't even decide if it's a real person or just an urban legend.

I am very suspicious of you at this moment also I understand the few that occasionally get away but the thought of the technology alone scares away a ton of people who would be serial killers. The 60s-70s had a ridiculous amount of serial killers compared to today. The number has gone down because more and more people are getting caught before they hit the 5th person. The average I have seen is usually three. There will always be people who can outsmart the system because it usually takes an increased intellect to even want to murder someone with no motive.

[pennydreadful]

LOL... I'll confess, my interest in the subject is keen and probably ghoulish (bordering on the macabre) - you've got me there. But hey, everyone here knows I'm a freak - why start letting the team down now?

You do make solid point - figures show that the number of serial killers is definitely on the decline.



It'd be interesting to examine the sociological factors as to why the rate of serial murders has decreased - as you've said, there's a higher rate of apprehension. I also wonder whether the fact that people are more wary, less likely to trust strangers, pick up hitchhikers, leave their doors unlocked etc makes it more difficult; access to victims isn't quite as easy as it was back in the 80's. There's also the fact that there's an incredible amount of sites with graphic death-related content and violent pornography available - perhaps this is a partial outlet for people with these sorts of tendencies; then again, perhaps not.

Police are better at keeping records of missing persons, so there appears to be a higher rate of people going missing even though in reality it's just better bookkeeping.

That being said, the awareness of the rise in technology works both ways. For the serial killer who doesn't seek notoriety, who prefers to operate in secret - there is an awareness that body disposal has to be a priority. If you want to avoid detection, the best way to go about it is to make sure there was never any evidence that there was a murder to start with. A serial killer in this day and age may well choose to operate this way - a smart psychopath knows that the best way to avoid detection is to not leave any evidence which would kick off an investigation to start with.

On the other hand, there's also the undeniable fact that these days, serial killers simply aren't the media sensation that they were in the 80's - while there's a draw for the psychopath in terms of wanting to prove that they're cleverer than the police, that they can outsmart them, the media don't clamor about serial killers or unsolved murders the way they used to. These days, Joe Public is more afraid of mass shootings and terrorists than of the Bundys of the world. It could also be a deliberate effort on the part of police to keep serial killers out of the news, given that they have historically enjoyed the attention.

I'm also left wondering whether in 20 years, the numbers will spike again. Because on the other hand, the general population the US has increased exponentially from what it was at 100 years ago. This means two things: one, more potential victims, as there are always going to be disenfranchised and vulnerable people in any society, and two: more potential violent psychopaths per capita.

It would also be interesting to examine whether the decline has been a worldwide trend, as there is still an enormous rate of unsolved murders in countries outside the US/UK. For obvious reasons, like police corruption, lack of proper internal procedures, a faulty justice system, there are countries where unsolved murder is much easier to get away with.

Here's the part where I bring up yet another documentary... Seriously though, there is a good one called Killer's Paradise - it was done in 2007 and it examines the high rate of unsolved murders of women, and it examines some of issues with the legal system, the government and the police department which allow that kind of thing to flourish. Linkage here for any who are interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer%27s_Paradise

[snake]

I can't really tell, but I think you like serial killers, Penny.

[pennydreadful]

LOL and here I thought I was being subtle. j/k

[Davetello]

Thanks for all the posts.

Cyber Cubed - it's not really a creepy topic. This subject pops up on quite a lot of websites, it's not an uncommon thing to discuss. And I think this is the first time I've seen you refer to someone by name. I'm flattered

[Davetello]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Incidentally, I found it really tough to argue with Kevin Spacey's character in "Se7en". Like, he was a monster, but in listening to him present his arguments, there's a real logic and intelligence to what drives him. That's the scariest thing; it's not like these guys are often "crazy" in the sense they're baying at the moon and drooling on themselves. They're just usually super-intelligent people who went "nuts" because they have a disconnect in their brains as far as how unfair things are and how imbalanced the world sometimes is. Some people just go, "Huh, I guess it really IS all pointless, life as we know it really DOES have no meaning", and then they lose it. And that's less "insane" then it is "seriously imbalanced and disturbed", which, to me, is WAY more dangerous than simple "crazy".

The rest of your post was great, and summed up my feelings, but I wanted to talk about this part.

Some of them do indeed kill indiscriminately, but as you say, some are driven by their view of the world and some sort of 'moral compass'. I too could see Spacey's logic, even as a 12 year old. I also completely understand what the Joker was doing in the Dark Knight. His plan failed with the ships, but he was trying to illuminate the hypocrisy that people display on a day to day basis.

That's all a little different from your regular serial killer, many of whom are simply sociopaths who have an urge to kill, generally a sexual urge (the above were sociopaths, but they had a reason for what they were doing). But, while I would never murder someone, there are people in this world whom I think don't deserve to live, and I can understand why someone would want to snuff them out. Those sort of killers are more like moral crusaders, though.

[Hannurdock]

I like Dexter, but he killed other murderers mainly.

I don't like serial killers, I find them frightening ... but there is a fascination with something so inhuman.

[BubblyShell22]

I have always been fascinated by murder cases, and followed the Jodi Arias case nonstop. She's not a serial killer, but I believe she had the potential to be one had she not been convicted of Travis Alexander's death.

And, Dave, I feel you about certain people who don't deserve to live on this Earth. I feel that way sometimes, too.

[pennydreadful]

I think Hollywood tends to choose the 'crusader' types like Dexter and John Doe for their shows and movies as it's easier to romanticize them.

I know Dexter was meant to be a drama series with very dark humor, but I could never get into it - I always sat there thinking about how sloppy he was. You know, the "Dude, if I were killing people, I'd never make those mistakes!" kind of thing. Though I can't talk about anything past the first two seasons with any authority as that was as far as I watched. The amount of raw materials that the man had to purchase and dispose of on a regular basis was a huge weakness in his method, not to mention the time for the set-up and breakdown of his murder scenes. All it'd take is one homeless dude or some teens wanting to get their buzz on in one of his little abandoned warehouses or something and it'd be all over.

John Doe was relatable in that he looked at the world around him and was repulsed by it - and that's something that most people can connect with on some sort of level, even if you didn't agree with his individual victim choices.

[slashpieturtlemix]

Originally Posted by pennydreadful

I think Hollywood tends to choose the 'crusader' types like Dexter and John Doe for their shows and movies as it's easier to romanticize them.

I know Dexter was meant to be a drama series with very dark humor, but I could never get into it - I always sat there thinking about how sloppy he was. You know, the "Dude, if I were killing people, I'd never make those mistakes!" kind of thing. Though I can't talk about anything past the first two seasons with any authority as that was as far as I watched. The amount of raw materials that the man had to purchase and dispose of on a regular basis was a huge weakness in his method, not to mention the time for the set-up and breakdown of his murder scenes. All it'd take is one homeless dude or some teens wanting to get their buzz on in one of his little abandoned warehouses or something and it'd be all over.

John Doe was relatable in that he looked at the world around him and was repulsed by it - and that's something that most people can connect with on some sort of level, even if you didn't agree with his individual victim choices.

We need a serial killer show where the killer acts like Sherlock from the BBC series lol that would be amazing

[FoxBoxKid]

To anyone who likes serial killer/sociopath stories, I gotta recommend Death Note.

[slashpieturtlemix]

Originally Posted by FoxBoxKid

To anyone who likes serial killer/sociopath stories, I gotta recommend Death Note.

Yeah Deathnote was pretty amazing. Kinda bummed about the ending but they had to end it some time. I think my favorite serial killer is actually Desty Nova from Battle Angel. True class with him!

[pennydreadful]

Right on, FoxBox - Death Note was awesome.

I keep hearing people raving about Hannibal but I haven't felt motivated to finish watching Season 1. I think I have a bit of a hard time getting drawn into fictional serial killers as for me, they can't compare to the real thing in terms of being creepy or scary, and rarely explore the mental landscape of the psychopath to my satisfaction.

[Davetello]

Originally Posted by FoxBoxKid

To anyone who likes serial killer/sociopath stories, I gotta recommend Death Note.

Seen Death Note twice, excellent. Light is very deluded though - he becomes so obsessed with power that he begins to think he's the ruler of the planet. Great show though.

Personally, I prefer Johan Liebert to Light (the serial killer and prime antagonist of Monster). He's just far more calculating and cold than Light. Light is arguably not a sociopath; we see him experience a range of emotions and you get the feeling that he's simply been corrupted by his lust for absolute power and the fact that the note grants him that. But Johan is just a cold-blooder killer. His environment probably screwed him up, but he seems to kill his victims without showing any empathy or compassion. And, unlike Light, he doesn't start out killing criminals. He begins with innocents.

I keep hearing people raving about Hannibal but I haven't felt motivated to finish watching Season 1. I think I have a bit of a hard time getting drawn into fictional serial killers as for me, they can't compare to the real thing in terms of being creepy or scary, and rarely explore the mental landscape of the psychopath to my satisfaction.

Binged Hannibal earlier on this year. Really, really good show. It's surprising that a non-cable show can be of such high quality. The second season is certainly a step up from the first.

I see Dexter is mentioned above. Clearly it's unrealistic but that doesn't detract from the entertainment value, for me. I've seen all 8 seasons, and also rewatched the first four (because it jumps the shark in season 5). Season 4 with Trinity is some of the finest television ever.

[Redeemer]

Originally Posted by Davetello

What are your views on these people? I have to admit that I have a fascination with serial killers, both in fact and fiction (which sometimes overlap). The psychology behind it intrigues me.

I find it amazing that people have absolutely no feelings whatsoever for other humans, and that empathy, compassion and love are completely absent. I also find it fascinating that they're able to evade detection thanks to their high intellects, expert lying, and deceptive natures.

My favourite serial killer (poor way to phrase it, admittedly) is probably Dennis Rader. I read a lot of his story in 2009 and have kept up to speed with him ever since.

Serial Killers are not always the smartest people. One reason they remain elusive is the fact that they cross jurisdictions and police do not share information with one another.
Serial Killers are interesting, but its scary to know some have fully adopted the triad of Sociopathy. Or that there people like Bundy who have developed such a high level of social skills they actually use it as a tool in their killing method.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

This topic is kinda creepy, Dave.

Its depressing me more than anything.

[Davetello]

Originally Posted by Redeemer

Serial Killers are not always the smartest people. One reason they remain elusive is the fact that they cross jurisdictions and police do not share information with one another.
Serial Killers are interesting, but its scary to know some have fully adopted the triad of Sociopathy. Or that there people like Bundy who have developed such a high level of social skills they actually use it as a tool in their killing method.


Its depressing me more than anything.

Yeah, I know it's often a stereotype that they're all incredibly smart. Although I was reading again earlier and it's apparently a myth that they cross state lines, as you claim. I guess every case is different and peculiar in its own way.

Yeah, the McDonald triad. I was going to mention it in my OP but was trying to keep it succinct. For anyone who is unaware, the three signs in childhood of a potential future serial killer are arson, torturing and killing animals, and bedwetting.