Policy reflection

Allen91

Adams.pdf

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >Policy reflection

t ~.: '..

3 ~ Killer Profiles

~ '

{' I

The murderers we interviewed were not representative of men who kill ~~I their partners in one important respect: none of them had also killed them-

selves. For two of the men, this had not been for lack of trying. Immedi- ', ately after strangling and stabbing his partner, one man had plunged the

same knife into his neck and slashed both wrists. In an attempt to finish Himself off, he had then attempted to stab himself in the chest. By that point, however, he had been too weak from loss of blood to penetrate his rib -cage and passed out. This man had survived only due to the rapid re- sponse of the EMTs. I will describe this man, Allen, in more detail in the later section about the suicidal type of killer. The other killer who had attempted suicide had shot himself in the chest immediately after shoot- ing his partner in the neck and head. He was hospitalized for two months in recovery. In profiling the suicidal type of killer, I will draw from other research findings.

Including the men who we characterized as suicidal, I found all thi~-ty- one killers could be classified under at least one of five broad types. These types were jealous, substance abusing, materially motivated, suicidal, and career criminal. I also found that there was considerable overlap among these types. We classified more than half of the men as belonging to more than one of these types. The laxgest overlaps were between the jealous and the substance abusing types. There was also a considerable overlap between the career cruninal and the materially motivated types. I will say more about these overlaps in the section about men who pose multiple threats.

'There are any number of alternative ways that killers, like any other individuals, could be classified. One possible classification scheme would

~Y~

~~ ~j ' i ~ h ' S1

r a k~~

~~. R _ C ~ fi

- Y 1.

~~,~ Y ~~~T~ { ~iW'~•° r y t

t 'Y' ~ ~ ~

~} ~ 5 ~ t l~ F'(

C ~' £ 1rt _`

1 \: r

1 ~

'.:

y { j ,t4

i t'

-. .- _

._ ,w.ti ~T

v ~7 ..

be according to personalit

y type. I did not undertak

e to classify t he killers

in this manne r because it

is already lrn own that murd

erers have m any per-

sonality type s. I wished i

nstead Co foc us on assess

ments of beh avior and

attitude. Tho ugh there mi

ght be some value to asse

ssing which pexsonality

types are mos t common; th

e added time it would hav

e taken to ad minister

personality a ssessment too

ls would hav e been at the

expense of t he struc-

tured intervi ews and the a

ttitude and be havior measu

res.

Similarly, I d zd not attem

pt to categori ze the killers

formally acc ord-

ing to mental health diagn

oses. One re ason was tha

t this also wo ald have

been time co nsuming and

at the expen se of other i

nformation. S econdly,

:̀~ classification

s based on ps ychopatholo

gy are notor iously hard

to under-

stand and im practical for

those who i ntervene in d

omestic viole nce cases,

_~ and even mo

re so for the general publ

zc. For insta nce, to say th

at some

killers have narcissistic pe

rsonalities o r even anti-s

ocial ones is useless as

' ' a guide for a

ssessing dan gerousness s

ince most pe ople charged

with as-

k: '

~~'

sessing dange r do not use,

and are not q ualified or tra

ined to use, p sycho-

_ .l diagnostic me asures. One

such measure , for instanc

e, is the psych opat,~ic

4. ; checl~list.l Th

is is used by farensic psy

chologists a nd other trai

ned crimi-

;; . nal justice w

orkers to ass ess for psych

opathy, one major aspec

t of anti-

,.~~ ' social person

ality disorde r. It is know

n that high p roportions o

f violent

~~ ~'~. +

offenders, pa rticularly kil

lers, have su ch traits.2 Wh

ile some of these are

~, ~' behavior trait

s, such as chr onic lying an

d exploitativ e behavior, ot

hers are

more subjec tive, such as

the Lack of r emorse or gu

ilt for one's actions,

t glibness or s

uperficial cha rm, having a

grandiose se nse of self-w

orth, be-

~ ~ >, ing irrespons

ible, and hav ing shallow

affect. Discer ning these tr

aits is not

,~w~ ~ only difficul

t for the Iay public but als

o among law enforcemen

t profes-

'~~~ sionals, and

among train ed therapists

as well. Ev en the short

ened ver-

~x;-:" ' sion of the p

sychopathy checklist tak

es at least on e hour to co

mplete b}~

'~a ; a trained pro

fessional. Us ually those j

udged to be high in p

sychopathic

~2~ - traits have a

lready amply demonstrate

d their high potential fox

violence

~< and fox other

crimes agai nst people. P

erhaps the m ost useful

aspect o'

~ off~;

such diagnos tics is to ma

tch the indi vidual with

the form of treatmer~,

z ~ ~ ~1iat might b e most effect

ive. It is comm only advise

d that indivi duals wt,~

t ~~.i ~~

F> , ~.. ~'

~ 7 are assessed

eo be high in psychopath

y will not be nefit from

outpatie,~~

~, ~, ~,

~ '- < 2 £

therapy and should only r

eceive treatm ent in a highl

y structured enviro ~'

~, ~ ~ '

ment. Furthe r discussion

of psychopat l~y will be pr

ovided in th e sectic

r ;;

~̀~:~ ~,~ ~ ;.~;n- about materia

lly motivated and career c

runinal types of fillers.

36 ( TNhy Do They Kill?

ways ~

th~k ~~

ships,

ilePS.

beh~v

were ,

~aulr~

killer;

consi,

.lea]

[Most

cater

5,.,;~' cam' a - ,-r

~ ~

~ ~ l h~ [C

t~ ̀~ ( )

(: ~ 1

t 1 h ~'~,

~ ~ ~y f ~.

-~. ~i~ ~K ! 'i

.I I I ~r ~Y 2 'v h~

_s ou ht to cafe orize killers accordin to their behavior atterns

I g gg P ',

'~,

2~[ 1

relationship histories more than on their psycholo gical cliaracteris- k r, ;;' " w ~'

and

Tics. These behaviors are easily di scernable for victims of abuse as well ~ ~ ".

as those who work with them. In classif ying each killer, I relied upon ; , ~ ,'

has own testimony as well as police repor ts and newspaper accounts of I:~ ' ~`~.

murders. Such accounts often provided backgroun d information, such

~~~ ~ ~ , ~ ' ̀

the ~. x

as quotes from witnesses and friends and relative s of the victims. These i ~ ;

witnesses often had informarion about the perpetrator's prior abuse of the

deceased. I also had access to each killer's criminal record, as well as trial

transcripts in some cases. To confirm the validity of each of the categories

of killer, I relied upon information from the victims of attem pted homicide

that we interviewed. From these interviews, a more detailed picture of

perpetrators of near-fatal abuse emerged. Demographically, the perpet ra-

tors of attempted homicide were very similar to the killers. Judging fro m

their victims' accounts, they also exhibited similar attitudes, expectations,

and patterns of abuse. The killers and near-killers were also similar in

their rates of substance abuse and mental health problems, as well as their

exposure to violence in their upbringings. The more detailed information

provided by victims of attempted homicide, particularly about perpetra-

tors' abusive behavior, was indispensable in. completing the picture of

men who kill. In this way, the victims of attempted homicide served as

"stand-ins" for those women who could no longer speak.

Each of the five types of killers profiled had somewhat distinctive

ways of meeting women and of forming intimate relationships. I found

that each type also had unique patterns of behavior within those relation-

ships, as well as unique complaints and grievances toward their part-

ners. Though all five types of perpetrators exhibited abusive or coercive

behavior toward their partners, it seemed to be motivated by factors that

were unique to that particular style. Moreover, the fatal and near-fatal as-

saults appeared to be triggered by these same factors. For each type of

killer, I found that the man's short-term triggers were not new but were

consistent with his longtime grievances toward the woman he killed.

Jealous Type

Most of the killers carne across as extremely jealous. This was the largest

category of killers, with seventy-one percent fitting the criteria for mem-

Killer Profiles ~ 37

s,- - - -

~ _ W -,'~

~: <̀.

~~E

~. $~M

', ,~

t~~-. 4? -~_~

~̀ ~, ~ ~,Q

bership. It is probabl

e that the a ctual perc

entage is h igher, but

we did not

have suffi cient infor

mation ab out some o

f the kille rs to scree

n them in a s

jealous typ es. Accord

ing to info rmation fr

om the vic tims of att

empted ho-

nnicide tha t we inter

viewed, ezg hteen of t

he twenty p erpetrator

s (or 90% )

were extr emely jeal

ous, The c ziteria I u

sed for cat egorizing

a killer as a

jealous ty pe include

d the follo wing four

characteris tics and be

haviors:

1) The pe rpetrator f

requently had jealou

s suspicio ns that his

partner wa s sexually

involved o r intereste

d in others. He was

preoccupi ed with th

ese jealou s thoughts.

2) He fre quently ma

de jealous accusation

s to his pa rtner, and

frequently asked jea

lous quest ions.

3) He oft en made a

ttempts to confirm hi

s suspicio ns by moni

toring

the victim' s whereabo

uts and ac tivities.

4) He'd c ommitted

at least on e act of ab

use oz vio lence towa

rd the

victim or t oward her

alleged ro mantic par

tner in res ponse to hi

jealous su spicions a

r beliefs.

All twenty -two of the

killers wh om we cha

racterized as extreme

ly jealous

e~ibited at least th

ree of the a bove chara

cteristics. It is impor

tant to not e

that criteri a number t

hree by its elf did not

qualify a k iller as be

ing jealou s

since his m onitoring

may have had anothe

r motive be sides jealo

usy. Some

of the kill ers, especi

ally the m aterially

motivated ones, mon

itored the ir

victims' a ctivities n

ot with an y jealous n

otions but with inten

t to over see

their activ ities. The

purpose w as not to

confizm o z disconfi

rm a jeal ous

suspicion but to dete

rmine whe ther the vi

ctim was f ollowing

through o n

things tha t he expec

ted of her. For examp

le, several killers ad

mitted th a(

they often monitored

their part ners' spen

ding. Othe r killers s

aid that they

often moni tored thei

r partners' social act

ivities to ensure tha

t they w e+ -

not associ ating with

people th e znen con

sidered to be "a bad

in8uen cc

Often thes e "bad infl

uences" m eant peopl

e who migh t seek to t

ake steps ~~

end the rel ationships.

One killer admitted

that he for bade his

partner fro,

seeing cer tain relati

ves whom he said h

ad "put id eas in her

head a bs~-

being a ba ttered wom

an." Seve ral of the

ottzer kill ers said t

hat they ~~ ',~

often liste ned in on t

heir partne rs' teleph

one conver sations

with frie ' ''s

and relati ves to moni

tor what might be d

isclosed a bout the

women's

tivities an, d plans. So

me killers seemed n

ot to worr y about

tl~e ex iste L°

38 ( Wh y Do The

y Kill?

~" e C

we did not r them in as m ted 'P ho- (or 90%) ~ killer as a ~viors:

~~ s !'i , was

d ~

~itoring i E.

u'd the to his

jealous to note jealous ~. Some d their >versee ealous igh on ~d that ~t they

were :nce." eps to from about ~ had

of another man as much as the possibility that the victim would end the

relationship. These men could be said to be possessive more than jealous.

] will say more about possessive control and stalking in later chapters.

In many cases, the killer's monitoring of the victim appeared to have

a dual purpose: to confirm a jealous suspicion and also to look for signs

of compliance or noncompliance on her part. In determining whether

certain killers fit the jealous profile, it was necessary to go beyond their

self-assessments about jealousy since many downplayed any jealous ten-

dencies. Even some of the men who claimed to have killed their partners

in a "jealous rage" avowed not to be abnormally jealous individuals. As

one killer put it, "I'm a reasonable man but she drove me to be jealous

with what she was doing." This man cited no solid evidence that his part-

ner was being unfaithful, though he had continuously spied upon her and

sought to verify her accounts of her activities. During this man's murder

trial, the victim's family and friends strongly refuted his claims that she

had been having an affair and said that the victim had often complained to

them about his jealousy.

Killing from Jealous Rage?

One of the most popular and persistent ways that the media portray do-

mestic homicides is as "crimes of passion" in which a jealous husband

kills an unfaithful .wife and sometimes her lover as well. Unfortunately,

both investigators and reporters sometimes glibly offer this phrase as an

explanation, as if to distinguish these killings from others that are por-

trayed as more "heinous" and "cold blooded." But is that ever the whole

story? When a murderer claims to have killed out of jealous rage, this

should never be accepted at face value. When domestic violence has been

part of the equation, the man's accusation of the woman's infidelity must

be examined within the context of an abusive relationship. Was the killing

a moment of "temporary insanity" prompted by the killer's discovery of

an affair? Or was it the final culmination of possessive control and escalat-

ing violence within the relationship?

To answer this question, I examined each case in which the killer :ends claimed that the murder had been primarily prompted by his partner's in- s ac- i volvement with another person. Thirteen of the thirty-one killers (65% ence ~ of the jealous type of killers and 41% of the total) made such claims. It

E Killer Profiles ~ 39

should be no ted, howevex

, that twelv e of Chese m

en said that the warder

also had bee n prompted

by the victi m's decision

to end the relationship.

Seven of th ese victims h

ad already separated fro

m their futu re killers an

an. eighth, w ho had neve

r lived with him, had br

oken off any contact wit

him. Interes tingly, only o

ne of the thi rteen men wh

o claimed to have killed

out of a jeal ous rage had

been convic ted of mansl

aughter. Sev en were con-

victed of fir st degree mu

rder while the remaizun

g five were convicted of

second degr ee murder. T

his means th ere was ove

rwhe3ming evidence tha

these men, c laiming to ha

ve killed in a jealous ra

ge, had in fa ct acted with

considerable premeditatio

One killer, Dennis, cla

imed to hav e found an

unused cond om on

his estrange d wife's nig

ht table, pro mpting him

to stab her i n the chest.

{

Strong evid ence of prem

editation, h owever, was

presented at Dennis's

murder trial. The couple

had separa ted a year e

arlier when his wife, Su-

san, took ou t a restrainin

g order and f iled for div

orce. Over th e year befor

her death, Su san had acc

used Dennis of violating

her restzain ing ordex by

entering her house on th

ree different occasions wh

en she wasn 't there and

by making t hreatening p

hone calls o n two other

occasions. Susan had b

gun dating a nother man

shortly befor e her divorc

e fxom Denni s was final-

ized. Meanwh ile, Dennzs'

s gambling problem ha

d escalated t o the point

where he was tens of thou

sands of doll ars in debt.

According t o the police

investigatio n of Susan's

homicide, D ennzs carri

ed a hunting knife with

him when he broke into h

er house on the evening

he killed he r, There was

also eviden ce that Dennz

s had made several pho

ne calls to tr ack Susan's

whereabouts that day. Th

e medical ex aminer repo

rted that Sus an had been

stabbed at l east nine tim

es.

In eight of t he cases whe

re the killers claimed to

have killed o ut of a

jealous rage , there is no

independen t evidence t

hat their part ner had been

involved wit h someone el

se. In four o f these cases

, friends and lor zelatives

of the decea sed provided

strong test imony to tb.e

contrary, sa ying that aa

rnfzdelzties o n the victim

's part had b een solely i

n the imagin ation of th

jealously po ssessive perp

etrator. Tab le 3.1 summa

rizes our fin dings abou

this.

In some cas es, it was ha

rd to discern whether th

e killer since rely be-

lieved that h is partner ha

d been inv olved with s

omeane else or whethe

his 'allegatio ns were fabr

icated in ord er to win s

ympathy fro m others, i

cluding cour t juries. Far

some of the killers, their

continual allegations

infidelity ap peared To hav

e been a ma jor part of

their attempt s to cont

rol

40 ~ tivtzy Do ~Q y Wit?

3,4\ C,

(~ i `~ _

43~ ~: i ci-~

~ ~

ti~ y t l

4 ~

~ ~N~ ~ 1~K . : i "mil

fi, r r

k ~~}

:~ ~E

'•411 5. ,"_ ~y~`f

l~'y~%

... s'~~'v " X

i^ .. ~~7 ~.. f.

y-'~

Table 3.2: Find ings relevant to the kill

ers' claims

} i

of killing out of a jealous rage

Total number of men claiming to

.~'

~ _'.'

have killed out of a jea lous rage

13 (42%) ~ ~ kS

N=31 ~ c z~r

Of these thirteen man:

Number convicted of fir st degree murder

Number convicted of se cond degree murder

Number convicted of mansl aughter

There is evidence the victim was involved with

someone else 5 (38%)

There is no evidence the victi m was involved with

someone else 8 (62%) ~

and to isolate their partners socially. Many victims o

f severe abuse said I'

that their abusers' frequent allegations had caused them

to curtail or cease

contact with friends and rela tives. One victim said, "I

just gave np with

my friends anyway because if I did make an effort to see th

em, he would

always badger me with questio ns and make my life miserab

le."

For battering men, their jeal ousy provides a nearly per

fect excuse

for their abusive behavior, maki ng it appear "crazy" or irr

ational rather

than deliberate or calculating. Some batterers go so far as to

proclaim that ~

their extreme jealousy is evid ence of their deep devotion a

nd passion for

their partners. In explaining hi s jealous rages, one young m

an told his

girlfriend, "I wouldn't do the se things if I didn't love you so

much:'

Jealous Thoughts and Behav iors

According to the victims of sev ere abuse that we interviewed

, the vast ma-

jority of their abusers displa yed extremely jealous behavi

or. Nearly 90%

of the women said that they we re subjected to frequent jeal

ous questions

and accusations, often accomp anied by abusive behavior su

ch as monitor-

ing, stalking, and threatening o r committing vzolence. At l

east half of the

women said that their partners checked their clothing for

signs of sexual

activity. Table 3.2 presents fi ndings about how victims ra

ted the jealous

feelings of their abusive part ners.

In some instances, the abusi ve men's lists of imagined r

omantic rivets

KiIler Profiles ~ 41 i

i, ,,.r,.t ,.:

■

Table 3.2: SeYiously ba ttered women's ratings

of their partners' jeal ousy

Percentage

of victims

who said "yes"

How jealous did your partner He was very

get of your relationships with jealous or 89

members of the opposite sex? extremely jealous

In general, how jealous of a He was very

person do you think your partne r jealous or

was? extremely jealous

In response to the following

scenarios, how jealous do you

think your partner would be

— We were at a bar together and He would be

another man invited me to dance moderately to 83

but I politely said no. extremely jealous

—When buying something at a He would be

convenience store, I laughed at moderately to 69

something the store clerk said. extremely jealous

N=35

are very long, extending even to members of the victims'

families. Nearly

one-quarter of the victims we interviewed said that thei

r abusers had ac-

cused them of sexual interest in their own relatives. The

women said they

found this particularly distress ing since these accusations

were sometimes

accompanied by demands that they stop having contact w

ith the relative.

Three women said that they regretted telling their abusers

about their past

traumatic experiences with incest since it subsequently le

d to allegations

that they had been complicit with the sexual acts or tha

t they continued

to have interest in the relat ive who abused them. In on

e case, the bat-

terer beat up the vicfiim's fat her who had sexually abused

her as a child.

This led to the victim beco ming further alienated from

her mother and

siblings.

42 ~ why Do zney emu?

■

Case Exam

~<I 1~nAw th It was the

Emmit was thi

nursing home

twice previous

wife and one b

ended badly di

had threatened

mit insisted th

about it." Emr

date, when Lc

husband with f

sistence, Lour

parents. Louis

failed marriage

Emmit confro:

driveway. Afte

Emmit, Louise

After one mar

hirn and the ne i

now, Emmit h

working in an.

couple bought

Suspicion

ously urged h~

After about fr

~ the seasonal se

worked odd jc

ing all their bi

back to school

she resumed ~

By mid-1

fair because sl

incident in ea

x se; - ,:, -,_::.> ~ _ <': rte=' _ _

.,<.,z {.5~' _ ~`

~~"s} y

Case Example 1

"I knew that I couldn't trust her .

It was the same way with my sec ond wife."

Bmmit was thirty-nine and Louise twenty-nine when they first met a

t the

nursing home where they we re both working. Emmit had been marri

twice previously and Louise once. Emmit had two children by his fir

wife and one by his second. Emmi t said that both of these prior marriages

ended badly due to infidelity on each ex-partner's part. Conceding that he

had threatened violence and someti mes hit or pushed each ex-partner, Em-

mit insisted that these were "natural reactions to their cheating and lying

about it" Emmit's first jealousy to ward Louise appeared after their first

date, when Louise admitted that she was still living with her estranged

husband with whom she had atwo -year old son, Brian. At Emmit's in-

sistence, Louise filed for divorce two mon ths later and moved in with her

parents. Louise's parents were negativ e toward Emrnit because of lus two

failed marriages and urged Louise to stop seeing him. In response to this,

Emmit confronted Louise's father, havi ng a "fist fight" with him in the

driveway. After Louise's father filed a ch arge of assault and battery against

Emmit, Louise decided to find an apartm ent in which to live with her son.

After one month in the new place, Emm it convinced Louise to live with

him and the new couple found a larger apartment several towns away. By

now, Emmit had taken a new job at a car rental agency and Louise was

working in another nursing home in the same town. Within one year, the

couple bought their first home and thei r son Benjamin was born.

Suspicious of Louise's relationship s with co-workers, he continu-

ously urged her to quit her job so tha t she could be a full-time mother.

After about five years of this, Louise reluctantly quit her job to work at

the seasonal seafood restaurant that Emix ut had purchased. Though Emmit

worked odd jobs during the winter mon ths, the family had difficulty pay-

ing all their bills and fell into debt. L ouise convinced Emmit to let her go

back to school so she could pursue her n ursing license. At the same time,

she resumed work as a nurse's aide at a nursing home.

By mid-1994, Emznit began to suspe ct that Louise was having an af-

fair because she was coming home l ate on some evenings. After orie such

incident in early September, he deman ded to know where she had been

Killer Profiles ~ 43

.:.,:, M` F,; .~ x i

S t mk'~. Sit `2 s A. s

~1~t~

._ .. .. ,.. ~ r .. _~

,Y., t~s~ s

'_._. _._._ _ ..__ __..... ._'_

_~...,_..>~ ,_ i i ..__..

_ ~., i.._.,_~~ ._

and she insisted that she had been shoppin

g. He rifled her purs e looking

for a store receipt, an d finding none, grabb

ed Louise by the shir t while

calling her a liar. He demanded that she L

eave, and in response , Louise

took the two children to stay with her paren

ts. The following da y, Louise

returned with the pol ice to geC some of har

belongings. Meanwhil e, Em-

mit has spoken with s everal neighbars who

all sought to assure him that

Louise had been faith ful to him. Fu11 of re

morse, Emmit drove to Louise's

work the next day to leave flowers and a n

ote of apology on the windshield

of her car. Louise cal led him that evening a

nd Emmit begged her to return.

Louise agreed to do so on the condition t

hat Emmit stop makin g jealous

accusations. Two days later, however, EmrrLi

t's suspicions return ed when

Louise was one hour late convng home fr

om work. They had a loud ar-

gument in which Em mit accused Louise of

neglecting the house and she

accused hzm of being short with the childre

n. During this conflict , Emmit t

knocked over several pieces of furniture an

d pushed Louise into a wall.

On September 22, Emm it drove by Louise's

workplace late in the da y

to verify whether she was working late as s

he had told hizn over t he phone.

When he arrived at th e nursing home, he n

oticed Louise getting i nto a car t

with a man. He follo wed the other car from

a distance until they pulled `

into a Dunkin Donuts . In a jealous rage, Em

mit appxoacl~ed the pai r in the j

parking lot, yelling a nd threatening to kill

both of them. Louise insisted `

that the other man wa s just a co-worker and

they had just been pic king up

donuts for a meeting at work. Emmit caLted

her a liar, telling her, "If you

want to destroy our m arriage, then goodby

e:' He then drove to L ouise's

parents house and told her father that Louise

was having an affair. R eturn-

ing home, he told th e same thing to twelv

e-year-old Brian, who quickly

left to visit a friend. Emrnit then loaded his

shotgun with the inte ntion of

shooting himself but stopped when Brian

returned home with hi s friend.

After putting the shot gun away, Emmit ga

thered up nearly eve rything

that Louise owned, ma king numerous trips

out to the back yard, where

he placed her clothing , shoes, jewelry, pict

ures, and. other keepsak es into

a pile. With Brian ques tioning what he was d

oing, Emmzt poured gasoline

on the pile, setting it a blaze. Fearing what w

ould come next, Brian $ed to

a neighbor's house. M eanwhile, Emmrt cal

led Yus brother, Ronal d, to te11

him what had happened . Ronald came over to

see the sti11-burning pi le and e

convinced Emmit to co me over to his house in

order "to calm down." Ron-

aldtold Emmit, "If you don't trust Louise, yo

u should just divarce he z." He

44 ~ Why Do They Kil l?

j ~ _

1cy~,r ~ t ~ ,,^c~~- ~` ~ °' k ~. X~'~ .~~ t~So.~` 4 ~ ~I`3 c ~.`J 0 gx~~ ,it ,~ t .~ ~ ~; ~ .~,, ,r t ~.L k F~ . C ~4r -t

L ,c ~ ~,r ~~ .~ ,(7 r T' r..̀ ~ti~ kh f ~Sl ~ ~ 3

nt ;~f ~ --- ,

.~.. ~..,. .~.~r= ., .Le ey. ~ tea,,. Pik, .~F~ t _~~'~

_ ~~

took Enunit out to dinner, bnt Emmit was continuousl sobbin and couldY gnot eat. Emmit returned home to find the police. The police told him that Louise had taken out a protective order that barred him from being in the house and from having any contact with Louise. The police also informedEmmit that there would be a court date at 9:00 tl~e next morning for ahearing to determine whether the restraining and vacate order should becontinued. They transported Emmit back to Ronald's house. That evening,Ronald and his wife continuously sought to assure Emmit that Louise had ~not cheated on him On his way to court the following day, Emmit stopped at the bankwhere he cleaned out the joint checking account. At the court hearing,Louise told the judge that she feared Emmit due to his violent jealousy.The judge continued the restraining order, warning Emmit that he was notallowed to have any contact with Louise, Brian, ar Benjamin. A hearingwas set for ten days later to determine whether the restraining order wouldbe extended for a year and to determine whether Emmit would be allowedto have child visitations. After the court hearing, Emmit stopped back atthe barilc to tell them he would stop making mortgage papments on thehouse as well as loan payments on Louise's car. Emmit spent the rest ofthe day at his restaurant. That evening, Emrnit and Ronald planned to attend a party to be heldat a Chinese restaurant by a friend of the family. Knowing that Louisehad also been invited, Emmit went out to purchase a new suit in hopes ofimpressing her at the party. Arriving early at the party, Emmit was arixiousto see Louise despite her restraining order against him. He arrived at 5:45,and not seeing Louise, went to the box where he had four rum and Cokesover the next two hours. During this time, Emmit talked with many friendsas they arrived for the party, telling all of them that Louise had cheated onhim and kicked him out of the house. Most of the friends had already heard -about the situation and tried to tell Emmit that Louise was a good wifewho would never cheat on him. At 7:45, Louise arrived with Benjamin,now age eight, and several cousins. Benjanun ran over to sit in his father'slap as Louise and hex cousins took a booth in another section of the restau-~ rant. A bit later, when Louise came in to summon Benjamin, Emmit triedto speak with her. In response, Louise told him, "Don't make a scene," andretuxned with Benjanun to the other room. Over the next two hours, Emtnit had two more drinks while continu-

Killer Profiles ~ 45

~ :

~̀ ~ F 2

~ ~.

4 _

, _,

( f S~ .- r~ [ ~ :.

r s s ~ ~ ~}ti Fri ~1 .z~~x- ~' • . _ -

ing to talk with friends and relatives about the situation.

He became in-

creasingly furious that others did not believe his accusat

ions of Louise.

Emmit left the restaurant at 10:00 and decided to drive t

o Louise's house.

He parked his car several s treets away and walked to

her house, trying

to avoid being seen by any neighbors. He het himself in

via some sliding

doors in the back and looked around the house to see if an

yone was home.

He then sat in a chair and a waited Louise's arrival.

Hearing Louise and the chil dren arrive home at 10:30, E

mmit laid be-

hind achair in the living roo m. He waited there in the da

rk while Louise

made the boys take their showe rs and gave them a snack in

the dining room

before putting them to bed at 11:00. Emmit waited anoth

er fifteen minutes

before making his move. He first looked into both boys'

bedrooms, look-

ing fox Louise. He saw that Be njamin was already asleep w

hile Brian was

watching television. He then went into Louise's bedroom w

here he found

her lying an her bed with her television on. He wali~ed cl

oser Co see if_she

was asleep, and noticed tha t her eyes were closed. He

touched Louise's

arm and called her name. L ouise awoke with a start, say

ing, "What are

you doing here?" Emmit t old her, "Louise, I love you. P

lease don't leave

me. I don't care what you d id. Thin1~ of the kids. All I wa

nt is for you to

see a docCar." As he was say ing this, he put his hand on

her chest. When

she pushed to get up, Emmi t pulled a knife from her dr

esser drawer and

jumped on her. He stabbed h er several. times in the chest

, stopping only

when Benjamizi walked in s aying, "Daddy, what's goin

g on here?" The

knife was sti11 sticking in Lou ise's chest with its handle bro

ken off. Emmit

told Benjamin to go back into hi s room and then called his

brother, Ronald.

Ronald's wife answered and Emmit told her that he had j

ust stabbed Lou-

ise. Meanwhile, the next-do ar neighbor arrived, after hav

ing been sum-

moned by Brian. Emmit yel led at the neighbar, who then

fled the house

with the two boys. Before t he police arrived, Emmit stab

bed himself once

in the stomach. T'he wound w as not considered Life-threat

ening. The police

testified at Emmit's trial tha t Louise had been stabbed se

venteen times.

One witness who had atte nded the party on the night of

the murder testi-

fiedthat Emmit had kept say ing, "I'll kzIl Louise and pat

her in her grave."

Contrary to Emmit's claim t hae he'd had seven mixed drink

s that evening,

no alcohol had been found in his system when his blood alc

ohol level was

tested two ho2zrs after t11e mur der. Emmit was convicted o

f murder in the

first degree and is currently serving a life sentence.

46 ~ why Do zney x~.t?

h y~1~~4~r~ ~~~~a a. t ~ t ~s~j~ ~«> _y ~~+~ "Sk

'~( ~:~Srr f~'-: t

i r ~ Y F.~,V ~5~s̀ ri r tc Z t - e--2~ ga - h tt ~ ~ ~ ~L ~ ~' ., a ~T r ~ ~

~c ~ s~ tc Si S ~ _ nr ~ 1 2; ~., l 7u s .~ 9. ~ ~i- =t

1 ,L~. r~ ?' ~ r L; ~~r ~ ,~'N s ~i_ ti yr

~1i A~ ~ { F' „s ~~-k s'~. ;

r ~, :z.F .~~ F~ ..c L~~! r ~S 4 ~ 4

..i ce S ~1 .yE{ ; '~a 24'"f

r~ ~~ t

< t rs.~ 3~1 S. .~'Y i YC..,. t Y t ~1 fi ~. j r

~z -_,,

A ~ '~ - t 4

r ~! r u y 1'~ 1 y~ - c7 yi t 1,- C ~ h- C y~ Z s r

~ 4 ~. ,s'~ h

t 35 ~c ~` ~~ ~ i' ~' " k~'i >t.~ _ F~ y>~ y ~ J

. r t {t

}~ r-'a. a~ ~'d { { -F F Fs z j ,- -i ~r

1.' ̀ F .`.~'i.

jr.c mss: ~ ~f'~b 1 t~~ ~ sa ''Yti ~" ~ t ~ ~~x -.~

s~ ,. _ ~~~ t ~~ ~ r .;, f

Emotional DependencE and Instability

The sheer prevalence of extreme jealousy among killers makes it difficult

tc~ deternune how they are unique, other than from their jealous behavior.

3 Many of their characteristics are similar to those found among the sub-

stance abusers who will be profiled in the next section. This is not sur-

prising given the large overlap between these two groups. Both kinds of

killers are emotionally volatile, moody, and self-centered. If we separate

out the substance abusers from the other jealous men,. the remaining men

~ ` are more stable in terms of their work records and relationship histories.

f They are more likely to be employed, to be married, and to have children.

They are similar to the substance abusers, however, in the frequency and

explosiveness of their violence. Their violence may be somewhat more

predictable in that it is often prompted by jealous suspicions and not sub-

ject to the aggravating effects of alcohol or drugs.

In some ways, it is easier to identify unique features of the jealous

types by exanuning the men who don't fit the profile. This was appro~-

f mately one-third of the killers. The most obvious differe nce of these nine

x men was that they did not display jealous behaviors, though nearly all

of them could be said to be possessively controlling. These men did not

appear to have worried about the possibility that their partners would be-

come involved with other men. Was it because their partners gave them no

reason for concern? Three of these men said that their partners had been

involved with other men. In all three cases, the killer said he had not cared

about this other relationship since he did not love his partner. Two of these

men said that they had left their partners shortly before killing them and

three others were estranged from their partners. None said that he wished

s to reunite with his partner.

f ` Compared to these men, the jealous men appeared much more in- vested in maintaining their relationships with the women they killed. None

who were estranged from their partners said that they had initiated the

break-up. All of these men said that they had wanted to reunite with their

partners. Jealous men were significantly more likely than their nonjealous

counterparts to say that they felt "highly dependent" upon their partners.

They were more than five times more likely to characterize themselves as

"needy or clingy." Nearly one-third of these men characterized themselves

as "helpless much of the time:' By contrast, none of the nonjealous men

Killer Profiles 47 . ,

,: ? _

viewed themsel ves this way.

There were no differences bet

ween these

groups of men i n the proportion

who character ized themselves

as "impul-

sive" or as "expl osive." Howeve

r, the jealous m an were four t

imes more

likely to say th at they were "se

t off by Iittle tYu ngs:' They wer

e also more

than twice ~s li kely to say that

they were "sens itive to insult"

and to char-

acterize themsel ves as "moody

" A summary o f these self-pe

rceptions is

provided in Tabl e 3.3.

The jealous ki llers came acr

oss as more e motionally vol

atile and

moody than th e other killers,

though they we re no more li

kely to abuse

alcohol or drugs . The jealous k

illers also disti nguished themse

lves in how

much they were influenced by t

heir relationship s. They rated t

hemselves as

being much mor e emotionally d

ependent on the ir partners, as w

ell as more

emotionally ne edy oz clingy. Th

is suggests a much bigger i

nvestment in

their partners' l oyalty and emoti

onal availabilit y, One killer sai

d, "I didn't

realize how bad off I was emoti

onally. Y thoug ht in my heart

I could get

her back." When asked if there

was anything h is estranged pa

rtner could

have said to ha ve avoided bein

g killed, anotYi er man said, "If

she told me

she wouldn't lea ve me. I was so

vulnerable, I w ould have belie

ved her."

The jealous me n were more li

kely to say that they had want

ed fre-

quent sex with their partners. G

iven their jealo us thoughts, fr

equent sex

may have been a way for these

men of contin ually confirmin

g their pri-

mary status with their partners.

The jealous me n were also mo

re likely to

Table 3.3: Com parison of j

ealous and no t-jealous kiA

ers

on how they s ee themselve

s (by percen tage)

Jealous trait

Moody

Sensifiive to insul t

Feeling needy or clingy

Impalsive

Feeling highly d ependent on my p

artner

Set off by little th ings

Explosive

Feeling helpless much of the time

Jealous No t-jealous

I fount

men men

that let

70 30 `

of trig

68 30

we11 a

57 10

the zrr

52 5 0 Fo

r e~

52 30 te

n se

42 1 0 men

36 3 0 mitten

31 0 allegF

N=22 N=9 persa

48 1 Why Do Th ey Kill?

tween these

s as "impul-

times more

-e also more

and to char-

:rceptions is

volatile and

;ly to abuse

;lves in how

emselves as

vell as more

vestment in

id, "I didn't

I could get

~rtner could

she told me

ved her."

granted fre-

-equent sex

:g their pri-

~re likely to

Llers

't-Jealous

men

N=9

}

say that they had w anted sex immediately followi

ng an act of violence

toward the victim. Th e perpetrators' expectations of se

x after violence are

discussed in more detai l in the section on sexual viole

nce.

A higher proportion of the jealous types of killers reported t

hat they i

had no friends, and on average, they had fewer friend

s than the other

killers. This was especi ally true when we separate out

the jealous men

who did not have substan ce abuse problems. Seven out of

the eight non-

substance-abusing jealous men said that they had no friends. Thes

e seven

men also had been far les s likely to want to engage in so

cial activities

with their partners. None said that he and his partner had

spent any sig-

nificant time with mutual friends . When asked why, one of thes

e men said,

"I didn't trust her friends." H e went on to explain that several

of his wife's

friends had encouraged her to leave him due to his violence

. 'Itvo other

men said their jealousy had been the reason for not socializi

ng with other

couples. Both had strongly s uspected their wives of having af

fairs with

other women's husbands. Th ese men had not only refused to

accompany

their wives on evenings out w ith other couples but had also

attempted

to dissuade their wives from do ing so. One man, Gregory, ha

d been so

suspicious that his wife was ha ving an affair with the husband of

her best

friend that he had followed her on several occasions when sh

e said she

was having dinner at a restaur ant with her friends. Crregory ad

mitted that

he had peered through the win dows of the restaurant to make s

ure that his

wife was "with who she said s he was with."

Triggers for Homicide

I found that each type of killer had somewhat distinctive trigger

ing factors

that led him to murder. In exam ining each homicide, I looked

at two kinds

of triggers: longstanding ones , such as grievances against t

he victim, as

well as recent events, such as estrangement or a suspected affai

r. Often,

the immediate triggers were s imply continuations of longstan

ding ones.

For example, the jealous killer' s "jealous rage" leading to ho

micide of-

ten seemed but a cuJ.mination of his longstanding jealousy. As

previously

mentioned, over half of the je alous men said that the murders

they com-

mitted had been primarily trig gered by jealous rage about their

partners'

alleged involvement with oth er men. About half of these men

named a

person whom they had believe d to be sexually involved with th

eir partner.

Killer Profiles ~ 49

~~~ ~~~ ~ x '~ r,` ~. .~ . h .~_ ,_

Two men said that the imme diate trigger had been thei

r partner not admit-

ti~ng to an affair they had as sumed she was having. One o

f these men said,

"If she had said ̀ I'm sorry, ' or ̀ I don't want to be with

you,' I would have

killed myself instead." Th e other man said, "If she had

just admitted it, I

would have just left" This man had lured his estrange

d partner to a hotel

for one Iast night with her an,d then demanded that she

admit an affair.

Four men said that their mu rderous rage had been mot

ivated not by

.suspicions about a speczfi c rival but by the idea that th

eir partners would

end the relationships and even tually xeplace them with so

meone else. One

man said he had been inf uriated by the idea that "s

omeone else would

have her." Beyond their jeal ous vengeance, tl~e vast majo

rity of the jealous

men said that the murders also had been triggered by

anger at their part-

ners for ending or attemptin g to end the relationships.

The two most com-

ri~only stated motives for ki lling were to punish the par

tner for ending the

relationship and to prevent her from leaving. Asked hi

s motive in killing

his recently estranged partn er, one killer said, "To sto

p her from hurting,

me, and to keep our family to gether." This man went on t

o explain that his

having sex with her one la st time before killing her

had been "a way of

preserving us as a couple for ever."

Most of the men said that the ir suspicions about their par

tners ending

the relationships became m ore frequent over time, Thr

ee-quartexs of the

jealous men said that they b ecame "obsessive" about the

ir partners in the

hours and days leading up t o the murdez. Three-quarte

rs said that they

also had become increasin gly "desperate:' By contras

t, only 10% of the

other kiIlers said that they ha d felt desperate or obsessi

ve just prior to kill-

ing their partners, Several me n said that they had nat slep

t for days befare

the murder. One killer said, " I was obsessed, evezy waki

ng moment." This

obsession had been accomp anied by inexeased monitori

ng, and in many

cases, stalking of their partne rs.

One killer, Harold, said, "i suspected Jenaya was mak

ing plans [to

end the relationship] but I did n't know for sure. The mo

re distant she be-

came .. , it got worse. And i t got to the point where I wa

s obsessed with

knowing . , .what she was t hinking." In the weeks bef

ore he shot Jenaya

to death in a hotel room, Ha zold had begun to take mor

e and more time off

from work to monitor her acti vities. From obsezving her

interactions with

a fellow tenant, Harold had become convinced that Jena

ya was planning

to leave him fox the other m an. Unbeknownst to Jenay

a, Harold had quit

his job two weeks before the murder in order to devote

himself full time

so ~ why Do ~rney x~n?

`~"`_

s ,

c t

i i

to observing her. He wo uld leave the house in the mornin

g at the usual

Time, as if lie were goi ng to work, -and then park his truck

down the street

from where he would s py on Jenaya.

Another killer, Anthony, had also quit his job in order to spy on h

wife, Robin. Two days befo re the murder, Anthony had bound Ro

bin's feet

and wrists with duct tape an d held her hostage all night while thr

eatening

to kill both of them. The next day, Robin had obtained a protec

tive order,

requiring Anthony to leave their house, Desperate to enlist t

heir support,

Robin had visited.Anthony's p arents to tell them of her decision t

o file for

divorce. She did not know that A nthony was sitting in the stairwell, li

sten-

ing to their conversation via a baby monitor. He had overheard Rob

in tell-

ing his parents that she would take the children to Cape Cod the fol

lowing

morning. Anthony's parents ha d been so fearful that he might kill R

obin

before she fled that they had ins isted he make an emergency appoi

ntment j

with his psychiatrist for the foll owing morning. Throughout that

night,

they had taken turns standing wa tch outside his bedroom to make

sure

that he didn't leave.

Early the following morning, Ant hony had called a cab from his room

and then told his parents he needed to go outside for a smoke. He had

then

fled in the cab to Robin's house. W hen he arrived, Robin had just p

ut the

two boys in the car and had gone b ack inside to get some bags. Anthon

told the two boys to stay quiet bef ore going into the house to find Robi

n, j

Trapping her in the bathroom, An thony stabbed Robin in the ches

t and

lower back with a fishing knife.

While Anthony had monitor ed Robin's behavior throughout th

eir

eleven-year marriage, he reporte d that this behavior became mor

e fre-

quent during periods of separat ion or pending separation. During

one

prior separation six years earlier, A nthony had hired a private investig

ator

to conduct surveillance of Robin. Reflecting back on the intense energy

he -

had devoted to "worrying" about Robin's plans, Anthony said that h

e felt

a great relief after killing her. "It was almost like having an orgasm,

" he

added.

Potential Deterrents

I asked each man a variety of qu estions to identify what might hav

e pre-

vented from killing his partner. Some questions related to potential

im-

mediate deterrents while others concerned long-term measures such a

Killer Profiles ~ 51

.~... .....t

counseling, criminal sanctio ns, and other kinds of i

nterventions. I found a prc

that each of the killer type s was somewhat distinct in

the kinds of poten- f ,̀E,e ~

tial deterrents that they id entified. I asked each man

to look over a list of

potential deterrents, and to indicate which "would

have" and "would not Hers

have" prevented him from killing. This list included

it, "'

relat

a) a judge putting me in ja il with a warning that any

further violence Hers'

would result in more jail time

gest

b) attending a batterer in tervention program

upst;

c) a clergy person talking to me about my violence

romp

d) a pofice officer threaten ing to arrest me for any f

urther violence ~ smog

toward my partnex alle€

e) a family member urgin g me to stop my violence

toward my i

partner a ba

~ a friend or relative of m y partner threatening to

beat me up or had

kill me assa

g) being on probation f grax

h) being on probation an d having to wear an ankle

bracelet that ~ not ~~

notified police whenever I came close to my partner

com

i} my partner wearing a b eeper that notified the pol

ice whenever I Ve~1

came close to her ~ }us ;

j) my partner having a re straining order against m

e ~ and ~

k) having my violence t oward my partner publici

zed in the local ~ grat I

newspaper ~ whe

1) realizing I would spen d the rest of my life in pri

son ~ J~

intervention ~:

out

"prc

Nearly all of these men said that a batterer

program might ~

have helped them to stop t heir violence at an earlie

r stage. Despite this, fee l

none of these men had att ended such a program, eith

er voluntarily or as ue d

ordered by a court. Such p rograms were not as ava

ilable during the early ~ hav

to mid-nineties when many of these murders occurred

. Those who counsel ~ ad n

batterers say that the bigg est barrier for these men to

seek help is their de- ~ pro

nial of abusive behavior. The jealous killers I inte

rviewed were no differ- ~ pos

ent in this regard, othex tha n pexhaps having an even

highex level of denial.

Most denied having been abusive to theix partners,

and therefore would sho

not have seen the need for treatment that focuses o

n domestic violence. act;

The jealous men who were also substance abusers wer

e more apt to admit of

52 ( Why Ao 'They Kill?

=t.: ,;

__:

; =~;.

~ tis~2

~i. :z ~ <#Y.ti

{

a problem with alcohol or drugs than with domestic violence, though (as

we will see in the next section), neither did they seek treatment for this.

Those without a substance abuse problem tended to view their part-

~~ers, and not themselves, as the ones with the problems. As one man put

ix, "She couldn't keep her pants on, that was the main problem in our

relationship." Other jealous killers were more specific about their part-

ners' involvement with particular men. When asked to identify the big-

gest problems in his relationship with his partner, Harold said, "That man

upstairs," meaning another resident with whom he suspected Jenaya was

romantically involved. In response to this same question, James, who had

smothered his partner, Corinne, with a pillow, said, "her uncle," citing her

alleged past sexual involvement with her uncle.

James was the only killer I interviewed who had previously attended a batterer intervention program. One year prior to killing Corinne, James had agreed to attend such a program during his incarceration for a past assault of Corinne. Unfortunately, James had stopped attending this pro- gram after twelve sessions when he was released from prison, and did not heed the program's recommendation that he continue treatment in a community-based program. Interestingly, James credited the batterer inter-

vention program with helping him to recognize, at least temporarily, that his jealous feelings concerning Corinne and her uncle were unwarranted and had been destructive to their relationship. As James put it, the pro- gram had motivated him to "stop throwing her uncle in her face." Asked whether he had continued to do so following his release from prison, James said, "No, but I ruminated about it when we was separated, I guess out of insecurity." James added that if he had continued his treatment, he "probably" would have been better able to handle his jealous and insecure feelings. While there is certainly no guarantee of this, had James contin- ued his batterer intervention and substance abuse programs, he might not have violated Corinne's restraining order on the night he killed her. James admitted that these feelings "flared up" when he was drinking. James is profiled as a jealous substance abuser in the later section about men who pose multiple threats.

Outcome studies of batterer intervention programs have consistently shown that program completers are significantly less likely to commit new acts of violence, particularly serious ones, than noncompleters. One goal of such programs is that abusers strictly obey the conditions of protec-

Killer Profiles ~ 53

~. rr:~. , ~ .. _ ~ _

five orders. Progr ams also commonl

y require particip ants to commit to s

briery, sometimes with the additzon

al requirement of submitting to ran

dom

drug screens that are conducted by

court personnel. Barterer intervent

ion

programs also pr ovide participants

a weekly opport unity to discuss a

ruminations, obs essive thoughts, o

r forms of "negat ive self-talk" suc

h as

jealousy or anger toward their part

ners. One comm on intervention i

s to

help abusive men identify such neg

ative thoughts in their earliest stag

es,

before they escal ate, and to replac

e them with more constructive way

s of

thinking, which in turn will help th

em to make better choices. The nee

d to

choose an alterna tive course of act

ion was best arti culated by one of

former clients, Ke ndrick, who had

a history making jeatous accusatio

ns to

his partner.

"Yeah, I'd just r un with those fe

elings [his anger and jealousy] and

then 7'd do somet hing stupid like

going . .. to the bar and showing

up at

her house and tal king shit. ... Now

, I go to ameeti ng [Alcohol Anon

mous] or call my sponsor."3

Though Kendrick 's wards suggest

someone with se lf-motivation, he

is like many abus ive men who do

not voluntarily ch oose to attend a b

at-

terer intervention or a subsCance a

buse program, an d only do so beca

use

of a court order. Without court mon

itoring, many ab usive men do not

re-

main in such prog rams long enou

gh to make lastin g changes. Outco

studies of abusive men in batterer i

ntervention progr ams have shown t

hat

program completi on, as well as de

sistence from vio lence, are most lik

ely

when program pa rticipation is acc

ompanied by cons istent monitoring

the courts.¢

Substance Ab4a. sing Type

Naxt to the jealo us type, the lar

gest category of kz llers was those

who

abused alcohol or drugs. Nineteen

of the killers, or 61%, frt this catego

ry.

In comparison, 7S % of the perpetra

tors of attempted homicide were c

las-

sified as substanc e abusexs based o

n the victim's rep orts of their alc

ohol

and drug use. Clas sification for the

killers was based on their self rep

orted

nse of alcohol an d drugs as well a

s their responses to the Addiction

Se-

veriry Index (ASI) .5 Questions on t

he ASI require res pondents to ind

icate

both lifetime use of alcohol and dr

ugs, as well as t heir use during

the

past thirty days. I also asked the m

en to rate the fre quency and amou

nt of

54 i Why Do The y Kill?

to so-

ndom

,noon

.s any

Bch as

is to

Cages,

iys of

;ed to

~f my

ins to

and

up at

iony-

n, he

bat-

:ause

>t re-

;ome

that

kely

g by

who

;ory.

;las-

~hol

rted

Se-

cate

the

~t of

y' ;:

substance use during the thirty days immediately p receding the murder.

Each man was asked to estimate th e number of days he used alcohol and

particular drugs during this thirty-day per iod. To put this in context, I also

asked each man to talk about any increa ses, decreases, or other changes

in his substance use during the comple te duration of his relationship with

the woman he murdered. Each man was addi tionally asked to describe any

f' consequences of his use, such as arrest s for drunk driving or drug posses-

1 sion, or problems in the relationship rel ated to his own or his partner's use

of alcohol or drugs. Table 3.4 provides a summa ry of alcohol and drug

abuse by the killers.

Based on their patterns of use, all the men in this group fit the pro-

file of an alcoholic or a drug addict. Just over half o f the substance abus-

k ers could be classified as polydrug abusers since they abused more than

one substance. Aside from alcohol, the most common ly abused drug was

marijuana, reported by eight of the men. Eight of t he men also reported

~' overusing one or more medications that had been prescribed to them or

a that they had illegally obtained. ,These medic ations included Valium,

~ Elavil, Xanix, Codeine, Percocet, Demerol, o r Darvon. Four of the killers

reported heavy use of cocaine or crack, while two sai d they were addicted

to heroin.

When assessing an abusive man's potential for homicide, there is

some evidence that substance abuse by itself is a significant risk marker.

~ There is more evidence, however, that f requency of abuse is especially

f significant and that the risk of homicide increases dramatically when the

abusive man is abusing alcohol or drugs on a daily basis. The incidence of

F daily use of alcohol and drugs among the s ubstance abusers is shown in

Table 3.5.

Table 3.4: Patterns of substance use among killer s

(by percentage)

Substance abuse profile Substance abusers All killers

Abused alcohol only 26 16

Abused drugs only 21 12

Abused alcohol and drags 52 32

N=19 N=31

Killer Profiles ( 55

"Zc 7J' ̀'S...~1. ~Z~wY14~ ~. ~5{tii'lrst.~_ ~C ~~~, , h .~ , r _ _ ... .

. ..

~~~~~

,~.

Table 3.5: Daily abuse o£ substances among killer

(by percentage)

Substance abuse profile Substance abusers Afl la

llers

Daily abuse of alcohol only 57 35

Daily abuse of drugs only 52 32

Daily abuse of alcohol and dr ugs 31

N=19 N=31

Does Substance Use Contribu te to Murder?

Our findings about alcohol an d drug use by the killers are

consistent with

those of Jacquelyn Campbell and her colleagues based o

n their inves-

tigation of 445 intimate partne r homicides and attempted

homicides of

women.6 This study found tha t half the perpetrators were pr

oblem drink-

ers and that half used illegal drugs of some kind. There w

as a substantial

amount of overlap between the alcohol and drug abusers. Thi

s same study

found that one-third of the pe rpetrators had used alcohol

at the time of

the homicide ar attempted hom icide while 12% had used dr

ugs. In about

one-quarter of the cases, the p erpetrator had used both alc

ohol and drugs

on the day of the homicide or homicide attempt.' Pooling

the data from

the thirty-one killers and the twenty victims of attemp

ted homiczde in our

stztdy, we found somewhat higher proportions. Half of

our kiIlers said that

they had been drunk or high or both on the day that th

ey killed their part-

ner or ex-partner. Meanwhi le, half of the victims of a

ttempted homicide

also reported that their perp etrator had appeared to b

e drunk or high on

the day of the near-fatal as sault. For most of the perpe

trators who used

alcohol or drugs on the day of the murder or attempted

murder, alcohol or

drug use was not a departure from their usual pattern. Ne

arly all, from the

killers' and victims' accoun ts, had habitually abused al

cohol or dxugs on a

daily basis. Howevex, this do es not mean that alcohol or

drug use was not

a factor in the fatal and nea r-Fatal assaults. When aske

d if they thought al-

cohol or drugs had been a s trong factor in their partner'

s near-fatal assault,

1 half of the victims of attempted h

omicide said yes. Generally, victims

{ ' gave two rationales for their ans

wers. A few said that their partner's vio-

lence had always been more severe when he had been d

rinking or using

drugs. One woman said tha t hex boyfriend had physicall

y abused her only

56 ( Why Do They Kill? ~

- <rAs ~ ~ , .~ ~ ~ - _ -~ - —

~ ~ t'- Y }y ~ z{ _

F~ } I~ G{ ~ Y

~~'~~ ~ ,r<S ~3~1~ 2 ! 1 ~ j J f

~,,.

~ `

e=.'

~ '' t

when he was drunk. As one woman put it, "He didn't hold back as much

when he was drinking." Another said, "He was more honest about what he

really thought when he had alcohol in him," citing his jealous accusations

and threats. These women were essentially saying that alcohol or drugs

seemed to trigger their partners' violence, including the men's attempts to

.kill them. Most of the women, however, gave a different reason for think-

1ng alcohol or drugs had played a strong role in their abusers' near-fatal

assaults. These women said that their partners' alcohol or drug use had es-

calated and seemed a part of an overall deterioration that they had noticed

in the days or months leading up to the assaults. In most cases, the victim

traced her abuser's deterioration to when she had separated from him or

otherwise taken steps to end the relationship. Besides increased alcohol or

drug use, some victims said they'd also noticed other signs of deteriora-

tion such as neglect of hygiene, depression, lack of sleep, or loss of a job.

Here is one victim's account of this.

Interviewer: Were there any other changes you noticed in the three

months prior to the homicide attempt?

Vickie: He seemed to be coming apart.... I could tell he

wasn't bathing and he'd lost a lot of weight.. . . And

his sister told me that he'd been fired from his job.

Interviewer: Do you know the reason?

Vickie: She told me it was from his going to work drunk.

Several other victims said that their partner's deterioration was accompa-

nied by increasing levels of violence and "paranoid" behavior in the three

months leading up to the near-fatal assault.

Interviewer: Did you notice anything else?

Kelly: Well, he was always watching me.

Interviewer: How do you mean?

Kelly: Even when I was sleeping, he would be awake and

looking at me.

Interviewer: Why do you think he was doing that?

Kelly: I think it was because he was suspicious of what I was

up to.

Interviewer: You mean jealous?

Killer Profiles ~ 57

t , _ _ ,- , __. _ ,._ _ ~ _ _ I _,.

~~ - _,

t , ,. ~, ~Lfi~G'.a'1 ~~!',.'~w ~°.~s~' ,~,t_ '~t~ ~ _, ....r.. Lc~a::' r _~~2.~; -:,, ~~. C'f._ ~~ "..N,~ ~.. ~~~»~.v~rry ixf•

--_ .r .. ....

Kelly: Not just that. Par

anoid. He wa s always par

anoid but

he became e ven more so.

He thought everyone was

against him, not just me.

Interviewer: Do you kn

ow why?

Kelly: The only thing I c

an think of w as the cocai

ne just

because that was never a

big thing for I~im before.

Despite this testimony to

the effects of alcohol and

drugs, half o f the vic-

tiros of subst ance-abusing

perpetrators said that the

y did not thi nk alcohol

or drugs had been signif

icant factors in the neat-f

atal assaults. Most of

these women thought tha

t their partne rs would hav

e done the s ame thing

anyway, and several wome

n said they t hought alcoh

ol use was m erely in-

cidental to th e attacks. Fu

rther eviden ce of this is

provided by the court

~' i

findings con cerning the k

illers. Compa red to the o

ther killers, those who

abused subst ances were m

ore likely to have been c

onvicted of m nxder in

the first degr ee (42% com

pared to 25 % of the non

substance ab users). A

conviction o f murder in

the first degr ee indicates

"irrefutable" evidence

of pramedita tian on the k

iller's part. Despite this,

over one-th ird of the

substance-ab using killers

did not show strong preme

ditation, acc ording to

the court, an d were found

guilty only of manslaugh

ter. Judging from the

court finding s and sentenc

es, the subst ance-abusing

killers were m ostly on

opposzte end s of the prem

editation sca le, suggestin

g that they h ad either

carefuIly pla nned the kill

ing or hardly at all.

How do subs tance-abusing

killers differ from those

who do not a buse

alcohol oz dr ugs? I found

that they are more severe

ly and frequ entlq vio-

Ient. They ar e also young

er, less likel y to be marri

ed or to hav e children,

and more like ly to be une

mployed. Tn m any ways, t

he substance abusers

appeared le ss stable and

more volati le than their

nonsubstance -abusing

counterparts . Many of t

he substance abusers talk

ed of a prog ression of

abuse that h ad correspon

ded with their increased c

onsumption o f alcohol

or drugs. Mo re often, the

ir relationsh ips had been

short-lived, including

theme relation ships with th

e deceased. O n average, t

hese relation ships had

lasted two y ears prior to

the murders. This compa

res to five a nd a half

years for the nonsubstanc

e abusers. Th eir relation

ships with th e deceased

had not only ended faster

but also star ted faster as

well. I found that the "

substance a busers had s

ignificantly shorter cour

tships with t he women

they killed; t wo and a half

months on a verage comp

ared to five a nd a half

ss t why Do 7n ey ~~

months for the

detail in a late

that was not cc

Severe Violerc,

Some researcY

abusing batter

batterexs.$ The

ponents of the

contribute to

effects such a;

Personality e'

centeredness,

more sensiti~

include finan

factoxs can g

an intimate r

Propone

act very difl

is determine

experiment:

alcohol-Iacr ;~

punch, becc ~

bibed aIcot ~

falsely belie I

tric shock i

~o g1ve.~r 'I

as an excur

it," such in

might get

At Ie~

hol or do

that they

killing th~

their acre

their syst

months for the other killers. Short cou rtships will be discussed in more

detail in a later chapter, sinc e we found this to be a separate risk factor

that was not confined just to sub stance abusers.

Severe Violence

Some researchers and service prov iders have reported that substance-

abusing batterers exhibit more severe leve ls of violence than do other

batterers.8 There are two primary theo ries about this. According to pro-

ponents of the "disinhibition theory," alcoho l and some drugs directly

contribute to violence in a variety of wa ys. These include physiological

effects such as loss of motor control and ability to control one's impulses.9

Personality effects include a lowered ab ility to tolerate frustration, self-

centeredness, avoidance of problems, black-an d-white thinking, and being

more sensitive to insult. There are also li festyle consequences that can

include financial losses, unemployment, an d social alienation. All of these

factors can greatly contribute to a person's likelihood of using violence in

an intimate relationship.

Proponents of the "deviance disavowal" the ory argue that people re-

act very differently to alcohol, and whether a person resorts to violence

is determined by one's beliefs about drinking.10 They point to famous lab

experiments in which subjects who are led to believe they are drinking

alcohol-laced punch at a party, when in fa ct there is no alcohol in the

punch, become more aggressive than those s ubjects who had actually im-

bibed alcohol. Other experimental studies have shown that subjects who

falsely believe they have imbibed alcohol administer higher levels of elec-

tric shock to individuals who give wrong an swers to tests they are asked

to give.11 These experimental results suggest that individuals use alcohol

as an excuse to act out or become violent. By s aying "alcohol made me do

it," such individuals seek to avoid responsibil ity for actions that otherwise

might get them in trouble.12

At least two of the men I interviewed ap peared to be using the alco-

hol or drugs to downplay responsibility for mur der. These men claimed

that they had consumed large quantities of alcohol or drugs just prior to

killing their partners. Drug tests administer ed to them immediately after

their arrest, however, showed that there had been no alcohol oz drugs in

their systems. This does not mean that alcoh ol or drugs did not contribute

Killer Profiles I 59

,~ /~ L

~ ~~,

to these killings in other ways, howe ver. Both men did in fact have long

histories of alcohol and drug use th at may well have contributed to thei

decisions to kill their partners. Each fit the profile of an advanced-stag

alcoholic who had experienced multip le negative effects as the result of

alcohol use. One was homeless and h ad not held a job of over two months

for the previous ten years. The oth er had committed multiple robberies

and other crimes to support his drug habit. Though neither was in fact

drunk or high on the day of the mur ders, alcohol and drugs appeared to

have greatly influenced their lifestyles and narrowed their choices.

', Regardless of whether alcohol or drugs cause

these men to be violent,

the substance-abusing killers appear ed to have committed more frequent

and more severe prior acts of violence toward the women they killed. They

were almost twice as likely as the othe r killers to admit past violence tha

had occurred on at least a monthly le vel. They were approximately twice

as likely to have previously injured their partner. Several of the men had

committed past acts of severe vio lence that could have easily resulted i

the deaths of the victims. These inc lude the following incidents by five

different men:

1) Bludgeoned the victim repeatedl y over the head with a pipe until

she lost consciousness and required hospitalization for over one f

à week

2) Threw the victim over a stone wa11 onto a busy highway

li 3) Strangl ed the victim into unconsciousness

~ 4) Punched and kicked the victim repeatedly while

throwing her

around a room (for about twenty min utes), resulting in many &

severe lacerations to her head and bo dy

5) Repeatedly drove drunkenly and recklessly with the victim in

I th e car, once crashing into a set of gas

pumps and setting them

ablaze

For about one-third of the substance -abusing killers, the homicide ap-

peared almost as an inevitable culmi nation of their highly violent and

reckless behavior toward the victim. For two of the men, their fatal as-

saints were arguably not the most s evere acts of violence they had to

mittedtoward the victims. ,~

so ~ why Do They Win?

Ca;

One

out

"bei

with

whip

later

som

Vinc

ing

acct

COUI

m7n'

lon

horr

stop

AftE

time

then

she

to t~

he v

cent

Vine

sent

her.

havf

but

Chip

have long

ed to their

need-stage

e result of

~o months

robberies

gas in fact

speared to

es.

~e violent,

frequent

lied. They

~lence that

tely twice

men had

esulted in

is by five

pipe until

ver one

g her

zany

m in

them

cide ap-

~lent and

fatal as-

ad com-

1r y i ~` , _ r 7.~~'' t +~ ti"-' ̀ v y a 'ids t

_ _ ' _

~f 1tC by r r~ ~i ~:: ;~ "..2 ~r .

rtì: ~ 6 a ,~~ .5 ~ S':t

~~ _,, y `'~ ~ 4 s F ~, ~+ ~~~ t` : ~

• y~ r z ~ f' a

I~'~. ~ ~

Case Example 2 !~'

"She'd always do the opposite of what I'd tell her." ~.„

One year prior to killing Carol, Vincent had assault ed her while they were

out "drinking and partying" with mutual friends. Enraged that she was

"being too friendly" with a mutual friend, Vincent had hit her in the face

with a beer bottle. Carol had sustained a deep lacerati on over her eye for

which she'd required at least twenty sutures. Approxi mately six months

later, Vincent had again assaulted Carol while they were out drinking with

some friends. This time he'd punched her in the face, bre aking her jaw.

Vincent had been arrested and served three months in jail.

One night shortly after his release, Vincent and Carol went out party-

ing with mutual friends. Both of them consumed a great deal of alcohol,

according to Vincent. Vincent went to the liquor store six times during the

course of the evening, buying and helping to consume six pints of pepper-

mint schnapps, four quarter-pints of hot (cinnamon) schnapps, a h alf gal-

lon of vodka, and about sixty dollars' worth of whiskey. They arrived

home at 9:30 p:m. and began to argue. Carol complained that V incent had

stopped up the toilet by throwing some macaroni in it. Vincent tried to un-

stop it with a broom handle, and then broke it over his knee in frus tration.

After Carol yelled at him, Vincent punched her in the leg and ar m several

times and then backhanded her in the face, giving her a blood y nose. He

then gave Carol a towel to wipe her face and sat down to wa tch TV while

she went to bed. That evening Vincent slept on the couch.

When he awoke, Carol's face was swollen and he offe red to take her

to the hospital. She refused his help and instead called the p olice while

he was taking a shower. Vincent was arrested. Ten days later, w hile Vin-

cent was still in jail awaiting trial, Carol died of a blood clot to her brain.

Vincent was convicted of manslaughter and received aten-y ear prison

sentence.

Asked if a jail sentence for his serious assault of Carol a year p rior to

her death would have made a difference, Vincent said, "Not really, I world

have gone back to her. She'd always do the opposite of what I'd tell her

but I was infatuated with her. I'd do anything for her. I'd take h er out for

Chinese four times a week, buy her flowers. Twice I bought her kittens:'

Killer Profiles ~ 61

~_a't~~~,1L..F.;wr~~:~r~~'~,'3~,~~r.*~'+~e:~r ~"~t ,ti.~zy.,:s. ..~ .._. .

...w .. ... ~. ., ~ .. .... , . .. ....::.~ : .. .. . .. .:w> .

,...~yc vs

:E.~iF ~,1:`q:K+1a'~.[e 5:s £-i'-.SC:~-~.'4:.,~. ~~iS.y?.j tyi ~ _

l.'2::::`." '' w ~ ,e: .. , .

E, .. JS': '....

r v. ......

Economic and Emotional Instability

The substance-abusing killers were most distinct from the other killers

in their lack of stability. I have already mentioned that their relationships

with the deceased had faster beginnings and endings. They also appeared

to be less stable in a multitude of other ways. They were twice as likely as

the other men to be unemployed at the time of the killings. Overall, their

work histories were more sporadic. On average, they changed jobs much

more often and held jobs for shorter periods. They were almost three

times as likely to have been fired from a job. Their annual incomes were

considerably less than those of the other killers. They were three times

less likely to own a home, However, their level of education was similar

to that of the other killers. Just over half had completed high school and

one-quarter had attended at least one year of college.

A pattern of instability was also reflected in the substance abuser's re-

lationships. Despite the fact that they were an average of six years younger

than the other killers, the substance abusers had more relationships that

preceded their involvement with the women they killed. These relation-

ships were more short-lived and more likely to have ended due to abusive

behavior. The substance abusers were half as likely to be married to the

murder victim, and three times less likely to have ever married. They were

also half as likely to have had children. Those who did primarily appeared

to have been abusive parents. More than half admitted to assaulting their

children verbally or physically on a regular basis. Compared to the other

killers, substance abusers also appeared to have been less involved with

their children. Half admitted to having no contact with their biological

children following the dissolution of their relationships with the mothers.

Some admitted to being unable or unwilling to tolerate children's emo-

tional needs.

Compared to the other killers, except for those we deemed financially

exploitative, the substance abusers were most likely to have depended fi-

nancially upon the murder victims. Given their long periods of unemploy-

ment and underemployment, this often extended through most of the rela-

tionships and often had been a point of contention with their partners. One

man, who had been on extended disability, said that his wife had repeat-

edly questioned his inability to work. Several of the men said that they

had resented their financial dependency on their partners and believed t hat

s2 ~ Why Da They Ki11?

I ~y z

~ .... l'

it had given their par tnexs too much power over th

em. One man added

that "she lorded it ove r me every chance she got." Tw

o men said that they

were more suspicious and jealous toward their partn

ers when they were

unemployed.

Compared to the other killer s, substance abusers seemed m

ore emo-

tionally volatile. They rated themselves as quick to anger b

ut also said

they were often depresse d. Two-thirds of the substanc

e abusers rated

themselves as being moody . This is ovex three times the

proportion of

other killers who perceived themselves this way. Despite

this, they were

no more likely to rate them selves as being depressed. Half

of all killers

said that they had been depres sed for significant periods of ti

me.

Another distinguishing featur e of the substance abusers was tha

t they

were mach more likely to repo rt that they had had many fri

ends and an

active social life. The median nu mber of friends claimed by the

substance

abusers was five, compared to o ne for the other killers. Substa

nce abus-

ers were also more than twice as likely to say ~ha~ they had s

pent at least

one day or evening per week w ith a friend or friends indepe

ndently of

their partners. overwhelmingly, these friends were fellow subst

ance abus-

ers and their times together had r evolved around alcohol or drugs

or both.

Four of the substance abusers said that they had spent more eveni

ngs with

their friends than with their partne rs. As well as their solo activi

ties with

friends, most of the substance a busers reported that they freque

ntly had

seen friends with their partners. About two-thirds of the substanc

e abusers

said that, together with their part ners, they had spent at least on

e evening

per week with mut-uaI friends. Th is compares to just one-quart

er of the

other kiIlers. One-third of the s ubstance abusers said that the

y and their

partners had spent most of their e venings out with friends, whil

e none of

the other killers reported this. As with their solo friends, the ki

llers re-

ported that most of these mutual friends were also heavy users of

alcohol

or dnigs. Thzs choice of friends ma y explain why sa few of the s

ubstance

abusers had voluntarily sought he lp for their drinking or drug u

se. As one

killer put it, "They wasn't [sic] g oing to te11 me to stop [drinki

ng] 'cause

they was all doing the same thing." This man went on to say that

he had

retained the same group of "drin king buddies" since childhood

and that

most had been arrested for alco hol-related crimes such as dis

turbing the

peace, dnmk dxiving, and assaults .

Killer profiles ( 63

.. t~~" _ ~1.~~ .l.F .. y~'p ~ TIC."l. l {~_~ n~i .lei• ,. ~CiE ~t L ~ y~

~~~..74'II -.

.~ _ _..-.__. __. .> .. ~_ i

_ ~ .~.. .~ __ ~.~~.... .~ ..iL lam. _

BlamingAlcohol and Drugs

The substance abusers were least likely to express self-regrets, next to

the materially motivated killers. When ask ed to check off whether they

"sometimes felt like a failure," only 17% o f the substance abusers gave an

affirmative response. By contrast, 40% of the other killers checked "yes"

to this. Given their poor economic and e mployment status relative to the

other killers, one would expect substanc e abusers to feel more like fail-

ures. However, many substance abusers are known to maintain grandiose

self-images. Substance abusers often use al cohol and drugs to avoid self-

doubts and to bolster their self-regard. This can become a vicious circle.

The more negative consequences the substa nce abuser incurs due to drink-

ing and drug use, the more he may want to further imbibe in order to

forget the past. Drinking also becomes a wa y of excusing or rationalizing

failures. When discussing their failure to advance their careers, a number

of the substance abusers I interviewed ex pressed "I could have been a

contender" sentiments. As one man put it, "Alcohol messed me up" in

reference to his long periods of unemploym ent. Not surprisingly, the sub-

stance abusers were far more likely to blam e their violence on alcohol or

drugs. More than half of the substance abuser s said that they would not

have killed their partner had they not been dru nk ar high on the day of the

murder. Only one of the nonsubstance abus ers made this claim.

Triggers for Homicide

Many of the substance abusers revealed long standing grievances against

their partners, but part of the long-term pi cture for these men was also

that their partners had had longstanding grie vances against them. Quite

often, these grievances had revolved about the man's substance use, lack

of financial stability, and general lack of resp onsibility. Victims had also

complained about the men's abusive behavior. As mentioned earlier, these

men's violence was often more frequent an d more severe than that the

other types of killers. Without exception, the ir physical violence was ac-

companied by economic abuse. Compared to th e other killers, substance

abusers were more likely to be unemploye d or underemployed and to

drain finances on alcohol and drugs. Alcohol a nd drug use also commonly

resulted in additional costs such as drunk drivin g injuries and fines, dam-

64 ~ Why Do They Kill?

i ',{

f ~' R~' ~,

° ~ S.

e~ -~ ~y

} _ 4 v~ C

L. ~ l hit.

L '~ y ~4r

i T ' x r;

- . 9 lj - _ 14

V."- ( ,tit ~ f

1-)~ A [

:T~! ~ ~ ,p

1 V ~,t t

~. Fc ~~ f3 ~ ~4 aJ v Y.. ~~ ~1 3

~̀.:.~.~

t .'

controlling behavior. Just as often, victims said the complaints triggering

the murder attempts had been minor ones. Some women said they had

made no complaints at a11, and their partners appeared to be reacting to

some imagined slight.

age to one's car as well as other property, and medical costs associated

with poor health. Substance abusers often engaged in a wide variety of

psychological abuse that typically included name-calling, lying about their

whereabouts, having affairs, and not following through on promises.

Despite this, substance abusers were half as likely, compared to the I II,

other killers, to be estranged from their partners at the time of the homi- P

tide. For those who were no longer living with their partners, estrange-

ment appeared to be a prominent triggering factor for the murders they

committed. Nearly all of these men also qualified as jealous types of kill-

ers. For the substance abusers who were still living with their partners, the

immediate triggers to the murders appeared to have revolved around more

mundane grievances. Nine of these men said that the immediate trigger

had been that the victim was complaining about something. According to

the killers, these nine victims had complained about the following:

1) His drinking and wanting her to go into a particular bar

2) His staying home from work. Killer said he had been upset that

neighbors would hear her yelling and they would be kicked out

of their apartment

3) Him having stopped up the toilet by throwing macaroni in it

4) Him having left her at a party to go out with his friends

5) He had stolen her heroin

6) He had taken some of her money

7) He had broken a flowerpot

8) His not getting help for his depression

9) Something that the killer cannot recall

There is no way of knowing how accurately the killer is reporting these

triggering events. However, the victims of attempted homicide whose

partners had been substance abusers cited similar triggering events, even

though these victims often said that the near-fatal attacks had come not in

response to their complaints about their partners' behavior. In some cases,

there had been major complaints about the men's drinking, violence, or

Killer Profiles ~ 65

~ ~ , + ;zk~ ~_ Y.r. T i _- .. ~~ K.Ja .~~Fl"S ~~ ~rS :' ~~~ r ..._ r, .~. c .~ .. ~.. ~ .~_. n v. _n l.. .,. . . -. .

~-+;_ :

Potential Deterrents

The majority of substance abuse rs identified alcohol or drug treatme

nt as

the biggest potential deterrent for t hem. Despite this, only 36% had

re-

ceived any kind of treatment for th eir alcohol or drug abuse prior to

the

,' murders. Moreover, more than

half the men who had sought treat ment

only stayed in treatment for short periods that ranged from a single me

et-

ing at A1cohQlics Anonymous to three to four sessions with a substa

nce

abuse counselor. All of the four m en who had received longer treat

ment

did so as a prisoner or as a conditio n of probation. This usually consis

ted

of attending a residential detox pr ogram of ten to thirty days follow

ed by

a period of group education. Two o f the men who had attended detox sa

that this had been their only pe riod of sobriety during their entire

adult

lives. Most of the substance abuser s admitted that their abuse of alcohol

drugs had begun in their teen years, some starting as early as age eleven

I also asked each man whether he had experienced any mental health

problems as a child or as an adult . Just over half of the substance abusers

said that they had suffered from de pression or bipolar disorder at leas

once, though some had never recei ved a formal diagnosis for these. In

terestingly, these men were more likely to have sought treatment for

de-

pression than for their substance ab use. All eleven men who had depre

sion said that they'd sought som e form of treatment for it. For two

these men, this treatment came o nly when they were children and

had

been triggered because of conduc t problems at school. For two others

the treatment they received had be en in prison or as a condition of pro

ba-

tion. One of these men, John, had been ordered to attend treatment fol

lowing his conviction for animal abuse. One year prior to killing his e

tranged wife, John had poisoned ove r 10,000 migratory birds in his Ca

', Cod neighborh ood. Accarding to John, neighbor

s had complained about

seagulls, and working as an extem unator, he had volunteered to take

care

'~~ of the pro blem.

'" Of the entire list of potential deterr

ents listed in the previous section

about jealous killers, none were se lected by more than half of the s

ub-

stance abusers. By contrast, a major ity of the other killers (ranging fr

<~ 62%-75 %) checked off six of the ten items.

Half the substance abusers

~~ believed that bei ng jailed by a judge and having to

wear an ankle bracelet

would have "very likely" prevente d the murders. The least likely

potential

``1

66 ~ Why Do They Kill?

- ;:~ -

. .:_. , ,

r.~

_ _ _..

Ì {

1 C'

r , r~ ' r

~, r

~z ' ~ ~z t r

'' ~~ t i~

~ ~ F ~

f ,

f deterrent selected by the substattce abusers was "a clergy person t

alking to

~ me about my violence." The other killers were thzee times more like

ly to

as r say that this would likely have

prevented them from committing murder.

e ~ The substance abu sers' low endorsement of this item reflects

their general

le ~ lack of participation in formal religio us activities. Less than one-third of

nt ~

;t- these men said that they attended religi

ous services on a regular or occa-

Je ~ sional basis. The propo rtion of church-going among the other kil

lers was

~t ~ ' somewhat higher at for ty percent Only two of the substance-ab

using kill-

;d ers said they had ever discussed marital problems with their clergy

person.

Neither, however, had disclosed his domestic violence to the pastor.

~y ? Most substance abusers rejected all other potential deterrents in favor

alt ~ of measures that would have prevente

d them from drinking or using drugs

on the day of the murder. Short of bein g in jail or some other controlled

~r s environment, few of the men had any ideas of how this might have been

th t achieved. Only one of the substance ahuse

rs had been on probation. One

rs ; of the conditions of this man's probation h

ad been that he submit to ran-

st dom tests to detect whether he had used alco

hol or drugs. The last screen-

ing he had undergone had been three months prior to the murder, and the

i- results had been negative for alcohol or

drug use.

Compared to the other killers, substance abu sers were least likely to

s- ~ f have sought informal help o

r advice from other people. This may be be-

d ( cause many of their friends w ere fellow substance abusers. When asked

s, friends who had witnessed his domestic vi

olence had ever intervened, one

killer said, "Nah, they was all doing the s ame thing." Only one of these

1_ ~ men said that a friend had ever interve ned. This was Kevin, the young

man who shot and killed his friend, Rob, when Rob was trying to stop

ie Kevin from hitting his girlfriend, Rebecca

. After killing Rob, Kevin fired

zt ~ _ his assault rifle at Rebecca, ki]ling her too.

,e i A few of the murder vic tims, including Rebecca, appeared to be

sub-

stance abusers. Several of the victims of attempted homicide said that

~n their abusers had often pressured them to d

rink or to use drugs along with

>- ~ them. In two cases, victims said that

the perpetrators had been their prime

n suppliers of drugs. If a victim is abusin

g substances, she may not have as

-s much credibility to courts, police, child

welfare workers, and other help-

Jt ers as other victims of abuse. Many battered women's programs

do not

~ accept victims who are acti vely drinking ar drugging. This creates a c

on-

siderable gap in services. Our helping sy stems need to be better trained

i Killer Profiles ( 67

. r 4'~r ~;+~'~

_ _ - ,:~~-~1 ~ ~..

and equipped to deal with t he special needs and challen

ges of substance-

abusingbattered women. Safe ty planzung witi~ these victi

ms is essential as

they may be less aware of the danger they face ox less able

to take steps to

protect themselves and their children.

Even victzms who do not abuse substances often need h

elp to recog-

nize that substance abuse do es not cause their partner t

o batter, though

it may well make the abuse worse. When the batterer abu

ses alcohol ar

drugs ou a daily ar near-dail y basis, the level of danger

grows exponen-

tially worse. Those who asse ss danger with victims sho

uld therefore al-

ways ask detailed questions a bout file perpetrator's patter

n of alcohol and

dxug use. Sometimes, battere rs can be prosecuted for the

ir drug crimes

more easily than for domesti c violence since such pros

ecutions for drug

crimes don't require the batt ered partner's testimony. Tw

o victims of at-

tempted homicide said that t heir pezpetrators were never

prosecuted for

domestic violence since the w omen had beep too fearful t

o call the police

or to file criminal complaints. In both cases, howevez, th

e perpetrators u1-

timately received substantia l jail sentences for drug traffi

cking.

Mafierially Motivated Type

The term "materially motiva ted" conjures someone who

commits murder

for profit. Though it is know n that some men murder thei

r wives purely for

monetary gain, this was not the case for any of the kille

rs I interviewed,

including those I have chara cterized here as materially m

otivated. In this

context, materially motivated killers are those whose pri

mary interests in

their relationships with women related to money and other m

aterial assets.

Following from this, the murd ers they committed appear t

o have been pri-

marily motivated by grievance s concerning money, possess

ions, and other

material benefits. These murder s were not committed for p

rofit but rather

to avoid material loss. The te rm "material" is important

here since it en-

compasses more than money. It includes possessions, such

as a house and

a car, but also the benefits th at such possessions confer. In

the case of a

j hous e, the material benefits includ

e not just haying equity as we ll as status

within the community, but a lso having a place to call home

, with all of the

attendant privileges. In the con text of an intimate relationshi

p, ttze rriaterial

benefits of home also includ e the comforts one receives fro

m a committed

partner, such as sexual intima cy, emotional support, and

companionship,

~ sa (why ~o Tney emu?

ass

see

loy

dis

~t r. kil:

pez

ria

ers

ati~

is t

she

kil

cep

S01

ou;

ha~

hid

ads

ab~

be.

P~ file

f - ~ `

as well as housew ork and childcare. What s

tood out among the materi ally

motivated men wa s their unilateral expectat

ion of such services with out

assuming any recip rocal responsibilities. Per

haps more to the point, they

seemed to expect su ch services while having

no emotional attachment or

loyalty to their part ners. Many of the other

killers, such as the jealou s

men, similarly expect ed services from their pa

rtners. However, they also

displayed some degree of emotional attachment

to their partners, even zf

it had been often com municated in an abusive

manner. AlI of the jealous

killers said they had l aved their partners either

throughout or for some

period in their relationship with the women they kil

led. None of the mate-

rially motivated men sai d this.

The criteria for members hip in the materially moti

vated group of kill-

ers includes the following features:

1) He exhibited very few jealous feelings and little

jealous behavior.

2) He was materially ex ploitative andlor possessi

ve. His grievances

primarily revolved around money and other material

benefits.

3) He had an overwhelmin gly negative view of wome

Lack o f Jealousy

Materially motivated kiIlers w ere unique among partner kill

ers in theiz reI-

ative lack of jealous thoughts a nd feelings concerning thei

r partners. This

is because jealousy, whether w ithin the normal or extrem

e range, requires

an emotional investment in on e's partner. The materially

motivated killers

showed no signs of having m ade such investments. Non

e of these seven

killers revealed a histozy of h aving been emotionally at

tached to the de-

ceased or to any previous pa rtners, While all of the other

killers admitted

some degree of jealousy, rangi ng from normal to extreme o

n the two jeal-

ousy scales that we used, no ne of the materially motivat

ed men reported

having even normal degrees of jealous ~lioughts or feelings.

Initially, I was

highly skeptical about these c laims, all the more so since

some of the men

admitted that they had monit ored their partners' activities

. When asked

about this apparent discrepa ncy, the men said that their m

onitoring had

been motivated not by jealous suspicions but by their wish

to know their

partners' plans, and in particul ar whether the women had be

en planning to

file charges fox domestic vio lence, obtain protective order

s, oz seek ~o end

Killer Profiles ~ 69 i

t... i. _ ... . _v _r ,...

+]; ~. :dP+,r:r~~ ~'a

~~ ~~ ~',

the relationships. O ur interviews with

the victims of att empted homicide

b~-

also provided some evidence about th

e lack of jealousy a mong this sub-

anc

group of perpetrato rs. Four of the twe

nty victims of atte mpted homicide

that we interviewe d rated their partner

s as being "not jea lous at a1P' ar

tots

only "mildly jealou s." As one woman

said, "He didn't c are ai~out me or

for

worry about me bei ng with someone e

lse; he just cared a bout the horse

~V,

and all the things in it."

po,

Violence, for the mat erially motivated

perpetxators, was not triggered hey

by their own jealous y but more often b

y that of their partn ers. All four of !

ac]

the victims who said that their partners

had not been jealou s also reported ~

tiv

that their partners h ad been continually

involved with oth er women, and

that their complaint s about this had tri

ggered violent resp onses from the

men. Most of the mat erially motivated f

illers also complai ned about their

lih

partner's jealous co mplaints. For som

e, these jealous com plaints repre-

sented an attempt to "own me," as one m

an put it. E ~,

These men did no t appear to have wo

rried about losing their part-

ners so much as th e money and other

material benefits c onnected to the

relationship. For so me men, this would

have meant loss o f a home. For

~ m

those who were une mployed, it meant J

oss of their primary source of "in- ~

+' come." Ideally for s

ome, the relationsh ip would have end

ed without the ~ to

Ions of such financi al support. In fact,

two of the men adm itted' that they

~ ~o

had continued to re ceive money or gift

s from ex-partners w ith whom they

#'~

had continued to ha ve sexual relations

during their relatio nships with the

~ ~

women they killed .

~ bi

4 v.

Contempt for Wome n

a o

All seven of the mate rially motivated

killers painted an ov erwhelmingly

negative picture of their partners. No

t once during the fo ur-hour inter-

views did any of th ese men communica

te a positive senti ment about the

women they had mu rdered. When aske

d directly, none co uld think of a

positive attribute of h is partner. Each man

we~zt to great lengt hs to demon- ~

ize the deceased, as i f perhaps to ration

alize the murders th ey had commit-

ted. While this may be true, it-was also

clear that this hostil ity had been a

3 t

longstanding featur e in their reiationsl~

ips with their partne rs.

Abusive men in ge nezaJ tend to have

highly critical opini ons of their

;~ partners. In my pxe

vious study that com paxed abusive to n

onabusive hus-

70 ~ Why Do 'The y Kill?

t ~ x

k i5f

~. 2 { r _{ i M1

_ t t j ~ ~~

: r

.l~_1

oh ~ i ,.

t _ ~.;t

~ '~i

~ _ t

i s C R k'

npted homicide unong this sub- npted homicide alous at all" or ire about me or about the house

is not triggered ers. All four of is also reported ~r women, and ~nses from the zed about their iplaints repre-

ing their part-

7nected to the f a home. For source of "in- d without the fitted that they th whom they ;hips with the

rwhelmingly r-hour inter- ;nt about the ld think of a is to demon- Zad commit_ ~ had been a

ons of their abusive hus-

bands, I found that abusive husbands had significantly less positive regard

and empathy for their wives, and much more antipathy towards them .13

Despite this, the vast majority communicated some positive regar ds

toward their partners, and most professed to love them. This was even true

for the majority of killers I interviewed, though as a whole, their neg a-

tive feelings and attitudes toward their partners appeared to outweigh their

positive ones. Their overall attitude seemed to be, "I couldn't live with

her and I couldn't live without her," revealing a sometimes begrudging

acknowledgment of affection or perhaps dependency. The materially mo-

tivatedkillers were the only type of perpetrator who appeared to have had

no positive regards or sentiments toward their partners. Their overall atti-

tude seemed to be something akin to "good riddance for someone I never

liked to begin with." Their contempt for their partners appeared to be an

extension of their contempt for women in general, These were the only

men I interviewed who revealed an overt distain for women. The other

killers appeared to like women, at least in theory. In practice, however,

they could never seem to tolerate the one they were with. By contrast, the

materially motivated killers were more consistent; they held all women in

contempt, including those with whom they had been partnered. These men

tend to view women primarily as objects of complaint, and perhaps more

to the point, as restrictors of their liberties. Referring to his many arrests

for domestic violence, Everett said, "Women have always gotten me in

trouble." For Everett, "trouble" came not from his violence toward women

but from women's complaints about it. Several of the materially moti-

vated men did express regrets for having killed, but their regrets seemed

to revolve around their loss of freedom rather than their partners' loss

of life. For some, their incarceration appeared to be their final grievance

against the deceased, as if to say, "Look at the problems she's caused for

me now."

The open contempt that materially possessive men held toward their

partners was accompanied and fueled by many longstanding grievances

and grudges. It should be noted that all of the killers had held grudges

against their victims or felt aggrieved in some way. For most, however,

these grudges appeared to have been short-lived and episodic, as in the

case of jealous rages or alcoholic binges. These periods of anger had of-

ten been followed by apologies, retractions, and periods of conciliation.

There appeared to have been many highs and lows in their relationships,

Killer Profiles ~ 71

, ~. , ~,

r ,: 1 .. . _~' i... ..., ~ f ~t ~.. -:.. ~_a, x~ ,.~rr i f:e ~_.,_ ~ z.t-.~ ~.~:~~h„'~ a .. ..._a _4.. ~- z .. ~~ l.~t. r M;v E ..,...,. .. ,. _ . _

and considerable emotional flu x on their parts. The materia

lly motivated

killers, however, did not repo rt this same pattern of high

s and lows, or

of emotional storms with thei r partners. Instead, these me

n appeared to

have e~ibited more of a patt ern of contemptuous detachm

ent toward their

partners. Their animosity to ward their partners had rese

mbled a "slow

burn" rather than a "quick fu se:' While 62% of the other ki

llers character-

ized themselves as being "moo dy," none of the materially

motivated men

thought of themselves in thi s way. Compared to the other

killers, these

men were the most guarded and evasive about discussing

the events that

had led up to them murdering their partners or ex-partners

. Only one of

the seven men acknowledged a ny intent to kill his partner. I

n fact, two de-

nied committing the murdexs a ltogether. Three others claim

ed that shoot-

ing their partner had been "a n accident," while another cl

aimed it to have

been in self-defense. Despite this, five of the seven men

had been con-

victed of first or second deg ree murder. This suggests tha

t, on avezage,

these men were more calcula ting killers than the others,

and ones who

were also more likely to atte mpt to cover their Uracks.

Judging from their relationsh ip histories, the materially

motivated

killers did not look to women for-love but primarily for s

ex and mate-

rial benefits, such as money, p lace of residence, housekeep

ing, and some

cases, childcare. Despite this o verall commonality, I found

that there were

two distinct types of men in t his category: those who w

ere financially

exploitive of women and thos e who were financially posse

ssive in their

relationships.

Financially Exploitative

The three men who fit this prof ile appeared Co view women

as interchange-

able, and disposable, objects of exploitation. These men ha

d had twice

as.many prior relationships, r elative to their ages, as the j

ealous killers.

Their past relationships had a lso been more short-lived an

d overlapping

and they often had been involv ed with several women at one

time. Consis-

tently, these men had sought to appropriate the financial res

ources of each

woman with whom he had bee n involved. A11 three of thes

e men acknowl-

edged that they had also stolen money or possessions from p

ast partners.

None of these men had marr ied the murder victim or had

children with

~z ~ why Da ~rney x~t~

to eir

~w er-

.en

;se

iat

ie-

~t-

tve

>n-

;e,

:ed

te-

ere

;ll~~

eir

;e-

ice

;rs.

ing

>is-

ich

wl-

;rs.

ith

All three of these men said that he had been s

exually involved with

other women during h is relationship with th

e woman he killed. Only one-

third of ttze other killers made such claims. Perha

ps directly related to thi s,

the materially explorta tive killers were most li

kely to complain about j eal-

ousy by tine women t hey killed. For these mer

z, their biggest grievan ces

seemed to be when th eir partners had compl

ained about their viole nce,

znfidelity, or substanc e use. One man said th

e biggest problem in his rela-

tionship with the deceas ed had been her complai

nts about his involveme nt

with a motorcycle club , Most of these men app

eared to knave longstand ing

perceptions of their par tners as "too bossy," "to

o jealous," or overly cri ti-

cal. Asked their bigges t complaints about their

deceased partners, two of

the znen simply said, "S he bothered me." Press

ed to clarify what he mea nt

by being bothered, one of these men, Sidney, s

aid, "She'd do nothing but

complain." This man we nt on to describe how hi

s girlfriend would com-

plain about his staying out all night, his not tel

ling her his plans, and his

yelling at her. Adding that he had gften encou

ntered this problem wi th

women, Sidney said, " They are nice at first but

when I move in they ge t to

think they own yon." T he other man who said

that his partner "bother ed"

him explained that "she was always getting int

o my business." Five of the

materially motivated me n killed their partners

after the relationships had

ended, essentially claimi ng that the victims had

provoked their own mu r-

ders by continuing to m ake claims on them.

When asked what he thought had been the

biggest problems in his

relationship, Evezett said , "Her jealousy, withou

t a doubt. Pius her alwa ys

wanting to fight with me ." Everett went on to c

omplain about Monique 's

frequent accusations of his interest in other wo

men. Despite this, Eve rett

freely admitted that he had had numerous affai

rs, but justified this by s ay-

ing she had been free to do the same. Everett al

so complained that afte r he

had broken off the relat ionship with her, Moniq

ue had demanded payme nt

of money and gifts she had given him, and a

lso accused him of havi ng

stolen some jewelry th at he had given her. Th

is culminated in Moni que

showing up at his hous e to demand he return t

he jewelry. Though he ad-

mitted beating her up, E verett continues to den

y shooting her to death as

ber. Each had lived i n her house or apartme

nt and had contributed lit tle or

no money to the re nt or mortgage. Each s

aid that he had lived pri marily

off of his deceased partner's income.

,; ':' ~̀

~ = ~. '; ~' ~,"

Killer Profiles ~ 73

~ { ..

j .. ~: ,... _ r.

> - ':.

J.,.N,!'t5 u.... ...... ,

~.,~,., r~: ;~

she stood in his parking lot that evening. Despite ove

rwhelming evidence his wife

of his guilt, Everett insists that he was "framed" by an

other man who hap- ing or rn

pened to be visiting with fz iends that day.

"never s

Another killer, Kyle, had l eft his girlfriend, Hadley

, to move across murders

the country eight months be fore killing her. He said he

had returned only partner.

because Hadley had told h im that she was pregnan

t with his baby, and range mf

that he had wished to conv ince her to have an abortio

n. On the day of the own ed

murder, he had found out Hadley had lied about bei

ng pregnant in order ~ s hare of

to lure him back to Massa chusetts with her. He aske

d her to go for a walk dad o~,i

alon the railroad tracks, where he then strap led her

and buried her bod

g g Y

brose, i;

in the woods. Kyle fled ba ck to Oregon. Though he

had been questioned

about Hadley's disappea rance, he was not arreste

d until her body was Case I

found over a year later.

~ a

«y~

Financially Possessive Ambro:

Two of the materially mot ivated killers, Ambrose

and Lester, had been ing a C

married to their victims and had more stable rela

tionship histories with fr om a 1

women than the five men p reviously described. Whil

e the financially ex- a year 1

ploitative men had relation ships with the deceased t

hat had averaged one a nd shf

year, Ambrose and Lester had each been married m

ore than ten years to ~ co ok at

the woman they killed. Furth er, each had far fewer prior

relationships rela- ° p ant an

five to his age. Both men h ad had children with his

wife. By every mea- fam ily,

sure, Ambrose and Lester h ad been more economical

ly stable than the ern,

other five men. Each had held the same job for mo

re than fifteen years, ~,f

owned a home, and had lo ngtime stakes in his comm

unity. In this regard, b rother

they deviated from the pat tern of the other five me

n who collectively '~ fey ~~

owned no homes, had held no jobs longer than two y

ears, and as adults ~ b rose

had not lived in any commu nities far more than a fe

w years. What these ~ and rer

two men had in common wit h the other five was their

lack of jealous feel- regular

ings, contempt fox their part ners, and their longstandi

ng grievances con- with a

cerning money and material things. These two men w

ere not financially A mbrc

exploitative of women but r ather had been equal wage

earners with their ~ only st

partners. But while neither looked to women for financ

ial support, both ~ from b

had been financially posses sive in their respective rel

ationships. Each man with p

'~ ha d frequently accused leis w

ife of being "a financial d rain." Each man ~

cafe oz

~s admi tted that he had frequently

become verbally or physic ally violent to e

ven b

~~ ~ v~rhy Do They xxn~

i q' X1 4

to ) :s t

s "~` ~' ~ t

( k - 1

', i-~ ~ t 7 t r j sue" i;~ ~

i"r

~ v 7~

i «

F ~`.Ji }CY -~

.,r; j~

rL f ~ tw ~ .,'

'' ~ ~_. ~~ ~` 'r

Y y Y ~.~ ~ \ '

~ j. „ .~~j _

~ t 4ltY

~. ~ .. ~ :; ~

,r ,. i

~ ~~

f 17: .

;̀' ~. `̀

J ̀ )

Z i

{̀ t

t :.~

~.. ........ .. _ .. . 3..

.. .

... Y'. ;~.'.

x::.:.: -... __ .: _.;.

~ .

'='

his wife in resp onse to her spendu

cg or her corziplain ts about his spen

ing or money management. Both

men complained that their partners w

ere

"never satisfie d °' In both cases, t

heir xelationships had ended prior to

the

murders, and ne rther man had se

emed interested in reconciling with

his c

partner. However , both were embit

tered about the div ision of property

ar-

rangements of the ir divorces. Critic

al to this was tha t both men had co

owned abusiness with their partner

s. Each had stood to lose half of his

share of the bus iness as part of th

e divorce settleme nt. One man, Leste

had owned a butc hery and deli coun

ter with hts wife. The other man, Am

brose, zs profiled as follows.

Case Exarr~ple 3

"You're old and fa t and I hate you"

Ambrose and Luis a were both thirt

y-one when they w ere married follow

ing a two-month courtship. Luisa

had an eleven-yea r-old son, Samuel,

from a prior marri age. Stanley, their

first and only cY~ii d together, was bor

a year later, Luisa had grown up wor

king in her family' s sandwich shop,

and she continued to work at her br

other's shop. Amb rose worked as a

cook at another res taurant. Ambrose

was restless to own their own restau-

rant and continual ly accused Luisa

of being too cont ent working for h

family. He also co mplained that Lui

sa was "selfish" an d overly critical of

him.

After four years of pressure from A

mbrose, Luisa ag reed to ask her

brother to sell Isis restaurant to diem

, and Ambrose qu it his other job so

they could manag e the new restaur

ant together. Shor tly after this, Am

brose was arreste d for soliciting a

police officer posi ng as a prostitut

and received a fin e of $200. He nev

er admitted to Lu isa that this was

regular activity of his. Luisa did fin

d out, however, ab out his relationshi

with a younger wo man and his visits

to strip clubs. Wh en she confronted

Ambrose about t his, he told hex, "Y

ou are old and fat and T hate you. Pm

only staying with you because of St

anleq." Perhaps to sidetrack attentio

from his own inf idelity, Ambrose b

egan to accuse Lu isa of having affai

with particular me n. Later that year

, Luisa obtained a restraining and va

cate order after cl azming that Ambr

ose had beat her u p. Though he denie

even being in the house that day, th

e order was grant ed and Ambrose w

Killer Profiles ~ 7 5

_ .. -

~' J„ fi'a~'° ~ w.a ~_...

_~ _ . .

ordered to vacate their house as well as their busines s. He moved in with dQW

some friends and took a job at another restaura nt. Luisa filed for divorce. 1e~

As part, of the divorce settlement, Ambrose agr eed to sell his share of the

restaurant, receiving a substantial profit from his i zlitial investment.

Ambrose looked into buying a new restaurant. Ac carding to Luisa's

family, Ambrose continually violated Luisa's rest raining order by enter-

ing her home and threatening her and Samuel and by making threatening

phone calls. Ambrose denies this.

According to the police report, Ambrose wal ked into Luisa's res-

taurant on June 6, displayed a 38 caliber handgu n, and yelled, "Freeze,

motherfuckers!" He then went to the counter to wh ere Luisa was washing

pans and shot her in the side. His second shot st ruck her wrist and arm.

Luisa's sister, Mary, then pushed his arm, causi ng the third shot to miss

Luisa. Ambrose then straddled Luisa, who was lyi ng on the floor, and fired

two shots into her head and neck at point-blank ra nge. According fo sev-

eral eyewitnesses, he then turned to Mary, smiled, put the gun to her chest,

and pulled the trigger but was out of bullets. He fled the restaurant and

later called to turn himself in to the police.

Ambrose gives a very different version of thes e events. He says that

Luisa called him the previous day to ask him to come to the restaurant so

they could discuss something. When he arrived at the restaurant, Luisa

pulled a gun from her purse and pointed it at him . He kicked the gun out

of her hand, knocking it into the sink. Luisa trie d to grab the gun but he

got to it first. They struggled with the gun and it went off, striking Luisa in

the head. Despite the police report that he fired fi ve shots, Ambrose says

he remembers only one shot. After firing this shot, he grabbed the bag of

bullets and ran out of the stoxe.

According to testimony at Ambrose's trial, Stanley , aged six, said that

his father had frequently hit his mother. Mary said that Luisa had gotten

some kind of venereal disease due to Ambrose's f requent visits to prosti-

tutes. Once, when Luisa complained, he told her, "I will cut you up and

fry you." One day when Mary called the house, Stanley answered and

told her that his father had broken in and had go ne upstairs looking for

his mother with a big knife. He had grabbed his fath er by the leg to stop

him but Ambrose had told him he would kill him and his brother. Mary

had gone over to the house and .Ambrose had an swered the door, telling

her that i~uisa wasn't home. When she persisted. he h ad let Luisa come

true,

divot

the r

~~i r a frif

back

frier

back

ing t

had t

appe;

ProjE

Amb~

woul~

This i

fense

one's

unflat

same

Greec

they

vein,

becau

panne

contrc

thems

thinki:

tuns.

ated, c

Ambr~

restau;

him b~

~ ,. _--

:_ - ~

~ ~

f _

~ ~ t

~ 'fin. S .. F

( l'

i ~ x .

~ S~:

Y.~ -

I „

- ~

~~a

Y..' .

downstairs to ma ke coffee. Luisa

had denied that there had been an

y proti-

lems but later c onfided to her si

ster that what S tanley had told

her was

true. Shortly after this inciden

t, Luisa had told Ambrose that she

wanted a

divorce. He to ld her, "Z'm not g

iving you a divo rce; I'll give you b

ullets in

-.the head inst ead." He also had

written a letter to her saying that

he would

kill her and Sam uel. Two weeks

prior to t1~e murd er, Ambrose had

brought

a friend over t o Luisa's house

to tz-y to convin ce Luisa to take

Ambrose

'back. When Lu isa refused, Amb

rose had told he r he would kill he

r. The

friend had told Ambrose that he

should be nice t o Luisa if he wan

ted her

back. Lnisa's mu rder occurred on

the anniversary of her wedding.

Follow-

ing the murder, Mary found that

Luisa's apartm ent above the res

taurant

had been ransac ked.

s Ambr ose was convicte

d of murder in th e first degree. Tw

o subsequent

~. ; f appeals f

iled by Ambrose have been denie

a `'

~ .- s

Projection

! ` Ambrose' s depiction of Lu

isa as selfish, ove rly critical, and

untrustworthy

~, would se em to be a more

accurate depicti on of himself rat

her than of her.

1 This is no t coincidental. A

mbrose appears to be using a psyc

hological de-

fense mechanism known as proj

ection. Projectio n is the tendency

to see

one's own (usuall y negative) chara

cteristics in othe r people. By ascr

ibing

unflattering attrib utes onto others,

the individual eit her avoids seeing

these

same traits in him self or rationaliz

es that he is mer ely being like ot

hers.

~ Greedy in dividuals, for ex

ample, often just ify their venality

by saying that

they are just doin g what everyon

e else does or wa nts to da. 7n a s

imilar

vein, many batter ing men see thei

r partners as sel fish and unapprec

iative

because they the mselves are self

ish and unapprec iative. They see

theiz

partners as being controlling an

d vindictive beca use they themsel

ves are

controlling and v indictive. They s

ee their partners as jealous becau

se they

themselves are je alous. Many of

the killers appea red to use proje

ctive

thinking as a way of seeing their p

artners as persecu tors rather than a

s vic-

f tuns. The se men frequentl

y complained th at they had felt m

ocked, humili-

ated, or otherwi se "disrespected

" by the women t hey killed. For ex

ample,

Ambrose said th at he had felt "hu

miliated" having to sell his share

of the

restaurant. Anoth er man said that

he had felt that h is wzfe was "mock

ing"

him by becoming involved with

another man fol lowing their sepa

ration.

Killer Profiles ! 77

ti: r r~~ s.~•.

.'A~.n.:..._.. .. ... e^

.. ,

e. a, .. n':o,. ~

~. .;.. •'a.. ~~~.,

This man had in fact flaunted his relationstzips with other wo

men through-

out their marriage by continua lly bringing other women ove

r to the house

for sex when his wife was th ere and by openly comparing

these women to

her in highly unflattering and gzaphic terms.

Similarity to Murderers for Pro fit

Though there is no evidence t hat any of these men killed

their partners

purely for profit, they appear to have much in common wi

th those men

who do. The materially motiv ated men seemed the most ca

lculating and

remarseless of all the killers that I interviewed. These appea

r to be com-

mon traits among men who ki lled their partners for monetar

y gain. I know

of no systematic study of thes e kinds of killings. Therefore,

what we know

about them is based primarily o n court testimony and media

reports.

One potential difference in th ese media-reported cases is t

he apparent

absence of histories of domes tic violence. However, we

must remember

that domestic violence is often hidden from public view s

o it may well

have existed in many or mos t of these cases. As mention

ed previously,

there was strong evidence of p rior violence on the part of al

l thirty-one of

the men that I interviewed. O ther research studies of killin

gs of women

by their intimate partners have found histories of domestic v

iolence in the

vast majority of these cases.14 For instance, one researcher f

ound evidence

~, of prior domestic violence in 85

% of the eighty-seven women 's homicides

that she examined.15 No resear ch has specifically analyzed r

ates of prior

domestic violence in cases whe n husbands kill for profit.

However, there have been some high-profile cases in wh

ich there

was no known history of do mestic violence. One such cas

e was Charles

', (Chec k) Stuart, a furrier store manag

er, who murdered lais pxegna nt wife,

Carol, in Boston in 1989. Mr. S tuart tried to cover up his cri

me by claim-

ing that a man had robbed an d shot him and his wife in th

eir car shortly

jy after t hey had attended a chiTdbirthi

ng class at Brigham and W omen's

Hospital in the Roxbury sectio n of Boston.16 Boston police

subsequently

, arrested and charged an African

American man who matched the descrip-

floe that Chuck Stuart had give n of their assailant. Subsequent

ly, evidence

emerged that Mr. Stuart had e nlisted his brother, Matthew,

to help him

kill his wife so that he could benefit fxom her Life insurance

policy. On

the evening of the crime, Matt hew delivered the .38-caliber

handgun that

r .,

F s {

r s

,: ,~ ~~`, .~~;1 ,.~ >; ~„,_. ~ ~ ;1

~. s : ~~.~,~ .,F- , ~. :̀ rt 3 ~f1j

i~E~.

J~i L;4

,i a .~

~ ~a: ;i

~~ !

~1:,1 'i

r 1

~~ i

~ t ~

✓ k y„ }

~ , ,_ C . .

;.,.~..

Chuck used first to shoot Carol Ciauck

then shot himself i n the stomach in

order to bolster his claim of being

robbed. Evidence e merged that Chuck

Stuart had been invotved with anot

her woman with wh om he'd been mak-

f Ong secret plans to buy and m

anage a restaurant, Mr. Stuart subseque

ntly

killed himself by jumping off the

Tobin Bridge once it became clear that

he was about to be charged with t

he murder. Accordin g to the extensive

media reports, as well as the police

interviews with Ca rol 5tuart's fziends

E and relativ es, no one had kn

own of any instanc es of domestic abu

se by

,,._ ~ Chuck. Wh

ile evidence of pri or domestic violen

ce has been uncover ed in

other such cases, i t appears that a si

gnificant number o f these for-profit

killexs do not previ ously hatter their w

ives.

~ Despite this potential dif

ference, men who k ill for profit appe

ar to

~ have many of the same preocc

upation with money and material benefi

ts as

~: the material ly motivated killer

s that I've profiled. They appear to fit m

ore

closely the profile o f the financially p

ossessive men than the financially

~ exploitative ones. This is beca

use they are more .often married to t

heir

f murder victims. Thi

s makes sense sinc e the financzal gain

is greater when

t11e killer is married to his victim and

therefore stands to inherit hex as-

sets as well as to b e the beneficiary o

f her life insuranc e policy. Another

potential similarity between the profit

killers and tfie finan cially posses-

j slue ones th at I interviewed is t

heir ambitions for w ealth and social st

atus.

s Chuck Stuar t, for instance, had

apparently cultivat ed an image of some

one

E with high ambition

s. He had lavishe d his mzstress with

fuz coats, a dia-

} mond ring, a nd other expensive

gifts. Similarly, bo th Ambrose and Les

ter

had been business o wners with dreams

of wealth and of e nhanced social

status. Each man, li ke Chuck Stuart,

had seen his wife a s a hindrance to

~ these dreams. i

One perpetrator of a ttempted homicid

e, Richard, had alre ady achieved

{ high social s tatus as a physicia

n. Just prior to his attempt ~o kill leis

wife,

Louise, by poisoni ng her, he was und

er investigation for illegal prescrib-

ing practices. As h is one-time office

manager, Louise k new that Richard

had been overprescr ibing to his patien

ts and also fraudule ntly billing in-

stzrance pzoviders. S he also suspected t

hat Richard had att empted to finan-

F dally explo it disoriented elder

ly patients by "ply ing them with gifts

" and

inducing them to become dependent

upon drugs that he prescribed. Prior

j to her filing for divorce, Rich

ard had increased the amount of Louis

e's

life insurance polic y and was openly s

pending time with a nother woman.

Killer Profiles ~ 79

4:P

t ~~ ,~.y~ ~

..._ _ n C: l ~ f ,

3 ~4t~, ..~. -i~w _.

.. .... . . .._ . .. ..

+• f'-~rti :+~~'.~

~zd:.~''v~=~'" ` r~~i ~.-?:'~.~,; i

''=9•~,.'-~v':iA~'ti e~ii:

°'3~" ~"r,X.:,.r

. vx4:'e 3+.

Louise was one of the t hree victims of attempted

homicide who felt that

her perpetrator had had a financial motive to kill he

x. "I was in the way of

the life he wanted to have ," Louise said, adding, "

and he figured my death

was cheaper than divorc e:'

Another potential similar ity between far-profit kil

lers and the mate-

xially motivated type of killer is that both kinds

of men appear to have

features associated with anti-social personality

. These include lacking

empathy and remarse, bein g manipulative and exp

loitative of others, and

having shallow emotions. Louise spoke of Richard'

s "complete lack of a

conscience," for instance . Three of the materially

motivated kiIlers had

been formally evaluated as having anti-social pe

rsonality. All thxee also

qualified as career criminal s, based on their lengthy

criminal recards. The

other four men might also have scored high on t

he psychopathy scale,

a test used to identify feat ures of anti-social perso

nality. None had ever

received a mental health evaluation ar been in a se

tting that required psy-

chological testing. None h ad an extensive criminal

history. In fact, Am-

brose and Lester had no p rior arrests at a11. Having

a criminal record is not

a prexequisite for a diagn osis of anti-social person

ality, however. Many

people with thzs persona lity exploit others witho

ut breaking laws, and

even when they do, mana ge to avoid arrest. Further

discussion about the

ch~acteristics of individua ls with anti-social perso

nality will be provided

in the section about the c areer criminal type of kill

er.

Potential Deterrents

Compared to the other type s of killers, the materially

motivated ones were

the least likely to have par kicipated in a therapeutic

program prior to com-

mitting murder. Only thre e of the seven men had

attended any kind of

counseling during his lif etime, and far one man, it

had been involuntary.

This man, Kyle, had been required to see a therapist

while in high school

because of missing classes and acting out in class.

Diagnosed with con-

duct disorder, Kyle had also been arrested numer

ous times for stealing

cars. Kyle reported that he had dropped out of schoo

l after seeing his psy-

chologist appro~mately ten times.

Two of the materially mo tivated killers had volunt

arily sought treat-

ment, but neither had staye d in treatment for more th

an ten weeks. In both

cases, this therapy had be en received more than fi

ve weeks prior to the

~>j, ;~-.-

~;': murders these men committ

ed. One of these m en, Lee, had atten

ded sev-

`' ezal grou p sessions at a Vete

ran's Administrati on Hospital for vic

tims of

'' post-trauma tic stress disorder.

More than ten yea rs later, Lee killed

his

t partner by s traiiglirtg her and b

reaking her neck. L ee claimed that this

was

~' an "involu ntary instinctive re

sponse" after his p artner had thrown

some

hot tea in his fac e. Lee reported th

at he had been tra ined to kill people

~ in this man ner while serving

in the army durin g the Vietnam War

era.

The other killer w ho lzad previously

sought counseling was Gerald, the

man who said tha t he "accidentally"

shot his gizlfriend , Pamela, at close

~ ' range in th e face with his sawe

d-off shotgun. Ger ald had bziefly rece

ived

treatment for depre ssion during one o

f his prior incarcera tions for armed

r robbery.

Not only ware th e materially moti

vated men least lik ely to have

sought therapy but they also identifi

ed the fewest potent ial deterrents for

~, the murders they committed. Th

eir reluctance to ci te factors might wel

l be

i' influenced by the fact that mo

st of these men den ied comzxiitting mu

rder

altogether or avowed that the killing ha

d been in self-defe nse or otherwise

provoked by the vic tim. As Gerald sa

id, "Nothing would have prevented

' it because i t was an accident;

' Despite this, six o f the men identified

some

potential factors that might have pr

evented their vict ims' deaths. Un-

like the jealous kill ers, few selected pa

rticipation in a ba tterer interven-

tion program as a potential deterrent.

Only two of the m en said that this

"might have" hel ped prevent the de

aths of their partn ers. Interestzngly,

three men identified two particular tec

hnological devices a s potential de-

terrents. They sele cted "knowing my

partner had a bee per that notified

the police whenever I came near her"

as a factor that "v ery likely would

have" deterred them from killing thei

r partners. They al so selected "be-

ing on probation a nd having to wear

an ankle bracelet t hat notified police

whenever I came ne ar my partner" as a

"very likely" dete rrent. When they

committed the murd ers; both of these

men had active re straining orders

tYiat required them t o stay away from

their partners. Each man accurately

reported that "my partner having a re

straining order" ha d not been a suf-

ficient deterrent.

Everett explained, "If someone does

something to me and gets away

with zt, the only thzn g that will work is

them being away where I can't find

them."

These men's endoz sement of beepers

for victims and an kle bracelets

Killer Profiles ~ 81

-~—~--~ ;r~ ~ , r~

w.,..,~,. . ,, ~,.... ., -_

for perpetrators lends su pport to the arguments

of many threat assessmen t

specialists thafi strict mon itoring ox confinement

are the only effective de-

tezrents for some types o f dangerous offenders.

The "ankle bracelet"- is

one form of monitoring that has increasingly bee

n used with sex offend-

ers, particularly those wit h a history of assaulting

children. This system is

mare aptly known as Gl obal Position System (G

PS) monitoring since the

ankle bracelet worn by t he offender is programm

ed to send a continuous

signal that is tracked by satellites, which then b

ounce the signal back to

the monitoring device. T he monitoring device i

s programmed to keep a

real-time record, as well as a map, of the offend

er's whereabouts in rela-

tion to places that are frequented by potential

victims, such as schools

or playgrounds. Some j urisdictions have recent

ly used GPS to monitor

domestic violence offend ers._In these cases, the

system is prograznined to

show when the offender comes within a certain

distance, say one mile, of

certain buildings used by the victim. These typi

cally include her home,

workplace, house of wor ship, and businesses th

at she Frequents. In some

cases, the offender's prob ation officer is automatic

ally beeped whenever

the offender comes with in the specified distance

of any of the selected

buildings. One of the big gest drawbacks of GPS m

onitoring is that it can

only detect the offender's pro~mity to selected

buildings, rather than that

of the victim herself. Kno wing the victim's usual

travel route from home

to work, a perpetrator co uld accost her somewhe

re along this route with-

out alerting the GPS monit or. Another drawback is

that the system is only

as effective as the respon se time of the monitorin

g authorities. Even if a

perpetrator accosts his v ictim in one of the sel

ected buildings, he could

easily kiIl her before the m onitoring authorities ar

rive.

Suicidal Type

Though I did not know i t at the time, Jerold was m

y first encounter with a

suicidal abuser. I didn't l ~now Jerold was suicidal

since he'd revealed no

history of suicidal threats or attempts on the intak

e form when ke enrolle d

in the batterer interventi on program where I wor

ked. During the first thr ee

group sessions he atten ded, Jerold often cracke

d jokes and appeared t o

be optimistic about his f uture. Only after he had

missed the next two se s-

sions clid I learn from his probation officer that Jer

old had killed himself.

Despite his denials on t he intake form, Jerold's w

ife, Anita, knew him to

,,.

'_ ~ ,.,'

;£'r {

p (t

be suicidal beca use he had frequen

tly threatened to kill her, thezr two ch

il-

dren, and himself. Jerold would oft

en repeat this threa t when Anita talk

A about en ding the relations

hip. Fearing that h e would make go

ad on these

threats, Anita t ook steps to prote

ct the children and herself by obtaini

a protective ord er tYiat required Je

rold to move out t he house and to a

void

any contact with her or the childr

en. Anita asked s ome of her neighb

ors

to alert her shou ld they see Jerold

in the neighborho od. She coached

the

f children t o go to a neighbor

's house should t heir father show u

p, telling

them, "Don't tr y to talk to daddy,

just z~un to Shirle y's Douse." Despi

these plans, Jer old showed up u

nannounced on ea rly morning wit

h a

loaded shotgun. Brandishing the gun

, he threatened to "take out tine who

family." Anita be gged and eventual

ly convinced Jero ld to let the childre

n i

go. After the chil dren fled, Anita sa

id silent prayers in anticipation of be-

ing killed. Instea d, Jerold walked u

p to her, saying, "Y ou ruined my life"

just before shooi ng himself in the

head.

7erold's case help ed me to recognize

that suicidal men are not a.Zways

easy to spot. I als o came to see that f

or some perpetrato rs, their suicidaliry

{and overall threat potential) rises an

d falls according t o the status of their

relationships with their partners. an

d children. Given the ever-changing

situational factors , threat assessmen

ts should not be one-time events bu

need to be repeate d when the circu

mstances change. F actors such as es-

trangement, as we ll as changes in

a perpetrator's e mployment, health

mood, and level of drinking, are al

l extremely relev ant to assessing hi

threat potential. As the situation chan

ges, the level of da nger may increas

or decrease. Thera pists who work w

ith suicidal indiv iduals similarly r

port that the like lihood of suicide v

aries according to the situation. Whe

a suicidal individ ual has been abusi

ve to his partner a s Jerold had been

the threat of homic ide always looms

as a potential out come, Based on re-

search findings, there is good reas

on for this. As men tioned earlier, abo

30% of intimate p artner killings of

American women are followed by su

cide. The proporti on of murder-suic

ides xelative to mur der-only cases ap-

pears to vary a gr eat deal from regi

on to region in the United States, with

western and south ern states having

higher rates than in the central, eas

ern, and northern states. CampbelY

s study of femicid es in eleven Ameri

can cities found the rate of murder

-suicides to be 51 % in Houston and

38% in Los Ange les, compared to

8% in Baltimore and 13% in Kans

City.l' During the ten-year period fr

om 1995-2004 in Massachusetts, the

KitIler Profiles ~ 83

murder-suicide rate was 29%.18 By comparison, th

e murder-suicide rate ~ attempt

in Arizona was 55% durin g the two-year period fro

m 2000-2001.19 Dur- ~ biologi

ing the three-year period f rom 2002-20Q4, the rate

in Florida was 40%.20 temptzr.

Overwhelmingly, murder -suicides involving intim

ate partners are perpe- mother,

Crated by men. Various stud ies have found the propor

tion of male perpe- ~ killing

trators in these kinds of cas es to be in the 85%-95%

range.21 ~ childre: 1

More Stability ~ Gun U

Aside from the fact that th e killers are mostly male,

surprisingly little has ~ The re

been written about murder -suicides involving intim

ate partners. There is choice

some evidence that these perpetrators tend to be si

gnificantly older than ~1~ t~f

their victims. One analysi s of data of such cases in

six American states e of the

found that perpetrators w ere, on avezage, over six

years older than their i P~,~d ~

victims.22 Studies of homic ide-only cases have not

found such a signifi- of twee

cant age difference betwee n the killers and the kille

d. In our study, only perpett

17% of the killers were si x or more years older tha

n their victims. How- ers we

ever, neither of the two me n who attempted suicide

was six years older. In f to a gL

fact, one was twelve years younger his victim. Regard

less of whether they murder

axe older than their victims , there is stronger evidenc

e that perpetratars of up to t1

murder-suicide are older th an those who kill their pa

rtners only. The pre- ~ pe~~~

viously cited national stu dy by Campbell and collea

gues found that 11% ~~

of the perpetrators in murde r-suicide cases were fifty

years of age or older, ents tl~

compared to 7% of the pez petrators in murder-only ca

ses.23 his prc

Compared to men who kill only their partners, ano

ther distinguish- follow

ing feature of men who a lso kill themselves is that

they are more likely ~ explan

to be married to their vict ims. In CampbelYs study

, 51%o of the murder- risk fa

suicide perpetratars wexe married to their victims,

compared to 33% of of fem

the murder-only perpetrators .24 Though these killers

were no more likely x Lion is

to have biological children of Cheir own, they were m

ore likely to be liv- ~ stua

ing with the biological child ren of the victims. How d

o we interpret these had to

findings? It is possible that the e~stence of stepchildr

en poses additional panne

grounds for jealousy and r esentment for these men.

Some battered women

have reported that their abus ers are jealous of their rel

ationships with their

own children. Many of the abusive men I have coun

seled have expressed Subst

particular resentments tow ard their stepchildren. S

ome have attempted Suicic

to portray stepchildren as u ndermining influences o

n their relationships cuhol.

with the mothers. One man continually claimed that

his stepdaughter was murde i

~ 84 ~ Why Do They Kill?

x ~ i

'fir r - - ~

~ - , '~~~,,r ~ ~ ~,~, ~ "'~

_ .~~ ~'~ti,~ {

I cj. e ,'~~~ ;i ~ ~ a,.

! _ i

j ~,

'~ ~

~~ }

t . ~ k Ak~ ~,~

t -' ~ ~a

G ~ 1 '.!

'..̂

f ..-

r ~ # ~

„_.

_ . .

_ •. .

f Z h

'' - Y ,

~~: Y .'; .,~~l~ ~lv-~

x t 4'~

~ ,.y ~ _ _._~ ~

t. _ _ __. 5 ~_.

_ ~ _«~. ~._

.. _ _ma c "_ _ _

... ~ . ~ _ .

V~ .~ _

yam._

{ _ -

r-suicide rate attempting to Qrchestrate a re

conciliation betwe en her mother a

nd her

-200 L 19 Dur- ~ ~;

1~~ological father. Much of his tim

e during group se ssions was spent

at-

la was 40%,Z0 tempting to portra y this eleven-yea

r-old girl as an e `~il influence on

her

ors are perpe- mother. One of th e killers, Harold,

who had tried to conunit suicide

after

f male perpe- ~ filling his estra nged partner, said

that he deeply re sented Jenaya's a

dult

children becaus e he knew that th

ey were "against” him.

Gun Use

ngly little has ~ The reader might recall that gun

s are overwhelm ingly the weapo

n of

Hers. There zs choice for men w ho kiIl their partn

ers. This is even more so for men

who

tly.older than ( kill themselv es after slaying

thezr partners. Ca mpbell found th

at 61%

nerican states 4 of the women in the murder-s

uicide cases were killed with a gu

n, com-

.der than their pied to 28% of the women in

the murder-only cases.2S A second

study

such a signifi-

E of twenty murder

-suicides in Ariz ona found that ni

neteen of the twen ty

~Ur study, only perpetrators use d a gun.26 These

studies also found that the suicidal k

ill-

victzms. How- ers were mo re likely than th

e not-suicidal on es to have had ea

sy access

Years older. In to a gun. The Campbell study f

ound that 81% of those who perpe

trated

f whether tYtey murder-suic ide had easy acces

s to a gun over t he one-year period

Leading

perpetrators of a~

up to the fatal ass aults. This same

study found that just over half of t

hese

only, The pre-

perpetrators had previously threat

ened their victims with a weapon.

Fund that 11 % E One interp retation of this fin

ding is that easy access to a gun pr

es-

>f age oz older, ~ ents the depres sed and angry pe

rpetratar with mo re of a "quick fi

x" to

his problems. Si mply having a gu

n may make it m ore likely for him

~r distinguish- ~ follow t hrough on any im

pulses to kill his partner and/or

himself This ~

re more likely f explanation fit s research that s

hows that gun ac cess is one of the

leading

of the murder- risk factors t o femicide in ge

neral, and may b e even more so f

or cases

red to 33% of ~ of femicide-sui cide. Contrary to

this interpretatio n, substantial pxe

medita-

no more likely tion is eviden t in cases of mur

der-suicide. For some of the kille

rs in our

ikely to be liv- i study, their eas y access to guns

was not. coincident al to their crimes.

Many `

intezpret these had taken pains to obtarn

guns wick the a pparent intention t

o ki11 ti2eir

uses addi~ionai partners.

attered women

hips with their

lave expressed Substance Abus

ave attempted suicidal k illers may be m

ore likely than n onsuicidal ones t

o abuse al-

relation sYu p s c ohol. In their s

tudy, Campbell a nd colleagues fo

und that 52% of the

daughter was murder-s uicide group of

killers had been abusers of alcoho

1.28 In their

Killer Profiles ~ 85

closer examination of forty-two cases, these researchers found that 63%

along

of these perpetrators had used alcoho l on the day of the fatal assaults. This

~ of an

same study found no significant differ ences between the murder-suicide

ality ~

killers and the murder-only ones in thei r use of illicit drugs. About half of

ally v

each group had used one or more drugs of some kind. It seems likely that

~ style c

a higher proportion of the murder-suic ide group of killers had used pre-

~ a "slo

scription drugs since they were mo re Likely to have sought treatment and

; his pz

medication for their depression. ~ searcl

for be

Depression very d

Most studies of murder-suicide cases have found depression and other

~ matic

forms of mental illness to be prominent factors in the lives of the perpetra-

~ bid or

tors. One of the first studies of such ca ses in Great Britain, conducted in

j likely

1967, found that forty-five of the seven ty-eight killers had exhibited some

~ contin

form of "mental abnormality" and that twenty-eight had suffered from

styles,

depression.29 A later study that directl y compared murder-suicide cases to

~ a goon

murder-only ones found that three-quar ters of the first group of perpetra-

style.

tors had suffered from depression whil e none of the twenty-four killers

medic

in the latter category had been depr essed.30 The Campbell study judged

is hang

that 38% of the murder-suicide killers h ad had "poor mental health" com-

pared to 28% of the other killers.31 A f ourth study accessed coroner files Case

of 121 homicide cases. This investi gator found that the men who killed

themselves were more likely to have suffered from depression.32 Not sur-

prisingly, most studies have found the se men were more likely. to have

~ m

threatened or attempted suicide. . ~

But how do we account for the surpris ingly large proportion of these ~

Allen

men with no apparent histories of suici de attempts ar depression? It seems

who n

likely that, for some of these men, kill ing their partner had been the pri-

~` ners. I

many aim and killing themselves merely an afterthought. Rather than re-

~ the th1

fleeting any longstanding wish to com mit suicide, these men's decision

and a

to do so may have been a rational ch oice made after killing their partner:

disfigt

choosing death over the prospect of lif etime incarceration. Others might

have arrived at this choice in a less r ational manner. Those who killed

~ as a cc

their partners in blind rage ar while in toxicated might have killed them-

match

selves in a panic before having the oppo rtunity to think about it.

~e pe

Much like the other types of killers, th e suicidal types appear to fall

Way of

~. s6 ~ wny no zney Wit?

}

4̀ ~ L ~~ 7 -~ #« j t ~ 4 -. `~~

h ~L '~„r a ~ v.r ~ i

T ~ . r ~.' k

}:, F . ~ ~ a ',1

a r

_ .. . __ --- - - ,_ _

_" '__~. ~ ~~ y ~~tl C~iq '

Utz ~ r- x ~ 4 f

.~' ~ i r a

1. along both ends of the emot

ional control continuu m. Some e~ibit more

of an impulsive sty le while others fit mor

e of an over-controlled pexson-

ality profile. Tlae imp ulsive style of abusive

man is much more emo tion-

` - ally volatile a nd prone to frequent r

ages. In contrast, the ov er-controlled

j style of abuser is much more deliberate, calcul

ating and operates mor e at

~' a "slow burn. " This type of abuser te

nds to accumulate grie vances against

t - his partne r betwoen his period

ic explosions of rages. One team of re-

searchers compared t he rr~are impulsive sty

le of abuser to pit balls a nd the

more calculating one s to cobras.33 Jealous

feelings are common fe atures

for both styles of abu sers, bat as with ang

er, tend to be communi cated

very differently. The i mpulsive type tends to

make more frequent and dra-

matic jealous accusati ons. He may also be m

ore prone to so-cared mor-

bid or delusional jeal ousy, The more compu

lsive style of abuser is more

likely to keep his susp icions to himself for lo

ng periods, while condu cting

S continued survei llance on his partner. D

epression can be a fea ture of both

j styles. James, de scribed earlier in this c

hapter as a jealous type of killer, is

i ~ a good exampl

e of how depression lo oks for someone with a

n zmpulsive

` style. This typ e of man often uses al

cohol and drugs as fo rms of self-

medication. Allen, pro filed here, provides a

n example of how depre ssion

is handled by someone with the opposite sty

le.

Case Example 4

"I took the life of a bea utiful human being ..

my wife of 32 years.. . ,"

Allen was cited in Chap ter 1 as one of the tw

o perpetrators I intervi ewed

who made bona fide at tempts ~o kill themselv

es aff~r murdering their part-

ners. Due to the seriou s injuries he had sust

ained by stabbing himse lf in

the throat, Allen spoke in a voice that seeme

d halfway between a gr owl

and a whisper. Ten yea rs after the murder, Fu

s eerie voice along with hzs

disfiguring scars rema ined as daily reminders

A11en was twenty-two and Andrea sixteen wh

en they became involv ed

as a couple, and they ma rried two years later.

The couple seemed a znis-

match right from th e beginning. Andrea wa

s strikingly beautiful, with

the petite fzgure of a m odel. She was elegan

t in her style of dress , her

way of communicating, and in her overall man

ner. 7n contrast, Allen was

Killer Profiles ~ 87

4. z~ ~.s~~r..,~' ~ ~ -~ _ .. ., .,, _

--- ~--._.._,-....,r,,,,~,,~, d e f ~ f~ s ~?lz

~l^~ y ~-,

~„

rather coarse of feat ures, stocky, and usu

ally clad in overaIl s and flannel

work shirts. A Port uguese immigrant, h

e could barely speak and write in

English.

From the beginning o f their marriage, th

e couple fought freq uently.

Many of these conff icts centered on Andr

ea's dislike of Alle n's uncouth

mannex and his desir e to have sex three to

four times a day. Du ring some of

these arguments, All en would grab and sh

ake Andrea. His vio lence gradu-

ally escalated to slap ping her zn the face

and thxowing her to the floor.

Their first child was born in 1964. Until

1970, when their d aughter,

Lori, was born, Andx ea worked as a compu

ter software progr ammer. Allen

worked two jobs (on e full-time and one p

art-time) as a machin ist. In 1972,

Allen started his own construction compan

y, against the advice of Andrea

as well as his brothe r and sister. When th

e company foundere d, Allen be-

carne severely depres sed and spent much

of 1974 in bed. He began to see

a psychiatrist but wa s not pxescribed any

medications.

By 1976, Allen took a job at an auto plan

t and his depression lifted.

Meanwhile, Andrea had received a prom

otion at her softw are company

and was now heading her division. Still at

tempting to salvage h is constxuc-

tioncompany, Al1en convinced Andrea to

quit this fob. When t he construct

tion company folded three months later, A

ndrea felt "too prou d," accord-

ing to Allen, to ask fo r her job back. Instea

d, she took a job as a buyer for a

clothing store, a job that she continued unti

l her death nearly fi fteen years

later.

By the time the coup le bought a house lo

t in 1977, they were a rguing

every day and no lo nger sleeping togeti~e

r. Allen was rehired aC the auto

plant and spent nearl y all of his off time

helping to build thei r fourteen-

room house. During this period, Allen be

gan to suspect that Andrea was

having an affair, tho ugh he did not confro

nt her about this unti l years later.

A few times, he stop ped at Andrea's store

and sensed that she w as embar-

rassed by his unsophi sticated appearance

and manner. Allen complained

that Andrea was spen ding nearly all of her

paycheck on cloth ing for the

children and herself. He felt a growing gul

f between the rest of his family

and himself. At this point, he began to fre

quent strip clubs onc e or twice a

month.

Allen's depression wo rsened during the 19

80s, yet he refused t o seek

help at ehe urging of h is family and sibling

s. Finally in 1990, Al len started

seeing a psychiatrist on a weekly basis. He

was eventually dia gnosed with

as ~ why Do ~ney ~t~

bipolar disordex

prescribed Proz;

were turned ofF

Between 1990

point where h~ ;

house and yard

In August 1

riod, according

of it" and r~tun

had been havin

mantically invc

confronted her,

out and find a p

avoided Andre

Allen awo]

According to A I

that he had bec I

twenty-three a

wave a kitchen

her until she p~

stabbed har zn

in the neck. Hf

to penetrate hi.

found A1Ien ly

EMTs and rus

life.

Dozing th

whom Andrea

leave Allen la

together." At 1

torney for hin

second de~ee

in prison. Dui

meat in haltin

I took the

and the n

n overalls and flannel

:ly speak and write in

ale fought frequently,

:e of Allen's uncouth

~ daq. During some of

~. His violence gradu-

gher to the floor.

when their daughter,

re programmer. Allen

a machinist. In 1972,

the advice of Andrea

foundered, Allen be-

bed. He began to see

his depression Tilted.

:r software company

salvage his constnzc-

~• When the construc-

"too proud," accord-

ajob as a buyer for a

i nearly fifteen years

7, they were arguing

s rehired at the auto build their fourteen-

ect that Andrea was this until years later. that she was embar- r. Allen complained on clothing for the he rest of his family Tubs once or twice a

;t he refused to seek ~ 1990, Allen started .ally diagnosed with

bipolar disorder with "obsessive -compulsive Features; ~ ror wmcn ne wa

prescribed Prozac. Allen f requently checked the appliances t

o see that they

were turned off and compulsively tended the yard, mowing

it every day.

Between 1990 and 1993 , Allen's depression continued to

deepen to the

point where he started negle cting his hygiene and stopped atte

nding to the

house and yard altogether.

In August 1993, Allen stoppe d seeing his psychiatrist. During this

pe-

riod, according to Allen, An drea would frequently berate him

to "snap out

of it" and return to therapy. O n October 3, Allen's suspicions

that Andrea

had been haying an affair were confirmed. He learned that she

been ro-

mantically involved with her store manager for several years. When he

confronted her, she admitted the affair and told him she planne

d to move

out and find a place of her own later that month. Over the next week,

Allen

avoided Andrea but became in creasingly depressed and agitated.

A11en awoke at 8:30 on October 12 to find Andrea preparing for wo

rk.

According to Allen, she "blew u p at me" for pacing. She also comp

lained

that he had become a bad exa mple for their daughter, Lori, who wa

s now

twenty-three and still living at home. When she continued to yell

and to

wave a kitchen knife at him, Alle n said he "snapped" and began to

strangle

her until she passed out. To en sure that she was dead, he took the kn

ife and

stabbed her in the neck. Allen then slashed his wrists and stabbed h

imself

in the neck. He tried to stab him self in the heart but by then was too

weak

to penetrate his ribs due to the loss of blood. When the police arrived,

they

found Allen lying unconscious n ext to Andrea's body. He was revi

ved by

EMTs and rushed to the hospital. where he underwent surgery to save

his

life.

During their investigation, poli ce interviewed Charles, the man w

ith

whom Andrea had been involved, who confirmed she had made plan

s to

leave Allen later that month and that they had made plans "to make

a life

together." At his court hearing, Alen rejected an offer by the distri

ct at-

torney for him to plead guilty for manslaughter. Instead, he pled guilty

second degree murder, saying that he deserved to spend the rest of hi

s life

in prison. During his sentencing in court, Allen read the following

state-

ment in halting English:

I took the life of a beautiful human being ... my wife of 32 years

and the mother of our two beaut iful children. My wife was very

Killer Profiles ~ 89

~ _

,~: ,

_ - - - - ~ -,--_......,~~,,,,r

pleasant, very intelligent. She always worked very ha

rd. Some

members of my family and my attorney thought that I

should be

charged with a lesser crime. I understand and appreciate

their

feelings and concerns far m e but I am the one who has

to live

with myself and my consci ence. When I came to Bri

dgewater [the

psychiatric hospital where he had awaited trial] I was in

bad shape

emotionally and physically. The help and care that I rec

eived is truly

overwhelming to me. Bef ore coming to Bridgewater, I

could only

spell very, little; after spendin g 14 months of school a

t the institution

I now write to my children, to my nieces and even legal

material to

my attorney. I realize these words and these sentences

are not well-

written but they are from my mind and heart.

Since there was no trial , it remains unclear how

premeditated Allen's

murder of Andrea had been . Allen said. that he had h

ad frequent, though

unexpressed, thoughts of k illing himself but denied a

ny foxethoughts of

killing Andrea.

Judging from his history, Allen is clearly not an im

pulsive person,

but neither does he come ac ross as a calculating and r

emorseless one. Al-

len does, however, fit the profile of someone who is

emotionally over-

controlled. He did not have fr equent outbursts of anger

but admitted. that

he had frequently ruminate d about Andrea's apparent l

ack of affection and

loyalty to him. His ruminat ion appeared to be a comb

ination of anger to-

ward her and self-loathing. He said that he had frequent

ly felt inferior to

Andrea. Allen also said thaf i he had felt "ashamed" abo

ut his long bouts of

depression during which he had been unable to work an

d to maintain his

house and yard, As Andrea grew more and more dista

nt, Allan had sunk

deeper into his depression. The final straw, evidently,

had been Andrea's

decision to leave him for ano ther man.

Allen was not blameless i n the breakdown of his rel

ationship with

Andrea. He admitted to f requent sexual coercion and

violence, primarily

during theix first ten years together. Over the last ten

years, he had ze-

treated into self-isolation an d depression. Andrea's dec

ision to become

involved with another man is undexstandable and even

reasonable, given

this context.

so ~ why Do ~ney ~?

Triggers for Hom;

Estrangement and j

jority of cases of ~

suicidal type of ki:

profiled earlier in t

to their victims, ar

be older. For some

to the perception t1

partners. This sen;

these men's suicid

contribute to an a

partners. I have k

who have said that

emotional needs, A

he wouldn't get he

him up and make k j

on to explain that

preventing her hus

For other suit

not be emotional r

ownership of them

sessiveness:' Beiz

betrayal or defeat

that his partner "~

experienced as an

his killing her. Th ;'

obedience of his ~ I

Daly and Wil

ral extensions of s

and families. They

apparently strikes

than the prospect

at least he has cal

V - 'z~*f

'~1

{

L.> e~~ ~' r ~

~ e -~`r 4 , r. z

lf 1 r. v t - '',,

1c~~ tf - 1

3 ~. A 4 1 ~ ~' ~ ~

E ~ ~f ~ . i t >.i r i1' y~ 3 ' t " ~ -.1cl Tj ~ J x ~~i-f ~r ~. i

3 R I

Mme ld be

~ Triggers for Homicide

:ir ~ Estrangement and jealousy appear to be the immediate triggers in the ma-

ve jority of cases of murder-suicide. Tn terms of motivation and style, the ',

er [the suicidal type of killer appears most similar to the jealous type that was

3 .cha„P profiled earlier in this chapter. Suicidal killers are more apt to be married

to eheir victims, and to have had longer relationships with them, and to

be older. For some of these men, like Allen, these factors may contribute

to the perception that there is no life beyond their relationships with their

partners. This sense of no viable future may be greatly exacerbated by

these men's suicidal depressions. The existence of depression may also

contribute to an abnormal degree of emotional dependence upon their

~' partners. I have known many battered women with depressed partners

who have said that they feel overly responsible for meeting their partner's

~' emotional needs. As one woman said, "He was depressed all the time, but

he wouldn't get help. Instead he'd blame me and I was supposed to pick

~'' him up and make him feel better. It got to be too much." This woman went

on to explain that throughout their relationship, she'd felt responsible for

preventing her husband from killing himself.

For other suicidal types of killers, the primary triggering factor may

not be emotional dependency on their partners so much as their sense of

ownership of them, something that Websdale has labeled "obsessive pos-

sessiveness." Being left by a longtime partner may signify the ultimate

betrayal or defeat for this kind of man. So attached is he to the notion

that his partner "belongs" to him, her decision to end the relationship is

experienced as an unforgivable insult of him, and a larger injustice than

his killing her. This represents a valuing system in which the loyalty and

obedience of his partner supercede any beliefs in love or affection.

Daly and Wilson have argued that femicide and familicide are natu-

ral extensions of some men's proprietary beliefs concerning their partners

and fanulies. They state, "The prospect of losing his family through death

apparently strikes the desperate familicidal father as no more disastrous

than the prospect of losing them through desertion! Better, perhaps, since

at least he has called the shots and exerted his authority."34

Killer Profiles ( 91

t , ... ~. ~ c. , f ~ .. .t-. r_...5,, ,.~i w:`S4 _, a ..a..." ~. l . fx. ~, ... ~ ~, r ~-Y . _ ~ _.zt s .. ,.. r

Potential Deterrents

Two problems are present for th e suicidal abusive man: depress

ion and

domestic violence. However, treat ment for one is not likely to allevia

te the

other. In fact, there is evidenc e that each form of treatment ma

y be less

effective if not accompanied by the other. Allen said that his tre

atment for

depression, along with his medica tion, had helped somewhat to all

eviate

his depression and to ward off t houghts of suicide. He added th

at he had

not been motivated to continue t his treatment because of the cont

inued

decline of his relationship and be cause of his growing suspicions abo

his wife's involvement with anoth er man.

Allen said that he never discuss ed these suspicions with his psychia

trists, nor did he ever tell the psy chiatrist about his domestic violen

ce.

It is not unusual for abusive men to not disclose their domestic viole

nce

to mental, health therapists. Unfor tunately, surveys have also sho

wn that

therapists rarely ask about domes tic violence unless the client broa

ches

the subject. This has been an imp ortant matter for therapeutic tra

ining,

given the high incidence of dome stic violence among those in men

tal

health counseling, substance abuse treatment, ar family therapy.

Had Allen attended a batterer int ervention program (BIP), it is much

more likely that his violence wo uld have been discussed, since su

ch pro-

grams proactively require their clients to describe their violen

ce as well

as the issues, such as jealousy, t hat trigger their abusive behavior.

Such

programs also assess for indicators of dangerousness. For some pro

grams,

this assessment sometimes inclu des confidential telephone interview

s with

the victim, as well as accessing the perpetrator's police reports an

d crimi-

nal history. When strong indicators of dangerousness are identified,

these

programs alert the victim as well as the criminal justice system.

Beyond

this, BIPs work to manage the risk by continuously monitoring da

ngerous

perpetrators for signs of escalat ion, growing desperation or d

epression,

alcohol or drug use, and their ove rall reactions to changes in the

status

of their relationships with their part ners and children. The following

case

example illustrates how long-term risk management and treatment

were

provided by one such program.

ion and

riafe the

be lass

nentfor

ilieviate

he had

ntinued

is about

~sychia-

iolence,

~iolence

~wn that

roaches

raining,

mental

is much

Bch pro-

as well

~r. Snch

~grams~

ws vaith

3 crimi-

d, these

$eyond

ngerous

ression,

e status

ng case

nt were

Case Example 5 f

"Whds going to prot ect her now?"

Philip was thirty- nine when he was arre

sted for domestic violenc e toward

his wzfe, Dons. Th e couple had three ch

ildren, ranging in age fr om siY

to seventeen. Philip was a trained plumber w

ho operated his own plu mb-

ing business anc3 hom e heating oil delivery b

usiness. Philip was conv icted

of one count of dom estic violence and s

entenced to a probation t erm of

one year. Two condi tions of Philip's probati

on were that he obey th e pra

tective order that fo rbade any contact with

his wife and that he at tend a

forty-week BIP. Durin g his first group session

, Philip admitted that h e had

pushed and grabbed Dor is in a restaurant during

the incident that led to hi s

arrest. When asked abo ut prior incidents, he

estimated that there had b een

at least twenty. Inclu ded in these had been

several threats to kill. Dor is.

In response to a questi on about suicide threats

and attempts on the in take

form, Philip wrote that he had cut his wrists

six weeks earlier. Philip had

been seeing a psychiatr ist since the zncident a

nd had been prescribed o ne

medication for anxiety and another for depress

ion.

Shortly after Philip s tarted attending the BIP,

his group leaders Learned

from Doris that he had violated the terms of his

protective order by ente r-

ing her home and had committed a new act of

violence toward her. Thi s

consisted of throwing a knife at her. The knif

e had narrowly missed h er

head, lodging in the wall . Doris want on to desc

ribe past incidents of vi a

lence on Philip's part t hat far exceeded his ow

n accounts. During a pri or

period of separation, P hilip had threatened a

nd assaulted her sister a nd

punched Doris in the ja w when she came to her

sister's defense. Doris said

that Philip was extremel y jealous and would con

tinually accuse her of ha v-

ing affairs. One time, a fter accusing her of ha

ving a romantic interes t in a

neighbor, Philip had ta ken out a knife and att

empted to bind Doris' ha nds

and feet with duct tape. When the knzfe grazed h

er and she began to ble ed,

Philip began to cry and plead with her not to cal

l the police. His pleas were

accompanied by Philip 's threats to kiIl Doris,

the children and himself

Doris said that Philip h ad frequently threatene

d to kill himself in the

past and even kept a pac ket of Exacto blades in

his pants pocket. He wou ld

sometimes take a bla de out while they were s

ittzng together on the co uch

and begin to cut his wri sts. Donis also reported

that Philip had continu ed to

Killer Profiles + 93

drink even after beai_nning his medications for depression and ar~iety. Do- Philip

ris said that when she attempted to discuss this with Philip's psychiatrist, not preven

he refused to believe that Philip had been physically abusive to her and ers control

urged her to accept Philip back into the hou se so that she could support the uniting wig

management of his depression. Philip said

Dons did not want the BIP staff to repor t Philip's new act of vio- to protect 1

lence to the police or court, saying that s he believed it would only put ing to viol:

her in more danger. Doris believed that Phi lip would kill her and possibly month but

the children if he were arrested. She said that when Philip had been ar- toward hey

rested in the past, he had used his mental i llness as a reason to avoid jail. become pr

Philip's group leaders respected Doris's w ishes but advised her to begin confirmed

seeing a battered women's advocate so tha t she could strategize about her school, an.

children's and her own safety. Doris agreed t o do this. Because Philip had The B

disclosed to his group leaders that he had continued to drink, they were since Phili

able to speak with his probation officer, who agreed to arrange for random were Conti

alcohol and drug testing during the durati on of his probation. The proba- adjusted tc ',

tion officer also agreed to begin seeing Philip on a weekly basis to monitar ~ would still

his progress. Meanwhile, the batterer inte rvention program continued to t ally offeri~

provide monthly reports to the court that documented the indicators of what she r

dangerousness that were present in Philip's s ituation. None of these oral timed to

or written communications included any re ferences to the new act of vio- become tr

lence that Doris had reported, however. relationshi

During his group sessions, Philip was as ked to talk about his feel- she and he

ings of depression andjealousy. His group leaders and fellow group mem-

bers pointed out to Philip that he had an i mportant role to play with his Career d

seventeen-year-old son who was now livi ng and working with him. The

son, Robert, had a serious drinking problem and had been arrested several Perhaps th

times for drunk driving, disturbing the pea ce, and vandalism. The group we investi

encouraged Philip to set a good example for h is son by maintaining his profile wh

own sobriety and nonviolence. Philip began to attend several AA meetings This repre

with his son. Robert also attended aparent-tea cher meeting with Robert to ria we use

discuss his problems at school. Over time, th is new focus appeared to help he had bef

Philip become less focused on the status of his relationship with Doris, five or mo

though he continued to hope for reconciliat ion with her. Because of his half of his

continuing feelings of jealousy, Philip's group l eaders recommended that the perpe4

he continue in the BIP for additional time b eyond the forty weeks that compares

were minimally required, and Philip agreed t o do sa

the other F

s4 ~ why Da they z~?

- - - _ ~ ,

~P;' r-

,>~. < ~ -

.~ _.

_.__ ~ _ _ u ~_. ... _ _ _ _ ,.__ ._ _ .

_ ~ _ _

~d arixiety, bo- Philip eventually left the prog

ram after two years. Tho ugh they could

's psychiatrist, ~

not prevent Philip fr om leaving the progra

m at this point, his grou p lead- ~

;ive to her and continue d to wo that Phili

had still not abandoned his hopes of re-

ers ~' P

uld support the ~ uniting wit h Doris. Most troublin

g, when asked if he a ccepted the divorce,

Philip said that he mostly accepted it but

asked rhetorically, "Who' s gozng

ew act of vio- ~ to protect her now?" At this point, a

ccording to Doris, Philip was continu-

vould only put ing to vzol ate her protective order

by showing up at her ho use about once a

;r and possibly month but that he had avoided an

y new acts of physical or verbal violence

p had been ar- toward her. She said that the two

daughters who remained with her had

~n to avoid jail, become pr ogressively less ar~iou

s and fearful during thi s time. She also

:d her to begin confirmed that Robert had maint

ained his sobriety, had graduated high

:gize about her school, an d was doing well at his

new job.

ruse Phrlip had The BIP staff have spoken wit

h Doris periodically ove r the six years

ink, they were since Philip completed the program.

At last report, she an d the children

age for random ~ were con tinuing to do we11. Sh

e reported that foz the m ost part, Philip had

on. The proba- adjusted to their divorceand had

remained nonviolent. She added that he

~asis to monitor would stil l show up "unannoun

ced" at her house once or twice a year, usu-

n continued to ally offer ing to xepair somethin

g. Doris said that she felt she had escaped

e indicators of what sh e had once felt would

be certain death at Philip 's hands. She con-

ie of these oral tinned to wo rry that zf she should

begin a new relationsh ip, Philip would

new act of vio- become th reatening again, but s

aid that she was not lo oking for a new

relationship and just fe lt lucky to be alive and

free of "the daily terror" that

about his feel- she and her children had once f

aced.3s

~w group mem-

~ play with his Career Criminal Typ e

with him. The izrested several Perhaps

the most easily identi fiable type of killer and

would-be killer that

sm. The group we inves tigated was the career

criminal. One-fifth of the killers fit this

naintaining leis profile while one-fourth of

the perpetrators of at tempted honnicide did.

~1 AA meetings This r epresents a combined pr

oportion of 21% of the offenders. The crite-

with Robert to ria we u sed for classifying a p

erpetrator into this gro up included whether

ppeared to help he had be en incarcerated four o

r more times as an ad ult, whether he had

up with Doris, five or m ore prior convictions fo

r felonies, and whether he derived at least

Because of his half of hi s income from crimina

l activities. To qualify as a career criminal,

~mmended that the pe rpetrator had to have m

et at least one of these conditions. Table 3.6

any weeks that corxipare s the proportions of ca

reer criminals who me t each criterion with

the other perpetrators.

KiIler Profiles ~ 95

r -~"" -

~ ,

Table 3.6: Prior criminal activities of killers

and would-be killers (by percentage)

Career

Criminal record criminals Others

Was incarcerated 4 or more times as an adult 54 0

Was convicted of 5 or more felonies as an adult 45 2

Derived at least half of his income from criminal 100 0

activities N=11 N=40

Prior Incarceration

Just over half of the career criminals qualified on the grounds of having

served four or more prison terms or having been convicted of five or more

felonies. Only one additional man in this group had served a prison sen-

tence; the rest had avoided convictions for their crimes or eluded arrest

altogether. By comparison, none of the other perpetrators had been incar-

cerated as many as four times. In fact, only twelve percent of these men

had been incarcerated at all. Mostly, their prior incarcerations had been for

domestic violence crimes. Overwhelmingly, the prison time served by the

career criminals had been for other crimes such as breaking and entering,

assault and battery, assault and battery with a weapon, drug possession,

drug sales, or probation or parole violation. However, two of the career

criminals had also served time for past domestic violence crimes. One ex-

ample was James, previously described as the man who had smothered his

partner, Corinne, to death with a pillow. Two of James's six prison terms

had been for domestic violence toward Corinne. The other four had been

for larceny, possession of a Class D drug, assault and battery, and assault

and battery with a dangerous weapon. Both of these last two crimes had

been committed against strangers. Prior to killing Corinne, James had ap-

peared in court forty-eight times to face ninety-one charges. The five years

of combined prison time that James had served were but a small fraction

of what he would have served had it not for his many suspended sentences

and reductions in prison time for "good behavior."

Three of the career criminals had served at least half of their adult

lives behind bars prior to killing their partners. One of these was Ger-

ald, the man who shot his partner Cynthia in the face with asawed-off

ss ~ why Do Bey x~?

shotgun. Pric three-fourths had been fivf months of tr violated the had lived in 1 robbery and her refusal to

Prior Convi~ E

Career crimi~ other killers ~ crime versati

{ prior convict: hicular infrac

t ones such as i had commute ~ tivity extende

violent crime rape and oche: violent felon} drug possessi their crimes r conventions a

Criminal Li f

Some of the c such based sty Eying killers and few felon most of their There were su crime and tho two of the me

~ they had after

- ~ F

~. -~

+~ _ :f __ 'I

— a

?:. — t.

~,, ~ ,

shotgun. Prior to meeting Cynthia, Gerald had spent

twelve years—nearly

three-fourths of his adult life—behind bads.

The longest of these sentenc es

had been five years for three armed robberie

s. During the entire four teen

months of their rel ationship, Gerald had be

en "on the lam" for havi ng

violated the terms of his parole. Facing a wa

rrant for his arrest, Geral d

had lived in hiding w ith Cynthia while continu

ing to support himself vi a

robbery and larceny. O n the day he killed Cynt

hia, they had argued over

her refusal to Iet Ium u se her car to commit a ro

bbery:

Przor Convictions

Career criminals who k ill their partners distingui

sh themselves from the

other killers not only in the sheer volume of thei

r past crimes but in their

crime versatility. For the non-career criminals, th

e vast majority of their

prior convictions had be en for domestic violen

ce, non-felony motor ve-

hicular infractions, such as driving without ins

urance, or alcohol-related

ones such as disturbing the peace or dnznk drivin

g. The career criminals

had committed many of these same crimes as weIl

, but their criminal ac-

tivity extended far beyo nd these realms. They ha

d committed many more

vi"nlent crimes against p eople other than their int

imate partners, including

rape and other assaults on strangers or acquaintances.

They had many non-

violent felony conviction s, such as for fraud, gra

nd theft, home invasions,

drug possession and sales , and buxglary. The shee

r volume and variety of

their crimes reveal these men as chronic and per

vasive violators of social

conventions and authority .

Criminal Li festyle

Some of the career crimi nals we interviewed wou

ld not have qualified as

such based strictly on pr ior convictions or prison

terms. Two of the quali-

fying killers and tl2ree of the would-be killers

had had no prison records

and few felony convicti ons. They qualified as c

areer crirriinals because

most of their income a s adults was derived f

rom criminal enterprises.

There were subtypes of these men: those who we

re members of organized

crime and those who a ppeazed to be "solo oper

ators." Of the first group,

two of the men were longtime "bikers," accord

ing to the women whom

they had attempted to k ill, while the third was

evidently a member of a

Killer Profiles ~ 97

'4~̀'., y

.i' y ~2 T 1 .j ~- -i

} '~ ~.~

~̀ -

more established cr ime syndicate, akin to

the Mafia. All three of these

men were perpetrator s of attempted homicid

e. Their victims decli ned to

discuss the details of t hese men's criminal ac

tivities for fear of xetri bution

from them or from th eir crime associates.

Some of the career cr iminals

that I interviewed co nfirmed that they had

warned their partners n ot to

disclose their criminal activities, and two men

said that they had speci fi-

cally threatened to ha ve their partner harme

d by others if she dis closed

their crimes. One victi m of attempted homici

de reported that her p artner

had repeatedly said th at he had "put a contrac

t out on her" after his arrest

for selling drugs. These threats continued from

prison. This woman added

that "he was so paran oid towards the end, h

e thought it was zne, even

though that was the la st thing I would have d

one."

All three of this latter group of men—those

who appeared not to b e

members of organize d crime—were men w

ho had killed their par tners.

Despite their not being part of a formal netwo

rk, each of these men admit-

tedthat most of his frien ds and peers were also

involved in criminal act ivi-

ties. One of these men, Donlon, characterized

himself as a fulltime "dea ler

and stealer" who also took part-time legitima

te jobs "when busines s was

slow." Donlon denied having any formal cri

minal partners but said t hat he

relied upon his netwo rk of friends to conduc

t and protect his drug sales.

This depiction is simila r to that of another kil

ler, Everett, to whom I asked

whether his friends su pported his criminal ac

tivities. Everett respo nded,

"They was all doing t he same thing" but als

o denied having any f ormal

crime partners. Both D onlon and Everett rep

orted that their father s had

extensive criminal reco rds. Everett's father h

ad been incarcerated fo r kill-

ing agirlfriend ten yea rs pzior to Everett's m

urder of his partner. E verett

said -his father had ta ught him "how to surv

ive on the streets" an d that

they had committed ma ny crimes together wh

en he still lived wzth hi s fa-

ther. Intezestingly, most o~ tYie career criminals

I interviewed said tha t they

were closer with their fathers than their mother

s. This was the only group

of killers in which the majority said this.

Donlon and Everett ar e typical of the other

career criminals in t hat

their criminal lifestyle appeared to be one that

they learned from their fa-

thers as well as from ot her adult figures during

their upbringings. Onc e es-

tablished, this lifestyle w as actively abetted and

refined by their re spective

peer networks. This ki nd of intergenerationa

l and peer support fo r anti-

social behavior is remi niscent of that reporte

d by the substance-a busing

98 ~ Why Da They Kill?

All three of these

ictims declined to

fear of retribution

career criminals

;ir partners not to

t they had specifi-

~s if she disclosed

;d that her partner

er" after his arrest

'his woman added

t it was me, even

appeared not to be

Led their partners.

these men admit-

in criminal activi-

a fulltime "dealer

Shen business was

;rs but said that he

pct his drug sales.

to whom I asked

'sverett responded,

laving any formal

their fathers had

:arcerated for kill-

is partner. Everett

streets" and that

lived with his fa-

wed said that they

gas the only group

criminals in that

ned from their fa-

ringings. Once es-

~y their respective

• support for anti-

;ubstance-abusing

type of killer. This is not coincidental given the large over

lap that appears

to exist between these two groups. Nine of the eleven m

en that we charac-

terized as career criminals w ere also substance abusers. Co

mpared to the

other three types of kil lers, men in these two groups

were far more likely

to report having five or more male friends, and to say

that they saw their

friends at least twice pe r week. Their friendships appe

ar to have provided

a powerful form of peer support for these men to

engage in drinking,

drugging, violent and in many cases, criminal behavior.

For the most part,

the substance-abusing men had attempted to induct thei

r partners into this

netwark. This was somew hat less true for the career crirr

iinals, who tended

to keep their peers somewha t separate from their partners.

In any event,

the existence of such a stron g peer network for these me

n surely poses a

daunting challenge for a fe male partner who seeks to compl

ain about, or

leave, her abusive partner. The victims of attempted hom

icide whose part-

ners were substance abusers or career criminals were le

ast likely to say

that they could turn to mut ual friends for support or help. A

s one woman

put it, "They were all doing the same thing," referring bo

th to their drink-

ing and violence. Another wo man, Anna, said that she woul

d routinely see

her boyfriend's friends "slapp ing their girlfriends around,"

adding, "it was

like a big joke [to them]."

Abused women whose part ners are involved in crime ap

pear to be es-

pecially vulnerable. Not only do they have fewer mutual fri

ends to whom

they can turn for help, but a lso fewer of their own friends

as well. Most

of the victims whose partners were involved in criminal ac

tivity said that

they feared disclosing this in formation to their friends and

family for fear

of jeopardizing them. Not c oincidentally, these women se

emed the most

isolated. One woman, Angel a, said that her parents knew

about her part-

ner's criminal activities and f eared for her life. "But what

could they do?"

she asked. "They knew wha t he was capable of." Angela

went on to de-

scribe how her partner had r epeatedly threatened to kill her

. father.

Triggers for Homicide

The career criminals identifi ed many of the same triggers

that the sub-

stance abusers did. For some men, killing their partners app

eared to arise

out of mundane arguments. One example was Vincent,

already profiled

in the previous section, wh o had killed Carol by backhan

ding her to the

face after she had complained that he'd stopped up the toilet. Similar to

this was James, who smothered Corinne after she had complained about

his breaking a flowerpot. In other cases, the triggers for murder are more

similar to those described in the section about materially motivated killers,

reflecting another overlap in style. Many of the career criminals appeared

to have contempt for their partners, which seemed to be fueled by long-

standing grievances against them. This was evidenced by Gerald, the man

who killed Cynthia after she refused to let him use her car because he had

been drinking. Gerald's fury about this fit with his intolerance for any past

complaints or defiance by Cynthia. This same contempt was manifested

by Everett, who shot his estranged girlfriend when she showed up at his

house to demand that he return some jewelry that he had taken. Another

example was provided by Reagan, who killed his girlfriend, Crystal, after

she refused to have sex with him. Gerald, Everett, and Reagan are ex-

amples of highly vindictive men with very little emotional attachment to

their partners. All three men appeared primarily to expect money and sex

from their partners. Each would frequently come and go with little ac-

counting of their activities to their partners. Each admitted to having had

frequent sex with other women. At the same time, they were intolerant of

any expectations or complaints from their partners. Gerald and Everett

both talked of frequently having been "bothered" by their respective part-

ners, such as their complaints about the other women or the lack of time

spent together. Each had a prior history of other financially exploitative

relationships with women. None of these men seemed upset about hav-

ing killed his partner. Similar to the materially motivated type of killer,

each appeared to blame the deceased for the legal consequences that had

ensued.

Murder appears to be the result of the killer's immediate triggers

and the evolving situational factors, as well as his longer-term traits and

grievances. Of all the types of killers we interviewed, the career criminals

seemed most predisposed to kill. Similar to the materially motivated men,

the career criminals held overwhelmingly negative views of women. They

appear to view women as a somewhat necessary nuisance: useful for sex

and a place to stay but "nothing but trouble" in other regards. Not only

did they continue to demonize the deceased but most of their past part-

ners as well. Five of the six career criminal killers admitted to violence

100 ( Why Do They Kill?

toward at 1 the other ki

much higl~i

lence in the

ing that the

treatment c

lon talked c

money fron ing this, Dc

of crap fron

Based c

their lack o:

most simila

Many if nog

social perso

for these tra

on psychop:

personality

to as "psycl

common tra

Emotioi

Glib anc

Egocenl

Lack of

Deceit a

Shallow

Though mar

who kill thei

of these feats

interchanges

remorse for 1

ing women.

woman Boor.

_ ,

i ,,

toward at least one past partn er. By comparison, less than one-fourt

h of i

the other killers admitted violen ce toward a past partner. It is likely that

` much higher proportion of the other killers had actually committ

ed vio- ''

lence in their past relationships but were unwilling to admit it. It is rev

eal- l

ing that the career criminals had no such qualms about disclosing such ill

treatment of women. For them, it appeared to be a point of pride. Don-

lon talked of vandalizing an ex-par tner's apartment and car and stealing

money from her after she had kick ed him out of her apartment. In disclos-

ing this, Donlon explained, "I had t o show her that I don't take that kind

of crap from a woman."

Based on their relationship histories and criminal records, as well as

` their lack of remorse about the murders they committed, these men

seem

most similar to how criminologists oft en portray murderers in general.

Many if not most chronically violent offenders are thought to have anti-

' social personality disorder. Thou gh I did not administer any tests to ass

ess i

for these traits, I suspect that most if no t all of these men would score high

on psychopathy scales that are designed to measure features of anti-social

personality disorder. People with the se features were previously referred

~ to as "psycho aths." According to criminologist Robert Hare, the most

i p common traits found in psychopaths in

clude the following: 36

! Emotional/Interpersonal Real m Social Deviance

Glib and superficial attachments to othe rs Impulsive

Egocentric and grandiose Poor behavior controls

Lack of remorse Need for excitement

Lack of empathy Lack of responsibility

Deceit and manipulation Early behavior problems

Shallow emotions Adult antisocial behavior

Though many of these features are p resent to some degree in most men

w$o kill their partners, career criminals st ood out in seeming to have many

of these features. For these men, women are objectified as disposable and

interchangeable commodities. This is evidenced not only in•their lack of

remorse for their deceased partners but fox their overall pattern of exploit-

ing women. With this set of expectation s, it seems inevitable that each

woman soon outlives her usefulness. In fact, these men's relationships

---~—.~--~-.-,,T--.~~: ---,

with the deceased were more short-lived on average than those of any

other of the killer types. Their relationships averaged twenty-nice months

compared to ninety-two months for the other kil lers.

Potential Deterrents

For most of the career criminals, the most ob vious deterrent to killing or

trying to kill their partners would have been serving a jail sentence for

domestic violence or other crimes so that th ey would not have had ac-

cess to their victims. None of the victims of attempted homicide whose

abusers were career criminals had called the police due to a prior act of

domestic violence. In the few times the poli ce were involved, witnesses

had called them. Even when they had been arrested, none of these men

had been convicted of prior domestic viole nce, since their victims had

refused to testify. In two of the five cases, th e perpetrators even avoided

prosecution for the final act of attempted homicide due to their victim's

reluctance to testify. In both of these cases, however, the men received

substantial prison sentences for subsequent convictions for drug-related

crimes. A third perpetrator, who had bludg eoned his victim unconscious

with his motorcycle helmet, agreed to plead gui lty to assault and battery

in exchange for having charges of assault with intent to murder dropped.

This perpetrator received only a prison suspe nded prison sentence of siY

months, with one year of probation to follow. The two career criminals

who were convicted of assault with intent to murder were prosecuted be-

cause of "no drop" charges on the part of the district attorney. In both

cases, these cases were prosecuted without the testimony of the victims

and the perpetrators received prison sentences of eight to ten years.

Similarly, only two of the six career criminal killers that I interviewed

had previously been arrested for domestic violen ce. In both of these cases,

the violence occurred in public, and bystande rs—not the victim—had

summoned the police. Though there was strong evidence of prior domes-

tic violence by the other three career criminals, it appeared that their vic-

tims might have been too fearful to call the police. Despite this, two of

the career criminals had active wazrants against them at the time that they

committed murder. One of these was Gerald, wh o had been "on the lam"

the previous fourteen months for parole violation s. The other was Vincent,

who had an outstanding warrant for violation of the terms of his proba-

sot ~ why Do They ~ll~

tion at the time

for assaulting

his probation c

Vincent would

of his long cri~

prison sentencf

the opportunity

Likely would nc

incarcerated fo

with." Gerald

been that she p:

Only one c

attended a bat

that some of tl

in most prison;

county jails ha'

shift toward m~

prison system

other crimes a~

ies that have s:

cords re-offend

prisoners are rf

pity supervisic

sentences do n~

unless attendin

sentence. Even

conditions of t

program are of

up their senten~

a relatively she

attend aforty-v

they sometime.

altogether.

With a nev

creasing numb

vention progra

makes sense fc

i ~ :

~ ;

f .

ose of any { tion at t he time that he kill

ed Carol. Following h is three-monttz jail t

erm

ine months =' for assaulting Carol, h

e had violated proba tion by not checking

in with

a;- his probation offic

er. Had he been pi cked up by police fo

r his warrant,

~; Vincent wou ld likely have rece

ived an additional ja il sentence becaus

e ~'

of hzs long crimi nal record. In both

Vincent's and Geral d's cases, long

~` prison sente nces might well ha

ve provided their re spective victims with

~ ~~li~b ar ~ the opportunity to e

nd the relationships. For his part, Gerald

said that he

~ntence for likely would not have res

umed his xelationship with Pamela if he ha

d been

ive had ac- incazce rated for violating hi

s parole since he " didn't want her to b

egin

side whose ~ with." Gerald went on to e

xplain that his prima ry interest in Pamel

a had

prior act of been that she provided a pla

ce for him to stay wh ile avoiding the law.

witnesses f O nly one of the caree

x criminal killers wh o had served jai]. tz

me had

these mEn j attende d a batterer interve

ntion program whi le in prison. At the

time

victims had ~ that some of these mur@

ers were committe d, no such programs

existed

ren avoided ~ in mos t prisons or jails in

Massachusetts. Curr ently, nearly all the

state's

eir victim's ~ coun ty jails have such px

ograzns. Since 2000, many states have be

gun to

en received shift toward more of an

emphasis on rehabili tative programming i

n their

trug-related pri son systems, espec

ially for prisoners with histories of vi

olence and

inconscious oth er crimes against p

ersons. This has bee n prompted by the m

any stud-

and battery zes that have shown that

the vast majority of prisoners wzth viole

nt re-

~er dropped, i cords re-offend within on

e year of their releas e from prison. Furthe

r, most

tence of six ?i prisoners are releas

ed without parole, pr obation, or any leve

l of commu-

:r criminals pi ty supervision. This

means that convic ted batterers who s

erve prison

~secuted be- iI sent ences do not attend

batterer intezventio n programs upon the

ir release

~eY• In both ~ unles s attending such a

program was made a condition of their

original

the victims j sent ence. Even batterer

s who received a pri son sentence for viol

ating the

~~e~S~ ~ conditions of their

probation by failing to attend a batterer

intervention

interviewed ~ pr ogram are often not

required to attend such a prograrzi onc

e t1~ey wrap

these cases, ~ up the ir sentences. I have

known some battere rs who have chosen

to sezve

victim—had a rela tively short prison

sentence, say of one to three months, rak

her than

lrior domes- attend aforty-week batter

er intervention pro d am. In choosing thi

s option,

iat their vic- they sometimes are able t

o avoid any kind. of rehabilitative prograi

m~ing

this, two of altogethe r.

rna that they ~ Wi th a new emphasis

on prisoner re-entr y programs, however,

an rn-

`on the lam" creasing number of battere

rs are being requi red to attend batterer

inter-

~as Vincent, ven tion programs eithe

r daring or followi ng their prison sente

nces. This

f his probe- makes sense for a variety

o£ reasons. One is that there is strong e

vidence

Killer Profiles ~ 103

.~ ~K.. i., .,-, f ~ .n f ., h 1~.:. {thy.;; i

-- - - ~ „ V' f

that most batterers refrain from abuse whil e attending batterer interven-

tion programs. Further, those who comple te their programs are two to four

times less likely to re-offend than those who don't complete one.37 Bat-

terer intervention programs in most states are required to notify courts

promptly in cases when a batterer has d ropped out of his program or other-

wise not complied with program requirem ents, such as to consistently

attend, actively participate, refrain from abuse, and follow program rec-

ommendations. Further, programs are re quired to provide the court with

written documentation of the perpetratar' s noncompliance. This notifica-

tion to the courts serves as an early notice to courts that an offender is

at increased odds to re-offend. Tn many jurisdictions, the probationer's

failure to fulfill program requirements r esults in a probation revocation

hearzng, where he is subject to being inc arcerated for violating the terms

of his probation.

Too often, however, batterers who fail to a ttend or to complete their

batterer intervention programs are simpl y allowed to attend a less rigar-

ous program of their own choosing. In ma ny cases, convicted batterers are

able to avoid a certified batterer intervent ion program altogether by agree-

ing to plead guilty to domestic assault in exchange for being sentenced to

a shorter program, such as an anger man agement program, a substance

abuse program, or a private therapist. One study has shown that convicted

batterers who attend anger management or substance abuse programs are

significantly more likely to re-offend than those who attend state-certified

batterer intervention programs.38 Certified batterer intervention programs,

unlike anger management programs, are required to provide information

to victims such as the whether the batterer has enrolled in the program,

dropped out, or failed to complete the progra m. These programs provide

both victims and referring courts with w ritten documentation about the

batterer's potential to commit serious act s of violence, including homi-

cide and suicide. This information is often instrumental to the victim's

decision-making about her own safety, and also is useful to judges in their

sentencing decisions. 39

Several outcome studies of domestic violence offenders referred to

batterer intervention programs have shown that program completion rates

are improved and recidivism is reduced when the courts strictly monitor

attendance in such programs.40 In some juri sdictions, dedicated domestic

violence courts provide the structure for s uch enhanced monitoring. Typi-

l04 ~ why Do zney ill?

I ~~ ant pc

,~ Pa

3 Tl

ar.

~ th

{ in i

1 ~ e<

i j oy

,t ' th

i ki

,, e~

~~ st

cr. tr.

~ . i . f

I ;a

e i

r interven- i cally, in such systems, offenders attending batterer intervention programs

:wo to four must o before a 'ud e eve thirt da s for reviews of their rog ress.

g J g rY Y Y P

~ne.37 Bat- This review not only includes whether they have refrained from vio lence ~,

tify courts ~ ' and respected protective orders but also whether they have activ ely and

n or other- ~ positively participated in their batterer intervention program.41 Positi ve

insistently ; participation generally entails a willingness to discuss openly one's own

'gram rec- 4 past violence without blaming the victim, an ability to grasp the concepts j

;ourt with ~' of the program, and a demonstrated willingness to use nonabusive and

s notif ca- noncoercive ways of communicating with others. ~'

ffender is ~

~ationer's ~ Comparing Killers to Would-Be Killers '~

evocation ~

the terms I The most obvious difference between the men who killed their partners

and those who attempted to do so was the ineptness of the latter group's

lete their ~ efforts. For many, the problem did not seem to be in their lack of effort

;ss rigor- ~ but rather in poor execution. One strong factor in their lack of success was

terers are ~ that far fewer of these men used guns. A comparison of the methods used

>y agree- ~ in the killers' and the would-be killers' final assaults on their victims is

enced to ~ provided in Table 3.7. While nearly half of the killers used guns to kill

zbstance i their partners, only one of the would-be killers used one. This was Mark, it

onvicted ~ the man described at the beo nning of this book, who had fired seven shots

-ams are ~ into his estranged wife's car, missing each time.

certified ! Why didn't more of the perpetrators of attempted homicide use guns?

ograms, ~ One reason may be that they apparently had less access to guns than did I

rmation ~ the killers who succeeded. While 58% of the killers said that they had had

ro ramg e e s when the committed their crimes this wa s trae foras acc ss to nY ~ Y

provide ~ only 40% of the would-be killers.

gout the ~ Of course, this does not tell the whole story. I mentioned previously

homi- that three of the killers went out to get guns specifically for the purpose of

victim's ~ ,killing their partners. Therefore, a more likely explanation for the killers

in their greater success was that a higher proportion of them carefully planned

their fatal attacks. Two-thirds of them, after all, were convicted of mur-

rred to der in the first or second degree, meaning that there had been irrefutable

~n rates evidence of premeditation. By contrast, far fewer of the would-be killers

ionitor showed strong evidence of such careful calculation. Only about half of

mestic these men were prosecuted for attempted murder. The major reason for

• TYPi- this low prosecution rate appeared to be that fearful victims were reluc-

Killer Profiles ( 105

. . _. _. _._.. ...._. ~ ,._ T ~~~:~ ~... __. ~--,--~: ,.

Table 3.7: Methods used by killers and would-be killers

during their final assaults on their victims (in percentages)

Method Used Killers Would-be killers

Shooting with gun 45 5

Stabbing 16 35

Strangling with hands 16 5

Bludgeoning/B eating 10 40

Asph~iating/Smothering 6 0

Stabbing and bludgeoning 3 5

Strangling and beating 0 5

Sabotaging victim's car 0 5

Strangling and running over with car 3 0

N=31 N=20

tant to testify against their assailants. In some cases, this was additionally

prompted by hearing that the offender would agree to plead guilty to a

lesser charge such as assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, kid- j napping, rape, ar just assault and battery..

Two of the perpetrators weren't charged with any crime, however, due

to insufficient evidence. This was because the victims did not file a police In report. Both women said their partners were members of organized crime

j th,

and. that they were too fearful to call the police. lie Judging from the victims' accounts, about one-third of the perpetra-

tors (35%) had engaged in some form of planning for their final assaults ~ or

Of on the victims. Here is a sampling of these cases. ~

I be

1) Reggie's wife, Anna, had left him three years earlier and was ~ Pet living with another man when he tried to kill her. Having just '

found out that he was dying of liver disease, Reggie called Anna

att

the ~~~~' and asked her to meet him at a subway discussion so they could

(~l C!`l7CC t}1 P1T f`.}71~l~YPTI ~~1 PT7 C}1P '.I T'i'fVPf~ RP.ff 41 P. t(1(l~C (lllt A ~TI7fP. ~.

iIl~

Cages)

killers

itionally

.ilty to a

ion, kid-

;ver, due

a'police

~d crime

ierpetra-

assaalts

gas

just

i Anna

could

a kzufe

ore he

In't say

:d for

2) After his wife, Sylvie, moved ou t of their home, Edgar began

sneaking into her apartment to spy on her from a hidden crawl

space that he had enlarged undernea th the stairway. Once he

overheard her telling a friend.that sh e never intended to return

to him. The next evening, he knocke d on the door and when she

opened it, he stabbed her five times in the head while their two-

year-old daughter sat on the floor cryi ng.

3) Shortly after Lisa tried to have h er estranged husband, Alex,

committed to a detox center, he broke into her house at midnight,

bound her wrists and feet as she lay n aked in bed, and began

bludgeoning her and stabbing her wi th a screwdriver. Lisa was

able to break free at one point and d ove headfirst through the

closed second-story window, but Alex caught her by the feet

and pulled her naked body back thr ough the broken glass of the

window. He then rebound her and resumed his attack. Lisa broke

free a second time and leaped out the window, crashing onto

the driveway below. She then ran to a neighbor's house and had

them summon the police. Lisa susta ined multiple lacerations,

penetration wounds, and broken bones .

In contrast to these attacks, howeve r, the majority of victims believed

that the near-fatal assaults on them had been less calculated. Most be-

lieved that their partners' decisions to kill had been made "on the spot"

or immediately before an attack in reaction to something said or done.

Often, the attack had occurred withi n the context of a heated exchange

between them. This is somewhat m isleading, however, since it also ap-

pears that many of the men had ini tiated the interactions with the intention

to kill their partners. In fact, it se emed to some victims that the verbal

attacks had been simply the first part of the murder attempts. Many of

these victims said that the attacks began with the assailants loudly accus-

ing them of something, swearing at them and threatening to kill them.

In many cases, the assailant appe ared to have been ruminating about the

victim's presumed affair or plans t o end the relationship. One woman sai

it seemed he had been "working h imself up to it more and more." Another

said, "I could see he was kind of p syching himself up for whatever." A

third woman said, "I could tell he was hurting and just wanted to end

all. I should have known he wanted to end me!"

Killer Profiles ( 107

While most of the killers were more calculating than this, a substan- Table 3.8: Corn tial number of them were similar to the attempted killers in their apparent circumstances c lack of planning. This seemed particularly true of the killers who blud-

Characteristic geoned or strangled their victims. I have previously mentioned Vincent, 1 Mean age for instance, the man who had punched his partner, Carol, in the head

Mean grade comply after she had complained about his stopping up the toilet with macaroni. Had completed hig Carol died two weeks later of a brain aneurism. Vincent was one of the ten Had attended some killers who were convicted of manslaughter. Had married the vii

Aside from being less calculating and adept at killing, how else did ' Had children with the attempted killers differ from those who succeeded? Demographically, Caucasian they were remarkably similar. Table 3.8 summarizes the demographic African American traits of both groups of men. They were nearly identical in age, class Latino background, employment status, and marital status. One significant differ- Had blue-collar occ ence is that a somewhat higher proportion of the killers were Caucasian, F Had white-collar oc and while an equal proportion of each group was African American, none ~ Unemployed at time of the killers were Latinos. In contrast, four of the would-be killers were Estranged at time of

Latino men. The racial breakdown of all fifty-one of the perpetrators col- Victim was plannin,

lectively, however, is similar to that found among men who kill their part- relationship at t~

ners in this country, though our study had fewer African American vic- ~ Estranged at time or

tims. While 20% of the victims in this study were African American, just {

under 30% of American women killed by their intimate partners in 1998 ~ *This includes all chili were African American. The rate of Latina victims during this same year same household with is unknown since Hispanic victims of crime are classified as of "White"

or of "Other Race" by the National Institute of Justice in Uniform Crime

Reports. However, Peace At Home, a victim advocacy group that tracks '~ what consistent with

intimate partner homicides in Massachusetts, found that of 149 women { origin. The class bac

killed from 1991-1995, 9.4 percent were Hispanic.42 This same study matches those found

found that 65% of the victims were Caucasian, 21%were African Ameri- ~ research studies.

can, 2.7% were Asian, and 2% were classified as "Race Unknown." The `. Nearly equal pr

previously cited Campbell study of 445 homicides and attempted Komi- employed at the tim

cides of women in eleven American cities found that 24% of the women at the context of the

were of Hispanic backgrounds.43 not always coincider.

One other substantial difference between the killers and the would-be unemployed men hac

killers was that a higher proportion of the former group had failed to com- ? for their partner's aci

plete high school. Despite this, equal proportions had attended college. because they were m

Overall, the perpetrators were significantly less educated than the gen- = surveillance. Exampl

eral population of men, though their collective level of education is some- stalking.

108 ~ Why Do They Kill?

_ _ . i

i ,. ' - ~~

,~.;:, € :'~ ,.,,

~n this, a substan- a Table 3.8: Comp arison of demographic character

istics and

s in their apparent ~ circumstanc es of killers and would-be killers

killers who blud- ~ Characteristic Killers Would-be killers

~ntioned Vincent, ~ ~

Mean age 33 34

;arol, in the head Mean grade completed 11 12

et with macaroni, Had completed high school 48% 70%

gas one of the ten 7 Had a

ttended some college 22% 20%

Had married the victim 45% 45%

ing, how else did Had children with victim 61% 80%*

C3emographically, Caucasian 81% 60%

the demographic J African American 19% 20%

ical in age, class ~ Latino 0% 20%

significant differ- ~ Had blue-collar occupation 87°Io 85%

were Caucasian, ~ Had white-collar occupati on 13% 1

i American, none Unemployed at time of fin al assault 29% 2

d-be killers were ~ Estranged at time of f inal assault 48%

50%

perpetrators col- ~ Victim was pl anning to separate or end 16°Io

10%

ho kill their part- J relati onship at the time

m American vic- 1 Estranged at time or planned estrangement

64% 60%

~n American, just

partners in 1998

~g this same yeax

~d as of "White"

i Uniform Crime

Troup that tracks it of 149 women Phis same study

.African Ameri-

Unknown." The attempted homi- % of the women

nd the would-be ~d failed to com-

ttended college. :d than the gen-

ucation is some-

N=31 N=20

* This includes all children, whether b iological or step-children, who lived in the

same household with the couple.

what consistent with the lower econ omic backgrounds of their families of

origin. The class background and occupational status of the perpetrators

matches those found among perpetrato rs of domestic homicide in larger

research studies.

Nearly equal proportions of both groups of perpetrators were un-

employed at the time that they commi tted their final assaults. Looking

at the context of these cases, howev er, I found that unemployment was

not always coincidental to the murd er or attempted murder. Some of the

unemployed men had quit their jobs in order to have more time to moni-

tor their partner's activities. A few others had been fired from their jobs

because they were missing so many da ys from work in order to conduct

surveillance. Examples of these cases are given in the later section about

stalking.

-- -- . _ _ _ _. _ _ - ~,;-,̂-,r+.-~.e, ".,F+T! ~~;~,yn"E?a~~.aw•o......~.~+.y~r..F ...,,~̂ ',~-y 'ter.- .-.—.~... ,

Another similarity between the two groups of perpetrators was that Table 3.9: $reakdc

e' uictims or about the majority of each group were estranged from

th lr (in percentages)

to become estranged, at the tame of the fatal or ne ar-fatal assaults. Many

research studies have previously identified estrang ement as a strong factor

in domestic homicides.4̀` For this reason, estr angement is one of the risk

markers included on nearly all formal tools to asse ss danger and potential

lethality in domestic violence cases. Only recently, however; has this fac-

torbeen broadened to include planned estrangement b y the victim. In my

interviews with the killers as well as the victims of attempted homicide, I

found that the victims' plans to separate or to end the relationships were

just as likely to be cited as triggering factors for t he perpetrators as cases

where the victims had already left. As can be see n from Table 3.8, im-

minent estrangement was a condition in about one -eighth of the cases. In

conducting threat assessments, it therefore makes s ense to include whether

the victim is making plans to separate from her abuser and whether he

knows about those plans.

Beyond the demographic and relationship status sim ilarities in the ho-

micide and attempted homicide groups, I found th at the would-be killers

could be classified according to the same types that I had profiled among

the killers. Further, in determining which type each o f these perpetrators

fit, I found that there was a similar proportional spread across all five of

the killer types. This is summarized in Table 3.9.

Double and Triple Threats

Most of the killers and would-be killers could be ca lled multiple threats in

that they had characteristics of more than one type. I n fact, this was true

of nearly two-thirds of the men. Table 3.10 provide s a breakdown of this.

A somewhat higher proportion of the perpetrators of attempted homicide

(70%) qualified as multiple threats than the killers (58%). This may reflect

the greater likelihood that victims, relative to perpetra tors, would identify

key perpetratar behaviors such as jealousy and sub stance abuse.

Jealous Substance Abusers

The most common type of double threat was the je alous substance abuser.

The overlap between these two types of killers is considerable. Two-thirds

Perpetrator type Jealous

Substance abusing Materially motivated Career criminal Suicidal

* Totals exceed 100% sing

** Due to the exclusion fr undercounts the true pr~ ies of femicides that inc ranges from 25% to 30'

Table 3.10: Breakd

according to numb

Number of killer types the perpetrator fit

One type only

Two types

Three types

N=51

of the substance-abusi

half of the jealous kill

stance abuse appear to

it is possible that one f

to trigger murder. A n

their drinking had exa

jealous, James said, "'

drinking, that would r

kick in and then I'd be

110 ~ Why Do They Kill?

. _ _ __ _ _

Table 3.9: Breakdown of perpetrator types

(in percentages)*

Perpetrator type Killers Would-be killers Overall

Jealous 71 80 75 ~

Substance abusing 61 75 67

Materially motivated 19 15 18

Career criminal 19 25 22

Suicidal 9 10 10**

N=31 N=20 N=51

* Totals exceed 100% since many perpetrators were classified as more than one type.

** Due to the exclusion from this study of actual suicide cases, this undoubtedly

undercounts the true proportion of suicidal perpetrators. From larger research stud-

ies of femicides that include murder-suicides, the proportion of murder-suicides

ranges from 25% to 30%.

Table 3.10: Breakdown of killers and would-be killers

according to number of membership types they fit

Number of killer types Number/proportion

the perpetrator fit of perpetrators

One type only 19 (37%)

'Itvo types 22 (43%)

Three types 10 (20%)

N=51

of the substance-abusing killers also qualified as jealous types. Just over

half of the jealous killers were also substance abusers. Jealousy and sub-

stance abuse appear to be particularly deadly combinations. In some cases,

it is possible that one factar without the other would not have been enough

to trigger murder. A number of the jealous killers, for instance, said that

their drinking had exacerbated their jealousy. Asked what had made him

jealous, James said, "To be honest, I'm not that jealous. I guess if I was

drinkuig, that would make me more so. You know, the insecurity would

kick in and then I'd be talking some real shit to her [Corrine]."

Killer Profiles ( 111

■

. ~ . _ ~.

7 .~ .. .- , {.- r .,: ,~.~ _. ... . . J

-, .. i

Interviewer: Are you saying that when you were drinking that you

would think things that you normally wouldn' t think?

James: You can say that! Pd be thinking a lo t of things, yes.

Sick shit.

Interviewer: Like what?

James: Like her and her father.

Interviewer: You mean, you'd think Conine was sexually involved

with her father?

James: I might have accused her of that a co uple of times

when I had alcohol in me.

Interviewer: Did you really believe that?

James: Nah! Not regularly no. But again, if I'd been drinking,

yes.

Several victims of attempted homicide similarly noted that their abusers'

jealous threats would become worse with their drinl~ing and/or drug use.

Commenting on her partner's changes before his near-fatal assault on her,

Lydia said, "He seemed more paranoid. I think i t was the drugs."

Interviewer:

Lydia:

Interviewer:

Lydia:

Interviewer:

Lydia:

What do you mean by paranoid?

He'd always be thinking people was out to ge t him.

He'd say people was coming into the house and

stealing his money. He'd accuse me of crazy things.

Like what?

Hiding things from him. He'd accuse me of taki ng his

clothes if he couldn't find them.

Was his jealousy worse?

Oh God, yes! It was always bad but then he'd th ink I

had something going on with every person I'd meet.

We classifie ',

as both substanc ',

it was clear that

features of their

appeared to pias ',

of these women

in the six mont

said that their p

one of these fa

. which factor j

in the final assai

partner's jealou

ners had made j

comparison, on

drunk or high c

seemed an inin

her estranged h

sleeping with?''

Though his drir.

ing up to this a'

it [the attack] re

that their partne

using drugs. O~

her repeatedly

his recent drug ''

<̀very jealous" i

attack. The oth~

in the head. As: ,',

get messed up ~

For the ma

Other women did not believe that their abusive partners were necessarily that jealousy p~

more jealous when they had been drinking or u sing drugs but that their ' were merely fa

jealous threats and violence would be more severe . As one woman said, was used to cap

"That [jealous suspicions] was always in his head but when he was drink- 4 commonly cite

ing he'd really let me have it. He wouldn't hold back as much." Asked to in fact, many c

explain the connection between her abuser's use o f alcohol and his jeal- ~ the murder as f

ousy, another woman said, "I'd say it just enhan ced his insecurities." true even for b2

} t y

112 ( Why Do They Kill? . . Y

~ ~ r i#.

_~. _q

'„';

1 ~a. f

ig ~a~ Y°U We classified ju

st over half of t he perpetrators o

f attempted homi cide

dn't think? Pr as bot h substance-abu

sing .and jealous types. From the

victims' accounts ,

ings, yes, ~ zt was clear that both

substance abuse and jealousy had

been longstandi ng

features of thei r relationships

with their assail ants. In most ca

ses, both

appeared to pla y prominent rol

es in the final nea r-fatal assault. O

ver 90%

of these wome n said that thei

r parrners' jealo us behavior had

escalated

ly involved ~ in the six months

leading up to t he assaults. Two-

thixds of the w omen

said that their p artners' drinkin

g and/or drug us e had also escala

ted. Was

>f tzmes one of these factor

s more critical to the assault th

an the other? A sked

which factor je alousy ar subs

tance abuse—ha d played the bi

ggest role

in the final assa ult, most of the

women said the y believed it had

been their

'e~ ~n~ng> partner's jealou

sy. All but one of the women (

92%) said that th eir part-

ners had made jealous accusati

ons or threats on the day of the a

ssault. By

comparison, onl y two-thirds of

the victims sai d that their partn

ers were

Heir abusers' dr unlz or high on

the day of the assault. Jealous

accusations and threats

~ar drug use. see med an inimical

part of the phy sical assaults.

Lynette reported that

~sault on her, he r estranged husb

and, Wzlliam, k ept demanding t

o know, "Who a re you

gs• ~ sleeping

with?" as he bl udgeoned her ov

er the head wit h a baseball bat

Though his drin king and drug u

se had increased in the three mon

ths lead-

ing up to this at tack, Lynette sa

nd she believed t hat "he would h

ave done

o get dim, it [the attack] rega

rdless." In fact, only two women

said that they b elievad

se and tha t their partner w

ould not have a ttacked her had

he not been drin king or

azy things. u sing drugs. On

e of these was A manda, whose

husband, Ernest o, struck

her repeatedly over the head w

zth a wrench af ter overhearing

her reveal

of taking his h is recent drug

use to her moth er. Though con

ceding that Ern esto was

"very jealous" i n general, Aman

da said that jeal ousy played no r

ole in this

attack. The othe r woman was S

ylvie, whose hu sband, Edgar, s

tabbed her

he'd think I in the head. Asked

what prompted t his attack, she s

aid, "I think ne had to

~n I'd meet, g et messed up [wi

th alcohol] to give him the cou

rage."

For the majorit y of jealous dsv

nks or jealous dr ug abusers, it app

eared

re necessarily ~hae jealousy pr

ovided the moti ve for their attacl

~s while alcohol or drugs

b~zt that their w ere merely facil

itating factors. In some cases,

alcohol or drug use also

«oman said, was used to ca

mouflage preme ditation. Alcoho

l and drug impa irment are

~e was drink- commonly cited

grounds for di minished capacit

y during murder tr ials, and

=h." Asked to in fact, many o

f the killers cit ed their alcohol

or drug use on t he day of

and his jeal- t tze murder as e

vzdence that the murders were no

t premeditated. T his was

~ri~~S ~~ true even for tw

o killers who w ere found to ha

ve no alcohol ox drugs in

Killer Profiles ~ 1 13

- ~~

Table 3.11: Comparison of crimes for which jealous

and non-jealous Substance Abusers were convicted

(in percentages)

Jealous Non-jealous

substance abusers substance ab users

First degree murder 54 17

Second degree murder 15 33

Manslaughter 31 50

N=13 N=6

their systems when apprehended im mediately following the murders t

hey

committed.

One distinguishing feature of jeal ous substance abusers, compared

to non-jealous ones, was that the former group was more likely to ha

planned their crimes. The jealous substance abusers were more likely to

be convicted of first degree murde r compared to those who were su

stance abusers only. Conversely, the non-jealous substance abusers wer

more likely to be convicted of mans laughter, suggesting a much lowe

level of premeditation. Summaries of these findings are provided in

Table

3.11. The level of premeditation sh own by the jealous substance abuse

mirrored that shown by the other jealous killers who had no history

substance abuse.

Case Example 6 i

"I wanted to destroy all reminders of hun."

James was a slightly built man wh o cried nearly continuously during m

y F

interview with him. James said t hat he met Corrine in the fall of 1993

and

moved in with her within a week. B oth were thirty-siY. Corrine's daugh

ter, "'

Mary, was two years old. Shortly be fore James moved in, Corrine had

quit

her job as a legal secretary and so ld her condominium. The couple t

hen

lived off the proceeds of that sale. Du ring their first month together, C

or- ~

rine confided to James that she had been the victim of an incestuous

rape

by her uncle. Though James was init ially sympathetic, he began to

blarrze

Corrine for what had happened and to accuse her of being in love

with

the uncle. In November, Corrine c ame home to find that James had t

orn "s

114 ~ Why Do They Kill? } ,.

up a picture of the unclE

Corrine complained, Jar

a restraining order the n.

The following Apri:

her pictures, and tore u

other belongings. In eY

stroy any reminders of

entering, violating a rest

ceived a two-year prison

Corrine visited James e

program in prison and

born before his father ~

Within two months

gument outside a super

Mary wanted. James k

bystander called the po

a two-and-a-half year s

bation. All but six mono

decided to end her rel;

him another try by age

prison. Corinne and th~ ''~!

Shortly after Jame

high chair onto his fa I

and the police filed a z

Corrine were arguing

of the car and ran to

police were called. Af

yelled, "Shut the little

second child abuse red

removed both childre

a five-year term of pr

and see his probation

In August, Corin

her restraining order,

He was arrested and

to see Cozrine outside

ing order which forb

fought after she accu, I

alous

icted

ealous e abasers

tYie murders they

.users, compared

ire IikeIy to have

re more likely to

who were sub-

zce abusers were

ig a much lower

provided in Table

ubstance abusers

gad no history of

ously during my

- fall of 1993 and

>rrine's daughter,

Cortxne had quit The couple then th together, Cor-

iincestuousrape

began to blame -ing in love with t James load horn

up a picture of the un cle that he'd found in her f

amily scrapbook. When

Corrine complained, James backhanded her in t

he face. Corrine obtained

a restraining order the next day.

The following April, Jame s broke into Corrine's pla

ce, burned all of

her pictures, and tore u p all her clothes. He also

destroyed many of her

other belongings, In ex plaining this to me, James

said, "T wanted to de-

stroy any reminders of her uncle:' James was convicte

d of breaking and

entering, violating a retr aining order, and making th

reats, for which he re-

ceived a two-year prison s entence. During the one year

he spent in prison,

Corrine visited James ever y week. James completed a

n alcohol education

program in prison and w as promising never to drin

k again. James Jr. was

born before bis father was released.

Within two months of Ja mes's release, James and Co

rinne had an ar-

gument outside a superma rket after he had refused to

buy something that

Mary wanted. James kick ed Corinne in the shin an

d headbutted her. A

bystander called the pofi ce and James was arrested. Th

is time, he recezved

atwo-and-a-half year sent ence for assault and battery

and violation of pra-

bation. All but six months of this time was suspended

. Corrine had initially

decided to end her relatio nship with James but he co

nvinced her to give

him another try by agxeei ng to attend a batterer int

ervention' program in

prison. Corinne and the ch ildren viszted every weeken

Shortly after James's dis charge in rune 1993, James

Jr. fell out of his

high chair onto his face, according to James. Corin

ne called the police

and the police filed a repo rt of child abuse. The follo

wing day, James and

Corrine were arguing in th e car about what had happ

ened. Corrine got out

of the car and ran to her mother's house. When Ja

mes pursued her, the

police were called. After t he police arrived, Mary beg

an crying and James

yelled, "Shut the little bit ch up!" He was arrested a

nd the police filed a

second child abuse report. Following a child abuse i

nvestigation, the state

removed both children an d placed them into foster

care. James received

a five-year term of probatio n with the condition that h

e maintain sobriety

and see his probation offi cer every two weeks.

In August, Corinne wen t to court to charge James

with violation of

her restraining order, sayin g that he had threatened t

o "knock [me] out"

He was arrested and relea sed after posting bail of $20

0. James continued

to see Cozrine outside of he r house, despite the condit

ions of the restrain-

ing order which forbade s uch contact. On August 20,

James and Corrine

fought after she accused h im of talking about her to f

riends. James went to

Killer Profiles ~ 115

~- ~~ - i

a bar and began drinking. He called Corinne from the bar to demand that

she take his name off their phone bill. James says that, while at the bar,

he consumed ten to twelve beers and two shots of Jack Daniels. He called

Corinne four more times but she did not answer the phone. James took a

cab to Corinne's house, arriving at 11:00 p.m. When Corinne let him in,

James told her the place was a mess and ordered her to get rid of a par-

ticularhouseplant. When she refused, James knocked it over, breaking the

pot. Corinne began to scream at him to leave. James put his hands over her

mouth to prevent her from yelling. They struggled and fell down several

times, ending up near the couch. James was continuing to hold Corinne by

the mouth when he noticed she was no longer breathing. He was giving her

mouth-to-mouth resuscitation when the police arrived, having been called

by Corinne's neighbor. The police tried but failed to revive Corinne. Their

report indicated that Corinne had been suffocated, citing that there was a

pillow impression on her face. James pled guilty to murder in the second

degree and received a sentence of twenty years to life.

Jealous and Suicidal

While suicidal types of killers and would-be killers were clearly under-

represented in this study, their ranks among killers are substantial and

therefore warrant inclusion in this analysis. Nearly one-third of American

women's murders by their intimate partners are followed by the suicides

of the killers. As already noted, jealousy, combined with estrangement or

pending estrangement, appears to be the leading trigger for murder among

this type of killer. In many, and perhaps most of these cases, the man's

jealousy was not only an immediate trigger to murder-suicide but also

a long-term factor in the relationship. As was the case with Allen, who

was profiled in the section about suicidal type of killer, this jealousy is

accompanied and perhaps fueled by depression. Depression may lead this

type of man to become extremely dependent on his partner for emotional

support and caretaking. Allen's depression and dependency on Andrea ap-

peared to have been major factors in her desire to end the relationship,

which in turn only made Allen feel more jealous and depressed.

The picture that emerges from many other accounts of murder-suicide

is one of a depressed husband who becomes increasingly jealous and des-

perate as his partner seeks to end the relationship. Due to his depression

and extreme dependency on his partner, he sees no life for himself beyond

the end of 1

leads him t~

of the relati

their childrf

the idea tha

reflects a pr

why not jus

Carmer

himself as

stabbing his

had moved

another mat

throughout

to kill her

divorce. Ac

preceded the

himself at a

depressed a

had encoura

Only after Y

dren was C<

disorder. Th

Regardless c

"always jeal

curred two ~

with mutual

wanting to I

banged Amy

Carmen wog

out socially,

Jealous anc

Also a subsi

did not belie

to kill her a~

marijuana. C

sion, accordi

lss ~ Why Do They Kill?

demand that ile at the bar,

:ls. He called

James took a

ie let him in,

rid of a par-

breaking the

ends over her

sown several

d Corinne by

as giving her

been called

~rinne. Their

t there was a

n the second

early under-

~stantial and

~f American

the suicides

~ngement or

irder among

~, the man's

ide but also

Allen, who

jealousy is

iay lead this

r emotional

Andrea ap-

~lationship,

-der-suicide

us and des-

depression self beyond

the end of the relationship. His sens e of ownership over his partner also

leads him to want to ensure tha t his wife will have no life beyond the end

of the relationship. In more ra re cases, jealous suicidal men seek to end

their children's lives as well. Besi des indicating depression and jealousy,

the idea that no part of one's famil y shall continue to exist beyond oneself

reflects a profound self-centeredn ess and sense of ownership. Otherwise,

why not just kill yourself?

Carmen (later profiled in the chapter about child abuse) tried to kill

himself as well as his two children with carbon monoxide shortly after

stabbing his former wife, Amy. This occurred after Amy and the children

had moved into a new apartment and A my had started a relationship with

another man. Reflecting back, Amy sai d that Carmen had been depressed

throughout their three-year relationsh ip. He had repeatedly threatened

to kill her and the children along with himself whenever she spoke of

divorce. According to Axny, Carmen's de pression and suicidal behavior

preceded their relationship. He told her that he had once attempted to kill

himself at age fourteen. Amy said that Ca rmen had become increasingly

depressed and dependent upon her during their relationship. Though she

had encouraged him to get help for his de pression, he'd refused to do so.

Only after his incarceration for attempte d homicide of her and the chil-

dren was Carmen psychologically evalua ted and diagnosed with bipolar

disorder. This fit Amy's perception of Carmen as being extremely moody.

Regardless of whether he was depressed ar manic, said Amy, Carmen was

"always jealous." She reported that his fir st act of violent jealousy had oc-

curred two months after they began dating w hen they were playing golf

with mutual friends. "Out of the blue," said Amy, "Cannen accused me of

wanting to have sex with one of our frien ds." In a jealous rage, Carmen

banged Amy's head against the side of the car. Amy went on to say that

Carmen would make jealous accusations virtually "every time we went

out socially, or any time I changed my r outine a little."

Jealous and Suicidal Substance Abuser s

Also a substance abuser, Carmen quali fied as a triple threat. While Amy

did not believe that alcohol or drugs playe d any role in Carmen's attempt

to kill her and the children, she said that he had been a habitual user of

marijuana. Carmen's marijuana use might have contributed to his depres-

sion, according to Amy. Other researchers have found that suicidal killers

Kilter Profiles ~ 117

are more likely than other types of kill ers to abuse alcohol ar drugs. In S

ubstance-Abu.

many cases, substance use may be an attempt by the perpetrator to "self- Five out of the si

.medicate" his depression. Since alc ohol is a depressant, however, it of-

ten has the effect of making the in dividual more depressed. As was the

Perpetrators of ai

case with Allen, profiled in the section a bout suicidal killers, alcohol also

Aso substance a

counteracts the effects of anti-depres sant medications. Many other kinds

the career crimi~

of drugs, including marijuana, function as depressants. Substance use, de-

extended far bey

pression, and jealousy become a very deadly combination for some abu-

cgs as well as

sive men. Each condition often exacerb ates the other two, leading to an

were also more

escalating spiral of depression, subst ance use, and jealous behavior. Feel-

~ an d drugs. The f

ing the increasing danger, some victim s of these men actively seek help

abused alcohol c

~ for their partners. One victim of at

tempted homicide, Lisa, had sought to na1s. Being the

involuntarily commit her estranged hu sband to a detox program. Unfortu-

type of perpetra I

nately, this attempt backfired when he sought retribution by trying to stab

( by inalc~ng her c

her to death shortly after the judge r efused to commit him. Though se-

? Secondly, he co

verely injured, Lisa survived the attac k. Other victims were not so lucky,

her quiet about

Karen Trudeau was killed by her husba nd, Henry, on May 31, 2002,

hooked [on dru€

Three months earlier, Karen had filed f or divorce, alleging longstanding

4 ever go to the p~

physical abuse, and was awarded t emporary custody of the couple's two

to report me to I

children. In mid-March, however, Karen filed a criminal complaint, re-

,~ Beyond bei

parting that Henry had violated her protective order twice within four

Aso were their I

days. Henry was arrested and held over the weekend. On March 25, Karen

~m into prostate

and Henry's family sought to have Henr y committed to an in-patient sub-

~ relationsh ip wit

stance abuse program for thirty days, citing evidence that his suicidal be-

i risk for domesti

haviar and his drinking had escalated. He had twice been hospitalized for

} rest yle by an ;

depression and attempted suicide. Sever al months previously, Henry had

~ Abus er-pimps c

punched Karen in the back, destroyed her belongings, and threatened to

I pe ndency, contr

kill her. Despite this, the court denied the petition to commit Henry, and

~ The socia l stig~

he was released from custody with t he conditions that he submit to ran-

means of entrap

dom drug and alcohol screenings, repo rt to probation, and comply with

~ children oft en f~

the protective order. A review hearing wa s scheduled for May 23. In early

'' `~e~~'e system

May, Karen applied for three addition al criminal complaints, alleging

~ tempted l~omic i

that Henry had followed her around t own, shouted obscenities at her, and

# lose my babies:

driven by her house. Though the court held a new hearing on May 14,

Henry's conditions of release were n ot revoked, and apre-trial hearing

was scheduled for June 6 when all p ending charges would be handled.

Henry stabbed Karen to death on May 31 and then committed suicide,

as f 3

11s ~ why Do zney x~u?

Substance Abusing Car eer Criminals

~ Five out of t he six career criminals we

re substance abusers. All five of the

perpetrators of attemp ted homicide who qualif

ied as career criminals wer e

also substance abuser s. This connection make

s sense given that most of

~'' the career crimi nals were traffickers of

illegal drugs. Their use o f drugs

extended far beyond product sampling however

; most were daily users of

~ drugs. as well as o f alcohol. Compared to

tl~e other perpetrators, the se men

' were also more likely to pressure or com

pel their partners to use alcohol

4 and drugs. The fo ur victims of attempted

homicide who reported th at they

abused alcohol or drug s were partners of subst

ance-abusing career crim i-

nals. Being the victim' s supplier appeared to se

rve two functions for this

type of perpetrator. F irst, he could more effec

tively control his partner

by making her dependen t upon drugs and then

threatening to cut her off.

Secondly, he could thr eaten to reveal her drug

use as a way of keeping

her quiet about his cri minal enterprise. Said one

victim, "He wanted me

hooked [on dnzgs] 'cau se he could always use t

hat against me if I was t o

ever go to the police. Af ter we was separated, h

e was always threatenin g

to report me to DSS [the child protection agency

in Massachusetts]."

Beyond being their par tners' drug suppliers, tw

o of the perpetrators

also were their pimps. In both cases, the perpetrato

r had inducted his vic-

tim into prostitution. N eithez woman had been

a prostitute prior to her

relationship with her a buser. Prostituted women

are known to be at high

risk for domestic violenc e.46 Many have said that

they are forced into this

lifestyle by an abusive p artner who also acts as

their pimp or trafficker.

Abuser-pimps often util ize a combination of vio

lence, induced drug de -

pendency, control over w ages, and social isolatio

n to control their victims .

The social stigma that these women experien

ce becomes an addition al

means of entrapment w ithin their relationships.

Prostituted women with

children often fear that t heir arrest for prostitutio

n might result in the chil d

welfare system stepping in to remove their chi

ldren. One victim of at-

tempted homicide said, "That was my constant

fear, that T was going to

lose my babies."

Killer Profiles ~ 119